By Ruth Brown, Idaho Reports
After lengthy debate Thursday, the Idaho Senate killed a bill that would have granted some legal immunity to the manufacturers of pesticides in a 15-19 vote.
SB 1245 would have said the only required labeling on a pesticide is the labeling that comes from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to satisfy warnings of health and safety hazards.
Bill sponsor Sen. Mark Harris, R-Soda Springs, said the Idaho Department of Agriculture still retains authority over pesticide use. The bill would not apply to pesticide drifting causes of action.
The Caldwell Canyon mine in Soda Springs produces phosphate, which is used in pesticides, and the plant, owned by Bayer, employs about 800 Idahoans.
“These crazy lawsuits that we’re hearing about around the country are creating uncertainty for farmers and ranchers because we’re wondering if American made products will continue to be available,” Harris said.
In January, a jury in Philadelphia ordered Bayer, the company that manufactures Roundup, to pay $2.25 billion to a Pennsylvania man who said he developed cancer from exposure to the weedkiller, the man’s attorneys said, according to Reuters.
Harris received a $500 contribution from the Bayer PAC on Jan. 5, according to his campaign finance report. Because the Bayer PAC is not an Idaho political action committee, it is registered with the Federal Elections Commission and the full extent of its political donations in Idaho is not yet available.
When the bill passed the Senate Commerce and Resources Committee on Feb. 6, multiple lawmakers noted that some of the settlements around pesticides have been large.
A Bayer representative, James Curry, attended and spoke at the hearing. He told the committee that resources being used for litigation could instead be used for innovation, should the bill pass.
Harris stressed that the bill would not have protected a company if it committed fraud in the labeling.
Sen. James Ruchti, D-Pocatello, argued the bill was not just about Bayer or just about Roundup.
“This provides protection for all corporations,” Ruchti said. “Both good actors and bad. Because that’s what we do. We write laws for general application.”
Ruchti said one of the benefits of being able to sue a corporation is the discovery process, or evidence that becomes public. He compared it to a public records request for a private company.
“There is only one place that a single solitary citizen of this state, even of this country, can go toe to toe with a multibillion, multinational corporation and have a shot at getting justice,” Ruchti said. “It’s not in these halls, it’s not in the executive branch, and it’s not in the federal government and all of its agencies. It’s in a courtroom.”
Sen. Linda Wright Hartgen, R-Twin Falls, said agriculture was a large portion of her district.
“We need to defend our agricultural community for the use of what they need to use, and I know that they use it very carefully and I know that they follow regulations,” Wright Hartgen said.
Sen. Van Burtenshaw, R-Terreton, said as a farmer he cannot grow a field of alfalfa without the use of pesticides.
“As one of the few farmers here in the Legislature, I use this product on a continual basis for as long as I’ve been farming,” Burtenshaw said. “A lot of times, chemicals if you use them under the correct application are safe, and incorrect application it’s not safe. So, we have a product here that works, it works really well, and it’s beneficial to the way we farm and is beneficial to my business.”
Rep. Scott Herndon, R-Sagle, argued that the bill wasn’t about just one product.
“The reality is, people make mistakes, and they make mistakes for decades,” said Herndon. “Scripture tells us that the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. And people lie and they cheat… When that happens there needs to be a remedy for the harm caused, and the ultimate arbiter is before a jury of our peers.”
The bill would have impacted both tort law and common law lawsuits. It had seven co-sponsors in the Senate and 10 co-sponsors in the House.
A 2023 Boise State University study found that Latinx farmworkers in southwest Idaho had a detectable amount of pesticide chemicals in their urine, despite some using the appropriate amount of protective gear. In that study, more than 80 percent of the urine samples taken among 62 farmworkers had 10 pesticide biomarkers detected in their urine samples.
The “no” votes on the bill came from Herndon and Sens. Ben Adams, R-Nampa; Carl Bjerke, R-Coeur d’Alene; Cindy Carlson, R-Riggins; Dan Foreman, R-Viola; Phil Hart, R-Kellogg; Rick Just, D-Boise; Brian Lenney, R-Nampa; Tammy Nichols, R-Middleton; Doug Okuniewicz, R-Hayden; Ali Rabe, D-Boise; Carrie Semmelroth, D-Boise; Ron Taylor, D-Hailey; Ben Toews, R-Coeur d’Alene; Chris Trakel, R-Caldwell; Janie Ward-Engelking, D-Boise; Melissa Wintrow, D-Boise; and Glenneda Zuiderveld, R-Twin Falls.
Ruth Brown | Producer
Ruth Brown grew up in South Dakota and her first job out of college was covering the South Dakota Legislature. She’s since moved on to Idaho lawmakers. Brown spent 10 years working in print journalism, including newspapers such as the Idaho Statesman and Idaho Press, where she’s covered everything from the correctional system to health care issues. She joined Idaho Reports in 2021 and looks forward to telling stories about how state policy can impact the lives of regular Idahoans.