Stop favoring corporations over Iowans

Guest column by Tommy Hexter

April 10, 2024 via Des Moines Register.

Immunize Roundup's maker from liability? Stop favoring corporations over Iowans.

Will we continue to elect legislators who are funded by agribusiness associations that listen to industry needs only and continue following the certain death trap of chemicals and pollution?

On April 2, the Iowa Senate passed Senate File 2412, a bill that would grant immunity to pesticide companies from civil lawsuits related to damages caused by Environmental Protection Agency-approved pesticides. A bill with the same approach is currently sitting in the House Ways and Means Committee (after being notably rejected by the House Agriculture Committee), waiting to see if the industry can garner enough support to pass the legislation in both houses.

Major pesticide companies — namely Bayer (which produces Roundup with the active ingredient glyphosate, after purchasing Monsanto in 2016) — have been facing billions of dollars in lawsuits annually regarding health damages that the plaintiffs claim is caused by exposure to their products. Their campaign in Iowa is part of a larger multi-state lobbying effort continuing to turn the judicial tide to protect industry over people. After all, some say it is cheaper to lobby politicians to change the rules than to fight court cases. But what does this mean for Iowa’s farmers and for the state’s future?

I attended the Ways and Means subcommittee hearing on the House version of this pesticide company immunity bill on March 27. Chair Phil Thompson immediately turned over the floor to a lobbyist for Bayer, who presented two arguments. First, he believes that Americans should be able to trust the EPA label as enough protection, and second, he contended that Bayer may be unable to continue producing Roundup if it keeps losing money on lawsuits.

We then heard from Iowa Farm Bureau and Iowa Corn Growers Association, who both said that their farmer members stand in support of this bill, as Roundup allows them to do conservation practices like no-till farming and cover crops, which improve Iowa’s water quality. These perspectives are reasonable and make a sympathetic case. Americans should be able to trust the EPA to protect them from chemicals, and I imagine that for many of Iowa’s farmers, it is difficult to continue their current farming practices without Roundup.

However, opponents of the bill, such as the Iowa Association of Justice, pointed out several holes in the arguments made by agribusiness representatives that I believe tell the deeper truth about what is happening here.

First, the argument that Americans should be able to rely on EPA labels is easily disproved when you note that it was not until March 18, 2024, that the EPA banned asbestos after nearly 70 years of scientific studies demonstrating that it causes harmful lung diseases. Additionally, other international bodies, including the International Agency for Research on Cancer, have deemed glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

Second, Bayer claims that it is losing too much money on lawsuits, but less than 1% of Bayer’s lawsuits are based in Iowa. Our legislature passing this lawsuit will not give more than a miniscule improvement to Bayer’s financial situation. It would just remove the right of Iowa farmers to protect themselves in court while other people around the country continue to maintain that right.

Lastly, the argument that farmers are in support of this legislation is untrue. I testified as a representative of the Iowa Farmers Union, and I was confidently able to claim that we hadn't received any member support for this bill and that our organization supports the ability of our farmers to seek relief for pesticide injury.

It all started to make sense to me: Industry driven farm and commodity groups represent their farmers on the issues that are easy (such as conservation and crop insurance), but this story presents a blatant instance where members were clearly left out and misrepresented in the face of challenging issues that involve corporate interests.

This is an example of a larger, harsh reality in Iowa: Business as usual is killing us (we have the fastest-growing cancer rates in the nation and the largest use of Roundup). Those in power pull the wool over our eyes to prevent us from having a voice on the issues. But now, their motives and practices are becoming fully clear for the public to see. It is time to call your legislators and tell them to vote “no” on issues that represent corporations over Iowans, or else it is time to vote for someone else next time they are up for re-election.

Which do we choose, Iowa? Will we continue to elect legislators who are funded by agribusiness associations that listen to industry needs only and continue following the certain death trap of chemicals and pollution? Or do we actually start to give grassroots politicians a chance to represent farmers and Iowans, and give them the voice they need to decide on Iowa’s future? We have tough conversations ahead of us — about the future of Roundup and the safety of our drinking water — and Iowans deserve to have the information and a seat at the table in deciding what decisions are made.