Why California lawmakers often turn to bans

The Legislature is considering a bill to ban California’s last two first-generation rodenticides. During the second hearing on the bill this week, ag lobbyist Taylor Roschen pointed out that lawmakers banned four of the seven available rodenticides in 2020 and another last year.
 
Roschen pleaded with the committee to “stop buying into a whack-a-mole approach” and explained that state agencies are better equipped to delve into the science on these issues.
 
In response, Assemblymember Laura Friedman of Glendale charged that bans are needed because “our agencies take way too long to act.” She pointed to several other bans on chemicals she has authored or supported.
 
 “Our wildlife is struggling so much that they just can't wait,” said Friedman. “We have scientists here who have been studying this forever and a day.”
 
Asm. Steve Bennett of Ventura added that “our democracy, from the very beginning, has been set up to make it really easy to block, but very difficult to actually take action to get something done.” Bennett argued that regulators “get captured by arguments of delay.”
 
On that note: Asm. Akilah Weber of La Mesa raised alarms about a provision in the bill enabling citizen lawsuits.
 
Weber, who ultimately voted in favor of the bill, argued the unprecedented step would “open up the floodgates for litigation.” She interpreted it as “being able to sue because we think we understand how an animal feels.”