1 of 2

Write now Article Tools

Page 2 of 3

was quite eventful, prior to the events that lead to 9/11.

The issue is whether Whitman and the EPA did enough to warn workers about the danger of the air. Two days after the terrorist attacks, Whitman said that officials (OSHA, New York City Dept of Health, NY State Dept of Health, FEMA) had checked the air quality at the World Trade Center site and found that asbestos, lead and volatile organic compounds were below "any level of concern for the general public health." The EPA and the Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA) issued a statement Sept. 14 declaring the air "safe." Consequently, if the issue is simply the science behind the decision to declare the air "safe"-it appears to me that, testimonies from other agencies like OSHA, should have been pursued more vigorously compared with the angst for Whitman. Whitman appeared twice in New York City after the September 11 attacks to inform New Yorkers that the toxins released by the attacks posed no threat to their health.(5) On September 18 the EPA released a report in which Whitman said, "Given the scope of the tragedy from last week, I am glad to reassure the people of New York and Washington, D.C. that their air is safe to breathe and their water is safe to drink."(6) Later, a 2003 report by the EPA's inspector general determined that such assurances were misleading, since when the statements were made the EPA "did not have sufficient data and analyses" to justify them.(4) Further, the report found that the White House had "convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones" by having the National Security Council control EPA communications after the September 11 attacks.(5)(6)

Whitman who had experienced several conflicts with the Bush administration stepped on June 27, 2003.

As a result, it appears to me that the heated exchanges at Whitman from various Congressman, may have been unwarranted, simply based on her record alone. And perhaps, their anger should have been thwarted toward the executive branch. Particularly Cheney and Bush. Based on her record, it simply seems unlikely [if Whitman had the opportunity to take ultimate control of EPA's resources] the outcome for many of the responders and others affected, may have been different.

References
1. DePalma, Anthony (September, 2006) Officials Slow to Hear Claims of 9/11 Illnesses. New York Times, Published September 6, 2006.
2. Mount Sinai Medical Center. (2002). The World Trade Center Worker and Volunteer

• << previous page
• 1
• 2
• 3
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Is Whitman really to blame for air quality post 9/11??
We want to hear your view. Write now!