Print Friendly and PDF
Senate spending bill would cut EPA program that assesses chemical risks

Senate spending bill would cut EPA program that assesses chemical risks

An appropriations bill released yesterday calls for elimination of the Integrated Risk Information System as part of an overall $150 million cut to EPA funding

The Senate Appropriations Committee on Monday released a spending bill that would kill a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency program that evaluates the potential health risks to people from chemicals found in the environment.


The bill, which lays out the Senate recommendations for the 2018 budgets of the Department of the Interior and multiple environmental agencies, would cut the EPA's budget by about $150 million and roll the chemical testing program—the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)—into the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

The IRIS program has been around since 1985 and its science on the toxicity of chemicals is used at state and local health agencies as well as internationally.

In releasing the bill, Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairperson of the Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, said it ensures the "health, well-being, and safety of the American people."

But Democratic members of the Senate voiced concern with the proposed cuts to the EPA, including the cut to IRIS, saying TSCA was "not designed to accommodate the breadth of the IRIS program's responsibilities."

U.S. Senator Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, commended the budget for not taking the drastic cuts originally proposed by President Trump. However, in a statement he said he couldn't "look past the deep and damaging cuts to the EPA budget in this bill that put public health at risk."

"And I can't ignore that it takes aim at the laws that protect our environment and our communities," he added.

In addition to IRIS cuts, Democrats said the bill could spur more staffing cuts at the EPA, leaving the agency tasked with protecting environmental health with fewer scientists and public health experts, and pointed out it "endorses the President's request to eliminate nearly all of the agency's climate change programs."

U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Vice Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said the bill "bowed to the anti-science know-nothingism of President Trump by slashing environmental programs and denying the reality of climate change."

Across all agencies, the Senate bill represents a $250 million cut to 2017 funding levels but still $4.83 billion more than President Trump's budget request.

The federal government is currently on a short-term budget that will expire next month. The proposed cuts to the EPA under the Senate bill were less than those proposed under a House plan, which sought to cut the agency's budget by $528 million. President Trump proposed cutting the EPA budget by $3.6 billion.

Under the Senate bill, other departments—such as the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Office of Surface Mining—would also take cuts.

Become a donor
Today's top news

EU’s new climate change plan will cause biodiversity loss and deforestation: Analysis

In a plan full of sustainable efforts, the incentivizing of biomass burning has climate experts concerned.

Op-ed: It’s time to re-think the United Nations’ COP climate negotiations

Instead of focusing on negotiations, let the main event be information sharing, financing and partnerships that produce faster technological change.

Evidence of PFAS in sanitary and incontinence pads

The findings come on the heels of other testing that found the forever chemicals in some popular tampons.

From our newsroom

LISTEN: Beau Taylor Morton on the power of community organizing

“People can see you engaged and wanting to begin the work, not only as a researcher, but you’re invested in the community.”

Op-ed: What the media gets wrong about the new world population numbers

The last time that we lived within the productivity limits of our planet was about 50 years ago — that is a problem.

Pennsylvania’s first proposed hazardous waste landfill would be near homes and schools

Residents can voice their opinions at an upcoming public hearing or in public comments.

Where did the PFAS in your blood come from? These computer models offer clues

New research could help pinpoint “forever chemicals” exposure — giving communities a roadmap for cleanup and individuals direction on what to avoid.

Making an impact with environmental health: Yanelli Nunez, PhD.

Engaging in ways to make scientific work more impactful