May, 08 2009, 01:13pm EDT
Water Infrastructure Financing Act Is Step in Right Direction for Clean Water
American Rivers playing leadership role working with Senate to secure needed improvements
WASHINGTON
American Rivers today applauded the Senate introduction of the Water
Infrastructure Financing Act, a bill the nation's leading river
conservation organization says is an important step toward bringing
America's water infrastructure into the 21st century, despite falling
short in key areas. American Rivers praised senators Ben Cardin (D-MD),
Barbara Boxer (D-CA), James Inhofe (R-OK), and Mike Crapo (R-ID) for
introducing the bill, which authorizes $39 billion to help pay for
critical water infrastructure needs to reduce stormwater and wastewater
pollution across the country and also funds critical drinking water
needs. A similar bill passed the House earlier this year.
"The bill isn't perfect, but it is a great start," said Katherine
Baer, senior director for clean water at American Rivers. "Clean water
is the lifeblood of our communities, yet our nation's water
infrastructure is seriously outdated and global warming will make the
situation worse. This bill is an important step toward protecting
rivers and streams from pollution and making sure our communities have
clean drinking water."
American Rivers has fought for clean water for decades, and recently
was instrumental in securing over $6 billion in federal economic
recovery funds for clean water and green infrastructure.
Since its inception in 1987, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund
has provided $68 billion to over 20,000 projects, serving almost 95
million people. However, funding for this successful national program
has not kept pace with the serious threat sewage contamination and
polluted stormwater runoff pose, nor has the program been updated to
fund sustainable and cost-effective 21st century infrastructure.
Green infrastructure
The introduced bill includes new financial incentives for states and
municipalities to fund sustainable and cost-effective 21st century
green infrastructure and water efficiency, but unfortunately does not
include a dedicated set-aside for these innovative approaches as
provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the stimulus
bill signed by the President in February.
"While this bill includes some good incentives, it falls short of
the progress American Rivers helped achieve in the federal economic
recovery package," said Baer. "States across the country are already
set up to fund green projects and demand for funding well outstrips
supply in a number of states."
Green infrastructure approaches to clean water management include
using rooftop vegetation to control stormwater and reduce energy use,
restoring wetlands to retain floodwater, installing permeable pavement
to mimic the way water should naturally flow over the land, and using
potable water more efficiently. Such smart infrastructure approaches
have far-reaching benefits - they save money, reduce stormwater runoff
and sewage overflows, recharge drinking water supplies, and create
appealing natural areas for community enjoyment.
"Investments in green solutions to our water infrastructure problems
will create jobs, save money, and protect public health and safety,"
said Baer.
EPA's WaterSense program
The introduced Senate bill also authorizes the WaterSense Program at
EPA, a voluntary product labeling program that sets standards for
water-efficient products like plumbing fixtures and appliances and
allows manufacturers to certify their products under the WaterSense
label. Similar to the successful EnergyStar program, WaterSense has the
potential to save huge amounts of drinking water and reduce energy used
to move and treat water. American Rivers has been an active partner
with the WaterSense program, serving as one of only two non-profit
environmental organizations on its founding steering committee.
"We are very pleased to see strong support for the WaterSense
program. Promoting more efficient products saves water and energy and
also creates good jobs for manufacturers, plumbers and other trades,"
said Jenny Hoffner, Director for Water Efficiency at American Rivers.
Sewage pollution
While the introduced legislation includes important funding for
sewer overflow grants and monitoring for sewer overflows, it does not
include the detailed provisions in the Sewage Overflow Community Right
to Know Act (S. 937) introduced by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ).
These right-to-know provisions require public notification when a sewer
spill has the potential to affect public health and are part of the
House-passed bill.
"American Rivers looks forward to seeing this legislation move
forward and to working with the Senate to ensure dedicated funding for
green infrastructure and water efficiency and public notification for
sewage overflows," said Baer.
American Rivers is the only national organization standing up for healthy rivers so our communities can thrive. Through national advocacy, innovative solutions and our growing network of strategic partners, we protect and promote our rivers as valuable assets that are vital to our health, safety and quality of life. Founded in 1973, American Rivers has more than 65,000 members and supporters nationwide, with offices in Washington, DC and the Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, Midwest, Southeast, California and Northwest regions.
LATEST NEWS
Warren Says Trump Will 'Try to Ban Abortion Nationwide' If He Regains Power
"Donald Trump is proud that he overturned Roe v. Wade, he's proud he ripped away a fundamental freedom from millions of women," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
Mar 18, 2024
Sen. Elizabeth Warren warned Sunday that Donald Trump will aggressively pursue a national abortion ban if elected to another term after the former president and presumptive 2024 GOP nominee boasted about the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade—a move that opened the floodgates for draconian attacks on reproductive rights across the country.
Trump nominated three of the five Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn Roe in 2022, and he stacked lower federal courts with far-right extremists.
In a Fox News interview that aired Sunday, Trump said the justices "did something that from a lot of standpoints is extremely good" and repeated commonplace right-wing lies that Democrats support infanticide—claims that are frequently used to justify further rollbacks of reproductive freedoms. Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case brought by right-wing groups that could dramatically weaken access to medication abortion.
The former president said he will be deciding "pretty soon" on a specific abortion policy for his 2024 campaign for the White House. The New York Timesreported last month that Trump has told advisers and allies that he "likes the idea of a 16-week national abortion ban with three exceptions, in cases of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother."
Asked during the Fox News interview whether he thinks a 16-week abortion ban would be "politically acceptable," Trump responded, "We're gonna find out."
Trump's campaign previously dismissed the Times reporting as "fake news."
Trump on if a national 16 week abortion ban would be politically acceptable: "We're gonna find out."
He then lies about Democrats supporting the murder of born babies. pic.twitter.com/B5e41m9ftm
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 17, 2024
Warren (D-Mass.) said in response that "Donald Trump is proud that he overturned Roe v. Wade, he's proud he ripped away a fundamental freedom from millions of women, and if he regains power, he will go even further and try to ban abortion nationwide."
"By overturning Roe, Trump put judges and politicians in the driver's seat of women and their families' most personal healthcare decisions," said Warren. "He opened the door to even more extreme restrictions on our freedoms: criminalizing doctors, passing bans with no exceptions, and restricting access to IVF—and he brags about it."
"Trump said we're going to find out if the country will accept his plans for a national abortion ban, and he's right," the senator added. "He's going to find out this November when the majority of Americans who support reproductive freedom turn out to send President Biden and Vice President Harris back to the White House and remind Donald Trump that we will not go back—not now, not ever."
"As Project 2025 makes clear, opponents will not stop until abortion is banned and out of reach in all 50 states."
Right-wing groups, including the coalition known as Project 2025, have been working for months on a range of proposals that would further curtail reproductive freedoms at the federal level and undercut people's ability to receive basic medical care.
"In emerging plans that involve everything from the EPA to the Federal Trade Commission to the Postal Service, nearly 100 anti-abortion and conservative groups are mapping out ways the next president can use the sprawling federal bureaucracy to curb abortion access," Politicoreported last month. "Many of the policies they advocate are ones Trump implemented in his first term and President Joe Biden rescinded—rules that would have a far greater impact in a post-Roe landscape. Other items on the wish list are new, ranging from efforts to undo state and federal programs promoting access to abortion to a de facto national ban. But all have one thing in common: They don't require congressional approval."
Project 2025, a coalition of dozens of right-wing groups—including Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America and other anti-abortion organizations—is "drafting executive orders to roll back Biden-era policies that have expanded abortion access, such as making abortions available in some circumstances at VA hospitals," and "collecting resumes from conservative activists interested in becoming political appointees or career civil servants and training them to use overlooked levers of agency power to curb abortion access," according to Politico.
"Donald Trump is to blame for the ongoing abortion access crisis," Planned Parenthood Votes said in a statement earlier this month. "Because of his first-term actions, 21 states—and counting—now ban some or all abortion; and one in three women are blocked from access in their home states. As Project 2025 makes clear, opponents will not stop until abortion is banned and out of reach in all 50 states."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Russia's Putin Secures Another Term
The controversial leader won a record number of votes for a post-Soviet candidate even as opponents organized a protest at noon on the election's third and last day.
Mar 17, 2024
Despite protests on Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin won reelection with more votes than any candidate since the fall of the Soviet Union.
Exit poll the Public Opinion Foundation (POF) put the final tally after three days of voting at 87.8%, the Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM) at 87%, and Russia's Central Election Commission (CEC) at 87.3%. Putin will now serve another six-year term, meaning he will have been at the helm of the Russian state for longer than any leader since Catherine the Great, surpassing Josef Stalin.
The election comes less than a month after the second anniversary of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and is likely to lead to more tensions between the Russian and U.S. governments.
"It gives me some hope to see how many people are not happy with the dictatorship, the war, with what's happening in Russia."
"For a U.S. administration that hoped Putin's Ukraine adventure would be wrapped up by now with a decisive setback to Moscow's interests, the election is a reminder that Putin expects that there will be many more rounds in the geopolitical boxing ring," Nikolas Gvosdev, director of the National Security Program at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, told the Russia Matters project.
With most of Putin's prominent opponents either dead, imprisoned, or in exile, the elections results were considered a foregone conclusion by both friends and foes of his administration.
A Putin spokesperson said in 2023 that the election was "not really democracy" but instead "costly bureaucracy," according to CNN. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the White House National Security Council said the election was "obviously not free nor fair."
However, Russian opponents of Putin did find a way to demonstrate their position with a protest called "Noon Against Putin." The protest was called for by St. Petersburg politician Maxim Reznik, according to The Guardian. Participants were instructed to head to a polling place at noon and cast a paper ballot for one of the candidates running against Putin, or to write-in another candidate or spoil their ballot.
Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny had endorsed the protest before his death last month in a Russian prison, leading the Independent Novaya Gazeta newspaper to dub it "Navalny's political testament."
The action drew crowds to polling places both in Russian cities like Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Yekaterinburg and at Russian embassies around the world.
"This is the first time in my life I have ever seen a queue for elections," one woman waiting in line in Moscow told
CNN. Russian journalists reported that the lines at some stations within the country reached the thousands, according to Reuters.
Navalny's widow, Yulia Navalnaya, who had also endorsed the protest, voted at the embassy in Berlin, while several protesters gathered outside the embassy in London.
"I expected there to be a lot of people, but not this many," London-based participant Maria Dorofeyeva told The Guardian, adding, "It gives me some hope to see how many people are not happy with the dictatorship, the war, with what's happening in Russia. And we want to stop it."
Ruslan Shaveddinov of Navalny's Anti-Corruption Foundation told Reuters:
"We showed ourselves, all of Russia and the whole world that Putin is not Russia (and) that Putin has seized power in Russia."
"Our victory is that we, the people, defeated fear, we defeated solitude—many people saw they were not alone," Shaveddinov said
Keep ReadingShow Less
Van Hollen Says Netanyahu Spreading 'Flat Out Lies' About UNRWA
The Maryland senator defended the organization on CBS and said there was no evidence that it was a "proxy for Hamas."
Mar 17, 2024
U.S. Senator for Maryland Chris Van Hollen continued his defense of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East and its work in Gaza in an appearance on CBS News' "Face the Nation" on Sunday.
"The claim that Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu and others are making that somehow UNRWA is a proxy for Hamas are just flat out lies, that's a flat out lie," he told journalist Margaret Brennan.
The U.S. was one of many Western countries that paused funding for UNRWA after the agency announced in January that it had fired 12 staffers over Israeli allegations that they had been involved in Hamas' October 7 attack on Israel. However, some countries including Canada, Sweden, the European Union, and Australia have since restored funding. A report has also emerged that Israel tortured UNRWA staffers into falsely confessing to involvement in the Hamas attack.
"Netanyahu has wanted to get rid of UNRWA because he had seen them as a means to continue the hopes of the Palestinian people for a homeland of their own."
Van Hollen's remarks on Sunday come days after he argued for the restoration of UNRWA funds on the floor of the U.S. Senate and criticized Republican legislators who wanted to permanently end funds for the organization that supports some 6 million Palestinian refugees in countries across the Middle East, including around 2 million in Gaza.
During his speech, he pointed out that the Netanyahu government had not shared the underlying evidence that UNRWA staffers participated in October 7 with either UNRWA itself or the U.S. government. He also urged his colleagues to read a classified Director of National Intelligence report on Netanyahu's claims of UNRWA complicity with Hamas.
On "Face the Nation," Van Hollen said that the person in charge of operations on the ground in UNRWA was a 20-year U.S. Army veteran.
"You can be sure he is not in cahoots with Hamas," the senator told Brennan.
He also repeated claims that Netanyahu has wanted to eliminate UNRWA entirely since at least 2017.
"Netanyahu has wanted to get rid of UNRWA because he had seen them as a means to continue the hopes of the Palestinian people for a homeland of their own," Van Hollen said, adding that the right-wing Israeli leader's "primary objective" was preventing the formation of a Palestinian state.
However, the dismantling of UNRWA would be especially catastrophic amid Israel's ongoing bombardment and invasion of Gaza, which has killed more than 31,000 people and put the survivors at risk of famine. No other organization has the infrastructure in place to distribute the necessary aid.
"If you cut off funding for UNRWA in Gaza entirely, it means more people will starve, more people won't get the medial assistance they need, and so it would be a huge mistake," Van Hollen said.
He also said that only 14 of the agency's 13,000-strong staff in Gaza had been accused of participating in the October 7 attack.
"We should investigate it, we should hold all those people accountable, but for goodness' sake, let's not hold 2 million innocent Palestinian civilians who are dying of starvation... accountable for the bad acts of 14 people."
Van Hollen also repeated his call for President Joe Biden to condition the sale of offensive military weapons to Israel on the country obeying international law and allowing aid into Gaza. While Israel sent the U.S. a letter saying it was in compliance with the law, "the day it was signed, clearly the Netanyahu government is not in compliance, because we see that they're continuing to restrict humanitarian assistance," he told Brennan.
Also on "Face the Nation" Sunday, United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) Chief Executive Catherine Russell described the impact that a lack of aid was having on the children of Gaza.
"We know now that children are dying of malnutrition in Gaza," she told Brennan.
Russell said that not enough aid was reaching those who needed it, calling both air drops and sea deliveries "a drop in the bucket."
She also called for greater transparency into what was actually happening in Gaza and the difficulties of delivering aid.
"The world should be able to see what's happening and make their own judgments about what's going on," Russell said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular