Bayer Lobbies States to Shield Itself from Roundup Cancer Lawsuits

Facing billions in legal costs, chemical giant Bayer has successfully lobbied lawmakers in several states, seeking protection from lawsuits alleging that its popular weedkiller, Roundup, causes cancer. The Iowa Senate passed legislation, and measures are pending in Missouri and Idaho, which would grant pesticide makers immunity if their labels comply with EPA regulations.

Critics say the legislation – promoted in states crucial to Bayer’s operations – could have sweeping consequences well beyond Roundup-related lawsuits. Legal experts warn that it could stifle product liability claims and grant unchecked corporate power.

“It’s not good government to give a company immunity for things they’re not telling consumers,” said Matt Clement, a Missouri lawyer representing plaintiffs suing Bayer. He fears Bayer will seek similar legislation nationwide if successful in these initial states.

Bayer calls the bills a necessary defense against a flood of lawsuits. About 167,000 claims allege Roundup causes non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. While it has prevailed in some cases and settled others, Bayer has also lost multi-million-dollar jury trials – payouts that now total around $10 billion.

Bayer cites the “unsustainable costs of defending a safe, approved product,” and points to EPA assessments that glyphosate, Roundup’s key ingredient, is not carcinogenic to humans if used according to directions.

Farmers – who rely heavily on Roundup for weed control – are a key force promoting the legislation. Missouri Rep. Dane Diehl, who co-sponsored the bill, fears that without it, Bayer might pull Roundup, leaving farmers reliant on Chinese-made alternatives.

Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds echoed concerns, saying the state could “lose hundreds of jobs” in a city where Roundup is largely produced.

Bayer insists it will maintain operations but seeks legislative backing to support its product. Along with the company’s own lobbyists, a pro-agriculture group with Bayer’s backing is running an ad campaign highlighting the potential impact on jobs.

The legislation stems from a dispute over the adequacy of product warnings. The EPA approves labels, reiterating in 2020 that glyphosate poses no health risks. However, in 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified it as “probably carcinogenic.” A subsequent 2022 appeals court ruling found the EPA’s decision lacked “substantial evidence.”

Legal experts fear the pending legislation could shield companies even if products are later found to be harmful despite meeting regulatory requirements at the time.

Critics say, while the initial focus is on Roundup, this model of legislation could spread through corporate lobbying efforts and set a dangerous precedent that puts profits before public health and safety.