Scott Powers
A Florida Senate committee Monday gave the thumbs up to a bill that would overturn a Key West ordinance and prevent other cities from trying to ban sales of sunscreens that contain two chemicals linked by some to degradation of coral reefs.
In pushing Senate Bill 172 through the Senate Committee on Innovation, Industry, and Technology, Republican state Sen. Rob Bradley declared that the “scientific community does not support” claims that the two chemical ingredients in question, oxybenzone and octinoxate, may be killing coral reefs.
“Unfortunately, with all of the wonderful things that come with our beaches and our sunshine, we also rank second in the nation for the highest rate of new melanoma cases,” said Bradley, who described sunscreen as the “first line of defense” against skin cancer.
In February Key West approved an ordinance that would ban the sale of sunscreens containing those two chemicals, based on that concern.
Bradley’s argument: This is the Sunshine State, with the second-highest incidence of skin cancers in the country. Why would Florida allow local governments to ban sunscreens, of all things?
“This is a strong message to send to our citizens, the rest of the county and the world that Florida encourages the use of sunscreen to prevent melanoma; we do not discourage it,” Bradley said.
Yet Bradley’s statement about the science drew strong rebuttals from officials of Key West and several environmental groups who contended there is significant enough scientific consensus that the National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration and the National Park Service are concluding that the two chemicals are bad for the Great Florida Reef, the largest coral reef in North America.
One problem: No one has tested to see whether the two chemicals are at significant levels in the Florida Reef. Sierra Club lobbyist Deborah Foote suggested the state should investigate and research those levels, as has been done in the U.S. Virgin Islands and in South Carolina, before taking any positions on sunscreen bans.
“The state does have a compelling interest to protect the Florida Reef,” she said.
Ultimately, though, the opponents of oxybenzone and octinoxate fell back on the position that now is not the time for the state to preempt such ordinances, but rather the state should seek more scientific research and wait to see what it says.
The research that has been done has shown that oxybenzone and octinoxate have negative effects on corals and marine life, but only when they are exposed to “concentration levels generally not observed in nature.”
Several business groups, notably the Florida Chamber of Commerce and the Florida Retail Federation, lined up in support of Bradley’s SB 172. On the other hand, Jason Unger, lobbyist for Key West, noted that the CVS Pharmacy company has decided to phase out the chemicals from its sunscreens by the end of 2020.
The Florida Senate Committee on Innovation, Industry, and Technology showed no intention of doing so Monday, voting to support Bradley’s Senate Bill 172 by an 8-2 vote, with Democratic state Sens. Oscar Braynon and Gary Farmer casting no votes.
SB 172 and its companion House Bill 113 are a second attempt to preempt local governments from banning the chemicals. Last year a similar move was rolled into House Bill 1299, but it failed.
The bill is a policy contradiction to one introduced by Democratic state Sen. Linda Stewart of Orlando, Senate Bill 318, which would ban the chemicals in sunscreen statewide, unless someone had a prescription for them. It also is counter to a federal bill introduced by Republican U.S. Rep. Francis Rooney and Democratic U.S. Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, House Resolution 1834, to ban the chemicals in marine sanctuaries nationwide.
___
The News Service of Florida contributed to this post.
