Utah Democratic Congressional Representative Jim Matheson and co-sponsor Shelly Berkley, D-Nevada, introduced a bill in Congress on March 9 that will, if passed, provide additional protection to Americans impacted by the Bush Administration's funded project to resume testing nuclear weapons at the Nevada Test Site. Below is Congressman Matheson's testimony to Congress introducing the proposed legislation:

"Mr. Speaker, today I announce the introduction of legislation called the Safety for Americans From Nuclear Weapons Testing Act. Let me describe the history and the events that have led me to the introduction of this legislation.

"Our country began open-air testing of nuclear weapons in 1951. Between 1951 and 1992, over 1,000 weapons tests took place, over 100 above ground and over 800 below ground as well. Now, what is interesting about this is the government told the citizens of this country that the testing was safe. And I, like a lot of people in Utah, have roots in southern Utah, and my relatives live in southern Utah. They said it was safe too.

"I remember my dad telling me how people would wake up and watch the sky light up in the morning from the tests.

"People in southern Utah take a back seat to no one when it comes to their patriotism and their support of a strong national defense. What is unfortunate in this story is that the government lied. They lied to the people in southern Utah. They lied to anyone who was down wind of the fallout from the nuclear testing. In fact, the government knew they were putting people at risk. They kept that information quiet. It was not until the early 1980s that documents in the Pentagon were declassified that showed that in fact the government only conducted the testing when the wind blew the fallout in the least populated direction, which happened to be Utah.

"Now, a lot of people say, Wait a minute. We used to have those above-ground tests, but now they are below ground. This is an underground test right here. This was in 1970. This was an underground test. The dust and debris went 10,000 feet into the atmosphere. So the notion that underground testing is in and of itself safe, I think a picture is worth more than a thousand words.

"Now, what happened in Utah is rates of cancer are much higher than elsewhere in southern Utah. Ultimately, the government admitted culpability when Congress passed something called the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, which provided monetary compensation to individuals who happened to be living in certain counties that received high amounts of fallout from nuclear testing. Yes, the government ultimately did admit its culpability.

"Why am I talking about introducing this legislation today? Because Congress in the past year has taken some actions that are taking us down the path to renewal of nuclear testing of the Nevada test site. Since 1992 there has been a moratorium on testing. Congress voted in the last year to remove what is called the Spratt First Amendment which prevented development of new nuclear weapons. Congress also in its appropriations process voted to move ahead in funding of the development of a new generation of nuclear weapons. And development of a new generation of nuclear weapons to me means we are going down the path to additional nuclear testing. That is why I have introduced this bill.

"Now, you can say that this bill is important just because of its impact in the West and particularly in Utah, but this is not just a Western issue. This is a national issue.

"It turns out when we studied one of the significant isotopes from previous testing, Iodine 131, and showed the concentrations in each county; every county in the lower 48 States had concentrations of Iodine 131. Interestingly enough, if you look at this map, you will notice you have some counties up here in New York and Vermont that had higher concentrations than some counties in southern Utah. This once again from the National Cancer Institute demonstrates that fallout from nuclear testing is a national issue. It is a national concern. That is why I have introduced today the Safety for Americans From Nuclear Weapons Testing Act. Let me describe what the act does. First of all, it would require before any testing happens that the Federal Government conduct a full national environmental policy act review to assess health, safety and environmental impacts prior to conducting nuclear weapons testing. It requires congressional authorization prior to the possible resumption of nuclear weapons testing as well. If those steps are completed, it would require one week's public notice prior to any test, and it is going to require much more extensive monitoring for potential releases of radiation beyond the Nevada test site. It would require the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency to monitor radiation levels. But it is not just going to be the government that will be doing the monitoring because the legislation also provides for a grant program for universities, particularly across all the hot zones demonstrated by where Iodine 131 had gone, so we will have independent third-party monitoring to look for radiation releases as well throughout the country.

"The legislation says that if any radiation travels beyond the Nevada test site, then the U.S. must cease further nuclear weapons testing until Congress would vote to reauthorize such testing.

"The legislation creates the National Center for the Study of Radiation and Human Health. It would be a regional consortium of universities that will study the health effect of radiation exposure, radiation-linked illnesses, and other related research illness. Finally, the legislation requires the National Cancer Institute to provide human dose estimates for Americans for all radionuclides and all human organs produced by previous weapons tests. And a report would be provided to Congress and the public within 3 years. In fact, only one isotope has been studied by the NCI. It is an important bill for all this country. I encourage my colleagues to join me for providing safety for Americans from nuclear weapons testing." ⁽¹⁾

Idaho and other northwest Republican members of Congress have yet to sign onto Matheson's proposed legislation given that the National Cancer Institute (NCI) found Idaho as one of the major recipients of Nevada nuclear weapons test fallout. ⁽²⁾ Charles Land, NCI report author, estimated that fallout from nuclear weapons testing generated between 10,000 and 75,000 cases of thyroid cancer among Americans. ⁽³⁾ Independent analysis of NCI data by SENES Oak Ridge estimated the number of thyroid cancers in the U.S. from release of iodine-131 from Nevada Test Site at between 8,000 and 208,000. ⁽⁴⁾ Estimates have yet to be done for other radiation induced cancers and autoimmune diseases despite repeated requests by downwinders of nuclear bomb tests in Nevada.

Former President Clinton finally ended nuclear bomb testing early in the 1990's. Now President Bush intends to restart a new era of nuclear testing in Nevada.

In a unanimous House and near unanimous Senate vote (22-3), the Utah Legislature passed Joint Resolution 20 to urge Congress to expand compensation for radiation-related illnesses from nuclear testing to downwinders in all Utah counties. ⁽⁵⁾ This is an important step in recognizing that all of Utah was hit with fallout during the years of nuclear testing. This resolution also sends a clear and united message to Congress that Utahans are still reeling from the devastation dumped on them by over a thousand nuclear bomb tests in Nevada, and that the grossly inadequate funding of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act passed by Congress only extends the tragedy.

Congressman Jim Matheson's proposed legislation also targeting future tests in Nevada as Nancy Perkins reports from St. George, Utah in the Deseret Morning News ⁽⁶⁾ that " Dave Timothy remembers drinking lots of milk as a child growing up in Washington County during the nuclear bomb tests of the 1950s in nearby Nevada.

'I wanted to grow up to be big and strong', said Timothy, a slender gray-haired man who appears older than his 55 years. 'But there was the element iodine 131 in our milk, and I had cancer by the time I was 18'.

"Timothy and more than 160 other southern Utah residents gathered at the Dixie Center on Saturday for a town meeting with Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah. Those who attended the two-hour session not only shared their personal stories of living and dying with cancer, they heard Matheson's as well.

"My son never got to know my dad,' said Matheson, 43, whose late father, former Utah Gov. Scott Matheson, died at age 61 from a type of cancer associated with exposure to radioactive fallout. 'I think about my dad every day. I don't want to create another generation who has to face that.'

"'This is not a Utah issue alone. It's a national issue and we need to teach people about the risks we face,' he said. 'In good conscience we can't go down this road again.'

"Mary Neilson Anderson grew up in Washington City and recalled childhood memories of watching bloated family cows foam at the mouth and eventually 'puff up and die' following the nuclear bomb tests, she said.

"We used to invite the neighbors over and have a big watermelon bust while we watched the bomb,' she said. 'This is totally asinine and ridiculous to even consider resuming nuclear testing.'

"More than one person asked Matheson what they could do to help get his new bill passed by Congress.

"I've got one cosponsor and I'm looking for 216 more,' Matheson replied. 'I think this is a very responsible piece of legislation. This is not a partisan issue. I need you to talk to anyone you know around the country. We need to get this bill moving.'

"The legislation would require the government to conduct a National Environmental Policy Act review to assess health, safety and environmental impacts prior to conducting nuclear weapons testing. It would also require congressional authorization for testing to resume in Nevada and a week's notice issued to the public.

"I am tired of this state being the dumping ground for other people's waste," said Matheson. HR-3921 would require government and private monitoring of radiation levels throughout the country and create a consortium of universities that would study the health effects of radiation. "This has to be a full, open public process. It can't be classified," Matheson said.

"A healthy majority of the audience applauded one speaker who said he thought there had been enough nuclear weapons tests.

"'It kills people, whether it's here or in New York or Europe or wherever,' said Victor Cooper, who owns a café in Kanab. 'There should be no more nuclear testing ever in Nevada or anywhere else. More testing is unacceptable. We want a bill that says, 'no more nuclear testing, period.' "

Rep. Shelly Berkley, D-Nev., is the only House member thus far to sign on as a cosponsor. For more, see Matheson's website at www.house.gov/matheson/ or send email to jim.matheson@mail.house.gov.

What else can you do? Call your Rep. and Senator via Congressional switchboard at 202-224-3121 and urge them to cosponsor HR-3921.

"Last year, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the effort was 'a study. It is nothing more and nothing less.' But a report from the Congressional Research Service says the five-year, $485-million budget proposal "seems to cast serious doubt on assertions that the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator is only a study.

"The report notes that the program, budgeted for $7.5 million in the current fiscal year, would grow to $27.6 million in fiscal 2005, under the proposal. Spending would rise to a peak of $128 million in fiscal 2008, followed by $88 million in 2009.

"By the end of that period, according to this schedule, the Energy Department would have a bomb design and would develop a process for building it.

"Advocates say a nuclear bomb with a special hardened shell could burrow underground before exploding and destroy buried structures that conceal arsenals and command centers.

"Countries including North Korea and several nations in the Middle East, have built extensive underground military facilities, hoping to elude the reach of American conventional military power. Advocates argue that such a weapon would enable the U.S. to deter future underground projects. Foes argue that its use could devastate nearby populations and set off a new nuclear arms race.

"The Congressional Research Service report, issued to Congress on Monday, was not intended for public distribution. But the Federation of American Scientists, an arms control advocacy group, obtained a copy, which was posted on its website.

"Brian Wilkes, a spokesman for the DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration, insisted Wednesday that policymakers had not decided to build the bomb; rather, he said, the budget figures were developed only to fulfill the congressional requirement to have a five-year plan.

"'This is a placeholder budget,' Wilkes said. 'We have to plan for every contingency.' Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists said the government does not propose five-year budgets for every research program that might be approved for development.

"'If they had placeholders for every funding scenario, they'd have to request an infinite amount of money,' Aftergood said. 'This is an expression of intent to move ahead with an expanded program.'

"Congressional opponents have tried to cut funding and restrict the program's pace. Last year, they succeeded in requiring the administration to win special congressional approval to move from research into the development phase of the program.

"But one opponent, California Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Alamo), said figures showed 'they've been slow-walking us on the details, but fast-tracking money in order to go full steam ahead' if there is a Republican House and Senate after the November elections.

"Tauscher has written to Linton F. Brooks, administrator of the Nuclear Security Agency, saying that in the past, 'we were told that the [bunker buster] effort was to be a three-year study that would cost $15 million a year. This is the first notice we have received of a significantly ramped-up activity,' she said."

The Union of Concerned Scientists (USC) developed a highly documented and compelling report showing the probable radiation releases to the atmosphere from testing and/or using shallow "bunker buster" nuclear weapons.

UCS reports that, "Supporters of nuclear 'bunker busters' suggest that these weapons would allow the destruction of deeply buried targets without causing massive collateral damage." USC summarizes the results of their recent scientific studies, laying out the technical realities of how effective a nuclear bunker buster might be and what sort of nuclear fallout would result as follows as key factors:

"1.) Since weapons cannot penetrate very deeply into the ground, destroying deep, hardened targets requires powerful, high-yield nuclear warheads. 2.) Even a small, low-yield earth-penetrating nuclear weapon will create enormous fallout. 3.) The explosion cannot be contained underground. 4.) The radioactive debris thrown into the air can drift for miles on the wind. 5.) There is no guarantee that a nuclear blast will successfully destroy chemical or biological weapons. 6.) A nuclear attack on a bunker that contains chemical or biological weapons could easily lead to the release and spread of those agents. 7.) There are current conventional alternatives to the use of nuclear bunker busters."

For more information on Union of Concerned Scientists research, see http://www.ucsusa.org.

Idaho Department of Environmental Quality's (IDEQ) decision to issue the INEEL tank closure permit not only ignores the above legal battle but also ignores EPA Office of Inspector General's (OIG) February 2004 INEEL report and earlier September 1998 report showing extensive deficiencies in the IDEQ's permitting process that states, "We [OIG] concluded that the State's administration and the [EPA] Region's [10] oversight of the stationary source air enforcement program for Idaho's significant violators were not sufficient to ensure compliance with federal and State laws and regulations. We [OIG] believe that improvements are necessary to prevent threats to public health and the environment." ⁽⁹⁾

These EPA/OIG reports are a direct response to formal petitions filed by the Environmental Defense Institute, Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free and David McCoy to the EPA Inspector General.

Inadequate funding and lack of political will merged over the decades with multiple Presidential administrations' misguided priorities to stall any significant remediation of the buried waste. In the 1990's DOE did however launch a "privatized" program with then INEEL contractor Lockheed Martin called the Pit-9 waste exhumation demonstration project that cost over $100 million and never removed any waste. The Pit-9 project was fundamentally flawed primarily because the operation was never designed (thanks to withheld data) to handle the high radiation levels of the waste, and chronically corrupt contractor management. Litigation between DOE and Lockheed Martin continues today over contract violations.

Now DOE is implementing a new exploratory project at Pit-9 called "The Glove-box Excavator Method Facility" in a limited attempt to remove some waste and characterize it. Pit-9 is one of the least radioactive areas in the INEEL 97-acre dump called the Radioactive Waste Management Complex.

This exploratory work is what DOE should have done years ago to gain a more concise characterization of the buried waste and how best to design extraction programs able to deal with the high radiation and hazardous chemicals in the waste.

Exploratory "probes" into Pit-9 have recently revealed (and have been documented by EPA) nuclear waste that poses a significant problem of going "critical." That means the waste has sufficient quantities of nuclear materials that it could spontaneously generate a sustained nuclear reaction. This would not be like a bomb but more like a fire that no amount of water could put out. Incidents of this have already occurred on numerous occasions when bulldozers ultimately were used to cover the "criticality fire" with soil. Waste criticality fires by definition will release enormous amounts of radioactive material and be sustained by the high levels of pyrophoric chemicals also in the mix. For documented citations on the above see EDI website publications "Snake River Aquifer at Risk."

It remains to be seen if DOE/INEEL is doing yet another stalling project or if the DOE is serious about developing a credible means of exhuming the dumped waste and isolating these deadly contaminates from the biosphere, or just doing what they have always done in the past and stall in the hope that public outrage will subside.

DOE also has a plan to exhume beryllium blocks from the dump holes in the ground euphemistically called "soil vaults." The DOE program goal claims to encapsulate the beryllium in wax blocks.

It must be noted that the INEEL Centers for Disease Control Dose Reconstruction Health Studies related to chemical exposure and compiled for CDC by Pat McGavran found no significant usage of beryllium at INEEL. ⁽¹⁰⁾ This finding was reportedly based on information provided by DOE. Now there is a whole project to exhume beryllium blocks because of contaminate leaching into the Snake River Aquifer. This is both an indication of CDC's inability to adequately assess the exposure problems, as well as DOE's ongoing lack of full disclosure, even to another federal agency.

For more information see EDI beryllium report at http://www.environmental-defense-instiute.org

DOE's ongoing misinformation can be currently seen on the INEEL website that states. "Most of the transuranic waste buried at the Subsurface Disposal Area consists of contaminated clothing and equipment. It was shipped to INEEL from the Rocky Flats Plant near Golden, Colorado, and was the result of Cold War nuclear weapons production." If DOE were to be truthful, they would disclose that between 2,000 and 3,000 kilograms of plutonium was dumped at INEEL from Rocky Flats alone. ⁽¹¹⁾

Excessive INEEL waste operation mercury and unburned hydrocarbon emissions are specifically cited as Clean Air Act violations by EPA February 2004 Office of Inspector General report. ⁽¹²⁾

Undeterred by this IG report and the Clinton Administration era EPA scientific advisory committee findings, mercury is a significant public health hazard. EPA Administrator Michael Leavitt is pushing implementation of Bush's "Clear Skies" initiative that is the most serious attack on the Clean Air Act since it was created in the 1970s.

A cascade of studies in recent years has cast mercury as an escalating health danger, although its threat to the human nervous system has been known since at least the 19th century. That is when hat makers in England literally went mad from exposure to a mercury compound used in processing felt - hence the expression "mad as a hatter."

Today, the use of mercury in U.S. manufacturing is tightly restricted. But there has been no strict limit on mercury released into the atmosphere from the nation's 1,100 coal-fired power plants, the largest single source of mercury in the U.S.

Mercury occurs naturally in the environment, in fossil fuels like coal, and is released into the atmosphere when those fuels are burned. When mercury particles and gases drop into water, some turn into a more toxic form known as methyl mercury, which then enters the aquatic food chain. People are exposed to mercury chiefly by eating fish.

In 2000, a National Research Council study commissioned by Congress estimated that each year about 60,000 children born in the United States could have neurological problems because they were exposed to mercury before birth. Exposure could lead to developmental problems.

In the past few months, there has been a flurry of other disturbing reports, most focusing on the threat to the fetus from mothers eating fish with elevated levels of mercury. In December, the Food and Drug Administration warned all women of child-bearing age to limit their intake of tuna and other fish because of concerns about mercury.

Tom Hamburger and Alan Miller report in the Los Angeles Times ⁽¹³⁾ that "Political appointees in the Environmental Protection Agency bypassed agency professional staff and a federal advisory panel last year to craft a rule on mercury emissions preferred by the industry and the White House, several longtime EPA officials say.

"The EPA staffers say they were told not to undertake the normal scientific and economic studies called for under a standing executive order. At the same time, the proposal to regulate mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants was written using key language provided by utility lobbyists.

"The Bush administration has said that the proposed rule would cut mercury emissions by 70% in the next 15 years, and is tied to the president's "Clear Skies" initiative. Critics say it would delay reductions in mercury levels for decades at a risk to public health, while saving the power and coal industries billions of dollars."

Across the country, major resistance is springing up challenging Bush's attacks on environmental laws. Twelve state attorney generals and scores of major cities have launched a joint suit against EPA over its recent rulings.

In December, the Associated Press reported that, "A federal appeals court blocked new Bush administration changes to the Clean Air Act from going into effect the next day, in a challenge from state attorneys general and cities that argued they would harm the environment and public health. The Environmental Protection Agency rule would have made it easier for utilities, refineries and other industrial facilities to make repairs in the name of 'routine maintenance' without installing additional pollution controls. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued an order that blocks the rules from going into effect until the legal challenge from the states and cities is heard, a process likely to last months. The court's decision blocks at least temporarily one of the Bush administration's major environmental decisions. The court's justices said the challengers 'demonstrated the irreparable harm and likelihood of success' of their case, which are required to stop the rule from taking effect. EPA proposed the rule in December, the then-acting administrator signed it in August and it was made final in October. It was due to have gone into effect this week.

"Bringing suit were attorneys general for 12 states -- Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin -- and legal officers for New York City, Washington, San Francisco, New Haven and a host of other cities in Connecticut." ⁽¹⁴⁾

For more information on other recent EPA rulings that are crippling environmental laws, see Environmental Defense Institute's website publications.

Critics and even the software designers of electronic voting computer machines acknowledge that there is no way to credibly recount any individual vote because there is no paper record of the vote. Looming is the possibility of other like minded election officials like Florida Secretary of State Kathryn Harris or other state elections officials who may have control of the computer results.

What this means is unless voters challenge this crucial problem, voter fraud via computer manipulation will likely be part of the next election in November. And there will likely be NO credible recount other than what the election officials in control of the computers tell us.

Given the possibility for computer fraud, we may well be better served with the old punch cards until such time as credible and enforceable safeguards can be implemented. Despite known errors in punch cards, at least they can be recounted as physical evidence of a cast vote. An individual computerized vote currently cannot be recounted.

We must be realistic and acknowledge that those in power will go to any lengths to influence the election. In this electronic age, even the most reportedly sophisticated computer "fire-walls" at federal agencies, banks, and other data repositories, are not immune to "hackers." Underfunded and technically unsophisticated county election operations will remain extremely vulnerable.

Only about half of eligible voters exercise this fundamental Constitutional right. Which means that only about 1/4 of American voters decide who will represent our collective interests as President, members of Congress, and state and local government.

END NOTES

1. Congressional Record HR-3921 Government Printing Office Record Article 49 of 90 3/09/04. The text of the bill and updated information related to nuclear testing see http://www.house.gov/matheson/

2. National Cancer Institute:1997 "Estimated exposure and thyroid doses receded by the American People for Iodine-131 in fallout following Nevada atmospheric nuclear bomb tests", US Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, No. 97-4264.

3. David Rush, MD, and H. Jack Geiger, MD, "NCI Study on I-131 Exposure from Nuclear Testing: A Preliminary Critique," Physicians for Social Responsibility, Winter 1997-1998 Health Research Bulletin, citing NCI Charles Land's unpublished risk assessment calculations.

4. F. Owen Hoffman, "Summary of Dose and Risk Estimates to the U.S. Population from Release of I-131 from Nevada Test Site," SENES Oak Ridge Center for Risk Analysis, July 23, 1998.

5. The Salt Lake Tribune, M..Dickson, 3/12/04

6. Perkins, Nancy, Deseret Morning News, 3/13/04, "End to nuclear tests urged at town meeting."

7. Paul Richter, LA Times (3/11/04) "Questions Raised About Bomb Plan funding proposal shows bunker buster nuclear weapon isn't merely under study. "

8. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality 2/25/04 Approval of INEEL INTEC Phase II Partial Closure Plan (EPA ID No. ID 4890008952)

9. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General, Evaluation Report, Review of EPA's Response to Petition Seeking Withdrawal of Authorization for Idaho's Hazardous Waste Program, Report No. 2004-P-00006, February 5, 2004.

Office of Inspector General Audit Report, Air, Idaho's Air Enforcement Program, EIGAF8-10-0018-8100249, September 30, 1998. http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports

10. The Feasibility of Performing a Chemical Dose Reconstruction Study at the INEEL, Final Report, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, September 1999. Radiological Assessments Corporation Report No.4-CDC Task Order 1-999-final.

11. Environmental Defense Institute report "What's in the Waste" available at http://www.environmental-defense-instiute.org/publications

12. See endnote # 6, page 7

13. Hamburger, T , Miller, A., Los Angeles Times, 3/16/04, "Mercury Emissions Rule Geared to Benefit Industry."

14. Associated Press, 12/24/03, "Court Blocks EPA Rule Changes on Industrial Pollution"