If you have been following the controversy over why Mary Gade was forced to resign from her post as head of the U.S. EPA’s Region 5 Office in Chicago, you may have encountered the question, “So what? People get fired unfairly all the time. Why does this matter so much?”

If you’re just joining us and would like some insight into what has happened on this story so far, here are EnviroHumanImpacts articles on the matter:

EPA Ousts Mary Gade
Continuing Coverage and Commentary: EPA Gade Controversy
More Mary Gade Coverage (Or Is It Less?)

But back to, “Why does this matter so much?” Fair enough question with a fair enough answer. Sure, people are fired all the time, and many times one could conclude they were fired unfairly. Many, like Gade seems to have been, may have been doing their job and doing it well.

Of course, they all matter, but Gade’s firing is a matter of public safety regarding major industrial chemical pollution. That’s right, say it again, “major industrial chemical pollution.” Dioxin, in Michigan, released by Dow Chemical, at levels thousands of times greater than the federal and Michigan state cleanup standards is seeming to get a pass.

Someone trying to have the company found responsible for making that mess in Michigan (Gade) was fired (or rather forced to resign), and it appears, at least on the surface, that she was forced to resign because she was doing her job too well. She came down too hard when stepping on the wrong company’s dioxin-stained corporate toes.

And now she is gone from the EPA and everyone wants to know: Is it true, as Gade contends, that this forced resignation is due to her office’s dispute over the cleanup with Dow Chemical? What were the grounds of Gade’s dismissal? Was she wrongfully fired because of the dispute? If she was wrongfully fired, what steps will be taken by the EPA and the administration to see to it that the person who demanded the firing is held accountable (yeah, it’s a fat chance)?

If Gade were fired on solid grounds for dismissal, then that also needs to be brought to light for the public and especially those in the EPA (current and future). Based on the stated facts in news articles from the Chicago Tribune and Wall Street Journal, it appears Gade was wrongfully removed form her post for coming down too hard on a company that was able to pull some strings to have the thorn her office had become from its side.

Either way it happened, whether for solid reasons or because politics, money, corruption, and Mary Gade’s job collided, it matters, and here’s why:

The current prevailing perception regarding this matter is that Mary Gade was fired because she tried to enforce the law against a powerful company. Yeah, we know it’s getting redundant, but stick with us. If the perception is all that we ever know about this case and nothing more, then how will the person who fills Gade’s post deal with the pressure to enforce the law and not get fired like Gade? Will he or she feel that their hands are tied to thread lightly or be ousted in a similar manner (likely, yes)?

And that’s important because this dioxin mess is contaminating water and soil which in turn contaminates fish, grasses, cattle, and dairy products for end users (yes, us humans). This is not more of an EPA personnel matter than it is a public health and safety issue that needs big answers, either way it went down.

In sum, anytime corruption is perceived, whether in reality or only in perception, to have triumphed, we have just damaged the credibility of our processes present and future. If we let this forced resignation go without knowing why and the perception is that it was because she did the right thing, guess how people in her shoes might choose to act?

For if Ms. Gade were to be fired on solid ground — perhaps unrelated to the Dow matter (we’re not suggesting that she was, only acknowledging the possibility), again, it needs to be brought to light so as to free the hand of her successor, so that he or she knows it’s still okay to go after big polluters, like Dow Chemical.

We need and demand answers, and the media needs to put pressure on all parties involved to get to the bottom of this matter.

Tomorrow, we’ll talk about who else could put this on the political map, and how any one curious citizen, like yourself, could possibly get the Gade debacle into the mainstream!

Related posts:

1. Who Can Get the Mainstream to Cover EPA Gade Story? Many have asked, “Why has this story barely been covered...
2. More Mary Gade Coverage (Or is it Less?) Readers are contacting EnviroHumanImpact, curious about what has happened in...
3. Continuing Coverage and Commentary: EPA Gade Controversy We originally brought you the story yesterday of Mary Gade,...