1986 California Proposition 65
Proposition 65 (formally titled The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, and also referred to as Prop 65) is a California law passed by direct voter initiative in 1986 by a 63%–37% vote.
[1]: 1 In 1986, political strategists including Tom Hayden and his wife, environmental activist Jane Fonda, thought that an initiative addressing toxic pollutants would bring more left leaning voters to the polls to help Democrat Tom Bradley in his gubernatorial race against incumbent Republican George Deukmejian, who had vetoed several pollution cleanup bills.
[1] Hayden and others funded the initiative, and found three environmental attorneys to write it, including David Roe who did not expect it to pass.
[3] Proposition 65 regulates substances officially listed by California as causing cancer or birth defects or other reproductive harm, in two ways.
The requirements apply to amounts above what would present a 1-in-100,000 risk of cancer assuming lifetime exposure (for carcinogens), or above one thousandth (1/1000) of the no observable effect level (for reproductive toxins).
It remains politically controversial even after more than 30 years (see § Controversy and abuse below), in large part because it, in effect, requires businesses to know the scientific safety level for specific cancer- and birth defect-causing chemicals that those businesses are intentionally exposing members of the public to, unless government has already set those levels.
[1] From 2000 to 2020, businesses paid more than $370 million in settlements, with almost three quarters of that amount going to attorneys, and the majority of that going to a small group of perpetual litigants.
[12] Proposition 65 has also caused government and industry to cooperate on scientific issues of chemical risk, resulting in risk-based standards for 282 toxic chemicals in the law's first few years of operation, an accomplishment described by a Governor's Task Force as "100 years of progress [by federal standards] in the areas of hazard identification, risk assessment, and exposure assessment.
"[13] The existence of clear numerical standards has significantly assisted efforts to comply with the law, and to enforce it in situations of non-compliance.
For exposures from other sources, such as car exhaust in a parking garage, a standard sign might read: "This area contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, or birth defects or other reproductive harm".
Utility companies mail a Prop 65 notice to all customers each year to warn them about exposures to natural gas, petroleum products[30] and sandblasting.
[36] In the 2013–14 session of the California State Assembly, a consensus bill, AB 227, introduced by Assemblyman Mike Gatto (D-Los Angeles), effectively offered to protect certain small companies in specified circumstances from the threat of citizen enforcement lawsuits, by providing them with a streamlined compliance procedure and limited penalties.
"[39] As of 2019,[update] the below list includes some of the named Fortune 500[40] companies that have been sued or received an intent to sue for allegedly not disclosing the Prop 65 warning on one or more of their products.
[55] Proposition 65 requires that the governor revise and republish at least once per year the list of chemicals known to the State to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.
