Last Wednesday, on Capitol Hill, at a hearing packed with reporters, photographers, constituents, and industry reps, Representative Peter Welch (D-VT) zeroed in on a key moment in April 2006 that contradicted the testimony of Jim Shea, CEO of Gulf Stream.

Shea's company was paid $500 million to supply the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) with 50,000 trailers housing displaced persons in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Residents in some trailers would later complain of health problems including bloody noses, burning eyes, acute respiratory illnesses, and even miscarriages – as Amanda Spake reported in The Nation months before most in the mainstream media paid attention to this scandal. Shea testified that his company did nothing to hide any pertinent information about health issues associated with Gulf Stream trailers.

Yet in April 2006, as CNN prepared to air a story on elevated formaldehyde levels found in the trailers, Gulf Stream sent a statement to the network which Rep. Welch read aloud at the hearing: "We are not aware of any complaints of illness from our many customers of… travel trailers over the years, including travel trailers provided under our contracts with FEMA." Rep. Welch asked Shea, "Did your company make that statement?"

"We were speaking retrospectively," Shea said awkwardly, "prior to the March issue – when [the problems] started."

Rep. Welch continued: "On March 20, 2006… you received a statement – this was before you issued the ‘no complaint' statement – and I'll quote, ‘There is an odor in my trailer that will not go away. It burns my eyes and I am getting headaches everyday. I've tried many things, but nothing seems to work. Please, please, please, help me'.… How do you square your statement to CNN – ‘we are not aware of any complaints of illness' made in April 2006 – with a statement from a customer [in March] that was a complaint?... Had you received any complaints before April 2006 when you issued your statement to CNN that you had had no complaints?"

Shea paused a good five seconds before responding. "The complaints related to this matter that we received were two," he said.

"So the answer to my question is yes, you had received complaints prior to April, but you told CNN you had no complaints, correct?"

"And we were speaking of our history with FEMA as a program, sir," Shea said.

"Sir, that's a justification for saying something that was untrue," Rep. Welch said.

It was a bizarre hearing in that the Titans of deregulation – the Republicans – were arguing that a clear formaldehyde standard for trailers needed to be established in order for corporations to be held accountable. No one disagreed with the need for a clearer standard. In fact, Chairman Henry Waxman explained that a similar hearing was held in 1981 and members of Congress told FEMA, Housing and Urban Development, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) that a standard for formaldehyde levels in trailers was needed. (I can't imagine that Republicans were leading the charge on that.) "So I agree with my Republican colleagues when they say this is a failure of government. Government should have set standards…. But I also think this is a failure of industry," Rep. Waxman told four CEOs of trailer manufacturing companies. "Because some of you did testing and you found that there was a problem and that was the end of it. Several of you didn't do any tests at all, even though reports were coming out about high formaldehyde levels in trailers causing people to be sick."

Rep. Waxman pointed to Gulf Stream's testing of 11 occupied trailers over two years ago. Each one had levels of formaldehyde greater than 100 parts per billion, "the level at which acute health effects begin to appear in healthy adults," according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Environmental Protection Agency, SPSC, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and the World Health Organization. Four of the trailers had levels above 500 parts per billion, "the level at which OSHA requires medical monitoring of employees." In testing nearly 40 unoccupied trailers awaiting allotment to displaced families, Gulf Stream found that formaldehyde levels in half of them were above 900 parts per billion, "the level that EPA says no one should be exposed to for more than eight hours in a lifetime." Another company that built 5,000 units for FEMA – Forest River – hired a contractor to test its unoccupied trailers. The contractor advised that warning signs be placed outside the trailers reading, "Hazardous – do not enter."

Rep. Waxman said, "Gulf Stream never told any family living in its trailers about [its] test results. The company did spend a month carefully crafting a letter to FEMA about the test results." Gulf Stream wrote that "the formaldehyde levels [in the eleven] occupied trailers fall below the OSHA standard" of 750 parts per billion – the maximum allowable workplace exposure. It failed to mention the testing on the unoccupied trailers or describe the measured formaldehyde levels in the 11 occupied trailers that were cause for concern.

Dr. Michael McGeehin, Director of Environmental Hazards and Health Effects at the CDC, testified that a CDC study released in February concluded that all of the residents still living in 15,000 trailers – down from 143,000 – should be moved by FEMA due to formaldehyde exposure.

Rep. Waxman said, "The taxpayers paid $2 billion for trailers that now have to be scrapped as junk." He asked the four CEOs whether the government should get some of its money back from the companies? None of them offered support for that notion – three remained silent, while Shea said that the CDC's results could have been impacted by residents' activities such as smoking or cooking fish. (In contrast, the CDC concluded that the formaldehyde levels were probably higher during hotter months and when the trailers were newer than those measured in the February report. McGeehin also disagreed with Shea that cooking fish would raise formaldehyde levels.)

While Republicans were careful to express support for people who became sick as a result of living in the trailers, they were far more aggressive in defending the manufacturers. Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) mocked the proceedings, "Just full disclosure… in the room we're in right now we're at 80 parts per billion… if you need to leave, let us know…." Representative Dan Burton (R-IN) said , "I haven't seen any evidence that they violated any rule and haven't done their job to perfection. I'm kind of disappointed that we have you four here, beating up on you."

Despite Republican efforts to free the trail manufacturers from any responsibility, it was Representative Elijah Cummings who perhaps best summarized the failure of both industry and government to protect public health: "Our country is becoming mired in a culture of mediocrity, and a failure to be empathetic to human beings. So we can talk about standards here, there, and everywhere. But the question still remains: do we get what we bargain for, or are we getting something that does harm?"

While the CDC is now convening the relevant agencies to address the standards issue, and a federal class-action lawsuit against the trailer manufacturers and FEMA is pending, displaced people in 15,000 trailers still are in need of more permanent, safe homes.

---

With reporting from Capitol Hill by Greg Kaufmann, a freelance writer residing in his disenfranchised hometown of Washington, DC.

Comments (15)

1. Hey!

   Where are all the "capitalism at any cost" trolls who like to apologize for industry and turn every moral issue into a cost/benefit analysis?

   Leave it to "compassionate conservatives" to turn one of our nation's most horrific acts of nature into a perpetual assault on the people of the Gulf.

   And yet, there is not even a hint of accountability or shame.

   Welcome to disaster capitalism.

   Posted by drhammer at 07/14/2008 @ 11:23am

2. Ahh capitalists. Human life is only a number. How much can you get away with in order to reduce overhead? This is governments fault for not setting stricter standards on formaldehyde levels but should the companies be putting out trailers that have a high enough formaldehyde level that you it is recommended that you are not exposed to it for more than 8 hours in your life time? If I was running a company it would strike me as a little disconcerting that we are putting out a product that, unlike smoking which you KNOW will kill you, can be used in it's proper manner yet still kill it's occupants.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/14/2008 @ 12:39pm

3. It would be unAmerican for these people not to eat their losses in the free market all patriots believe in.

   Just as it would be unAmerican not to bail out the Fanny & Freddie investors.

   Where is your patriotism?

   Posted by sloper at 07/14/2008 @ 1:22pm

4. A SHREWD PROPOSAL

   This talk of trailers and the value of those who inhabit them has got me thinking about a fantastic solution to virtually everything that ails us.

   Clearly, we are entering an entirely new age of human and planetary ecological history. The twin perils of global warming and human overpopulation are bearing down on us like a runaway freight train, or perhaps more appropriately, like a 40,000 mph killer asteroid.

   We need to do something, and I believe that the perfect solution lies in the market –where else can we find genuine solutions?

   You see, I've heard it said lately that the value of a human life is approximately $6 million.

   $6 million dollars? Lee Majors was worth that much in the freaking ‘70s for crying out loud –and the way the dollar is plummeting, people will be worth nothing in less time than you can say "global depression".

   The solution is really rather simple isn't it?

   We need less people –it's supply and demand, stupid. The value of humans should first be calculated by the cost it takes to kill them off –at least for a while anyway.

   Now, the Iraq War has been entirely inefficient in this regard --we've killed what, 1 or 2 million maybe at a cost of a trillion or three? That's approximately $1 million a head. There is no question we can do far better than that. With a focused effort –-even if you include no bid, cost plus contracting-- I guarantee we can get that cost down to pennies on the dollar.

   And here's the really great news.

   We can grow all the corn and soy based fuel we desire, and still save money on food. You see, the vast majority of people in the places where we can get the best bang for our buck are young --under 20 years old with a huge percentage that are under 10 years old. This portion of the take can be kept alive in vast store houses relatively cheaply, and subsequently distributed into the food supply in the form of delicious patties that taste better than an Angus beef burger at your favorite steakhouse --simply scrumptious, you'll be a convert at the first aromatic mouth–watering whiff, let alone the first juicy bite!

   And when the human population is down to a reasonable number --to be determined by the contractors that "win" the bids-- we can revalue the remaining human population by a different formula. Whatever formula is chosen, rest assured that the value will be much more in line with our perception of self-worth.

   And the planet will be safe for humanity again!

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 07/14/2008 @ 2:51pm

5. Posted by b_kool_66 at 07/14/2008 @ 2:51pm

   or maybe we could teach our kids to read more and eat real food.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 07/14/2008 @ 3:30pm

6. or maybe we could teach our kids to read more and eat real food. Posted by frosty zoom

   the kids read plenty. they just don't read books. they read on line.

   as for food. do you belong to a community supported agriculture group?

   everyone should join one or start one.

   Posted by emile duBois at 07/14/2008 @ 7:53pm

7. It is a measure of how sick as a society are we that we can do almost anything for the money.

   A:"Yeah, we won't loose the bid for the contract, let's put the cheapest materials, forget about the stupid formaldehyde."

   B:"Yeah, if I don't defend them, who is gonna take care of my next campaign?"

   Both assertions make me really sick but the worst is coming and is:

   A:"No problem I'm sure the government is backing us"

   B:"We got them, the legislation is not clear enough so who cares..."

   In the meantime, 'C' is still without a home more than two years after Katrina. I just don't know why people in the south vote Republican it is so clear where do they stand at.

   Posted by Frank42 at 07/16/2008 @ 12:44am

8. Don't tell KVH, but it appears the French are going to build a NUCLEAR POWER PLANT in Finland! We have been led to believe that the Finn's are the perfect example of human evolution. How can these paragons of socialist perfection consider nukes?

   Posted by sntauri at 07/16/2008 @ 3:56pm

9. The Finns probably know that the French will be dumping the nuclear waste in Russia and payback, as they say...

   Posted by cka2nd at 07/16/2008 @ 5:28pm

10. We have been led to believe that the Finn's are the perfect example of human evolution. How can these paragons of socialist perfection consider nukes? Posted by sntauri at 07/16/2008 @ 3:56pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    how can you post this nonsense?

    Posted by emile duBois at 07/17/2008 @ 09:52am

11. WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States fails on most measures of health care quality, with Americans waiting longer to see doctors and more likely to die of preventable or treatable illnesses than people in other industrialized countries, a report released on Thursday said.

    we're not number one.

    Posted by emile duBois at 07/17/2008 @ 09:57am

12. Posted by sntauri at 07/16/2008 @ 3:56pm

    Can you say "non sequitur"?

    Posted by drhammer at 07/17/2008 @ 11:23am

13. The Plain and simple fact is as the author stated;

    1."the failure of both industry and government to protect public health"

    The other important point is;

    2.Chairman Henry Waxman explained that a similar hearing was held in 1981 and members of Congress told FEMA, Housing and Urban Development, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) that a standard for formaldehyde levels in trailers was needed.

    3.What you don't see is that throughout the CARTER, REAGAN, BUSH, CLINTON, and now the BUSH administrations NO prior Pres. admin. or Democrat or Republican controlled congress has or will do anything either! OSHA had been struggling with this for over 30years now and NO end is in sight!

    Why hasn't the current UNDEMOCRATIC congress done anything???????

    Posted by RedRiver_. at 07/18/2008 @ 01:25am

14. Emile:

    It is very simple to post nonsense. You just login and this little box opens up. Type words in it and then click on submit. Then progressives get worked up. It is much fun!

    Posted by sntauri at 07/18/2008 @ 08:45am

15. sntauri; Better yet post the TRUTH and watch them try to contort, dilute, devolve, and as a last resort LIE openly! Yes, it is such fun!

    Posted by RedRiver_. at 07/18/2008 @ 2:40pm