Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(133,954 posts)
Sun Oct 18, 2020, 03:28 PM Oct 2020

Crystal clean water? Not if Trump can help it

When asked about climate change and the environment in the first presidential debate, President Trump stated, "I want crystal clean water and air." As we mark the 48th anniversary of the 1972 Clean Water Act on Oct. 18, the president's words ring hollow.

For most of the past 48 years, the Clean Water Act produced dramatic improvements in the quality of our nation's rivers, lakes and coastal waters. But problems persist: In 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported that 46 percent of rivers and streams were in poor condition, contaminated with pollutants. That was also true of 21 percent of lakes and 14 percent of coastal waters.

Unfortunately, the Trump administration's unrelenting rollback of clean water protections is stalling progress toward fixing these problems and endangering a half-century's worth of gains.

Let's start with the budget. One core element of our nation's commitment to clean water is federal funding to states to construct sewage treatment plants. For FY 2021, the president proposed to cut this funding by 32 percent. This cut would come at a time when the need for clean water infrastructure is estimated to be $271 billion. Worse, this reduction is in the context of a potentially devastating overall cut to the EPA budget in FY 2021 of 27 percent.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/crystal-clean-water-not-if-trump-can-help-it/ar-BB1a9llC?li=BBnbfcQ&ocid=DELLDHP

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Crystal clean water? Not ...