Chemical industry plots to kill disputed security provision

Chemical industry lobbyists are confident that their allies in Congress will kill legislation that gives state and local governments the authority to pass stronger laws than the federal government when it comes to regulating security at the nation's chemical facilities.

The chemical industry was still formulating its strategy Monday, but expected to prevail over Democrats and environmental activists on an issue that has been festering for years.

The supplemental spending bill being debated by the Senate this week includes a controversial provision that gives state and local governments the power to enforce chemical security laws that are stronger than federal regulations.

"This isn't about states' rights; this is about national security," Jack Gerard, president of the American Chemistry Council, said in an interview Monday. "What does the environmental lobby have to say about security? Have they all of a sudden morphed into security experts in this country?"

But the chemical industry was deferring to lawmakers to decide when the best time will be to try and kill the provision.

Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, is expected to offer an amendment to strip the provision from the supplemental, industry officials said.

"We think we have good bipartisan support for our position and we'll determine at the appropriate time what tactics to deploy," Gerard said. "We fully anticipate and expect that our friends and allies will enjoin the debate at the appropriate time. They will know when that is."

He said the chemical industry is targeting Sens. Mary Landrieu, D-La., and Mark Pryor, D-Ark., as potential Democratic allies.

Democrats inserted the provision into the Senate's supplemental bill to override draft regulations issued recently by the Homeland Security Department.

The draft regulations say "state laws must give way to federal statutes and regulatory programs to ensure a unified and coherent national approach in areas where the federal interests prevail -- such as national security."

Critics say the regulations would roll back strong security laws passed by some states, such as New Jersey.

The Homeland Security Department plans to issue its final regulations "any day," a spokesman said.

The department spokesman said that about 90 comments were submitted in response to the draft regulations, some dealing with whether states should be able to enforce their own laws.

When asked if the department planned to alter its position on states' rights, the spokesman would only say: "I think ultimately that officials who have expressed concern are going to be satisfied but also the American public is going to be satisfied because they are going to get very strong regulations."

Meanwhile, environmental activists were trying to build support for states' rights.

"I think at a certain point some basic deference is given to people looking out for their state," said Andy Igrejas, environmental health campaign director for the National Environmental Trust.

Igrejas said the environmental lobby was looking toward Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Norm Coleman, R-Minn., for Republican support. Both senators are up for re-election next year.

"I think we might have a shot at getting them," he said.

He acknowledged the supplemental bill might be vetoed, but said whatever language it contains on chemical security will likely "influence the next round of bills that will be drafted."

The American Chemistry Council's Gerard argued that Congress should wait to see the department's final regulations before taking further action. He added that members of his group have voluntarily spent $3.5 billion since 2001 on security improvements.