California Governor Gavin Newsom's decision to veto a bill that would have banned the sale of cookware and other consumer products made with toxic PFAS "forever chemicals" has dealt a significant blow to advocates fighting for greater regulation of these pollutants. The move, which was widely seen as a victory for industry interests, may slow or even kill similar legislation in other states, where PFAS are already being phased out.
Critics argue that the veto hands the industry a new weapon to use in battles over PFAS in other states, and that Newsom's reasoning is flawed. Clean Water Action, which lobbied for the bill, described the veto as a "blow" to momentum building towards removing PFAS from these products nationwide.
The decision followed intense pressure from the cookware lobby, including from celebrity chefs with financial stakes in selling PFS pans. However, public health advocates remain optimistic that the broader shift in public opinion, driven by growing awareness of the risks posed by PFAS, will ultimately drive change. Stores like Target are already phasing out cookware containing PFAS, and the public is increasingly demanding action to address this issue.
Gretchen Salter, policy director for Safer States, notes that while the veto may have won this round, it failed in other states where similar legislation was supported by lawmakers who represented their constituents. "If lawmakers represent their constituents then they'll pass a ban, and if they represent billion-dollar companies then they will oppose it," she said.
The decision offers some insight into how a potential President Newsom would approach environmental and toxic chemical issues. However, advocates are already regrouping and exploring next steps to push forward with their efforts. As Anna Reade, director of PFAS advocacy for the Natural Resources Defense Council, notes, "the veto was not reflective of the diverse support" in California that included water industry representatives, sewage treatment professionals, firefighters, independent scientists, and public health advocates.
Despite the setback, there is a sense that momentum is building towards greater regulation of PFAS. As Salter puts it, "Pfas is on the way out because consumers are demanding it." Whether this demand translates into legislative action remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the fight against PFAS is far from over.
Critics argue that the veto hands the industry a new weapon to use in battles over PFAS in other states, and that Newsom's reasoning is flawed. Clean Water Action, which lobbied for the bill, described the veto as a "blow" to momentum building towards removing PFAS from these products nationwide.
The decision followed intense pressure from the cookware lobby, including from celebrity chefs with financial stakes in selling PFS pans. However, public health advocates remain optimistic that the broader shift in public opinion, driven by growing awareness of the risks posed by PFAS, will ultimately drive change. Stores like Target are already phasing out cookware containing PFAS, and the public is increasingly demanding action to address this issue.
Gretchen Salter, policy director for Safer States, notes that while the veto may have won this round, it failed in other states where similar legislation was supported by lawmakers who represented their constituents. "If lawmakers represent their constituents then they'll pass a ban, and if they represent billion-dollar companies then they will oppose it," she said.
The decision offers some insight into how a potential President Newsom would approach environmental and toxic chemical issues. However, advocates are already regrouping and exploring next steps to push forward with their efforts. As Anna Reade, director of PFAS advocacy for the Natural Resources Defense Council, notes, "the veto was not reflective of the diverse support" in California that included water industry representatives, sewage treatment professionals, firefighters, independent scientists, and public health advocates.
Despite the setback, there is a sense that momentum is building towards greater regulation of PFAS. As Salter puts it, "Pfas is on the way out because consumers are demanding it." Whether this demand translates into legislative action remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the fight against PFAS is far from over.
. I mean, come on, who needs "industry interests" more than people's lives? Newsom thinks he's got a big win here, but really he's just giving the green light to companies that want to keep us poisoning ourselves for profit 
. And now he's going to go on tour with his veto, trying to convince other states to follow suit... good luck with that 
.
. We need someone who represents the people, not just the fat cats 
. And let's be real, Newsom's whole "public health advocates" thing is just a PR stunt 
. He's got his own agenda and it's all about keeping those dollars rolling in 
. We're not going to give up on this fight without a fight 
. Target's already doing their part, and we've got other states like New York and Massachusetts that are already banning PFAS in cookware 
. It's time for California to get its act together 
.
about this news! California Governor Gavin Newsom's decision to veto that bill was a big 
for people who want to get rid of those toxic "forever chemicals" in cookware and other products. It's like, come on! 
. Stores like Target are already making changes, and people are getting more and more 
about PFAS. It's only a matter of time before lawmakers listen up 
. The veto might be a setback, but it's not going to stop us 
. We'll just keep fighting 
until we get the change we want! 
. It feels like the industry is getting a free pass just because of all the cash they're throwing around 
. But it's not just about some giant companies making more money – it's about keeping our families safe 
. And yeah, I know public opinion is shifting in the right direction, but sometimes it takes a bit more pressure before lawmakers start listening 
I gotta say, Gavin Newsom's veto decision on that PFAS bill was a major bummer for environmentalists 
. I mean, come on, "forever chemicals" are basically toxic waste and we know it already 
. And now, this veto is gonna make it harder to get similar laws passed in other states? That's just not right 
.
. Stores like Target are already jumping on the bandwagon and consumers are demanding more action 
And Newsom's reasoning for vetoing the bill? Please, it sounds like some weak attempt to placate industry interests 
. And with politicians like Newsom who are more worried about lining their own pockets than serving the people... it's just sad 
.
. It's like he's got his hand up in the air, saying "hold on, let industry figure this out". Meanwhile, public health advocates are over here like "duh, we've been trying to tell you about PFAS for ages! 
" And don't even get me started on the celebrity chefs 
... I mean, what's up with those guys? 
. Plus, public opinion seems to be shifting in favor of greater regulation 
. We'll see how this all plays out 
. The public wants change and stores like Target already started phasing out cookware with toxic chemicals 
. I feel like Gavin Newsom is playing it too safe 
, which isn't cool 
.
. The public is becoming more aware of PFAS risks and that's driving change 
. It shows there are people on both sides who care about this issue 
.
like they need a 'veto' to know better than the general public? 
. It's clear that some people in power are starting to listen, and as long as there's a growing awareness of the risks associated with these chemicals 
, we'll keep pushing for change until it happens 
.
and now it's gonna be super hard to get similar legislation passed in other states. but i'm not giving up hope 