[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 18]
[House]
[Pages 25556-25559]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2693, POPCORN WORKERS LUNG DISEASE 
                             PREVENTION ACT

  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 678 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 678

       Resolved,  That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 2693) to direct the Occupational Safety and 
     Health Administration to issue a standard regulating worker 
     exposure to diacetyl. The first reading of the bill shall be 
     dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of 
     the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 
     of rule XXI. General debate shall be confined to the bill and 
     shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by 
     the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Education and Labor. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall 
     be in order to consider

[[Page 25557]]

     as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the 
     five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     recommended by the Committee on Education and Labor now 
     printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of 
     a substitute shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     are waived except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. 
     Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no amendment to the 
     committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in 
     order except those printed in the report of the Committee on 
     Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may 
     be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be 
     offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be 
     considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified 
     in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent 
     and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall 
     not be subject to a demand for division of the question in 
     the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of 
     order against such amendments are waived except those arising 
     under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. At the conclusion of 
     consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 
     rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as 
     may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote 
     in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the 
     Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature 
     of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with 
     or without instructions.
       Sec. 2. During consideration in the House of H.R. 2693 
     pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 
     the previous question, the Chair may postpone further 
     consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated 
     by the Speaker.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Holden). The gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. 
Sutton) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-
Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for 
debate only.
  I yield myself such time as I may consume. I also ask unanimous 
consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise 
and extend their remarks on House Resolution 678.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 678 provides for 
consideration of H.R. 2693, the Popcorn Workers Lung Disease Prevention 
Act, under a structured rule.
  The rule provides 1 hour of general debate controlled by the 
Committee on Education and Labor. The rule waives all points of order 
against consideration of the bill except clauses 9 and 10 of rule XXI.
  The rule makes in order the Committee on Education and Labor 
amendment in the nature of a substitute now printed in the bill as an 
original bill for the purpose of amendment.
  The rule makes in order the two amendments that were submitted to the 
Rules Committee and are printed in the Rules report.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in favor of the rule and in favor of H.R. 
2693, the Popcorn Workers Lung Disease Prevention Act.
  The central Ohio town of Marion is located about two hours from my 
hometown of Barberton, Ohio. Marion has the unique distinction of being 
known as the ``Popcorn Capital of the World.'' Just this month, the 
town of Marion hosted its yearly popcorn festival, complete with a 
popcorn scholarship pageant, parade and 5K run.
  Unfortunately, these fun-filled festivities are not the only symbols 
of Marion's popcorn industry. It was recently discovered that a 
chemical used in the production of microwave popcorn is the cause of 
fatal lung disease in popcorn workers across the country, including the 
Popcorn Capital of the World, Marion Ohio.
  Diacetyl is a chemical ingredient used in microwave popcorn that 
gives the popcorn a distinct buttery smell.

                              {time}  1030

  Diacetyl has been linked to illnesses in hundreds of workers in 
popcorn and other food production facilities across the United States. 
Diacetyl is specifically connected to a lung disease called 
bronchiolitis obliterans. This condition makes it difficult for air to 
flow out of the lungs. This difficulty is not reversible, and it is 
sometimes fatal.
  In November of 2000, the National Institute for Occupational Safety 
and Health conducted voluntary tests of workers at a popcorn plant in 
Missouri. The workers in that plant suffered from chronic cough and 
shortness of breath almost 3 times as often as people in the general 
population. Those plant workers are over 3 times more likely to suffer 
from abnormally low airflow through their lungs. The percentage of 
workers in the popcorn plant with asthma or chronic bronchitis was 
double the national rate. Several workers from this plant in Missouri 
had conditions that were so severe that they had to be placed on the 
lung transplant list.
  Remarkably, Mr. Speaker, despite these reports from the Missouri 
popcorn plant and other plants across the country, there are currently 
no enforceable OSHA standards requiring exposure to diacetyl to be 
controlled.
  It has been 7 years since the first cases of popcorn lung were 
identified. It has been 5 years since the National Institute for 
Occupational Safety and Health published its first report stating the 
inhalation of diacetyl was leading to deadly results. There is simply 
no excuse for the lack of action taken by OSHA in the face of this 
evidence. OSHA has failed to uphold its primary charge to protect the 
safety and health of American workers.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation fills that fatal void by protecting 
workers from this damaging chemical. The Popcorn Workers Lung Disease 
Prevention Act directs the Secretary of Labor to create standards for 
workers' exposure to diacetyl in popcorn plants and in any location 
where diacetyl is used or manufactured. Our legislation requires that 
final rules for exposure to diacetyl be in place under the Occupational 
Safety and Health Act no later than 2 years after the bill is enacted.
  For the popcorn workers of Marion, Ohio, things are starting to look 
up. The popcorn factories in their town have eliminated the use of 
diacetyl because of its linkage to the fatal lung conditions. They have 
done the right thing.
  But not every production facility that uses diacetyl has recognized 
the danger. In fact, on Monday of this week, one of America's largest 
food manufacturers introduced their new toasted butter flavoring. What 
is one of the ingredients in this new butter flavoring? Diacetyl.
  Mr. Speaker, it is clear that some food manufacturers have gotten the 
message, but some are going to continue to ignore the science and put 
their workers in harm's way. Over 500 workers in Ohio are already 
suffering because of uncontrolled exposure to diacetyl.
  Today, we act to protect our food industry workers from these harmful 
chemicals and dangerous conditions. We stand up for workers and their 
families. This legislation is not just about the conditions in food 
manufacturing plants across this country. It's about changing the way 
we treat working men and women. It's about respecting the risks that 
they undertake every day to feed their family. The hardworking people 
who make our world turn deserve safe working conditions, a living wage, 
and strong support from Congress.
  I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this rule and the 
underlying bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to 
thank my friend, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton), for the time, 
and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  H.R. 2693, the underlying legislation that is being brought to the 
floor today, directs the Secretary of Labor to establish an interim 
standard regulating worker exposure to diacetyl that applies to flavor 
manufacturers as well as all microwave popcorn production and packaging 
establishments that use diacetyl.
  Diacetyl is a chemical found in trace amounts in nature and can be 
found in

[[Page 25558]]

such foods and beverages as beer and wine and some forms of chicken. 
The compound is also used in the production of the artificial butter 
flavoring in microwave popcorn. Since 2000, several organizations, 
including the NIOSH, the OSHA, have raised concerns regarding health 
effects of diacetyl on workers in manufacturing plants that use the 
chemical.
  Mr. Speaker, we all want to make sure that our workers are able to 
work in a safe environment. We also want to make certain that the 
policy that we enact is best for workers. We certainly want to make 
sure that in the end it doesn't harm them more. That's why a 
significant number of Members on our side of the aisle are concerned 
that this legislation may be premature.
  I just received a letter from the American Bakers Association, which 
I will submit for the Record. Its president, the American Bakers 
Association president, says, ``On behalf of the American Bakers 
Association, I am writing to express our opposition to the Popcorn 
Workers Lung Disease Prevention Act, which the House of Representatives 
is expected to consider this week. Passage of the legislation ``would 
significantly short circuit the appropriate regulatory process by 
mandating that OSHA implement a regulation, including a permissible 
exposure limit, PEL, applicable to all sectors of the food industry, 
and based on limited scientific data.''
  Mr. Speaker, even though OSHA has raised concerns about diacetyl, the 
agency itself has also said, ``At this time, insufficient data exists 
on which to base workplace exposure standards or recommend exposure 
limits for butter flavorings.''
  So we believe that it is important to give OSHA time to complete a 
scientific study of diacetyl exposure or to issue a recommended 
exposure limit for the use of that chemical. Without a complete study, 
Congress may push manufacturers to use different chemicals that could 
be even more directly responsible for diseases.
  Yesterday, the minority in the Rules Committee offered an amendment 
to the rule to allow for an open rule so that any Member who wished to 
bring forth amendments, ideas for legislative changes would have the 
opportunity to do so. Especially after listening to the commencement of 
this debate and if they have some expertise or perhaps they are in 
touch with some people with expertise, Members could bring forth 
amendments to improve this legislation. That is what we sought in the 
Rules Committee, and we offered an amendment to the rule to allow for 
an open rule.
  The majority voted down an open rule on a party-line vote. We think 
it's unfortunate that the majority did not want to consider this bill 
under an open rule. Now, considering that only two amendments were 
submitted to the Rules Committee prior to consideration, I really do 
not believe that we would have faced an avalanche of amendments. But 
the reason that it would have been important is that any of our Members 
and/or their staffs, listening to the commencement of this debate, if 
they have expertise, they could bring that expertise forth in the form 
of ideas, legislative ideas, amendments, for improving this 
legislation. Unfortunately, that will not be possible because the 
majority in the Rules Committee shut down debate, did not allow that 
open rule.
  I think an open rule would have been an easy lift on this 
legislation. Instead, we have this structured rule. So it is a missed 
opportunity, Mr. Speaker.
  If the majority would have offered an open rule, as a matter of fact, 
they would have doubled the number of open rules for this session on 
nonappropriation bills, because they have only brought forth one. So 
they had an opportunity to double the amount of open rules. It would 
have been an easy lift. So an unfortunate opportunity was missed.
  The material previously referred to is as follows:

                                  American Bakers Association,

                               Washington, DC, September 25, 2007.
     Hon. Howard McKeon,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. McKeon: On behalf of the American Bakers 
     Association (ABA), I am writing to express our opposition to 
     H.R. 2693, ``the Popcorn Workers Lung Disease Prevention 
     Act,'' which the House of Representatives is expected to 
     consider this week. Passage of H.R. 2693 would significantly 
     short circuit the appropriate regulatory process by mandating 
     that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 
     implement a regulation, including a Permissible Exposure 
     Limit (PEL), applicable to all sectors of the food industry, 
     and based on limited scientific data. For over 100 years, the 
     ABA has represented the interests of the wholesale baking 
     industry and its suppliers--companies that work together to 
     provide over 80 percent of the wholesome and nutritious 
     bakery products purchased by American consumers.
       The American Bakers Association prides itself on our long 
     history of assisting baking companies to stay ahead of the 
     curve on safety and health in the workplace. Our Safety 
     Committee provides tremendous leadership on safety and health 
     policy issues. We are committed to keeping our workers safe 
     and support science-based standards and regulations. The ABA 
     is aware of recent data from the National Institute for 
     Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) regarding the use of 
     diacetyl in popcorn manufacturing and the flavor 
     manufacturing industry. We also understand the severity of 
     the health effects that have been demonstrated in a limited 
     number of cases. However, we strongly believe that the recent 
     NIOSH data does not accurately reflect the use of diacetyl in 
     other sectors of the food industry, such as baking. 
     Differences exist in the food processing industry, the 
     concentrations of diacetyl used, and the existing controls in 
     place.
       Mandating specific requirements that OSHA must include in a 
     diacetyl standard sets a precedent that should be avoided. 
     Congress's role as set forth in the OSH Act of 1970 is to 
     ``assure so far as possible every working man and woman in 
     the Nation safe and healthful working conditions and to 
     preserve our human resources.'' However, it is the role of 
     the Department of Labor to use its expertise for implementing 
     regulations. For Congress to specify the applicable 
     requirements of a ``final standard'' would bypass 
     inappropriately the mechanisms and tests established under 
     the OSH Act. Expedited regulation, even if directed by 
     Congress, would rest on very limited scientific evidence and 
     would represent rushed and inappropriate legislative and 
     Agency action.
       Further H.R. 2693 does not address the carefully developed 
     procedures for rulemaking that Congress and the courts have 
     put in place under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), 
     including provisions designed to protect small businesses. 
     Finally, on September 24, 2007 OSHA announced its intent to 
     move forward with a rulemaking on diacetyl. This rulemaking 
     process should be allowed to move forward as it includes the 
     appropriate procedural safeguards.
       ABA respectfully urges you to oppose this legislation and 
     allow the regulatory procedures designed to protect the 
     interests of small businesses to guide OSHA in developing a 
     standard.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Robb MacKie,
                                                President and CEO.

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I am happy to yield 4 minutes 
to the gentlewoman from Connecticut, the chairwoman of the Agriculture 
Appropriations Subcommittee (Ms. DeLauro).
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this rule 
to allow the House to consider the Popcorn Workers Lung Disease 
Prevention Act. This is important legislation. It would require the 
Occupational Safety and Health Administration to issue a standard to 
minimize worker exposure to diacetyl, which is an artificial butter 
flavoring chemical that has been linked to irreversible, deadly lung 
disease known as ``popcorn lung.'' By passing this rule and bill, we 
meet our obligation to protect thousands of American workers and ensure 
the public health.
  More than 7 years ago, a physician contacted the Missouri Department 
of Health and Senior Services to report eight cases of fixed 
obstructive lung diseases, bronchiolitis obliterans, also known as 
``popcorn lung,'' in workers from a Missouri microwave popcorn plant. 
Follow-up investigations by the National Institute for Occupational 
Safety and Health found diacetyl to have caused the lung disease. Since 
that time, cases of popcorn lung have been identified in microwave 
popcorn workers in several States: Missouri, Iowa, Ohio, New Jersey, 
and Illinois. In all, NIOSH conducted six investigations at 10 
microwave popcorn facilities, finding respiratory impairment among 
workers at a majority of the plants.

[[Page 25559]]

  The science on this chemical's danger is clear. Beyond the NIOSH 
investigations, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention called 
for health care providers to report additional suspected cases of 
respiratory disease in workers exposed to food-flavoring chemicals.
  That was 5 years ago. This past April, the CDC again recommended that 
employers implement safety measures to minimize worker exposures to 
flavoring chemicals such as diacetyl.
  When I asked Secretary of Labor, Elaine Chao, during an 
appropriations budget hearing why OSHA was dragging its feet on issuing 
an ``emergency temporary standard,'' she responded, ``This is a 
difficult evaluation because of the relative lack of specific 
scientific information concerning the health effects of diacetyl and 
other butter flavoring chemicals.'' Indeed, we should not be too 
surprised by the fact that, even after all these years, OSHA has failed 
to issue a standard to protect workers from exposure to diacetyl, 
preferring to rely instead on voluntary efforts.
  The science is there. Scientists have called diacetyl's effect on 
workers' lungs ``astonishingly grotesque.'' They likened it to 
``inhaling acid.'' Workers who are exposed to diacetyl today cannot 
afford to wait. This legislation would require engineering controls, 
respiratory protection, exposure monitoring, medical surveillance, and 
worker training. It would also apply to popcorn manufacturing and 
packaging as well as to the food flavorings industry.
  Let me just tell you what the industry has done. ConAgra Foods and 
Pop Weaver, two major producers of microwave popcorn, have already 
announced that they will no longer used diacetyl to flavor their 
microwave popcorn because they understand it. They see the science and 
know that we have to act.

                              {time}  1045

  We have a responsibility in this body to both consumers and to 
workers. Yesterday, however, Kraft Foods announced a new toasted butter 
flavor which contains diacetyl; in fact, Kraft Company flavorist, Susan 
Parker, told reporters, ``To some customers diacetyl is not an issue; 
to others, it is. We're moving forward to formulating solutions to meet 
customer need.'' But what Kraft fails to realize and fails to mention 
is that diacetyl is an issue for all workers. This much we know, and 
that is why we need this legislation.
  I urge my colleagues to support this rule.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I will be asking for 
a ``no'' vote on the previous question so that we can amend this rule 
and allow the House to consider a change to the rules of the House to 
restore accountability and enforceability to the earmark rule.
  Under the current rule, so long as the chairman or sponsor of a bill, 
joint resolution, conference report or manager's amendment includes 
either a list of earmarks contained in the bill or report or a 
statement that there are no earmarks, no point of order lies against 
the bill. This is the same as the rule in the last Congress. However, 
under the rule, as it functioned under the Republican majority in the 
109th Congress, even if the point of order was not available on the 
bill, it was always available on the rule as a question of 
consideration. But because the Democratic Rules Committee specifically 
exempts earmarks from the waiver of all points of order, they deprive 
Members of the ability to raise the question of earmarks on the rule.
  This amendment will restore the accountability and enforceability of 
the earmark rule to where it was at the end of the 109th Congress to 
provide Members with an opportunity to bring the question of earmarks 
before the House for a vote.
  Last year, the distinguished new Speaker said that if she would 
become Speaker, she would require all earmarks to be publicly disclosed 
and would ``put it in writing.'' However, the new majority is falling 
quite short of the promise. Certainly this week, this is the second 
rule we are considering this week, and the second time the majority has 
disregarded earmark transparency. That's 0 for 2 this week, not a good 
week for transparency. Certainly it could be said it's a good week for 
hidden earmarks.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the 
amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the 
previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, let me begin with a point of clarification; 
the earmark rule was not waived. And to the question about whether this 
bill today is premature, I would argue that it's not premature for the 
500 workers in Ohio and those across this country who are now suffering 
from this irreversible disease.
  I have heard the workers' stories from the Ohio popcorn plants. I 
have heard the story of a worker who worked 12-hour shifts in the 
popcorn factory outside of Marion, Ohio. His job was to mix the 
flavors, measuring and dumping butter-flavored powders and pastes into 
the vats of soybean oil. Now, Mr. Speaker, he is so crippled from 
breathing the vapors in the plant that he hardly has the strength to 
hold his granddaughter. He is racked with spasms that leave him dizzy 
and incapacitated.
  In 2001, after an outbreak of diseases at the popcorn factory in 
Missouri, his employer guaranteed him that his plant was safe. Mr. 
Speaker, OSHA's failure to protect our workers by ignoring the reports, 
studies and warning signs has endangered the health of families. That 
is why we must act today. Our workers should never have to choose 
between their health and feeding their families. I urge a ``yes'' vote 
on the previous question and on the rule.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of 
Florida is as follows:

     Amendment to H. Res. 678 Offered By Mr. Diaz-Balart of Florida

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 3. That immediately upon the adoption of this 
     resolution the House shall, without intervention of any point 
     of order, consider the resolution (H. Res. 479) to amend the 
     Rules of the House of Representatives to provide for 
     enforcement of clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House 
     of Representatives. The resolution shall be considered as 
     read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on 
     the resolution to final adoption without intervening motion 
     or demand for division of the question except: (1) one hour 
     of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Rules; and (2) 
     one motion to recommit.

  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the 
yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________