February, 24 2021, 11:00pm EDT
Congress Just Introduced the Answer to America's Water Woes With Unprecedented Support: The WATER Act of 2021
77 Members of Congress and 540 Groups Unite to Endorse the Water Affordability, Transparency, Equity and Reliability Act of 2021
WASHINGTON
As America's communities continue to face oppressive water rates amidst a haunting pandemic, Rep. Brenda Lawrence and Rep. Ro Khanna introduced federal legislation today that would transform America's water infrastructure and ensure affordable, safe, and clean public water for all in this country. Senator Bernie Sanders introduced a companion bill in the Senate.
The Water Affordability, Transparency, Equity and Reliability (WATER) Act of 2021 is the comprehensive solution to America's escalating water woes. And Americans overwhelmingly support it.
The People's Water Project, a group dedicated to passing the WATER Act, joined 73 U.S. House representatives, 4 U.S. Senators, and a diverse coalition of 540 justice, labor, environmental, and advocacy organizations in endorsing the legislation. The organizations include ACRE, AFSCME, Consumer Reports, Corporate Accountability, Earth Justice, NAACP, Flint Rising, Food & Water Action, Citizens Action Coalition, In the Public Interest, United Steelworkers,The Water Collaborative of Greater New Orleans, and UAW, among others.
"The crisis in Texas illuminated how vital access to running water is for human survival. And the COVID-19 pandemic has put on display the unjust reality of America's water affordability, reliability, and equity crisis. Now, Congress finally has a real solution with the WATER Act of 2021," said Brittany Alston, Deputy Research Director of Action Center on Race & The Economy. "The only way to combat America's water crisis is with this type of bold, reparative change that both challenges corporate power and addresses water affordability, accessibility and quality across the entire country, especially in low-income and BIPOC communities. We thank Representatives Brenda Lawrence and Ro Khanna, Senator Sanders, and every Congressional cosponsor for stepping up for America's families today."
The WATER Act of 2021 creates a WATER Trust Fund that would dedicate $35 billion each year to grant programs and to the Drinking Water and Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs. These programs include a specific focus on providing support for rural and small municipalities, Indigenous communities, and low-income Black and brown communities who face disproportionate water issues.
Additionally, the WATER Act can create upwards of 1 million jobs at a time our country needs them most and will require the use of U.S.-made iron and steel on water system projects. It also applies prevailing wage law and encourages union labor to all projects funded by the Drinking Water and Clean Water State Revolving Fund programs.
"We have a moral and ethical obligation to ensure that all people have access to clean and affordable water," said Mary Gutierrez, Founder and Director of Earth Ethics. "For years, pre-COVID 19 and recent natural disasters, we have seen the inequities in the distribution of water, the WATER Act addresses these inequities. The WATER Act ensures that all communities, low-income, BIPOC, have access to clean and affordable water. Let's not forget that we can expect to see additional impacts to our existing infrastructure with increased intensity and frequency of storm events due to climate change. It's time to act now to address our failing infrastructure before more adverse environmental and public health impacts occur."
Over the past 50 years, federal funding for water has declined by more than 80% on a per capita basis. As a result, water rates have skyrocketed and are now unaffordable for millions of households in the U.S. When households are unable to pay these exorbitant bills, states often allow water service shutoffs.
In the face of COVID-19, a disease that has led public health officials to urge frequent at-home hand washing, only 43% of the U.S. population are protected from water shutoffs, and hundreds of local and state moratoria have already expired. As a result, 57% of the U.S. population --186 million people--are at risk of losing their water supply if they cannot keep up with bill payments during an unprecedented economic recession.
"From Flint to Pittsburgh, the private water industry's failures have endangered communities. It's clear that public investment -- not privatization under any name -- is the solution to American's drinking water and wastewater infrastructure crisis. And the WATER Act is just the tool we need," said Alissa Weinman, Associate Campaign Director at Corporate Accountability. "COVID-19 has only exacerbated the long-standing harms of lack of safe water access, particularly for low-income communities, Indigenous communities, and communities of color. In order to truly 'Build Back Better,' the federal government must renew its commitment to the human right to water by robustly funding our nation's water systems."
The WATER Act of 2021 not only responds to water accessibility and affordability, but also to privatization and quality. It details a path for upgrading our water systems to remove highly toxic and hazardous chemicals like lead and per-and polyfluorinated substances (or PFAS) from drinking water while also maintaining public control over these systems instead of handing over control to the private water industry and their Wall Street partners that want to commodify water for profit over public health.
---
Additional quotes from People's Water Project Partners:
"Water is life. We have a sacred duty to heed the cry of the earth and the cry of her most vulnerable people. Supporting the provisions of the WATER Act, including protections specifically aimed at improving water access and affordability in BIPOC communities, is our moral duty," said Blair Nelsen, Executive Director of Waterspirit.
"From the plague of water shutoffs during a pandemic for countless families with unaffordable bills, to the recent heartbreaking scenes across the South of frozen pipes leaving millions without water to drink and bathe, it has become desperately clear that our country is in a water crisis. Grave crises require robust solutions, and this is just what the WATER Act provides," said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Action, a leading organizational supporter of the bill. "The WATER Act paves the way to rebuilding our failing water system by addressing maintenance and modernization, cleanliness and safety, affordability and social justice - all in one clean sweep. The time for Congress and the Biden administration to make this critical legislation a priority has very clearly come. Our country can't wait any longer for a functional, safe and affordable water system for every community."
"Privatization of our water systems is a threat to public health, the environment, and democracy," said Donald Cohen, Executive Director of In the Public Interest. "Water is an essential public good, not a market commodity for corporations and wealthy investors. We need direct federal investment in water infrastructure across the country. This is an opportunity for the federal government to prove it works for all of us and not just the wealthy and connected."
On behalf of all the people who are suffering the consequences of a failing for-profit system and are denied the basic right to clean, affordable water, the People's Tribune newspaper supports the Water Act," said Sandy Reid of People's Tribune.
"Access to clean and affordable water is a basic human right. But for far too long, our country has allowed water to become a market commodity," said Toni Preston, Senior Campaigner at SumOfUS. "The Water Act is a necessary piece of legislation that will finally begin to address our country's failing water infrastructure, and ensure that every person in this country has access to clean and affordable water."
"The WATER Act is the first essential step towards social and economic liberation of all people, especially for the poor and marginalized. The 2020 Atlantic hurricane season generated 30 names tropical storms and 13 hurricanes, 6 of which were major hurricanes. This along with the recent winter storms that are pummeling Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi exposes the deep privation and indigence of the nation's water infrastructure. The WATER Act meets the nation's most pressing need for sustained investment into aging and unprepared water systems.," said Jessica Dandridge, Executive Director of The Water Collaborative,New Orleans.
In the U.S. Southwest - Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah - there is less rain and snowfall each year than the amount of water used in homes, businesses, and farms. As aquifers dry up, competition for scarce resources between water utilities, rural communities and agriculture leaves poorer communities at a disadvantage. In the face of climate change, with significant portions of the Southwest already under extreme drought conditions, these challenges threaten to endanger the health, safety and livelihoods of some of the most vulnerable people in our country. Federal investment in public water utilities is a critical necessity as the climate crisis looms, said Mariel Nanasi, Executive Director of New Energy Economy in New Mexico.
Corporate Accountability stops transnational corporations from devastating democracy, trampling human rights, and destroying our planet.
(617) 695-2525LATEST NEWS
Supreme Court Urged to 'Rule Quickly' After Trump Immunity Arguments
"It'd be a travesty for justices to delay matters further," said one legal expert.
Apr 25, 2024
After about three hours of oral arguments Thursday on former President Donald Trump's immunity claims, legal experts and democracy defenders urged the U.S. Supreme Court to rule swiftly, with just over six months until the November election.
Trump—the presumptive Republican candidate to challenge Democratic President Joe Biden, despite his 88 felony charges in four ongoing criminal cases—is arguing that presidential immunity should protect him from federal charges for trying to overturn his 2020 loss to Biden, which culminated in the January 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
Justices across the ideological spectrum didn't seem inclined to support Trump's broad immunity claims—which critics have said "reflect a misreading of constitutional text and history as well as this court's precedent." However, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) shared examples of what it would mean if they did.
"Trump could sell pardons, ambassadorships, and other official benefits to his wealthy donors, members of his clubs, or cronies who helped him commit other crimes," CREW warned. "Trump could sell nuclear codes and government secrets to help pay back crippling debts."
"But this isn't just about what Donald Trump could do. It's really about how total immunity for the president would threaten our democratic system of checks and balances," the group continued. "The president could order the military to assassinate activists, political opponents, members of Congress, or even Supreme Court justices, so long as he claimed it related to some official act."
After warning that a president could also order the occupation or closure of the Capitol or high court to prevent actions against him, CREW concluded that "the Supreme Court never should have taken this appeal up in the first place. They should rule quickly and shut these ludicrous claims down for good."
The organization was far from alone in demanding a quick decision from the nation's highest court.
"In the name of accountability, the court must not delay its decision," the Brennan Center for Justice said Thursday evening. "The Supreme Court's time is up. It needs to let the prosecution move forward. The court decided Bush v. Gore in three days—it should act with similar alacrity in deciding Trump v. U.S."
In Bush v. Gore, the case that decided the 2000 election, the high court issued a related stay on December 9, heard oral arguments on December 11, and issued a final decision on December 12.
On Thursday, the arguments "got away from the central question: Is a former president immune from criminal prosecution if he tried to overthrow a presidential election, using private means and the power of his office to do so?" the Brennan Center noted. "The answer is simple: No."
"It is not an 'official act' to try to overthrow the peaceful transfer of power or the Constitution, even if you conspire with other government officials to do it or use the Oval Office phone," the center said. "Trump's attorney was pushing the court to come up with a sea change in the law. That's unnecessary and a delay tactic that will hurt the pursuit of justice in this case."
In a departure from previous claims, Trump's attorney, D. John Sauer, "appeared to agree with Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is leading the prosecution, that there are some allegations in the indictment that do not involve 'official acts' of the president," NBC Newsreported, noting questions from liberal Justice Elena Kagan and conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee.
Barrett summarized various allegations from the indictment and in three cases—involving dishonest election claims, false allegations of fraud, and fake electors—Sauer conceded that Trump's alleged conduct sounded private, suggesting that a more narrow case against the ex-president that excluded any potential official acts could proceed.
Due to Trump attorney's concessions in Supreme Court oral argument, there's now a very clear path for DOJ's case to go forward.\n\nIt'd be a travesty for Justices to delay matters further.\n\nJustice Amy Coney Barrett got Trump attorney to concede core allegations are private acts.\u2b07\ufe0f— (@)
According to NBC:
Matthew Seligman, a lawyer and a fellow at the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School who filed a brief backing prosecutors, said Sauer's concessions highlight that Trump is "not immune for the vast majority of the conduct alleged in the indictment."
Ultimately, he said, the case will go to trial "absent some external intervention—like Trump ordering [the Justice Department] to drop the charges" after having won the election.
At the same time, Sauer's backtracking might have little consequence from an electoral perspective. Further delay in a trial, which Sauer is close to achieving, is a form of victory in itself.
Slate's Mark Joseph Stern pointed out that when Barrett similarly questioned Michael Dreeben, the U.S. Department of Justice lawyer arguing the case for Smith, it seemed like they "were trying to work out some compromise wherein the trial court could distinguish between official and unofficial acts, then instruct the jury not to impose criminal liability on the former."
"It was fascinating to watch Barrett nodding along as Dreeben pitched a compromise that would largely preserve Smith's January 6 prosecution but limit what the jury could hear, or at least consider," Stern added. "That, though, would take months to suss out in the trial court. More delays!"
Stern and other experts signaled that the decision likely comes down to Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts, with the three liberals seemingly supporting the prosecution of Trump and the other four conservatives suggesting it is unconstitutional.
People for the American Way president Svante Myrick said in a statement that "today's argument brought both good and bad news. It was chilling to hear Donald Trump's lawyer say that staging a military coup could be considered part of a president's official duties."
"Thankfully, the majority of the court, including conservative justices, did not seem to buy that very broad Trump argument that a former president is absolutely immune from prosecution under any circumstances," Myrick added. "On the other hand, it's not clear that there is a majority on this court that will quickly reject the immunity arguments and let the case go forward in time for a trial before the election. That's a huge concern."
Trump was not at the Supreme Court on Thursday; he was at his trial in New York, where he faces 34 counts for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 election cycle. The are two other cases: a federal one for mishandling classified material and another in Georgia for interfering with the last presidential contest.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Just the Beginning': 50+ Arrested for Blockading Citigroup Bank Over Climate Crimes
"Through people-powered resistance, we can give money a conscience and stop Citi's destruction of our planet," said one Indigenous campaigner.
Apr 25, 2024
Twenty more demonstrators were arrested Thursday, the second day of Earth Week protests targeting Citigroup's Manhattan headquarters in what organizers called "the beginning of a wave of direct actions to take place over the summer targeting big banks for creating climate chaos that is killing our communities and our planet."
Protest organizers—who include Climate Defenders, New York Communities for Change, Planet over Profit, and Stop the Money Pipeline—said 53 activists were arrested over two days of demonstrations, which included blocking the entrance to Citigroup's headquarters, to "demand that the bank stop funding fossil fuels."
Organizers said this week's demonstrations "were just the beginning" of what they're calling a "Summer of Heat" targeting big banks for their role in the climate emergency and for "polluting our land, air, and water, and threatening the health of children, families, and our planet." Citigroup is the world's second-largest fossil fuel financier.
"We're holding Citi accountable for financing dirty fossil fuels from Canada to Latin America and beyond," said Chief Na'moks of the Wet'suwet'en Nation, one of several Indigenous leaders who took part in the action. "Through people-powered resistance, we can give money a conscience and stop Citi's destruction of our planet."
Jonathan Westin, executive director of Climate Defenders, asserted that "Citigroup's racist funding of oil, coal, and gas is creating climate chaos that's devastating communities of color across the country."
"We're taking action to tell Citi that we won't put up with their environmental racism for one more day," Westin continued. "Our communities have reached the boiling point. Our children have asthma, our city's sky was orange, and our air polluted because of the climate crisis caused by Citi and Wall Street."
"We're going to keep organizing and taking direct action until Citi listens to us," he vowed.
Stop the Money Pipeline co-director Alec Connon said: "To have any chance of reigning in the climate crisis, we must stop investing in fossil fuel expansion. Yet, Citibank is pumping billions of dollars into new coal, oil, and gas projects."
"We're here to make it clear: If they're going to fund the companies disrupting our climate and our lives, we're going to disrupt their business," Connon added.
Activists have repeatedly targeted Citigroup in recent years as the megabank has pumped more than $300 billion into fossil fuel investments around the world since the Paris climate agreement.
According to the protest organizers:
Citi has provided $668 million in funding to Formosa Plastics between 2001-2021, which is trying to build a $9.4 billion plastics facility in a majority Black community in the heart of Cancer Alley in Louisiana.
Citigroup is also one of the biggest funders of state-run oil and gas companies in the Amazon basin, pumping in over $40 billion between 2016-2020, and a major backer of Petroperú, which has been involved in oil spills and Indigenous rights violations.
"From wildfires, heatwaves, and floods to deadly air pollution and mass drought, Citi's fossil fuel financing is killing us," said Alice Hu of New York Communities for Change. "We've sent polite petitions and had pleading meetings with bank representatives, but Citi refuses to stop pouring billions each year into coal, oil, and gas."
"That's why we're fighting for our lives now with the best tool we have left: mass, nonviolent disruptive civil disobedience," Hu added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
No Outside Probe, US Reiterates as Gazans Reportedly Buried Alive in Mass Grave
"How does it ever make sense that the United States asks the accused party to examine itself?" asked one incredulous reporter.
Apr 25, 2024
A Biden administration spokesperson once again brushed off calls for an independent investigation into how hundreds of Palestinians found in mass graves near Gaza hospitals died when asked Thursday about new reports that many of the victims were tortured, summarily executed—and in some cases, buried alive by Israeli invaders.
During a Thursday U.S. State Department press conference in Washington, D.C., a reporter noted Gaza officials' claim that mass grave victims "including children were tortured before being killed" and that "some even showed signs of being buried alive, along with other crimes against humanity."
"What's wrong with an independent, scientific, forensic investigation?"
Noting calls by Palestinian officials and United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk for an independent probe into mass graves, the reporter said that "this administration repeatedly said that it asks... the Israeli government to investigate itself."
"How does it ever make sense that the United States asks the accused party to examine itself and provide reports that you have previously said that you actually trust?" the reporter asked State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Vedant Patel. "What's wrong with an independent, scientific, forensic investigation?"
Patel replied: "We continue to find these reports incredibly troubling. And that's why yesterday you saw the national security adviser for this to be thoroughly investigated."
While National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan on Wednesday called reports of mass grave atrocities "deeply disturbing" and said that "we want answers" from Israel, he did not call for an independent investigation.
When the reporter pressed Patel on the legitimacy of asking Israel to investigate itself, Patel said, "we believe that through a thorough investigation we can get some additional answers."
Thursday's exchange followed a similar back-and-forth on Tuesday between Patel and Said Arikat, a journalist for the Jerusalem-based
Palestinian news outlet al-Quds who asked about the mass graves.
At least 392 bodies—including numerous women and children—have been found in mass graves outside Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, where Palestinian Civil Defense and other workers have been exhuming victims for nearly a week. Officials believe there are as many as 700 bodies in three separate mass graves.
Based on more recent exhumations, local Civil Defense chief Yamen Abu Sulaiman said during a Wednesday press conference that "we believe that the occupation buried alive at least 20 people at the Nasser Medical Complex."
"There are cases of field execution of some patients while undergoing surgeries and wearing surgical gowns," he stated, adding that some victims showed signs of torture and 10 bodies had medical tubes attached to them.
Gaza Civil Defense official Mohammed Mughier told reporters that "we need forensic examination" to definitively determine the causes of death for the 20 people believed to have been buried alive.
Previous reporting on the mass graves quoted rescue workers who said they found people who were apparently executed while their hands were bound, with some victims missing heads, skin, and internal organs.
Other mass graves have been found in Gaza, most notably on the grounds of al-Shifa Hospital, where Israeli forces last month committed what the Geneva-based Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor called "one of the largest massacres in Palestinian history."
It's also not the first time there have been reports of Israeli troops burying victims alive during the current war, in which Palestinian and international officials say Israeli forces have killed or wounded more than 122,000 Gazans, including at least 11,000 people who are missing and feared dead. Israeli forces attacking Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahia last December reportedly bulldozed and buried alive dozens of injured patients and displaced people.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular