World News

32580 readers

882 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

449

America far-right wants to cut funding for Clean Water Programs by 64% (www.commondreams.org)

submitted 2 years ago by Raphael to c/[email protected]

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Subcommittee, chaired by U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), on Thursday marked up a GOP appropriations bill for fiscal year 2024. A Republican fact sheet celebrates proposed "cuts to wasteful spending" and "claw-backs of prior appropriations," highlighting that it "reins in" the Environmental Protection Agency, "limits abuse of the Endangered Species Act," and provides protections for the fossil fuel industry.

The GOP proposal would slash appropriations for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF). The former provides low-interest loans for infrastructure projects like wastewater facilities while the latter provides assistance for initiatives like improving drinking water treatment and fixing old pipes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 37 points 2 years ago (4 children)

How can they possibly spin this as a good thing?

[–] Raphael 18 points 2 years ago

The water is rusty because metal rusts over time, metal is a natural substance therefore rust is a natural substance as well. The human body is natural as it was created by God, therefore rusty water is not harmful to the human body.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago

Bad water dumbs people down, which creates more voters for them.

[–] Matt_Shatt 11 points 2 years ago

They just want to let the local municipalities have the freedom to treat their own water how they want!

Unless it’s Austin or Houston or any blue city. Then the state will tell them how to not do it.

[–] JustAManOnAToilet -5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Are the programs shown to actually improve anything or does it become a slush fund? Don't get caught up in the name of something, look into what it actually does (or doesn't do).

Edit to add: that's just one avenue, then you have alternate strategies to tackle the same problem

[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Here's the eleven categories of projects that CWSRF loans can be used for.

Here's the six categories of projects that DWSRF loans can be used for. The DWSRF also publishes a periodic Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey that lays out approximate costs for various system sizes, and the distribution of system sizes across communities.

There is also a lot of overlap; quoting the OP article:

The [CWSRF] provides low-interest loans for infrastructure projects like wastewater facilities while the [DWSRF] provides assistance for initiatives like improving drinking water treatment and fixing old pipes.

The CWSRF Environmental Benefits Report from 2014 says:

14,838 Projects Financed

To 5,222 Communities

with one of the highlights being:

95% of Subsidy Goes to Recipients that Could Not Otherwise Afford the Project

With the variety of activities they support, and the fact that they are permitting projects that communities could not otherwise afford to engage in, I'd say they're very valuable.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

People who make such well sourced and written comments like yours is why i love lemmy/forum style communities.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago

Do you really think regulatory agencies serve no purpose? Does not the FDA protect you from deadly medication side effects? Does not the government protect your water, air and ground? Do you think shit water is unsafe to drink?

TL/DR; have you no common sense?