The aftermath of the water crisis in Flint, Michigan reverberated through Capitol Hill this month as a partisan-fueled debate over whether and how to deliver federal assistance to help the city replace its inventory of lead service lines delayed passage of a long-awaited energy bill.
Originally offered as an amendment to energy legislation under consideration in the Senate, the measure from Michigan Democratic Senators Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters would authorize up to $400 million for a new emergency infrastructure program under the Safe Drinking Water Act to help Flint “replace or fix lead-contaminated water pipes, to hire new personnel, and to cover the cost of technical assistance provided by the EPA.” The state of Michigan would be required to provide a dollar-for-dollar match to EPA’s funding, and the measure would also allow the state to forgive Flint’s outstanding Drinking Water State Revolving Fund debts. Another section of the proposal would authorize a $200 million Center of Excellence on Lead Exposure to monitor the health of individuals exposed to lead and connect them with a variety of available services.
But while senators on both sides of the aisle spent weeks negotiating the proposal, the amendment ran into opposition from Republicans concerned about the price tag. For example, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) warned against giving Flint a “blank check” to repair infrastructure that should be the “primary responsibility” of the city and the state.
Senators reportedly spent much of the weeklong President’s Day recess engaged in discussions aimed at reaching a deal, but as of late February still lacked agreement on how to pay for the aid. Another debate going on behind closed doors reportedly concerned whether any impending deal to pay for lead service line removal in Flint should also help other low-income cities replace their own lead service line inventories.
Senate Democrats have pledged to block any further action on the chamber’s energy bill until a deal on Flint funding is reached, but it is not clear whether they plan to also make action on other major legislation contingent on delivering assistance to the city.