[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 120 (Wednesday, July 22, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4234-S4236]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        REMEMBERING DAVID ROSNER

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I won't speak long. David Rosner has 
died. You have probably never heard of him, but I knew him. His 
research, along with his colleague Gerry Markowitz, helped expose the 
role of the lead paint industry in poisoning millions of children.
  He was a great public health researcher. Here is his book with Gerry 
Markowitz, which I just took down from my Senate bookshelf, where I 
keep it: ``Deceit and Denial: The Deadly Politics of Industrial 
Pollution.''
  David had smarts, and he had discipline, and he had guts. The smarts 
made him and Gerry path-breaking researchers. The discipline made their 
research incontrovertible, and the guts helped him weather the 
response, all too common, from American industry when faced with 
inconvenient truths: to lie, to bully, to disparage.
  Well, that behavior did not defeat David. His work stands.
  As I said, I won't speak long. I will instead ask unanimous consent 
that three obituaries be printed in the Congressional Record appended 
to these remarks. One is his obituary in The Lancet, the distinguished 
medical publication. The second is a reminiscence by his professional 
peer Bruce Lanphear. And the last is a Substack reminiscence by his 
daughter Molly.
  David was a special man. He did special work. I was proud to have 
worked with him.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                         Obituary--David Rosner

                           (By Andrew Green)

       Pioneering public health historian. Born on March 13, 1047, 
     in New York, NY, USA, he died on May 24, 2026, in New York, 
     aged 79 years.
       As a leading historian of public health, David Rosner 
     pursued ``the highest level of scholarship that he then put 
     to work for the benefit of people who had suffered illness 
     and death at the hands of industry'', said Amy Fairchild, 
     Professor in the Division of Health Policy and Management at 
     the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, MN. Rosner helped 
     develop and expand the field of occupational and 
     environmental history, showing how disease and death were 
     often foreseeable--and avoidable--by-products of 
     industrialisation. ``What he really wanted to accomplish in 
     labour history was to bring attention to health and the 
     effects of working conditions on worker's health'', said 
     Gerald Markowitz, Distinguished Professor at the John Jay 
     College of Criminal Justice in New York, NY, and Rosner's 
     long-time collaborator. ``He also really wanted to show how 
     the workplace and the environment are crucial elements in 
     improving public health.''
       Rosner received a bachelor's degree from City College of 
     New York, NY, in 1968 and a master's degree in public health 
     4 years later from the University of Massachusetts in 
     Amherst, MA. In that period, Rosner also worked at a hospital 
     for developmentally challenged children in New York. ``That's 
     really where he began to see the relationship between 
     environmental factors and disease, because many of the 
     children had been lead poisoned'', Markowitz said. ``That 
     really was an important education for him about how life 
     chances are completely altered because of housing conditions 
     or diets or just poverty.'' Rosner completed a doctorate in 
     the history of science at Harvard University in Cambridge, MA 
     in 1978. 4 years later, he published his first book, A Once 
     Charitable Enterprise, documenting how hospitals in New York 
     had transitioned from community-based institutions to 
     bureaucratised facilities. ``That was really a pathbreaking 
     work that got a lot of attention'', Markowitz said. At City 
     University Distinguished Professor, Rosner initiated and 
     academic career ``teaching public health students to think 
     not only about public health policy and practice and 
     epidemiology, but to think about history'', Fairchild said. 
     ``You have to know something about what came before you. It 
     shapes our assumptions and sense of what's possible.''
       In 1998, Rosner moved to Columbia University in New York, 
     where he was named the Ronald H. Lauterstein Professor of 
     Sociomedical Sciences and Professor of History. He also co-
     founded and co-directed the Center for the History and Ethics 
     of Public Health, which was jointly hosted by Columbia's 
     Mailman School of Public Health. ``He was great to younger 
     scholars and just very supportive of younger people coming 
     into the field'', said Susan Reverby, Marion Butler McLean 
     Professor Emerita in the History of Ideas and Professor 
     Emerita of Women's and Gender Studies at Wellesley College, 
     in Wellesley, MA.
       Rosner challenged the health and environmental harms caused 
     by industry both through his scholarship and in legal 
     settings. He would regularly testify as an expert witness on 
     behalf of people affected by workplace and environmental 
     hazards, including silica dust, asbestos, and lead poisoning. 
     ``He spent all this time testifying for workers and much of 
     that money he ploughed back into Columbia to build the 
     history of the public health programme'', Reverby said. 
     ``More than the content of his work on environmental and 
     occupational exposures, he really modelled what it means to 
     be an intellectual who contributes to our world'', said Mary 
     Bassett, Professor of the Practice of Health and Human Rights 
     at the Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health in Boston, 
     MA.
       With Markowitz, Rosner would write of edit several books, 
     including Deadly Dust: Silicosis and the Politics of 
     Occupational Disease in Twentieth Century America (1991), 
     Deceit and Denial: The Deadly Politics of Industrial 
     Pollution (2002), and Building the Worlds That Kill Us: 
     Disease, Death, and Inequality in American History (2024).

[[Page S4235]]

     Rosner, who retired from Columbia University as a Professor 
     Emeritus of Sociomedical Sciences in 2025, received a 
     Guggenheim Fellowship in 1987 and was named the recipient of 
     the 2026 Genevieve Miller Lifetime Achievement Award from the 
     American Association for the History of Medicine. He is 
     survived by his wife, Kathlyn Conway, a psychotherapist, and 
     their children, Zachary and Molly. ``Disease is not only a 
     matter of bacteria and viruses, but it is produced by the 
     social and political conditions that society makes'', 
     Markowitz said; Rosner ``very much believed that and that is 
     what he wanted his legacy to be, to make that known in the 
     public health world and the broader society''.

                             [May 25, 2026]

  How Rosner and Markowitz Revealed the Hidden Architecture of Disease

                          (By Bruce Lanphear)

       David Rosner and Gerald Markowitz did not simply write 
     history. Together, they changed how many of us understand the 
     relationship between industry, disease, science, and public 
     health. Their work became so intertwined that it is difficult 
     to think of one without the other. Yet David's death this 
     past week invites reflection not only on their partnership, 
     but on the singular role he played in reshaping public health 
     history.
       I had the opportunity and privilege to work with David and 
     Jerry--they were a package deal--in the Rhode Island and 
     California public nuisance cases against the paint and 
     pigment manufacturers. Watching them work was to see 
     historians operating not as distant chroniclers of the past, 
     but as investigators reconstructing how societies normalize 
     harm. They brought archives to life. Internal memos, trade 
     association minutes, and forgotten correspondence became 
     evidence not only of what industries knew, but of how 
     uncertainty itself was cultivated and deployed. More broadly, 
     Rosner and Markowitz helped redefine what public health 
     history could be. Rosner and Markowitz stood at the 
     intersection of history and public health. They understood 
     that disease does not emerge in a vacuum. It arises from the 
     worlds we build--our industries, our housing, our labor 
     systems, our politics, and our willingness to accept certain 
     harms as the price of progress.
       Their work on lead poisoning fundamentally reshaped the 
     public conversation. Lead was long portrayed as an 
     unfortunate but isolated problem affecting poor children in 
     deteriorating housing. Rosner and Markowitz showed something 
     much larger and more unsettling: lead poisoning was not an 
     accident. It was the foreseeable consequence of industrial 
     decisions, aggressive marketing, political compromise, and 
     delayed regulation. Their landmark work, Deceit and Denial, 
     documented how industries understood the dangers of lead long 
     before the public did and how scientific uncertainty was 
     often amplified to delay action.
       The same themes ran through their work on silica and vinyl 
     chloride. They chronicled how workers developed silicosis, 
     cancer, and other occupational diseases while industries 
     debated standards, questioned evidence, and insisted more 
     study was needed. They showed that uncertainty was not merely 
     a scientific condition; it was a political strategy.
       Rosner and Markowitz read corporate archives the way 
     epidemiologists read outbreaks: searching for patterns, 
     timelines, concealment, and consequence. They reconstructed 
     not only what companies knew, but when they knew it and how 
     they responded. In doing so, they helped expose a recurring 
     pattern in public health: the long gap between recognition of 
     harm and willingness to act. Their work did not remain 
     confined to universities or academic journals. It entered 
     courtroorns, regulatory debates, and public policy battles, 
     where it was often intensely contested precisely because it 
     challenged powerful industries and long-standing assumptions 
     about responsibility for disease.
       They also understood something profound about modern 
     disease. Many of the illnesses surrounding us are not sudden 
     catastrophes. They accumulate slowly across decades, hidden 
     within the ordinary routines of industrial life. Lead in 
     paint and gasoline. Silica in mines and factories. Vinyl 
     chloride in plastics manufacturing. These were not exotic 
     hazards. They were woven into modernity itself.
       That insight feels even more relevant today. We 
     increasingly inhabit a world saturated with synthetic 
     chemicals, pollutants, and technologies introduced long 
     before their long-term effects are fully understood. Rosner 
     and Markowitz's workforced us to confront an uncomfortable 
     possibility: we are, in part, dying from the world we built.
       Yet David was never merely cynical. His work carried a 
     moral seriousness without drifting into selfrighteousness. He 
     believed history mattered because it illuminated choices--
     choices made differently in the future if we were willing to 
     learn from the past.
       Many scholars write about public health. David Rosner 
     helped reveal its deeper architecture: the political 
     decisions, economic incentives, institutional hesitations, 
     and cultural assumptions that shape who becomes sick and who 
     is protected.
       That is an extraordinary legacy.
                                  ____


                            [June 16, 2026]

                   Losing My Dad While the Knicks Win

                           (By Molly Rosner)

       As Knicks fever took over NYC the last few weeks, I've been 
     excavating more memories of my dad and the Knicks, more 
     lessons that 1990s fandom taught me. So I wrote a fuller 
     piece about it. And here it is:
       My dad, a lifelong New Yorker and dedicated Knicks fan, 
     died on the Sunday of Memorial Day weekend, May 24th. One day 
     later, the Knicks won their first Eastern Conference 
     championship since 1999. Making sense of the cruelty of that 
     timing isn't easy.
       One tough reality about mourning is that the rest of life 
     keeps happening while you do it. Grief settles into you while 
     you go about your daily routine pretending a piece of 
     yourself isn't broken, missing. The Knicks kept playing, 
     magnificently, even though my dad wasn't there to answer the 
     phone after the game.
       My childhood in the 1990s was the last heyday for Knicks 
     basketball and I have a lot of memories mixed up with the 
     events of Madison Square Garden. As an awkwardly tall pre-
     teen, I found comfort in fancying myself as Patrick Ewing on 
     my basketball team. When Allan Houston played with a Band-Aid 
     on his head because he'd bumped it in the night while feeding 
     his baby, I thought there was nothing more noble or sweet. In 
     that moment, I saw that being a fan was about more than 
     athletic ability: Everyone loved Michael Jordan, but I could 
     see the qualities that made my own dad so wonderful in Allan 
     Houston. When I wore my Latrell Sprewell jersey to class, my 
     middle school science teacher asked me--a rule follower to 
     the core--if I supported his assault on his coach (before he 
     came to the Knicks). I grappled with adoring someone who 
     broke rules. I idolized the players my dad idolized.
       It was while my mom was undergoing chemo for breast cancer, 
     that my dad and uncle got season tickets as a relief valve. 
     Because of those tickets, my dad was there cheering in the 
     crowd when my brother and I played the national anthem with 
     the East Harlem Violin Program before a Knicks game. We 
     practiced while the Knicks warmed up and, for the length of 
     the song, the Knicks watched and applauded for us--a group of 
     local public-school kids--as we played on their court. When 
     the electronics store Nobody Beats The Wiz, sponsored the 
     Knicks, we played the free giveaway cassette tape with 
     jingles about The Wiz and raps about--and performed by--the 
     Knicks over and over again. ``I'm a Knicks fan , I'm a 
     Knicks fan  / I'm down with the orange and the blue!''
       My dad was always unabashedly proud and supportive of me, 
     so I can pinpoint the one time I knew I'd disappointed him. I 
     was approached at the Garden during a game and asked if I 
     wanted to shoot free throws during half time. As a teenage 
     girl who'd watched so many other fans miss in front of 
     thousands of people, I was too scared and I declined. When I 
     got back to the seats from the concession stand and confessed 
     to him, I remember his astonishment, ``My own daughter turned 
     down a chance to play at Madison Square Garden?'' So certain 
     am I in his love for me, that this ``failure'' became a 
     running joke that would pop up at various life milestones.
       My dad had that chance himself, playing for his high school 
     team on that hallowed court in Madison Square Garden in 1964. 
     Though he was a renowned scholar, one of his prized 
     possessions was the photo of him mid-air, arms stretched high 
     for a jump ball, converse sneakers dangling above the floor 
     during that game.
       As he got older, my dad's appreciation for the team turned 
     into one of awe for their athleticism. He'd repeat comments 
     throughout the game--look how strong they are, look how high 
     they can jump. ``Just incredible,'' he'd mutter to no one in 
     particular.
       This year on Mother's Day, when I called him during game 3 
     of the second round to tell him our car had broken down on 
     the highway about an hour south of Philly, he'd comforted me 
     first with the Knicks score and then noted that train tickets 
     home might be expensive because of all the Knicks fans coming 
     home that evening. He offered to come get me instead.
       Two days later, he went into the ICU.
       The final round of the Eastern Conference began--Knicks vs. 
     Cavs. After he stopped responding to our voices in the 
     hospital, my brother and I would put the Knicks game on in 
     the room, both holding on to the hope that the sound of 
     sneakers squeaking on the court, or the announcers calling 
     the plays, or the chants of ``de-fence'' would get through to 
     him--that those familiar sounds might just be powerful enough 
     to wake him up.
       We'd stay until halftime, when visiting hours ended, 
     watching, hoping. I walked the mile and a half home from the 
     hospital checking the score on my phone, eavesdropping on 
     conversations and shouts from inside bars where the game was 
     playing, unsure of how to navigate all the emotions I was 
     feeling: Devastation at my dad's condition; joy at the Knicks 
     glory punctuated by pain that I couldn't share this with him; 
     certainty that he'd want me to enjoy this; heartbreak that I 
     wouldn't receive a ``Yeah!'' text at the end of the game. As 
     I walked through Harlem, I stopped next to a group of four 
     men on folding chairs who'd set up a projector to watch the 
     game. I checked the score and complimented their set up. 
     Being conversant in Knicks meant we could talk to each other 
     with a certain level of familiarity. ``Let's Go Knicks,'' I 
     said in lieu of, ``have a good night.'' As I continued home, 
     I felt grateful that the whole city, it seemed, was rooting 
     for their hometown team--our team.

[[Page S4236]]

       The next morning, the ICU nurse caring for my dad, who is 
     not a basketball fan, told us that she'd checked the score on 
     her way to work just so that she could tell him the good 
     news. For us, that was a real act of care. His fandom was a 
     part of his identity as a New Yorker. The Knicks gave us 
     something hopeful to talk about even as we felt increasingly 
     alarmed that he wasn't responding to that news, or anything 
     else.
       And then, there they were, our childhood heroes: Patrick 
     Ewing, John Starks, Allan Houston, Latrell Sprewell, Larry 
     Johnson, and all our favorite players, thirty years older, 
     showing up to support this team that was, for the most part, 
     not born when the Knicks last saw a division championship. It 
     felt like they were coming together specially for my family. 
     The whole city has awakened in a way only New Yorkers can--
     with innovative watching parties, public joy, orange and blue 
     bagels, and signature snark that makes the city into a home.
       My dad bestowed on my brother and me the gift of being part 
     of the crowd. He taught us what it means to cheer through 
     thick and thin, what it means to maintain hope, and that 
     there is power in believing in something ``just for fun.'' I 
     share the bond of fandom with friends who send me texts 
     throughout every game even if we haven't spoken all year, and 
     I thank my dad for bringing me into this community.
       The day he died, we told my dad that the Knicks were one 
     game away from the Eastern Conference title that he'd waited 
     27 years to see. We told him that they looked like they were 
     going to sweep. We told him the Knicks were honoring him at 
     MSG. We told him the wait was over, we told him we loved him.
       You can't time grief. I know that writing this is an 
     attempt to make sense of something that defies logic. I 
     wondered if a Knicks win would exacerbate my grief, as many 
     things seem to right now. I'd cried big slobbery tears when 
     they won the East. But the road through the finals was filled 
     with moments of pure joy and camaraderie, the drama of an 
     historic comeback, and a team so likeable you can't help but 
     smile. It has felt like a balm on this open wound. I think 
     it's healing decades of strife for fans with people who 
     didn't live to see this victory. Karl-Anthony Towns said 
     after winning the championship that he felt like his mom, who 
     many fans know died in 2020, helped pull some strings for 
     this win. ``Thank you, mama. I appreciate you getting me 
     one,'' he said. Every lifelong Knicks fan has someone like my 
     dad who didn't get to see this championship, but believes 
     they might have helped pull some strings, too.
       I know my dad would not want our grief compounded by a 
     Knicks loss. Being a Knicks fan in the `90s was an exercise 
     in resilience. It taught us not to take anything for granted 
     and I draw on those lessons today.
       Now, even without my dad, my family cheers because being a 
     fan in New York is a legacy we are tasked with carrying on. A 
     chance to be part of something bigger than us. Something to 
     cheer for through pain.
       Go New York, Go New York, Go.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.

                          ____________________