Talking Points

This legislation will:

• Address environmental racism.
• Provide state governments with input from citizens who will be affected most from toxic pollution.
• Provide an equal and fair opportunity to those who otherwise may have no voice to protect themselves and their children from toxic assault.

This legislation is needed.

• All communities are under toxic assault but some communities are better at keeping out pollution than others. This legislation begins to level the playing field.
• Toxins affect fetuses, meaning children are born sick, and then must live in a polluted world. This legislation will help keep polluting facilities in check.
• Some neighborhoods receive more pollution than others due to their location, lack of resources, and racial make-up. This legislation will give these communities more control over the pollutants they are subjected to.

Civil rights and environmental protection do not hinder development.

• Title VI, part of the Civil Rights Act, provides protection from exclusion or discrimination based on race. People file complaints under Title VI when they suspect that they’ve been discriminated against in issues concerning environmental justice.
  For more information, please see SERC’s FAQ section for Environmental Justice or Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964.
• In an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) case study of Charlotte, North Carolina, representatives noted that the trust built between the community and the developer, and the fact that involvement continued throughout the project, gave community organizations a sense of ownership in the project and prevented opposition.
• According to more than 50 interviews at the seven EPA case study pilots in different states, Title VI concerns have not slowed down, blocked, or otherwise negatively impacted redevelopment activities.
• Delays in cleanup and redevelopment activities suffered at these seven pilots were not related to Title VI or community involvement issues, but were caused by waiting for liability protection agreements from states, jurisdictional and ownership uncertainties, and prohibitive cleanup costs.
  
  Source for the above EPA facts: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Environmental Justice in Waste Programs: Brownfields Title VI Case Studies: Summary Report

Democracy equals public participation.

• After Texas passed HB 801, which addressed public participation in facility permit approval, more public meetings were held and more comments were received earlier in the process as a result.

  Source: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission: State and Tribal Environmental Justice Advisory Panel Meeting, December 11, 2001.

Cumulative toxin levels are important.

• During the permit approval process, consideration of the total pollution burden for a community is key. Despite any facility’s claim of low emissions, a small increase in total pollution in a region may be too much for a community already saturated with toxins. Public participation in permit approval can keep cumulative impact in check.

  Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Civil Rights: Title 6 Guidance Comments: Comments on the Draft Revised Guidance for Investigating Title VI Administrative Complaints Challenging Permits (submitted by the New York City Environmental Justice Alliance (NYCEJA), August 28, 2000)

Everyone has the right to a healthy environment.

• Human beings deserve the maximum protection under the law from non-consensual exposure to toxic substances.
• All people should be maximally protected from potentially harmful exposures during embryonic development, childhood, and old age, when toxins are most dangerous.
• Special protections should be afforded to economically disadvantaged populations and communities of color from being situated near or exposed to potentially hazardous waste sites.

Some communities face multiple barriers to environmental justice.

• They can’t visit a doctor for ailments due to lack of health insurance and/or money. Also, sick people are less likely to fight back.
• They do not speak English and do not have access to important information in their native language.
• They lack time, money, child care, relevant information, and other resources needed for effective organizing.
• They harbor feelings of isolation, internalized racism, and disempowerment.
• They lack access to and the means to pay for scientific, legal, and other technical support.
• Real estate “red lining,” lack of resources, or other constraints prevent families from locating to healthier neighborhoods.
• They are denied bank loans for property improvement or better housing.
• They do not own a car and public transportation may not access parts of town conveniently; thus, they do not attend public meetings.

Many factors shape local environments.

• Emissions from factories upstream affect local environments. When there is a concentration of pollutants from all factories upstream of and in a neighborhood, toxins accumulate. These toxins may have a synergistic effect meaning their total impact on human health is greater than the sum of their individual effects. For children and those with weak immune systems, this can be especially debilitating.
• Any one person is affected by many environments, including the home, school, work, recreation areas including lakes and parks, the neighborhoods of friends and family members, the regions where locally-sold food is grown, and the areas through which drinking water travels to reach a community.
• Many communities face a myriad of issues. To reach a real, lasting solution, none of these issues can be looked at in total isolation, meaning it may be difficult to find apparent culprits or simple solutions.
  Source: Community Impact Assessment: Community Impact Assessment and Environmental Justice for Transit Agencies: A Reference.
• The communities affected by environmental justice issues may be affected differently by a given pollutant than the general population, due to local stresses, cultural practices, or other unique factors. For example, data on different patterns of living, such as subsistence fish, vegetation, or wildlife consumption and the use of well water in rural communities may be relevant to the discussion.

  Source: U.S. General Services Administration: National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): NEPA Call-in Fact Sheet: Environmental Justice.