[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 181 (Wednesday, November 15, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S17059-S17060]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  EPA/OSHA FINDINGS ON PASSIVE SMOKING

  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, the Congressional Research Service [CRS] 
released a long awaited report today that calls into question the 
validity of claims that passive smoking presents a risk to nonsmokers. 
It also highlights questions on the validity of the science behind the 
Environmental Protection Agency's [EPA] and subsequently the 
Occupational Safety and Health Administration [OSHA] findings on the 
effects of secondhand smoke. In 1993, the EPA released a report 
classifying passive smoke a ``class A carcinogen.'' This EPA report has 
been the basis for numerous actions taken to limit smoking in public 
places with the most dramatic example being the OSHA proposed smoking 
ban in all workplaces across the United States.
  However, this CRS report, indicates well placed skepticism on the 
methods used by OSHA to justify the need for such draconian and 
invasive policies as the one espoused by this agency. CRS also 
questions the very harm of second hand smoke. It found fault with the 
EPA's premise that there is no safe level of exposure to passive smoke, 
and the conclusions that OSHA drew from a limited number of studies, a 
practice which clearly undercuts the validity of the OSHA findings.
  The report released today is but the latest in a series by different 
high level specialists at CRS. Every report has led to the same 
conclusion: There is no scientific justification for smoking bans or de 
facto bans like the one issued by OSHA some months ago. In 

[[Page S17060]]
previous reports CRS stated unequivocally that, ``the epidemiological 
evidence for passive-smoking-related disease is weak.'' It has followed 
this statement up with today's report which represents a comprehensive 
look at this subject as well as an examination of purported risks for 
heart disease.
  While many agenda driven researchers have picked and chosen from only 
the studies that support their views, CRS, an agency which is 
unquestioned in its objectivity, has, during a lengthy 20 month review, 
rigorously examined all of the data on this controversial topic. Its 
conclusion is that the OSHA risk assessment as stated in its proposed 
rule is incorrect. While CRS is prohibited under its rules from issuing 
specific policy recommendations, the evidence of the study is clear and 
bears repeating: There is no scientific justification for the current 
regulatory action being sought by OSHA.
  The CRS study calls into question the very underpinnings that form 
the basis of Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] and OSHA claims 
regarding the dangers of second hand smoke. EPA has claimed since the 
release of its much criticized report back in January 1993, that there 
is no safe level of exposure to ETS. However, CRS directly refutes this 
assertion. Furthermore, it finds that the only reasonable chance of 
risk comes in extreme situations and even in those cases the findings 
are uncertain and in need of further research. This, in my view, is the 
scientific equivalent of the townspeople screaming out ``The emperor 
has no clothes.''
  In light of the seriousness of the findings of this study and the 
reputation of the organization that is so questioning OSHA actions, I 
am calling on OSHA to reopen its hearings on the proposed rule and to 
re-evaluate the justification for the rule in the first place. I 
respectfully suggest to my colleagues that this historic study 
undermines the premise for all government coerced smoking bans.
  Mr. D'AMATO addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York, Mr. D'Amato, is 
recognized.

                          ____________________