12. States Offer Corporations Immunity from Violating
Environmental Laws
Source: RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY, # 552, Title: "Right
to Know Nothing" Date: June 26, 1997, Author: Peter Montague, Ph.D.
Mainstream media coverage: related article in The New York Times, January
30, 1997, page B-7; National Public Radio, Talk of the Nation, October
17, 1997; National Public Radio, All Things Considered, May 8, 1997
SSU Censored Researchers: Robin Stovall and Brian Foust SSU
Staff Evaluator: Ellen Krebs
American corporations are successfully pursuing a new strategy to evade
environmental laws and regulations. One state after another has been
lobbied into adopting legislation to protect companies from disclosure
or punishment when they discover environmental offenses at their own
plants. Called the "Right to Know Nothing Laws," they have
been promoted nationwide by coalitions of big industries, including
AT&T, Caterpillar, Coors Brewing, DuPont, Eli Lilly, 3M, Pfizer,
Procter & Gamble, Weyerhauser, and Waste Management.
State laws are giving corporations immunity from punishment if they
self-report violations of environmental laws. Any documents related
to the self-reporting become officially secret, cannot be divulged to
the public, and cannot be used as evidence in any legal proceedings.
"Audit privilege" laws, as they are called, have been passed
in at least 21 states and are pending in 13 or 14 others. Such laws
typically contain the following provisions:
* Corporations that report violations discovered during a self-audit
are immune from prosecution for their violations. They cannot be fined
or otherwise punished if they disclose violations promptly to government
authorities and take "reasonable" steps to achieve compliance.
* Individuals who participate in conducting an environmental audit
cannot be called to testify in any judicial proceeding or administrative
hearing.
* If a corporation conducts an environmental self-audit of its operations,
the information in the "self-audit" cannot be disclosed
to the public or used as evidence in any legal proceedings, including
lawsuits and regulatory actions. Any information related to a self-audit
becomes "privileged." The corporation decides what is related
to its self-audit and what is not.
The state of Texas has even made it a crime for employees or government
officials to divulge anything related to environmental self-audits.
Thus citizens of a municipality in Texas can lose their "right
to know" about pollution from their own local landfill if the local
contractor chooses to conduct a self-audit.
The Clinton Administration has accepted self-auditing by saying companies
know how to audit their own facilities better than the government does,
and can do a better job of it. Last March, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency accepted Texas's "Right to Know Nothing Law" with only
minor changes, paving the way for state laws to be enacted nationwide.
UPDATE BY AUTHOR PETER MONTAGUE: "This story represents
a disturbing trend: Corporations are becoming less accountable to governments
and to the public. New laws are being passed in dozens of states, exempting
corporate polluters from enforcement penalties if they self-report violations
of environmental laws. It is as if murderers were being declared 'innocent'
simply because they confess their murders to the police. Furthermore,
under most of these new laws, when polluters self-report ... incriminating
documents [can be kept] from the public, and from judges and juries.
"The effect of these laws is to weigh the scales of justice heavily
in favor of corporate polluters. This, it seems to me, will further
erode the public's confidence in government. In addition, it will encourage
corporations to pollute more because they will know that penalties will
be waived if they simply report their pollution to the proper authorities.
As a result of increased pollution, public health will most likely be
endangered. As a result of diminished public confi-dence in government,
our democracy will most likely be weakened.
"As for developments since my story, the proposed 'federal audit
privilege' legislation is still making its way through Congress, and
the trend in the states has not been reversed. The mainstream press
has mostly ignored this legislation. The New York Times published one
story about it (before I did my story). Most state papers have ignored
the story, even when 'audit privilege' bills were being debated in their
state legislatures.
"Only one organization that I know of has been tracking this legislation
across the country: The Network Against Corporate Secrecy, led by Sanford
Lewis in Boston; Tel: 617/354-1030; E-mail: san-lewis@igc.apc.org."