Chemical Spill Leaves More Questions in West Virginia

As the chemical spill in the Elk River drifts downstream and more and more West Virginians are turning their taps back on, and as the story drifts off the front pages of the press, a few questions remain.

Safe to drink yet? No one really knows.

While we still have a fuzzy understanding of what the chemical 4-methylcyclohexanemethanol is and remain uncertain of its toxicity, the EPA is uncertain as to how much of the licorice smelling substance leaked into the river. Officials acknowledged that they don’t know how much of the substance may have leaked into the soil with the potential of seeping into the river if there aren’t proper clean up measures implemented.

            The West Virginia legislature has been quick to aide small businesses affected by the spill. HB 4175, the “West Virginia Small Business Small Business Emergency Act,” has already passed the West Virginia House of Delegates and would allow for small businesses to apply for grants and low or no-interest loans. Small businesses could also defer paying state payroll and sales taxes.

            I don’t disfavor helping small business. In this economy, a disruption of a week’s business could be a make or break situation. But the monies that would be helping these businesses would be coming from state tax dollars. In essence, with this bill, the people of West Virginia are going to be asked to compensate businesses because of an industrial accident of a poorly regulated corporation. Isn’t there a sense of robbing Peter to pay for what the corporation Paul is responsible for?

            And it’s curious that this is the first bill to come out of the West Virginia legislature after this accident. What of legislation to avoid such accidents in the first place? Wasn’t West Virginia urged to do so years ago?

            And though Senator Joe Manchin is reintroducing a bill that would provide for more stringent regulation of hazardous chemicals, West Virginia’s legislators are still voicing strong support for industry and trying their best to distance this accident from the coal industry. Remember, as they say, it is a chemical spill, not a coal industry related chemical spill.

            Finally, I found this over at Forbes. Ken Silverstein, at the business oriented publication calls for “corporate social responsibility,” saying that:

Devoted corporate citizens are endearing themselves to not just their shareholders but also to the communities where they live and conduct commerce. In turn, they are validating their brands and adding value. Conversely, cutting corners and evading responsibility diminishes their goodwill.

Well, well, well. I guess that Silverstein thinks that if we just left businesses alone, they, through their self-enlightened ways, would always do the right thing and soon we would be living in an Ayn Rand utopia of environmentally friendly corporate profits.

            I don’t dismiss what Silverstein says out of hand. There are many good people in charge of companies who want to do the right thing. But there are enough of them—and this spill gives us a good example of one—who are willing to cut corners, to disregard worker safety and health, to consider the environment as only a source for timber and minerals. This is why we need laws and regulations to make sure that they don’t hurt people or the environment.

            Most employees won’t steal from their employers, but we still have embezzlement laws to punish the no goodnics who do try to enrich themselves at their employers’ expense. Few people want to hurt other folks, but we still have laws against assault and murder to safeguard us against those who would.

It’s the same with business. Maybe we don’t need laws to keep us safe from Kumbaya Incorporated, but we should have some safeguards for the companies that aren’t so enlightened.