SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Columbia, S.C. is looking at the possibility of privatizing its water and sewage system. (Photo: Steve Johnson/flickr/cc)
South Carolina City's Water Privatization Proposal Threatens Public Control
Organizer says plan could worsen services, increase rates
Jan 28, 2015
South Carolina's capital city is exploring the possibility of privatizing its water and sewage system, prompting warnings that it could spell higher costs and lack of public control over "our most essential resource."
Reporting for South Carolina's The State, John Monk wrote
A move to solicit written expressions of interest from private companies was approved by council in open session at an early January meeting, Mayor Steve Benjamin said at Tuesday night's council meeting. However, that approval received virtually no publicity.
Renee Maas, Senior Southern Region Organizer with Food & Water Watch, told Common Dreams that the privatization could take different forms, with Columbia leasing or selling its assets, hiring consultants, or privatizing its management system.
Previous efforts to privatize the municipal systems elsewhere have show they can be costly for consumers, Maas said.
"Water rates tend to increase at three times the rate of inflation. This is pretty common," she said, adding that the private companies can cut corners and worsen service.
Further, "there's no incentive to conserve water for private companies because it becomes a monopoly. There's no incentive for private companies to fix a system, install green technologies or best practices. There's no competition for them."
Yet the "public does have a way to vote out the people running their water systems out or complain," she said. "When water is controlled by elected officials, the public can go to the elected officials." The private companies, in contrast, "are accountable to their stockholders, not the people they serve."
Mass stressed that it "is not at all a partisan issue because water belongs to everybody."
While there's been a trend of efforts to push forth water privatization, Mass said that "communities are fighting back."
She said her group and others in the community "plan to educate the public about the truth behind privatization and how it often leads to increased rates and loss of control over our most essential resource."
Water needs to be protected "in a way that is sustainable and equitable" now and for generations to come, she said.
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
South Carolina's capital city is exploring the possibility of privatizing its water and sewage system, prompting warnings that it could spell higher costs and lack of public control over "our most essential resource."
Reporting for South Carolina's The State, John Monk wrote
A move to solicit written expressions of interest from private companies was approved by council in open session at an early January meeting, Mayor Steve Benjamin said at Tuesday night's council meeting. However, that approval received virtually no publicity.
Renee Maas, Senior Southern Region Organizer with Food & Water Watch, told Common Dreams that the privatization could take different forms, with Columbia leasing or selling its assets, hiring consultants, or privatizing its management system.
Previous efforts to privatize the municipal systems elsewhere have show they can be costly for consumers, Maas said.
"Water rates tend to increase at three times the rate of inflation. This is pretty common," she said, adding that the private companies can cut corners and worsen service.
Further, "there's no incentive to conserve water for private companies because it becomes a monopoly. There's no incentive for private companies to fix a system, install green technologies or best practices. There's no competition for them."
Yet the "public does have a way to vote out the people running their water systems out or complain," she said. "When water is controlled by elected officials, the public can go to the elected officials." The private companies, in contrast, "are accountable to their stockholders, not the people they serve."
Mass stressed that it "is not at all a partisan issue because water belongs to everybody."
While there's been a trend of efforts to push forth water privatization, Mass said that "communities are fighting back."
She said her group and others in the community "plan to educate the public about the truth behind privatization and how it often leads to increased rates and loss of control over our most essential resource."
Water needs to be protected "in a way that is sustainable and equitable" now and for generations to come, she said.
South Carolina's capital city is exploring the possibility of privatizing its water and sewage system, prompting warnings that it could spell higher costs and lack of public control over "our most essential resource."
Reporting for South Carolina's The State, John Monk wrote
A move to solicit written expressions of interest from private companies was approved by council in open session at an early January meeting, Mayor Steve Benjamin said at Tuesday night's council meeting. However, that approval received virtually no publicity.
Renee Maas, Senior Southern Region Organizer with Food & Water Watch, told Common Dreams that the privatization could take different forms, with Columbia leasing or selling its assets, hiring consultants, or privatizing its management system.
Previous efforts to privatize the municipal systems elsewhere have show they can be costly for consumers, Maas said.
"Water rates tend to increase at three times the rate of inflation. This is pretty common," she said, adding that the private companies can cut corners and worsen service.
Further, "there's no incentive to conserve water for private companies because it becomes a monopoly. There's no incentive for private companies to fix a system, install green technologies or best practices. There's no competition for them."
Yet the "public does have a way to vote out the people running their water systems out or complain," she said. "When water is controlled by elected officials, the public can go to the elected officials." The private companies, in contrast, "are accountable to their stockholders, not the people they serve."
Mass stressed that it "is not at all a partisan issue because water belongs to everybody."
While there's been a trend of efforts to push forth water privatization, Mass said that "communities are fighting back."
She said her group and others in the community "plan to educate the public about the truth behind privatization and how it often leads to increased rates and loss of control over our most essential resource."
Water needs to be protected "in a way that is sustainable and equitable" now and for generations to come, she 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.