Linking air pollution to illness and death, and those who support changes
Senator Jenny Oropeza
December 20, 2007
SANTA MONICA – We are killing our children by poisoning the air they breathe.
At the same time, it comes as no surprise, that those living closest to pollution sources like congested freeways, refineries and the ports also are the ones most likely to believe regional air pollution is a problem and are more willing than most to support paying for improvements, according to some of California’s top policy experts. Such experts include respected pollster Mark Baldassare, president and CEO of the non-partisan Public Policy Institute of California; Alberto Mendoza, president of the Coalition for Clean Air; and Manual Pastor, director of the Program for Environmental and Regional Equity at the University of Southern California.
Baldassare, Mendoza and Pastor were members of a kickoff policy panel I moderated Nov. 30 on Latinos and air pollution sponsored by the 27 Latino members of the Legislature. Other panels during the recent two-day event in Santa Monica focused on health impacts, economic costs, regulation, decision making and advocacy.
No one is crying wolf when it is said that air pollution is deadly. As a cancer survivor reared close to the largest port complex in the nation, I take seriously the words of our top policy experts.
Here is what we know:
Despite improvements, too many Californians remain exposed to the most toxic air in the nation. This is especially true for those who live in low-income communities dominated by people of color. Sadly, 80 percent of Latinos live in areas that fail to meet federal Environmental Protection Agency air quality standards, as do 65 percent of African Americans and 57 percent of whites.
Daily exposure to diesel exhaust from airports, seaports, trucks and trains inevitably creates negative long-term health effects. It cannot be proven that nearly 50 years inhaling these toxic fumes caused my cancer. But studies show that particulate concentrations in the air cause dire health effects, including respiratory illness, choking asthma and increased hospitalization rates.
Much of the information presented at our policy briefing, entitled The Right to Breathe Clean Air, was disturbing. Expert after expert testified on the toxicity of the air concentrated in certain, mostly industrialized sectors, most of them in poor communities of people of color.
Baldassare’s data shows that resident concerns over air quality and air pollution are greatest in Latino and African-American communities. Seven in 10 Latinos believe health threats due to air pollution are a “serious” to “very serious” problem in their communities.
Pastor’s testimony followed through. He said the burdens of environmental hazards are not borne equally in California: In Los Angeles, African Americans are fifty percent more likely and Latinos are twice as likely to be living near facilities that store, transfer and/or dispose of hazardous wastes.
Compared to whites, Pastor said, Latinos and Asians have a lifetime cancer risk that is one-third greater; African Americans experience a 40-percent greater lifetime cancer risk from ambient air toxics.
Mendoza noted that ports and freight — diesel-emitting ships, trucks, trains and cranes that move cargo about the state — are responsible for 2,400 premature California deaths every year. And guess which two regions have the worst air pollution in America? The South Coast, including the 28th Senate District I represent, and the San Joaquin Valley.
In conclusion, increasing population, economic growth, dramatic increases in vehicle-miles driven, among other factors, make it nearly impossible to cut pollution. Sadly, unless we do something to halt or reduce these levels, we will continue to harm, even kill, our children.
Under the leadership of Asm. Joe Coto of San Jose, chair of the Latino Caucus, we will continue studying the serious health and equality disparities Californians faces. Among possible proposals: The study of the health effects traffic congestion has on children whose schools are near freeways. As we consider possible legislation in 2008, we know we cannot make substantive progress without a mandate from the public. For the sake of cleaner air, clearer skies and a healthier future for all, please join us in protecting our children.
At the same time, it comes as no surprise, that those living closest to pollution sources like congested freeways, refineries and the ports also are the ones most likely to believe regional air pollution is a problem and are more willing than most to support paying for improvements, according to some of California’s top policy experts. Such experts include respected pollster Mark Baldassare, president and CEO of the non-partisan Public Policy Institute of California; Alberto Mendoza, president of the Coalition for Clean Air; and Manual Pastor, director of the Program for Environmental and Regional Equity at the University of Southern California.
Baldassare, Mendoza and Pastor were members of a kickoff policy panel I moderated Nov. 30 on Latinos and air pollution sponsored by the 27 Latino members of the Legislature. Other panels during the recent two-day event in Santa Monica focused on health impacts, economic costs, regulation, decision making and advocacy.
No one is crying wolf when it is said that air pollution is deadly. As a cancer survivor reared close to the largest port complex in the nation, I take seriously the words of our top policy experts.
Here is what we know:
Despite improvements, too many Californians remain exposed to the most toxic air in the nation. This is especially true for those who live in low-income communities dominated by people of color. Sadly, 80 percent of Latinos live in areas that fail to meet federal Environmental Protection Agency air quality standards, as do 65 percent of African Americans and 57 percent of whites.
Daily exposure to diesel exhaust from airports, seaports, trucks and trains inevitably creates negative long-term health effects. It cannot be proven that nearly 50 years inhaling these toxic fumes caused my cancer. But studies show that particulate concentrations in the air cause dire health effects, including respiratory illness, choking asthma and increased hospitalization rates.
Much of the information presented at our policy briefing, entitled The Right to Breathe Clean Air, was disturbing. Expert after expert testified on the toxicity of the air concentrated in certain, mostly industrialized sectors, most of them in poor communities of people of color.
Baldassare’s data shows that resident concerns over air quality and air pollution are greatest in Latino and African-American communities. Seven in 10 Latinos believe health threats due to air pollution are a “serious” to “very serious” problem in their communities.
Pastor’s testimony followed through. He said the burdens of environmental hazards are not borne equally in California: In Los Angeles, African Americans are fifty percent more likely and Latinos are twice as likely to be living near facilities that store, transfer and/or dispose of hazardous wastes.
Compared to whites, Pastor said, Latinos and Asians have a lifetime cancer risk that is one-third greater; African Americans experience a 40-percent greater lifetime cancer risk from ambient air toxics.
Mendoza noted that ports and freight — diesel-emitting ships, trucks, trains and cranes that move cargo about the state — are responsible for 2,400 premature California deaths every year. And guess which two regions have the worst air pollution in America? The South Coast, including the 28th Senate District I represent, and the San Joaquin Valley.
In conclusion, increasing population, economic growth, dramatic increases in vehicle-miles driven, among other factors, make it nearly impossible to cut pollution. Sadly, unless we do something to halt or reduce these levels, we will continue to harm, even kill, our children.
Under the leadership of Asm. Joe Coto of San Jose, chair of the Latino Caucus, we will continue studying the serious health and equality disparities Californians faces. Among possible proposals: The study of the health effects traffic congestion has on children whose schools are near freeways. As we consider possible legislation in 2008, we know we cannot make substantive progress without a mandate from the public. For the sake of cleaner air, clearer skies and a healthier future for all, please join us in protecting our children.
Print
Email
