The Fluoride Action Network

A Big Victory in Massachusetts

March 2, 2006

Dear All,

We have just received the exciting news from Chris Neurath that the attempt to introduce mandatory fluoridation into Massachusetts has failed at least for this year (add this to last year's failed attempts to introduced mandatory fluoridation in Arkansas, New Jersey and Oregon).

Huge congratulations to the many citizens in Massachusetts who made this victory possible. I am thinking particularly of Dr. Stephen Dean at this moment. His efforts on this issue for over 30 years have been tireless. He has dug deep into his personal time and his own pockets to keep fluoridation out of Springfield and other communities and now the state. Among many, many contributions from Steve in this latest effort was his organizing of a bus to take people from Springfield and surrounding towns to Boston to lobby against the mandatory bill.

Steve will be the first to point out the enormous help he has had from many others, but if you send your congratulations to him I know he will share them with all the others. His email address is drdean@the-spa.com

Well done Massachusetts! Time for another tea party!

Paul Connett

Paul,

Although the local MAF opponents are extremely cautious on declaring an early victory, yesterday marked the final death throw of a bill that would require mandatory fluoridation statewide. The second of two committees assigned to examine the bill decided to "send it to study". This is a euphemism for tabling the bill. No action will be taken on the bill for the rest of the legislative session and no votes will be taken on the bill. The proponents may try to re-introduce it next year, but for now this is a solid victory for Massachusetts opponents.

You may want to check with Steve Dean, Deirdre Healey, and Deb Moore for details on the ways they led the fight against this bill (yes please, Steve, Deirdre and Deb please tell us how you did it, PC). Lots of lobbying at the state house including a public hearing where the opponents of the bill faced rows of dentists and dental hygenists and came out the clear winner on the facts, in my opinion. Actually, most of the assembled "suits" were not even willing to testify but were there for looks. In contrast, the opponents had more speakers than there was time for. From scientists and engineers like Mullenix and Coplan to inner city activists who were concerned that mandatory fluoridation (in non-F Springfield and Worcester) was simply a ploy by the state and dental community to avoid the real problem in their neighborhoods, which was poverty and lack of access to dental care due in large part by dentist's refusal to accept Medicaid patients and scarcity of free dental clinics.

Chalk this up as one more big victory against the current strategy of trying to get mandatory state fluoridation bills passed as a way of bypassing the public accountability that almost always surrounds individual local level decisions on whether to fluoridate. In local cases, this focus on the issue often results in the opponents of fluoridation winning. At the state level, the media pay little attention to these state mandates and if they pass, it is then too late. For example, the Boston Globe has not run a single article on the bill to make fluoridation mandatory state-wide.
Chris
FAN Bulletin #506
http://lists.fluoridealert.org/listinfo/fan_bulletins