State reps vote against pollution measures

Next time you wonder why Houston isn't able to reduce its pollution levels, think about the local lawmakers who voted against legislation designed to protect the public from toxic air pollution. Seems 20 of 34 state representatives from the Houston metro area — all Republicans, some representing industrial districts east of Houston — voted to table five measures that would have tightened health screening levels for pollution, set fines for the periodic release of toxic chemicals and required companies to monitor their emissions constantly.

The vote comes amid evidence that toxic pollution is a growing problem in the area and that residents are getting more concerned about its effects on their health:

In January, both the state and the Houston Chronicle released data showing several communities had levels of chemicals that could increase the risk of contracting cancer. The findings prompted community meetings and special Houston City Council hearings.

In May, days after the House vote, the 2005 Houston Area Survey revealed that nearly half of area residents considered local pollution control poor, more than any in the study's 24-year history.

But that wasn't enough to faze people like Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena:

"I have been around this all my life, I have been up to my waist in the levee which holds dredgings from out of the Ship Channel, and I don't have cancer yet," Talton said. "We've done a lot to clean it up."

Eeeeewwwww! After swimming in those chemicals, we imagine Talton doesn't need a night light. Not surprisingly, the Texas petrochemical industry contributed more than $600,000 to state legislators and officials in 2004, and the industry was expected to spend $2 million this year on lobbying. Yet some legislators claim the people who live in east Harris County — where the pollution comes from — just don't understand how great things really are.

Dennis Bonnen, R-Angleton, who chairs the House committee on Environmental Regulation and who raised the motion to table the amendments, said his "significant contributions" from the industry had nothing to do with it.

His votes, he said, are in line with his constituents, who view the risk posed by pollution very differently than residents of east Houston.

"In the Ship Channel, these are big corporate companies that have no benefit. The people that live by those plants have no connection to them and just live there, and they view" pollution as a nuisance, Bonnen said.

"The people (I represent) work in these plants and live here," he said. "We understand these things, and we don't think they are dangerous."

Well, of course: The people who work in the plants don't want anything to happen that might jeopardize their jobs. So we end up with a roadblock in the fight against pollution, even as the clock is ticking on the Houston area's federal deadline to get its pollution levels under control. If locals really are worried about pollution levels, though, we hope something will get done — after all, the only thing as important to legislators as corporate donations is re-election.