Some of the nation’s largest lobbying firms are working simultaneously on both sides of the Pfas “forever chemical” issue, raising serious questions about conflicts of interest and concerns that their activities are slowing states’ efforts to curb the public health threat.
A review of lobbying records in six states conducted by the nonprofit F-Minus found a variety of scenarios in which companies lobbied on both sides. The most common PFAs are associated with cancer. Lobbying firm Holland & Knight is affiliated with the American Chemistry Council, which represents the largest Pfas manufacturers in the United States, and has actively opposed most regulations. At the same time, Holland and Knight are lobbying for the American Cancer Society.
In a statement to the Guardian, Holland & Knight said it follows “rigorous ethics and dispute review procedures in all of our legal and public policy work”.
They argue that “the report’s conclusions are based on a flawed premise that assumes that a relationship with a client means that the firm is advocating on behalf of that client on all policy issues. This is a mischaracterization of the nature of the firm’s work with clients and falsely implies the existence of a conflict where none exists.”
Toncon Tope lobbyist Rocky Durham lobbied against a state bill in Oregon that would ban PFA from many consumer products. He also lobbied the Oregon Biosciences Association for funding for newborn rare disease screening. In utero Pfas exposure is associated with weakened immunity, neurotoxic effects, rare cancers, and other health problems.
In New Jersey, state records show that the Princeton Public Affairs Group lobbied for and against a bill that would ban PFA in some consumer products. According to F-Minus’ research, the company’s profit was $96,000.
While industry and lobbyists are often successful in repealing public health bills, leaders also enact “half-measures,” said James Browning, executive director of F. Minus and a former lobbyist. Either way, lobbying groups get paid.
“Whatever damage negative publicity does to their reputation on the negative side of forever chemicals is mitigated by some of the good work they do for schools and cancer organizations,” Browning said.
The investigation found that 26 health systems, 11 public school systems, 15 wildlife organizations, and 132 local governments are lobbying with Pfas manufacturers and industry groups, including the American Chemistry Council and the Cookware Sustainability Alliance. Lobbyists operate in 36 states.
The report comes amid widespread efforts at all levels of government aimed at curbing Pfas contamination and exposure. These chemicals are widely used in consumer products and industry and have been linked to a variety of health problems, including cancer, birth defects, weakened immune systems, kidney disease, and hormonal disorders.
The public health initiative prompted intense lobbying by the chemical industry against it, leading to the repeal of most Pfas bills in recent years. The F-minus analysis focused on six states because most states have weak lobbying disclosure laws, making it virtually impossible to track the activity. F-Minus is building a Congressional lobbying tracking device, Browning said.
The report looked at lobbying efforts for two Pfas-related bills in California and explained how this scenario could enrich lobbyists on both sides while slowing efforts to curb Pfas. SB 682 proposed banning Pfas from cookware and some other consumer products, while SB 454 established a private fund to help clean up Pfas in water.
PFA in consumer products causes water pollution, and water utilities in the state supported the ban on consumer products.
Lobbying firm KP Public Affairs made nearly $275,000 lobbying for and against SB 682. The company represented several chemical manufacturers and industry groups opposed to it. Lobbyed for the Western City Water District’s bill. Meanwhile, public policy advocacy groups lobbied for the creation of a clean-up fund and campaigned on behalf of the American Chemistry Council against consumer product bans.
Newsom vetoed the ban on consumer products, but not the cleanup fund. This means products containing Pfas will continue to contaminate California’s waters, fueling demand for cleanup. This veto allows “double-bottom lobbying firms to claim victory against industrial customers who use PFAS, and even against customers who support SB 454, despite the fact that this veto will further contaminate California’s water systems with Pfas,” the report states.
Craig Holman, ethics lobbyist for campaign finance watchdog Public Citizen, said state and federal law does not prohibit companies from lobbying on both sides of an issue, and that is common. However, Holman added that if there is any cooperation or information sharing between the two parties, the companies could be held legally liable to their customers. And this situation raises questions about authenticity.
“Most companies want to be recognized as a recognized expert advocating a particular position,” Holman says. “Lobbying both sides of an issue obscures that reputation.”
Browning, who previously lobbied for the American Cancer Society, said there is a “halo effect” in lobbying public health agencies, but that’s to be expected if lobbyists are working for both sides. Browning said some organizations know their employers are in conflict but refuse to sever ties. Other groups probably don’t know that their lobbying firms work on both sides.
Pfas, on the other hand, harms animals. Wildlife groups that share lobbying efforts with the American Chemistry Council include California’s Marine Mammal Center, Oregon’s Salmon for All, and the New York League of Conservation Voters.
Pennsylvania law requires schools to test drinking water for several Pfas compounds. Four schools in Philadelphia were found to be in violation of state standards. The City of Philadelphia and the American Chemistry Council share a lobbying firm, Holland & Knight.
The American Chemistry Council has been campaigning for federal legislation to override state regulations regarding Pfas. According to the report, Holland & Knight received $80,000 and $520,000 from Philadelphia and the American Chemistry Council, respectively.
After widespread Pfas contamination was discovered in Maine’s farmland and drinking water supplies, the state enacted a law banning the non-essential use of Pfas, including in most consumer products. Some products are exempt by law. Records show Preti Flaherty is working on the cookware exemption on behalf of the Cookware Sustainability Alliance. They are also campaigning against a bill that would require health insurance companies to cover the cost of testing residents’ blood for chemicals.
At the same time, Preti Flaherty has been lobbying for the Portland Water District, which is dealing with Pfas-contaminated water, and recently participated in a lawsuit against 18 Pfas manufacturers, the report said.
The report calls for a number of organizations and governments, as well as tobacco industry lobbyists, to sever ties with rival companies.
“The goal is to shine a spotlight on the lobbying firms that are working on both sides of this issue and force them to choose sides: side with us and our families, or side with the chemical industry,” Zimmer said.
