Decision is Science-Based; Ban would Undermine Food Affordability
As members of Congress develop proposals to ban the pesticide chlorpyrifos, CEI’s Angela Logomasini, praises EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt for his refusal to ban it earlier this year.
“Pruitt’s decision is a repudiation of junk science used to push unwarranted and counterproductive regulations,” says Logomasini, a Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, in "EPA Denial of Chlorpyrifos Ban Sets Pro-Science Precedent", a new policy brief on the topic released today. “Denying a ban on chlorpyrifos not only sets an important pro-science approach to regulation that the agency should continue to follow, it recognizes the essential value that this pesticide has in helping produce affordable food supply.”
Last March, Pruitt denied an activist petition to ban the chemical, which farmers have safely used for decades. Dr. Logomasini’s report details how activists attempted to force EPA to abandon long-standing scientific principles demonstrating its safety to push an unwarranted ban based on a single, poorly designed study.
Recently, Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) and six other Democratic Senators have proposed the "Protect Children, Farmers and Farmworkers from Nerve Agent Pesticides Act of 2017," which would ban the chemical without any scientific justification. This legislation is not only unnecessary, it would adversely impact consumers.
Because of excessive regulations on pesticides, few crop protection products are available to farmers to fight a wide array of crop destroying insects—both native pests as well as an increasing number of accidentally imported ones.
“The Trump administration decision to deny the petition is a welcome, pro-science shift in policy—and a victory for public health, consumers’ budgets, and struggling farmers,” says Logomasini.