CA Assembly Fails to Pass BPA Bill
Posted September 14th, 2009 by Elisa BatistaAs you all know, I and other members on the MomsRising team have been fervently working to pass a bill in California that would help eliminate the toxic chemical bisphenol A (BPA) in plastic baby and toddler products like bottles and sippy cups. I thought I would let you know how the vote went on Friday.
It had already passed the Senate and was favored by the Assembly 35-32. Unfortunately, it did not garner the 41 votes necessary to clear the Assembly. Here is how individual Assemblymembers voted.
Here is a statement by Sen. Fran Pavley, who sponsored and fought her heart out for this important bill:
“California was poised to join Canada, Minnesota, Connecticut and several other cities and counties in the United States that, with significant bi-partisan support, have enacted bans on BPA in baby bottles and other feeding products for children. ‘The science on BPA clearly shows cause for alarm,’ said Senator Pavley. ‘Every child from every community in our state deserves access to safe, affordable products. I don’t understand how some lawmakers are willing to ignore science and risk the health of California children.’
Bisphenol A (BPA) is an artificial hormone that is widely used in shatter-proof plastic baby bottles, sippy cups and the lining of formula cans. It leaches out of containers and into food and drink consumed by babies and young children.
More than 220 peer-reviewed studies have linked BPA to a host of health problems, including breast and prostrate cancer, infertility, obesity, and neurological and behavioral changes, including autism and hyperactivity.
Senator Pavley’s SB 797 was co-authored by Senator Carol Liu, D – Pasadena, and was sponsored by Breast Cancer Fund, Environmental Working Group and Physicians for Social Responsibility. The bill received widespread support from health care professionals, business owners and a long and diverse list of organizations including; Black Women for Wellness, Latinas for Reproductive Justice, The Help Group for Autism Spectrum Disorders, California Teachers Association, California Nurses Association, Asian Health Services, and California Women Infants and Children (WIC), SEIU, California Labor Federation, and Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice to name a few. The opponents include BPA manufacturers Dow and SABIC Innovative Plastics, as well as infant formula makers Abbott, Mead Johnson, and Nestle.”
I won’t lie. I am disappointed in the legislators who voted against the bill and abstained from voting. But I am also extra determined to fight for the bill when it comes up for reconsideration next year, and to convince these legislators that California families with science on our side are more powerful than corporate lobbyists. Will you join me?



3 Comments
November 13, 2009 at 11:11 pm by aliceThere are many things they are doing which are toxic and I think it’s great what you are doing and support the effort. Meanwhile, mothers will be working in many states now to fight mandating of toxic (mercury, aluminum, and even cancer-laden) vaccines.
[Reply]
November 13, 2009 at 10:59 pm by AliceWhile we are worrying about what things we buy, we should be worrying about what they are pushing on us and out children so intensely and I mean the swine flu vaccines. They are NOT organic but GMO and contain these things …
pestivirus,
mycoplasma,
viral fragments,
DNA fragments
bacterial components
adjuvants like
squalene MF59 and ASO3
thimerosal
aluminum
beta-propiolactone
animal cancer cells
nucleic-acid fragments
live organisms
pathogenic viruses
simian cytomegalovirus
ethylene glycol (antifreeze), Formaldehyde
embalming fluids
phenol (carbolic acid)
antibiotics like Neomycin and streptomycin
Pus fromm sores of diseased animals
Horse Serum
Calf Serum
Fecal Matter
Macerated Cancer Cells
Sweepings from diseased children
Lactalbumin hydrolysate Aluminum phospha
Retro-virus (SV-40) – contaminant virus of some polio vaccines
Chick Embryo
Sodium Phosphate
Foreign animal tissues containing genetic material (DNA/RNA) – from growth medium
[Reply]
September 16, 2009 at 6:05 pm by LisaIt’s worth reading the transcripts from the hearing. All the evidence is presented and by the end of it you can completely understand why they decided not to deem it toxic. Is it so far fetched that it might not actually be a problem?
[Reply]
Leave a Comment