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
Senate Finally Approves Flint Aid--At California's Expense
Michigan action shouldn't come at expense of 'endangered species protection in California, but that is the result of the partisan games at play,' said NRDC
Dec 11, 2016
The U.S. Senate on Saturday passed a wide-ranging $10 billion deal to fund water and infrastructure projects around the country, including the removal of lead pipes in Flint, Michigan--but climate advocates say the long-awaited assistance comes at the cost of environmental protections in drought-stricken California.
If approved by President Barack Obama, the Water Resources Development Act would allot $170 million to address the ongoing lead poisoning crisis in Flint, a provision that Michigan lawmakers and activists say is long past due. However, it would also approve $558 million to send more water to California farmers, make it easier to build new dams in the state, and target certain fish species for elimination from waterways.
The California provision was tucked into the massive bill against the wishes of one of its primary authors, retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.). Despite having worked on it for years, Boxer found herself urging senators to vote against the massive bill, saying it puts the interests of big farmers over endangered species protections for salmon and other fish.
"It breaks my heart," she said during a floor speech on Friday. "Here I am, standing up, making a big fuss over my own bill, saying vote no. It's really painful for me to have to filibuster my own bill."
As McClatchy notes, the provision would "dramatically [shift] 25 years of federal policy," and its "rocky road to the White House also proved a costly master class in political persistence and adroit maneuvering."
The waterways bill was approved in the U.S. House on Thursday. Its 78-21 passage in the Senate was greeted with mixed feelings from environmental activists.
"Federal funding to help begin fixing the pipes at the heart of the Flint water crisis is shamefully overdue," said Scott Slesinger, legislative director at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). "This is a start, but far more is needed to fix Flint and ensure safe drinking water to communities across America."
"We should not have to trade delinquent Congressional action in Michigan for the erosion of endangered species protection and a threat to fishing jobs in California, but that is the result of the partisan games at play in this bill," Slesinger said. "In spite of the poison pill rider gutting federal protections in California, we will redouble our efforts to protect the Bay-Delta."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
The U.S. Senate on Saturday passed a wide-ranging $10 billion deal to fund water and infrastructure projects around the country, including the removal of lead pipes in Flint, Michigan--but climate advocates say the long-awaited assistance comes at the cost of environmental protections in drought-stricken California.
If approved by President Barack Obama, the Water Resources Development Act would allot $170 million to address the ongoing lead poisoning crisis in Flint, a provision that Michigan lawmakers and activists say is long past due. However, it would also approve $558 million to send more water to California farmers, make it easier to build new dams in the state, and target certain fish species for elimination from waterways.
The California provision was tucked into the massive bill against the wishes of one of its primary authors, retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.). Despite having worked on it for years, Boxer found herself urging senators to vote against the massive bill, saying it puts the interests of big farmers over endangered species protections for salmon and other fish.
"It breaks my heart," she said during a floor speech on Friday. "Here I am, standing up, making a big fuss over my own bill, saying vote no. It's really painful for me to have to filibuster my own bill."
As McClatchy notes, the provision would "dramatically [shift] 25 years of federal policy," and its "rocky road to the White House also proved a costly master class in political persistence and adroit maneuvering."
The waterways bill was approved in the U.S. House on Thursday. Its 78-21 passage in the Senate was greeted with mixed feelings from environmental activists.
"Federal funding to help begin fixing the pipes at the heart of the Flint water crisis is shamefully overdue," said Scott Slesinger, legislative director at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). "This is a start, but far more is needed to fix Flint and ensure safe drinking water to communities across America."
"We should not have to trade delinquent Congressional action in Michigan for the erosion of endangered species protection and a threat to fishing jobs in California, but that is the result of the partisan games at play in this bill," Slesinger said. "In spite of the poison pill rider gutting federal protections in California, we will redouble our efforts to protect the Bay-Delta."
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
The U.S. Senate on Saturday passed a wide-ranging $10 billion deal to fund water and infrastructure projects around the country, including the removal of lead pipes in Flint, Michigan--but climate advocates say the long-awaited assistance comes at the cost of environmental protections in drought-stricken California.
If approved by President Barack Obama, the Water Resources Development Act would allot $170 million to address the ongoing lead poisoning crisis in Flint, a provision that Michigan lawmakers and activists say is long past due. However, it would also approve $558 million to send more water to California farmers, make it easier to build new dams in the state, and target certain fish species for elimination from waterways.
The California provision was tucked into the massive bill against the wishes of one of its primary authors, retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.). Despite having worked on it for years, Boxer found herself urging senators to vote against the massive bill, saying it puts the interests of big farmers over endangered species protections for salmon and other fish.
"It breaks my heart," she said during a floor speech on Friday. "Here I am, standing up, making a big fuss over my own bill, saying vote no. It's really painful for me to have to filibuster my own bill."
As McClatchy notes, the provision would "dramatically [shift] 25 years of federal policy," and its "rocky road to the White House also proved a costly master class in political persistence and adroit maneuvering."
The waterways bill was approved in the U.S. House on Thursday. Its 78-21 passage in the Senate was greeted with mixed feelings from environmental activists.
"Federal funding to help begin fixing the pipes at the heart of the Flint water crisis is shamefully overdue," said Scott Slesinger, legislative director at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). "This is a start, but far more is needed to fix Flint and ensure safe drinking water to communities across America."
"We should not have to trade delinquent Congressional action in Michigan for the erosion of endangered species protection and a threat to fishing jobs in California, but that is the result of the partisan games at play in this bill," Slesinger said. "In spite of the poison pill rider gutting federal protections in California, we will redouble our efforts to protect the Bay-Delta."
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.