President Barack Obama's 2017 budget proposal includes massive cuts to water funding, just weeks after he declared a state of emergency over the lead poisoning crisis in Flint. (Photo: Flint Journal)
Feb 10, 2016
President Barack Obama's 2017 budget, released Tuesday, includes a proposal to cut more than a third of a billion dollars from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) state water funding program, just weeks after the president declared a state of emergency over Flint, Michigan's water crisis.
The budget proposes slashing $370 million, or 11 percent, from the EPA's Clean Water State Revolving Funds (CW SRF)--which support water quality improvement projects like treatment plants--and reallocating the money to the Drinking Water (DW) SRF, which supports clean water systems and infrastructure.
Despite claims that the change would "boost water sustainability and reduce the price and energy costs of new water supply technology," watchdog groups warn that it does nothing to remedy the urgent water crises facing chronically underfunded communities like Flint.
But as Mae Wu, an attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), wrote in a blog post on Tuesday, that method is akin to "robbing Peter to pay Paul."
"Cutting funds that help keep pollution out of our water (CW SRF) and moving the money to remove pollution once it's already in our drinking water (DW SRF) is no solution at all," Wu wrote, noting that there is no guarantee the funds will ever even reach Flint.
"At best it is a short-term band-aid approach to addressing the chronic levels of underinvestment in our water infrastructure by local, state, and federal government," Wu said. "Both of the SRFs need more funding."
As Flint continues to struggle with lead poisoning in its public water, and Detroit residents are faced with ongoing water service shutoffs targeting low-income residents and communities of color, the cuts to such critical services are "unacceptable," said environmental advocacy group Food and Water Watch.
"Following the Flint water crisis, which is emblematic of our national water woes, it is outrageous that the Obama Administration can't be moved to truly step up and deliver the leadership needed to fully fund our water infrastructure," said the group's executive director Wenonah Hauter.
The cuts were also slammed on Capitol Hill, with Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) saying he was "grossly disappointed" by the proposal.
As Hauter pointed out, the budget is requesting a total of $2 billion for both SRFs, which "is a $257 million decrease over what Congress appropriated for 2016."
"Whether it's kids poisoned by lead in Flint and other towns, water service shutoffs in Baltimore and Detroit or water contaminated by factory farms in Ohio and Iowa, we face a growing water crisis that requires real, long term solutions that keep water clean, affordable and democratically controlled," Hauter said.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. The final deadline for our crucial Summer Campaign fundraising drive is just hours away, and we’re falling short of our must-hit goal. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
President Barack Obama's 2017 budget, released Tuesday, includes a proposal to cut more than a third of a billion dollars from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) state water funding program, just weeks after the president declared a state of emergency over Flint, Michigan's water crisis.
The budget proposes slashing $370 million, or 11 percent, from the EPA's Clean Water State Revolving Funds (CW SRF)--which support water quality improvement projects like treatment plants--and reallocating the money to the Drinking Water (DW) SRF, which supports clean water systems and infrastructure.
Despite claims that the change would "boost water sustainability and reduce the price and energy costs of new water supply technology," watchdog groups warn that it does nothing to remedy the urgent water crises facing chronically underfunded communities like Flint.
But as Mae Wu, an attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), wrote in a blog post on Tuesday, that method is akin to "robbing Peter to pay Paul."
"Cutting funds that help keep pollution out of our water (CW SRF) and moving the money to remove pollution once it's already in our drinking water (DW SRF) is no solution at all," Wu wrote, noting that there is no guarantee the funds will ever even reach Flint.
"At best it is a short-term band-aid approach to addressing the chronic levels of underinvestment in our water infrastructure by local, state, and federal government," Wu said. "Both of the SRFs need more funding."
As Flint continues to struggle with lead poisoning in its public water, and Detroit residents are faced with ongoing water service shutoffs targeting low-income residents and communities of color, the cuts to such critical services are "unacceptable," said environmental advocacy group Food and Water Watch.
"Following the Flint water crisis, which is emblematic of our national water woes, it is outrageous that the Obama Administration can't be moved to truly step up and deliver the leadership needed to fully fund our water infrastructure," said the group's executive director Wenonah Hauter.
The cuts were also slammed on Capitol Hill, with Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) saying he was "grossly disappointed" by the proposal.
As Hauter pointed out, the budget is requesting a total of $2 billion for both SRFs, which "is a $257 million decrease over what Congress appropriated for 2016."
"Whether it's kids poisoned by lead in Flint and other towns, water service shutoffs in Baltimore and Detroit or water contaminated by factory farms in Ohio and Iowa, we face a growing water crisis that requires real, long term solutions that keep water clean, affordable and democratically controlled," Hauter said.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
President Barack Obama's 2017 budget, released Tuesday, includes a proposal to cut more than a third of a billion dollars from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) state water funding program, just weeks after the president declared a state of emergency over Flint, Michigan's water crisis.
The budget proposes slashing $370 million, or 11 percent, from the EPA's Clean Water State Revolving Funds (CW SRF)--which support water quality improvement projects like treatment plants--and reallocating the money to the Drinking Water (DW) SRF, which supports clean water systems and infrastructure.
Despite claims that the change would "boost water sustainability and reduce the price and energy costs of new water supply technology," watchdog groups warn that it does nothing to remedy the urgent water crises facing chronically underfunded communities like Flint.
But as Mae Wu, an attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), wrote in a blog post on Tuesday, that method is akin to "robbing Peter to pay Paul."
"Cutting funds that help keep pollution out of our water (CW SRF) and moving the money to remove pollution once it's already in our drinking water (DW SRF) is no solution at all," Wu wrote, noting that there is no guarantee the funds will ever even reach Flint.
"At best it is a short-term band-aid approach to addressing the chronic levels of underinvestment in our water infrastructure by local, state, and federal government," Wu said. "Both of the SRFs need more funding."
As Flint continues to struggle with lead poisoning in its public water, and Detroit residents are faced with ongoing water service shutoffs targeting low-income residents and communities of color, the cuts to such critical services are "unacceptable," said environmental advocacy group Food and Water Watch.
"Following the Flint water crisis, which is emblematic of our national water woes, it is outrageous that the Obama Administration can't be moved to truly step up and deliver the leadership needed to fully fund our water infrastructure," said the group's executive director Wenonah Hauter.
The cuts were also slammed on Capitol Hill, with Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) saying he was "grossly disappointed" by the proposal.
As Hauter pointed out, the budget is requesting a total of $2 billion for both SRFs, which "is a $257 million decrease over what Congress appropriated for 2016."
"Whether it's kids poisoned by lead in Flint and other towns, water service shutoffs in Baltimore and Detroit or water contaminated by factory farms in Ohio and Iowa, we face a growing water crisis that requires real, long term solutions that keep water clean, affordable and democratically controlled," Hauter said.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.