Rebuke To Inslee

Print Friendly

February 19, 2016

 

Governor Jay Inslee

PO Box 40002

Olympia, WA 98504-0002

 

Dear Governor Inslee,

 

I am responding to a letter dated January 26, 2016, which I received from Taylor Wonhoff, your Deputy General Counsel. Regarding my Motion for Reconsideration of a proposed fluoridation rule, Mr. Wonhoff says:

 

As you concede in your motion, state law does not provide for matters of reconsideration. Accordingly, the Governor will not be able to review your motion for reconsideration.

 

This is an incorrect statement. RCW 34.05.330 does not prohibit the Governor from responding to a motion for reconsideration. It is not that you will not be able to review” our motion. You simply choose not to do so.

 

There are four reasons why you have an obligation to respond. First, the Board of Health failed to specifically address all the issues I raised. RCW 34.05.330 says:

 

Within sixty days after submission of a petition, the agency shall either (a) deny the petition in writing, stating (i) its reasons for the denial, specifically addressing the concerns raised by the petitioner,

 

The Board of Health failed to specifically address my argument that fluoridation materials fail the risk estimation test and therefore do not comply with NSF 60 and WAC 246-290-220 and therefore may not be used. And there were other arguments which the Board of Health failed to address.

 

Second, you did the same. You failed to specifically address my argument that fluoridation materials fail the risk estimation test and therefore do not comply with NSF 60 and WAC 246-290-220,  and therefore may not be used. And there were other arguments which the you failed to address.

 

Third, fluoridation is clearly unscientific. We are learning from Flint that chlorine, chloramine, and fluorosilicic acid all leach lead from plumbing. The amount of soda ash sufficient to neutralize chlorine or chloramine (we do not use chloramine in Snohomish and King counties) is insufficient to neutralize the silicic acid. It has an extremely low dissociation constant. To neutralize it the pH would have to be raised to 10, which is not desirable for other reasons. It would be like drinking milk of magnesia all the time. The stomach would be unable to digest food. Of the three acids, chlorine, chloramine, and silicic acid, silicic acid is the most persistent in leaching lead. See http://www.fluoride-class-action.com/silicic-acid-2.

 

Adding fluorosilicic acid to drinking water can never decrease the amount of lead therein. Fluoridation will always increase lead levels in drinking water. Recall that I pointed out the letter from Tacoma Public Utilities, which confirmed that lead levels dropped almost by half when fluoridation was temporarily halted because of a drought.

 

Fourth, you swore to uphold Washington law. Fluoridation using fluorosilicic acid is unquestionably illegal under Washington law.

 

If you persist in denying my petition or in refusing to respond to my motion for reconsideration, it will be clear that you support fluoridation and therefore that you support higher than normal lead levels. I urge you to get on the right side of history and put an end to this unscientific and illegal vice.

 

As tetraethyl leaded gasoline finally passed away, so too with drinking water fluoridation. Don’t be on the wrong side of science and history.

Re-read my Motion for Reconsideration at

 

http://jamesrobertdeal.org/wp-content/uploads/from-Inslee-denying-motion-for-reconsideration-regarding-fluoridation-1-26-2016.pdf.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

James Robert Deal, Attorney

WSBA Number 8103

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

7 − 6 =