Industrial benzene emissions in Houston: Legal barriers to reducing a public health threat

Decades of research show that environmental exposure to the chemical benzene is associated with severe carcinogenic, hematoxic and genotoxic effects on the human body. As such, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated the chemical as a Hazardous Air Pollutant and prescribed benzene air concentration guidelines that provide cities with an ideal ambient level to protect human health. However, in Houston, Texas, a city home to the top industrial benzene emitters in the US who undoubtedly contribute greatly to the potentially unsafe levels of ambient benzene, regulations beyond the EPA’s unenforceable guidelines are critical to protecting public health. Despite this, the EPA has failed to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for benzene. States are thus left to regulate air benzene levels on their own; in the case of Texas, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and state legislature have failed to proactively develop legally enforceable policies to reduce major source benzene emissions. This inaction continues to exacerbate a public health problem, which may only be solved through a legal framework that restricts preventable benzene emissions to protect human health and holds industrial companies accountable for violations of such regulations and standards. This analysis explores legal barriers that the City of Houston and other relevant agencies currently face in their attempt to demand and bring about such change. ^

Policy analysis of shifting to the state-run Texas women's health program

During the 82nd Texas legislature, state leaders passed a provision stating that healthcare providers, who perform, promote, or affiliate with providers who perform or promote elective abortion services may not be eligible to participate in the Texas Medicaid Women's Health Program (WHP). The federal government reacted to this new provision by vowing to eliminate its 90% share of program support on the grounds that the provision violated a patient's freedom to choose a provider; a right protected by the Social Security Act. Texas leaders stated that the Women's Health Program would continue without federal support, financed exclusively with state funds.^ The following policy analysis compares the projected impact of the current Medicaid Women's Health Program to the proposed state-run program using the criteria-alternative matrix framework. The criteria used to evaluate the program alternatives include population affected, unintended pregnancy and abortion impact, impact on cervical cancer rate, and state-level government expenditures. Each criterion was defined by selected measures. The population affected was measured by the number of women served in the programs. Government expenditures were measured in terms of payments for program costs, Medicaid delivery costs, and cervical cancer diagnostic costs. Unintended pregnancy impact was measured by the number of projected unplanned pregnancies and abortions under each alternative. The impact on cervical cancer was projected in terms of the number of new cervical cancer cases under each alternative. Differences in the projections with respect to each criterion were compared to assess the impact of shifting to the state-only policy.^ After examining program alternatives, it is highly recommended that Texas retain the Medicaid WHP. If the state does decide to move forward with the state-run WHP, it is recommended that the program run at its previous capacity. Furthermore, for the purpose of addressing the relatively high cervical cancer incidence rate in Texas, incorporating HPV vaccination coverage for women ages 18-26 as part of the Women's Health Program is recommended.^

An analysis of the revenue policy -making process of the Texas Legislature

The purpose of this dissertation was to develop a conceptual framework which can be used to account for policy decisions made by the House Ways and Means Committee (HW&MC) of the Texas House of Representatives. This analysis will examine the actions of the committee over a ten-year period with the goal of explaining and predicting the success of failure of certain efforts to raise revenue.^ The basis framework for modelling the revenue decision-making process includes three major components--the decision alternatives, the external factors and two competing contingency theories. The decision alternatives encompass the particular options available to increase tax revenue. The options were classified as non-innovative or innovative. The non-innovative options included the sales, franchise, property and severance taxes. The innovative options were principally the personal and corporate income taxes.^ The external factors included political and economic constraints that affected the actions of the HW&MC. Several key political constraints on committee decision-making were addressed--including public attitudes, interest groups, political party strength and tradition and precedents. The economic constraints that affected revenue decisions included court mandates, federal mandates and the fiscal condition of the nation and the state.^ The third component of the revenue decision-making framework included two alternative contingency theories. The first alternative theory postulated that the committee structure, including the individual member roles and the overall committee style, resulted in distinctive revenue decisions. This theory will be favored if evidence points to the committee acting autonomously with less concern for the policies of the Speaker of the House. The Speaker assignment theory, postulated that the assignment of committee members shaped or changed the course of committee decision-making. This theory will be favored if there was evidence that the committee was strictly a vehicle for the Speaker to institute his preferred tax policies.^ The ultimate goal of this analysis is to develop an explanation for legislative decision-making about tax policy. This explanation will be based on the linkages across various tax options, political and economic constraints, member roles and committee style and the patterns of committee assignment. ^