We are all familiar with the social science concept of unintended consequences—outcomes that weren’t foreseen or intended. History is rife with examples of well-meaning intentions that somehow went awry. In the 19th century, Australia introduced rabbits into the country as means for providing an additional food supply for its indigenous people.
I'm going to go out the proverbial limb here and assume that, by the time this issue has printed, the U.S. Senate will have passed legislation to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). I know I have a reputation of being a glass-half-empty kind of guy—but not this time.
Anyone who has read even a few of my previous columns knows I have a cynical streak. I could blame it on my 30 years spent in Washington, D.C., but I suspect I’ve always been a “glass half empty” sort of guy. However, I have now seen that miracles can happen and I have to believe what took place in the Senate with the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) reform bill just before year’s end qualifies.
By the time you read this column, the battle for Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) reform will be fully engaged. Battle lines will have been drawn, cosponsors for bills will have been recruited, and charges and counter charges will have been swapped back and forth in Senate committee hearings.