Green | November 25, 2008 | 5 comments

Why public funding of the US water system is the answer

Image
JanforGore
From maintenance problems in Atlanta and sewage spills in Milwaukee, to corruption in New Orleans and political meddling in Lexington, the recent history of water privatization in the United States is marred by underachievement and failure. During the 1990s, corporations — many of them multi-billion-dollar conglomerates based overseas — persuaded communities throughout the nation to transfer control of their systems to the private sector.

Corporations offer themselves as the solution to financial, technical and organizational challenges faced by municipalities throughout the United States. They are grappling with stricter standards, diminishing federal funding and a citizenry not keen on rate increases. But these corporations — mainly European multinationals RWE, Suez and Veolia — have produced mixed results at best. The privatization bubble is bursting.

As stories like those chronicled in this report have mounted in recent years, elected officials and citizens alike have viewed water privatization with increasing skepticism.

Instead, the answer to the water infrastructure crisis is a renewed commitment to public funding through enhancement of the State Revolving Funds and creation of a national water infrastructure trust fund. The federal government maintains trust funds for roads and airports — even the Capitol Rotunda’s frescoes and wildlife in South Dakota — but not for water. It’s time for the federal government to act and ensure the nation’s aging water and wastewater systems will be able to provide communities with safe and affordable service.

Local elected officials and citizens also are taking matters into their own hands. Movements are afoot in a growing number of communities — including Lexington, Kentucky, and Champaign-Urbana, Illinois — to buy their water systems from corporations. The momentum for public control is only escalating after many recent public victories in communities like Stockton and Felton, California.

Of the 254 million Americans on a community water system, 86 percent receive their water from public utilities. Public utilities are accountable to the communities they serve and in most cases are extremely well managed. It is in the best interest of the country to ensure these systems are preserved and improved.

“Water links us to our neighbor in a way more profound and complex than any other.” – John Thorson
  1. groups:
    News and Politics,   Green,   Earth and Science,   Health
  2. tags:
    News and Politics Green Earth and Science Environment 8 more
  3.     
    |

5 comments // Why public funding of the US water system is the answer

  • AveryMoore
    • 0
      AveryMoore  
    • Yup. Agreed.

      Everywhere water has been privatized, it's failed. It just turns into yet another form of corporate abuse.

      The contrast between what we now laughably call "government" and what the military expects from its own clarifies the distinction.

      Government wants to shed all responsibility for providing essential services as fast as their privatizing friends can cash in.

      In the military? The same form of misconduct would be regarded as Dereliction of Duty and the culprits courtmartialled.

    • 3 years ago
  • csmonut
    • 0
      csmonut  
    • Having worked in the wastewater industry for a number of years, I am also familiar with the potable water side of things.

      Typically private corporations come in on a 5+ year contract. Within that time, they must adhere to all of the permit requirements, etc.

      Problems start when the companies pay fines associated with "breaking permit" because it's cheaper than following the rules.
      And...they do not put money into maintaining the infrastructure.

      Ultimately, the city ends having to take back the water or wastewater treatment plant and sink millions of taxpayer funds into fixing all of the problems, plus paying fines.
      Or...the city could be forced by the state to take back the plants because of regulatory violations.

      Taxpayers don't understand the enormous amount of work that goes into the maintanence of the infrastructure, especially in a larger city.
      They only know they turn on the faucet and water comes out, (or they flush their toilet and it goes 'somewhere' :)
      So...when a city sees a potential savings, one in which they can say to the taxpayer, "it's not my fault" when the rates go up, they jump at it.

      The only ones that win, are the corporations. They made their money, and they are "outta there."

    • 3 years ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • Privitization of water hasn't worked as private companies are more in the pockets of government agencies. They have become our government, and that is not Democratic to me. A municipal water system run by local government with representatives elected by the people who have a say in the process brings more accountability than a private corporation only beholding to make profit for its shareholders. In the case of water as well, it is not a commodity but a public trust.

    • 3 years ago
  • jahbini
    • 0
      jahbini  
    • Jan, I have to agree with you. My 'libertarian' side would say that business can always be less expensive and more efficient than the government doing the same thing. But it never really works out that way when you take a larger perspective.

      Two huge problems with privatization are motive and visibility.

      For-profit corporations by definition are motivated to answer to their stockholders. That outweighs any "high minded" or social motivators. Our western concept of business has yet to create a counter-example.

      The other factor, visibility, is inherent in the competitive nature of business: Corporations don't tell their secrets. And they pretty much define what the secrets are. So when you want to find out what and how and the side-effects of a corporations operations, you are out of luck.

      Even corporations with close supervisory regulation soon "own" the regulatory agencies, and totally defeat the safeguards that regulation is supposed to insure: We are currently suffering from the very visible failure of that kind of regulation!

      Only governments that are totally accountable to the people (and sadly, our present federal administration is totally lacking in this regard) can satisfy the visibility and motivation requirements.

    • 3 years ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • By committing to upgrading water infrastructure and quality in the United States we are also sending a clear message to companies such as Nestle that deem to hold us captive to water as a commodity that they will not be allowed to steal our water and sell it back to us for a profit. They will not be allowed to take advantage of drought and the hardship of others to benefit their balance sheets at the expense of a resource that is a public trust. I hope Obama's economic plans that include upgrades on roads and bridges to create jobs (which I actually agree with) also include water infrastructure. It is way past due.

    • 3 years ago
more from Green:

top videos