Weeks of negotiations in the U.S. Senate have failed to break a hold on legislation that would provide millions of dollars to Flint, Michigan and other communities across the country to replace lead service lines and address other water infrastructure needs. Further action on the bill will now wait at least until April when senators return from a two-week recess.
Unveiled in February as a bipartisan proposal to provide quick water infrastructure aid in response to the Flint water crisis, the “Drinking Water Safety and Infrastructure Act” (S. 2579) has since stalled in the chamber after numerous senators placed holds on an energy policy measure (S. 2012) to which the Flint proposal was offered as an amendment. A hold allows individual senators to block consideration of legislation and often is used to gain leverage or secure concessions from bill supporters.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) imposed the most consequential hold related to the Flint funding because he initially objected to using federal dollars to repair Flint’s water infrastructure while Michigan held a budget surplus. Sen. Lee also objected to a budget offset that supporters intended to use to pay for the new water infrastructure spending, and senators were unable to come to an agreement before departing Washington for the spring recess.
As originally proposed, S. 2579 would deliver $100 million to Michigan through the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) to help replace Flint’s inventory of public and privately owned lead service lines. The bill would also appropriate $70 million in credit subsidy to the new Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) pilot program, which could be leveraged into loans to help communities across the country finance any WIFIA-eligible water infrastructure project. Another section of the bill would require utilities to notify the public within 15 days of an exceedance of a lead action level for drinking water.
Senators are expected to continue efforts to pass the legislation upon returning to Washington in early April. Should the Senate eventually approve the bill, its prospects in the House of Representatives are uncertain, as some Republican lawmakers in the lower chamber have expressed similar concerns about delivering dedicated Flint funding on an expedited basis.