How to Reduce Lead Exposures with One Simple Statute: The Experience of Proposition 65
![handle is hein.journals/elrna29 and id is 607 raw text is:
10-99
29 ELR 10581
ARTICLES
How to Reduce Lead Exposures With One Simple Statute:
The Experience of Proposition 65
by Clifford Rechtschaffen
Editors' Summary: Human exposure to lead is one of the most serious environ-
mental health threats today. Lead causes a variety of adverse health effects and
is particularly harmful to children. Unfortunately, the current regulation of
lead exposures is fragmented and often unsuccessful. California's Proposition
65, a right-to-know initiative, however, has achieved some noteworthy suc-
cesses in reducing public exposures to lead. Proposition 65 has spurred faster
and more significant lead reductions than federal law by prompting companies
to reformulate products and change their manufacturing processes. This Arti-
cle first discusses the hazards and uses of lead. The author next describes sev-
eral instances that demonstrate how Proposition 65 has stimulated the devel-
opment of new technologies and pollution prevention measures to reduce lead
exposures. The author then examines why Proposition 65 has been more effec-
tive than comparable federal regulations. To conclude, the author notes that a
simple, multi-media, self-executing statute like Proposition 65 can be more
powerful than a host of complex regulatory programs in achieving actual re-
ductions of pollutants in our environment.
A lthough the hazards of lead have been well known for
centuries, human exposure to lead remains one of the
most serious environmental health threats today. Lead
causes a variety of adverse health effects, and has particu-
larly devastating impacts on young children. Because lead
has been used in a multitude of industrial processes, moreo-
ver, it enters the environment from a myriad of sources, and
is ubiquitous in the human environment.
Since 1988, California's Proposition 65, a right-to-know
initiative, has achieved some noteworthy successes in re-
ducing public exposures to lead in media as diverse as cal-
cium supplements, brass kitchen faucets, water well pumps,
ceramicware, hair dyes, wine capsules, and factory emis-
sions. These sources all were subject to regulation by the
federal government, but Proposition 65 has spurred faster
and more significant lead reductions than federal law by
prompting companies to reformulate products and change
their manufacturing processes. Proposition 65's effective-
ness stems from several factors: it does not employ a one-
Mr. Rechtschaffen is a Visiting Professor, University of California at
Davis School of Law, and Professor, Golden Gate University School of
Law. The author worked on implementing and enforcing Proposition
65 for the California Attorney General's office from 1986 to 1993.
Vicki Clark, Caroline Farrell, Kristine Ogilvie, and Rebecca Sugerman
provided valuable research assistance on this Article. Thanks to Rich-
ard Jacobs, Karen Kramer, Bob Percival, and Ed Weil for reviewing
earlier drafts of the Article. Thanks also to Golden Gate University's
Faculty Research and Development Fund for providing a research grant
for this Article.
at-a-time, product-by-product regulatory approach; it is
self-executing and enforcement friendly; it imposes strin-
gent, health-protective limits on lead exposure; and it relies
in part on market incentives to change industry behavior.
Thus, the success of Proposition 65, in particular its
technology-forcing character, provides important lessons
for the ongoing national debate about how best to reform en-
vironmental regulation.
This Article describes several instances that illuminate
how Proposition 65 has stimulated the development of new
technologies and pollution prevention measures to reduce
lead exposures. It then examines why Proposition 65 has
been more effective than comparable federal requirements
in this area.
The Hazards and Uses of Lead
Lead is a well-known developmental and reproductive
toxin. Lead poisoning is widely recognized as the most seri-
ous environmental health hazard facing young children to-
day. ' Children under age six are at greatest risk because
their rapidly developing nervous systems are particularly
vulnerable to lead, and because their absorption rates are
I. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, lead
poisoning remains the most common and societally devastating en-
vironmental disease of young children. CENTERS FOR DISEASE
CONTROL AND PREVENTION, U.S. DEP'T OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES, STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE ELIMINATION OF CHILDHOOD
LEAD POISONING Xi (1991) [hereinafter STRATEGIC PLAN].
ELR
NEWS&ANALYSIS](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/elrna29&div=95&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
How to Reduce Lead Exposures with One Simple Statute: The Experience of Proposition 65
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most