During a withering hearing, Cincinnati toxicologist Michael Dourson defended his record against questions about his ties to the chemical industry.
WASHINGTON — During a withering confirmation grilling, Cincinnati toxicologist and Trump environmental nominee Michael Dourson defended his record against pointed questions from Senate Democrats about his close ties to the chemical industry and his “moral values” in endorsing weak safety standards.
Democrats on the Environment and Public Works Committee demanded answers from the University of Cincinnati professor about the money he has taken over his long career — from DuPont, Monsanto and other industry giants — for research that they said endorsed dangerous levels of chemicals and pesticides in the nation’s crops, drinking water and other products.
. @SenMarkey to Dourson: You’re not just an outlier … you’re outrageous”
Yow, @SenDuckworth grills Dourson about Koch-funded work on petroleum coke, says he does “pseudo science for the highest bidders”
Sen. Cory Booker, D-N. J., called Dourson a “corporate lackey” who has advocated for chemical levels “that will literally poison people.” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R. I., hit Dourson for his work on behalf of the tobacco industry, asking him to explain “the role you played to hide the truth about the dangers of smoking.”
In perhaps the most dramatic moment, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., choking back tears, said families in her state “are so frightened” by Dourson’s nomination because of his work, on behalf of DuPont, that seemed to downplay the risks of a possible carcinogen in the drinking water of a small upstate New York community. A few of those families were in the audience, visibly emotional as they absorbed the scene unfolding in the Senate Environment and Public Works hearing room.
5 Trump nominees before the EPW committee now. Only Cincy toxicologist Dourson getting a real grilling. Dems seem unified in opposition
President Trump has nominated Dourson to lead the Environmental Protection Agency’s chemical safety and pollution prevention office. Republicans on the Senate environment committee seemed generally supportive of Dourson’s nomination.
Chairman John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said Dourson was one of several “well-qualified individuals” put forward by the president and blasted Democrats for “blind opposition” to Trump’s environmental picks. Dourson was one of five nominees before the panel on Wednesday, but the Cincinnati researcher was the main focus of Wednesday’s session.
“I have been objective in my work,” Dourson says in response to Qs from @SenWhitehouse about the nominees work for tobacco industry
In his opening remarks, Dourson said that if he’s confirmed, “I will dedicate my mind, body and spirit to the work of this office.” He promised to protect “the American public, including its most vulnerable” and to be impartial in his decisions.
“We’ll bring the best science forward,” Dourson said. “We’ll be transparent. We will be collaborative. I commit to that.”
But pressed by Democrats on the committee, Dourson refused to say whether he would recuse himself from decisions affecting chemical companies that have given money to his nonprofit research foundation, called the Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment. Among the interest groups financing TERA and Dourson’s research: the American Petroleum Institute, the American Chemistry Council and the American Cleaning Institute.
In response to multiple questions, Dourson said he would rely on guidance from EPA ethics officials in determining how to handle decisions on chemicals that he has studied on behalf of corporate clients.
That was clearly not a satisfactory answer for Democrats on the panel. Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., said EPA’s rules would give him wide discretion in how to handle such cases.
In another tense moment, Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., pressed Dourson to explain his work on behalf of Koch Industries in examining the health effects of petroleum coke on a community in Chicago. Duckworth asked him whether he agreed with EPA’s current assessment that dust from petroleum coke presents a health risk.
“Yes or no?” she asked.
“I’m not really ready to answer this question,” Dourson said.
“Then I don’t think you’re ready to work for the EPA,” Duckworth responded.
Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., came to Dourson’s defense, asking the Cincinnati researcher why he was drawn to toxicology and what kind of pro-bono work he had done.
Dourson said he decided to enter the field after spending time in Liberia and becoming interested in preventive medicine. He said most of his work was on behalf of state and local governments, not the chemical industry. And he talked about a pro bono case in which he helped a woman and her family get medical and legal help after they had been poisoned by a chemical, which he did not specify.
“I have been objective in my work,” Dourson said.
Dourson’s fate is unclear. If he clears the environment committee, his nomination would go the full Senate. He would need 51 votes for confirmation in a chamber where Republicans control 52 seats to the Democrats’ 48 seats.
Sen. Tom Carper, the ranking Democrat on environment committee, said it would be hard to defeat Dourson but Democrats were going to try.
“There’s really serious questions about your heart,” the Delaware senator told Dourson at the closing of the grueling three-hour session.
“These decisions that we’re going to make, and that you would make if confirmed, are really life and death decisions,” Carper added. “You have witnessed… an outpouring of emotion, almost fear, about what your service might lead to.”
