Sometimes,
true life is hard to believe. A year
ago, with the country agog about unsafe drinking water in Flint, Michigan, the
notion that the US Government would soon
reduce the amount of federal money available to help state and local agencies
test for water safety would have been regarded as fanciful.
No
more. President Trump’s proposed budget
seeks to chop spending at the Environmental Protection Agency by $2.4 billion –
about 31% -- while eliminating a
quarter of the agency’s 15,000 jobs. Among many other cuts, the Agency is
proposing to reduce the grants that help states and cities monitor public water
systems from $102 million to $71 million. Since many cities have the same
eroded pipes that have afflicted Flint, it’s hard to understand why anyone
would want to reduce the number of inspectors while simultaneously eviscerating
the programs that follow up on and seek to correct unsatisfactory results.
Cutting back
support for clean drinking water is only one of many things the Administration doesn’t
think are worthwhile. The EPA is
proposing to eliminate the $400 million it now spends on regional cleanup
programs across the country, including an extensive effort to prevent further
damage to the Great Lakes. The Agency wants to cut the $165 million it spends helping states
identify and deal with pollutants not regulated by the Clean Water Act as well the
roughly $50 million it devotes to monitoring vehicle emissions, despite having
recently fined both Volkswagen and Fiat Chrysler for cheating on emission tests.
Is there
anything the Agency wants to spend more on?
Yes. It wants to double the
agency’s operations staff and provide a round the clock security detail for
Scott Pruitt, the new Administrator, who seems to think the door to door protection
provided for prior Administrators is insufficient.
Give you any
hint of who and what the new Administration thinks is important?
