[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 19 (Tuesday, February 2, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H489-H492]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             WATER SECURITY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 2015, the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Madam Speaker, I want to pick up on some issues of 
security. We have heard for the last hour discussions of security, and 
there are many different aspects to the question of security.
  Are we secure in this world in which we live? Well, there are a lot 
of problems. To be sure, we can worry about China and the South China 
Sea, and we do. Certainly, in the Middle East, where I recently visited 
the Gulf States and Iran, there are a lot of concerns there.
  As you move into Iraq, there are the issues of ISIL, al Qaeda and, of 
course, the great tragedy that is occurring in Syria where, basically, 
cities are simply being destroyed, obviously, the churches, the 
monasteries, the mosques--boom--housing.
  There are well over 270,000 people--Christians, Muslims, and others--
killed in the Syrian civil war and the resultant desire by people to 
get out of there. Immigration issues are abounding. Certainly, they 
affect us here in the United States.
  There are many other security issues beyond those that make the 
headlines. There are security issues in our homes. For example, do we 
have a job? Well, that is a big issue.
  Often here on the floor, in days gone by, I would stand with my 
colleagues and we would talk about creating jobs in the United States. 
We would talk about strategies of Make It In America, strategies to use 
our tax dollars to buy American-made products and services so that our 
money could be used to employ our own people and to support our own 
businesses.
  These are all very, very important strategies. They do happen to do 
with individual security, community security, and family security. So 
security has many, many pieces.
  Tonight I want to talk about one type of security. This is something 
that affects every human being, every animal, large or small, from an 
elephant to the smallest mouse. This security issue is one that affects 
every form of life. It is called water. It is called water.
  This is the most basic of security issues. You don't go but a day or 
2, maybe 3, days, if you are not doing much and it is really not very 
hot, without water. It is essential. This is a bottom-line security 
issue.
  If you don't have water, you are insecure. If you don't have water, 
you will very soon be dead. If you have poisonous water, you may not 
die immediately, but it will certainly affect you.
  Let's take a look at this. This is water from Flint, Michigan, United 
States of America. There are roughly 100,000 human beings in Flint, 
Michigan.
  Well, among the most essential of all of the things we need for life, 
for security, is water. That is Flint, Michigan, water, a city of 
100,000 people in the United States.

                              {time}  1915

  Oh, we would like to think of ourselves as being the most advanced 
place in the world. That is Flint, Michigan, water. Nine thousand 
children under the age of 4 or 5 have been drinking that water 
contaminated with lead for about 14 months.
  I am not going to go into the reasons why that tragedy is occurring. 
There are many. There is an FBI investigation and there are questions 
about the Governor of Michigan and the way in which it was done, but I 
am not going to go there today.
  I want to go to something else that we are responsible for here in 
the House of Representatives and our colleagues across the Capitol in 
the U.S. Senate. I want to talk about our responsibility here because 
this is our business.
  If we are concerned about security--and we are--we should--and we 
do--talk about al Qaeda. We should--and we do--talk about ISIS. We 
should--and we do--talk about refugees and whether they are safe or 
not. We talk about San Bernardino and the great tragedy there. We 
should talk about it, and we should do something about it.
  There is another side of security that we have specific 
responsibility to deal with. In 1974, we set out to clean up the waters 
of the United States with the Clean Water Act. Over the years, it has 
been amended. In 1996, we set standards for clean water and we provided 
some funding.
  If someone were to grade us on our success in addressing one of the 
fundamental security issues, that is, the ability to have clean, 
drinkable water, here is the scorecard. Let's take a look at it. Let's 
see.
  We can run down through aviation, bridges. Oh, by the way, this is 
from the American Society of Civil Engineers. They produce a scorecard 
on how well this great Nation, the United States of America, is doing 
on providing fundamental security.
  Aviation, bridges, dams, drinking water: D. Today, at a hearing on 
water, the Society of Civil Engineers said we have got a D on drinking 
water.
  Somebody asked them: Is that the bottom grade?

[[Page H490]]

  They said: Well, pretty much because if you go to an F, it is too 
much paperwork. So they just stop at D. D.
  We fancy ourselves to be the greatest place in the world, the most 
advanced economy. All the way down this list are D's, a couple of C's. 
Our infrastructure doesn't rank among the best in the world. In fact, 
we rank about where developing countries are.
  So what is the result of all of this? Well, Flint, Michigan, water, 
would you drink it? For 100,000 people in Flint, Michigan, that is 
their water supply. Without water, you don't live.
  Closer to my home in Porterville, California, a city of a few tens of 
thousands of people, no water. So they truck it in. I have got one of 
those on my ranch. It is called a livestock water trough. That is where 
the kids get their water in the United States of America.
  Oh, we think we are good. Security comes in many forms. Drinking 
water. So why does this happen? Why is it that, in this great Nation, 
all of us, 435 here, and another 100 across the Capitol--why is it 
Flint Michigan, Porterville, California, a half a dozen other cities in 
California, no water or contaminated water?
  Just in December it was reported that, in about a half a dozen 
communities in the San Joaquin Valley of California, the uranium in the 
water has reached a level beyond that which is allowed. That is okay. 
It is only going to be cancer.
  Uranium, fine. Flint, Michigan, Porterville, communities throughout 
this Nation. Oh, Toledo, Ohio. I remember Toledo, Ohio, last year shut 
down its water system because of contamination from algae in the lake. 
America. Why? Why?
  Here is why. A sharp drop in government infrastructure spending. Oh, 
government infrastructure spending. Federal Government infrastructure 
spending. For 435 of us; this is our job.
  Oh, let's see. This is 2002. Somewhere--oh, these are real dollars, 
disinflated, $325 billion. In 2014--that is 12 years later--$210 
billion. That is what happens. That is what happens when you don't have 
water in Porterville. That is what happens when you have uranium and 
the inability to take it out because you can't afford the systems. That 
is what happens in Flint, Michigan.
  Let's take another look at those numbers, another way to look at it. 
Spending on clean water and drinking water infrastructure. In 2014 
dollars--these are constant dollars across the way--1973, is that 
Ronald Reagan? I think so. No. Actually, it was a little later.
  That wasn't Reagan. It is the end of--what did we spend in 1973 in 
consistent 2014 dollars? We spent about $10 billion. Okay. In 1990, we 
spent about $6 billion. Again, these are dollars all consistent for 
2016 dollars. In 1999, we are down to about just under $4 billion. In 
2005, we get down to about $3.5 billion. In 2016, bingo, $2 billion.
  You wonder why we have a D? You wonder why the water systems break. 
240,000 water mains broke last year in the United States. You see the 
pictures of the sinkholes. That is not a geological issue. That is a 
water main issue. A water main is broken, washed out the street, washed 
out the community, and the houses fall into it. Not all of them, but 
that is basically it. 240,000 of those last year.
  What are we doing? Are we building new, high-quality water systems 
for our community? No, we are not. I will tell you what we are doing. 
Over the next few years, we are going to spend a trillion dollars in 
the next 20 years on rebuilding--that is a trillion dollars, not a 
billion--a trillion dollars--on rebuilding our entire nuclear warfare 
system. Every bomb, new airplanes, new missiles, new intercontinental 
ballistic missiles, new submarines, a trillion dollars. And this number 
competes with that trillion dollars.
  We make choices around here, folks. We make choices on how we are 
going to spend your tax money. We are going to spend it on nuclear 
bombs that go big in a big way, on new stealth bombers, new 
intercontinental ballistic missiles, new submarines, new dial-a-bomb--
dial it up, it goes big; dial it down, it goes small--so that we can 
use it as a tactical nuclear weapon. Whoa. We are making choices here.

  I can go on for some time about this. I get pretty excited about it. 
I get pretty dismayed. When I am in Brussels, as I was last week, 
returning from the Gulf States--Oman, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Qatar, 
Bahrain--looking at what is going on there, this is what I saw: I saw 
enormous problems. But I also saw a modern infrastructure. Go to 
Brussels. Look at their airport. Then go to an American airport.
  Water. Water. Flint, Michigan, water. State of Michigan, United 
States of America, that is the water that 100,000 Americans are forced 
to drink. We have got a Clean Water Act. We have got the laws in place 
to build our water systems.
  So what do we do? Well, I guess we would rather rebuild the B61 
nuclear bomb rather than building a water system for Americans for the 
security of 100,000 people.
  I live a long way from Flint, Michigan, but the guy I am going to 
call on, that is his home. That is where he was raised. Those are the 
people he represents.
  Dan Kildee, you have been on this issue for weeks and months. You 
have been sounding the alarm. You have been calling us out. You have 
been calling us out, all 435 of us and the Senate and the 
administration. You have been calling us out, and you are doing the 
work of securing the safety of the people in your community. Please 
join me, Dan Kildee, from Michigan.
  Mr. KILDEE. Well, first of all, let me thank my friend, Mr. 
Garamendi, not just for that introduction and for his comments about my 
hometown, but for his leadership on this issue.
  This is the critical issue that really determines whether we are 
competitive as a Nation. But it goes beyond competitiveness. It is the 
issue that will determine whether we have true national security. But 
it goes beyond national security. Sometimes it is a matter of life and 
death. Sometimes it is really a matter of health.
  In my hometown, the issue of failed infrastructure, particularly of 
the State of Michigan and their failure to manage infrastructure, let 
alone reinvest in it potentially, will affect not just 100,000 people, 
all of the citizens there, but, most importantly, will affect the 
trajectory of the lives of 9,000 children under the age of 6 who, for 
the last year and a half, have been drinking water that has elevated 
lead levels well beyond what normally would be required in order to 
take drastic action to correct the problem.
  And it was largely overlooked because of a failed philosophy of 
government in the State of Michigan that put short-term interest, 
short-term dollars-and-cents measures of success, ahead of not just 
long-term investment, but ahead of the lives of children that has 
resulted in this terrible tragedy.

                              {time}  1930

  I will just take a moment to tell you what happened and to support 
the efforts of my friend Mr. Garamendi in continuing to raise this 
question.
  The letter grade graph he showed regarding clean drinking water 
showed in the aggregate a grade of D. In Flint, it was an F. It was a 
failing grade.
  So, the failure to invest in infrastructure, and particularly urban 
infrastructure--roads, bridges, and water--led to significant economic 
difficulty in my hometown of Flint. The failure of the State to support 
cities--and, in fact, they cut direct support in cities--resulted in my 
hometown going into financial stress. The State then appointed a 
receiver to take over the city.
  Rather than provide support, rather than rebuild, it appointed a 
receiver, a financial manager, to go in with one tool, and one tool 
only, and that was a scalpel, to cut the budget of a city that was 
really begging for investment. Instead of investment, more cuts.
  One of the cuts was, for a temporary period of time until a regional 
pipeline to Lake Huron was completed, to draw drinking water from the 
Flint River, which for decades functioned as an open industrial sewer.
  In the State of Michigan, where we have the world's greatest source 
of surface water, freshwater, there was a decision to use the Flint 
River. But because of our aging infrastructure, old infrastructure, and 
lots of lead pipes, including thousands and thousands of lead service 
lines to homes, and the failure of the State to manage this process and 
treat the water effectively, highly corrosive water leached lead into 
the drinking water, and 100,000

[[Page H491]]

people have been subjected to elevated lead levels. Thousands of 
children have potentially been affected.
  The sad story here is that it all could have easily been prevented 
with just a little bit of investment and better management of the 
infrastructure. But we take water infrastructure for granted, as if all 
we have to do is turn on the faucet and the water will appear. No, it 
takes investment; it takes money; it takes resources. In this case, the 
State's failure has resulted in something that we hope is not repeated 
across this country; but without investment, there will be more Flint, 
Michigans.
  So what we need now is to call upon the State particularly to make 
the kind of investment in Flint to make it right. As I said, 9,000 
children in the city of Flint under the age of 6 have substantially 
elevated lead levels from the water that showed up in their blood in 
tests done by a courageous pediatrician, Dr. Mona Hanna-Attisha, who 
was one of the people who blew the whistle on this.
  So now we have a crisis in Flint. We have a loss of faith in 
government. But it is a crisis because this city is really at risk. We 
need significant investment to make it right. That investment would 
come in the form of a long overdue replacement of those lead service 
lines, that lead piping that is outdated, obsolete, and dangerous. 
Because of the failure to deal with this when it was a less expensive 
investment, we now have, I think, a very important moral responsibility 
on the State of Michigan to take care of the unique needs that these 
children will face as they go through their developmental stages. We 
need early childhood education for all of them. We need good 
nutritional programming--and not just to make it available, but to 
ensure sure they have good nutrition. We need additional help in the 
schools. We need behavioral support.
  There are consequences. There are human consequences to this failure. 
It is not just that the water looks bad, smells bad, tastes bad. It is 
unhealthy.
  Again, I hope Flint's experience can be an experience for the rest of 
the country, because the way our State treated the people of Flint was 
as if they didn't matter. They allowed this infrastructure to atrophy, 
allowed the city to atrophy, didn't support redevelopment, didn't 
support even the basic need of $140 a day to provide corrosion control 
treatment in this aging water system. All of that could have prevented 
this terrible tragedy, but they didn't do it.
  So now the State of Michigan bears the principal responsibility. I am 
doing everything I can to get Federal help for this, but the State of 
Michigan bears the principal responsibility. As far as I am concerned, 
it is up to them to make it right.
  The message that my friend has been bringing to this Congress when it 
comes to this question of infrastructure is that Flint proves that it 
matters what we do here. It matters what we do in this House. The fact 
is we have known as a Nation for a long time that, if we are going to 
be safe, if we are going to be competitive, if we are going to be 
healthy, we have to invest in that which we take for granted.
  Think about it, water, drinkable water. Most people in this room, 
most people in America never give it a second thought. You just turn on 
the faucet and it is there. It is literally what we depend upon for our 
very lives. In Flint, Michigan, because of this terrible failure, not 
only was it not safe, but we poisoned 9,000 children as a result.
  There are consequences to what we do here, and there are consequences 
to what we don't do here. So for those Members who have expressed their 
sympathy, I appreciate that, I sincerely do. But the children of Flint, 
the people of Flint, and, frankly, the people of Porterville and 
everywhere else need more than sympathy. We need investment. We need 
this Congress and this country to step up and do what it is right and 
invest in our own future, because if we don't, as you can tell, there 
are consequences.
  Thank you for your leadership on this.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Kildee, thank you so very much for the work that 
you are doing sounding the alarm and driving all of us. I know you did 
this morning in our Caucus. You alerted us to it. You motivated us. 
And, in fact, I am talking about it tonight because of your motivation 
that you gave to me and to our colleagues this morning.
  You spoke here a little bit about the human consequences. I would 
like you to take another run around this on how we bear--the community 
of America, and more specifically, Michigan--the responsibility of 
caring for addressing the human problem that now exists.

  Mr. KILDEE. I thank you for that question, because that is really the 
core of what we are dealing with right now.
  We need a lot of help in Flint. This could have been avoided. But now 
that this has occurred, there is some work we need to do to fix the 
pipes. There is some work we need to do to make sure the emergency 
needs are met--temporary water. But the real need is this human need.
  Lead is a neurotoxin. It affects development of the brain. The 
citizens who are most at risk are those children who are still in those 
early developmental stages, particularly children age 6 and under. 
Literally, children feeding, drinking formula made with this water will 
have the trajectory of their lives potentially affected.
  The thing that I think is important to keep in mind is, first of all, 
Flint is a tough town. We can live through this; we can get through 
this; we can succeed; but we are going to need resources. We need 
resources, really, to come from the people who did this to us, which is 
the State government with, I think, a completely bankrupt philosophy 
that basically says you are on your own.
  Well, you are not on your own when it comes to drinking water. We all 
expect drinking water to be clean. We have every right to expect that. 
It is a human right.
  But what we need now and what I think is morally required is to wrap 
our arms around these kids. We know that when it comes to brain 
development and challenges the kids might face, whether it is from a 
developmental question from some other source or derived from lead 
exposure, the more we do to help those children develop as early as 
possible, the better they will do in the long term.
  So, I will have legislation that I will introduce this week that puts 
Federal support in--and requires the State of Michigan to come up with 
its share, because they did this--so that we expand Head Start, Early 
Head Start, and that we give those kids the early opportunity to expand 
their minds; also, that we get them nutritional support, because we 
know that good, nutritious food--milk, for example--is very helpful in 
getting kids through lead exposure with minimal impact.
  Now, it is only to mitigate the damages and help these kids overcome, 
but what we need to do now as a community is what we would do for any 
child facing a developmental challenge. It is early childhood 
education. It is nutritional support. It is a school nurse, for 
example. We have gone so far in this country that we don't even fund 
the basics that we all grew up with. We all had a school nurse. You go 
to Flint, Michigan, a city of 100,000 people, and we have one school 
nurse.
  Also, it is after-school programming, enrichment opportunities. Most 
of the kids in my hometown, sadly, already have hurdles in front of 
them because of the misfortune of being born into poverty. They don't 
have the kind of opportunities that many kids take for granted: piano 
lessons, dance, art, after-school activities, gym time, a summer 
program. Maybe for the older kids, a summer job.
  That is the kind of help that will be required in order to move these 
kids from where they were headed before this crisis occurred and what 
the trajectory of their lives looks like right now.
  So the point is there are human consequences for the failure to do 
this right in the first place. And when we have a State government that 
failed these kids, they now have a moral obligation to step up and 
actually take care of their needs going forward.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. If I might interrupt you for a moment, this morning 
you spoke of a young child that was interviewed. Would you please share 
that?
  Mr. KILDEE. I will. I read this. It came from a writer from Detroit, 
a guy named Mitch Albom, who most people

[[Page H492]]

know for having written a bestseller, ``Tuesdays with Morrie.'' He came 
to Flint to interview children and to talk about what this whole 
experience meant to them.
  One young man said something which, in a very poignant way, in a 
really eloquent way, describes what exactly happened in Flint. The 
little boy said that he was afraid that he wouldn't be smart now, that 
he wouldn't be smart.
  It just occurred to me what a terrible crime this is, the failure of 
adults to manage the government in a way that takes the concerns of the 
life of a child into account and looks only at a balance sheet, only at 
a quarterly earnings statement--maybe the longest term that they look 
at it is an annual financial report--and wouldn't consider the fact 
that the result would be to have a young 8- or 9-year-old boy say to 
himself, ``I am afraid I won't be smart.''
  What does that do to that kid's hopes for himself, whether the 
cognitive, behavioral, or developmental impact of lead would have any 
substantial effect on him or her, kids that are in Flint? The fact that 
the lack of action by the government gives them doubt about their own 
future, doubt about their own capacity is just heartbreaking.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Kildee, thank you very, very much.
  ``I am afraid I won't be smart enough.'' I wonder if we should ask 
ourselves if we are smart enough. Are we smart enough? There are 435 of 
us facing a myriad of questions around this world and some of them in 
our own hometowns. Are we smart enough?
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________