Bipartisan Bill Would Help Flint, but Stalled in Senate

inhofe-james-okla-sen-357.jpg

WASHINGTON – A bipartisan bill that would provide $220 million of federal funds to Flint, Mich., as well as any other community facing a drinking water emergency, appears to be is stalled in the Senate.

The legislation, proposed last Wednesday by Sens. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., may be added as an amendment to the Safe Drinking Water Act Improved Compliance Awareness Act (H.R. 4470) pending in the Senate, but there are concerns about the revenue offset.

The bill would provide $100 million of drinking water state revolving funds to any state facing a water crisis. Under the drinking water state revolving fund program, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, using funds appropriated by Congress, awards capitalization grants to states based on the results of their most recent Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment. States provide a 20 percent match to the federal funding. Remaining balances from the capitalization grant and state match are then placed into a revolving loan fund that can be used toward additional loans. Any funds remaining after 18 months are distributed to all states under an existing SRF formula.

Flint, the seventh-largest city in Michigan, has faced lead contamination in its drinking water for the nearly two years since its water supply was changed from Lake Huron and the Detroit River to the Flint River, leading Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder to declare the city under a state of emergency in January.

Michigan lawmakers last week approved a $30 million state relief bill for Flint, which brought state funding on the issue to $70 million.

The Inhofe/Stabenow bill would require states to submit a plan detailing how the awarded funds would be spent before receiving any federal assistance.

The proposed legislation also would provide $70 million to back secured loans made under the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA), which leverages federal investments on a basis of up to 60 to 1. A federal investment of $70 million would support secured loans of up to $4.2 billion to address water infrastructure, according to Inhofe. The loans could be used in conjunction with tax-exempt bond financing.

The measure also would provide $50 million toward health programs to treat and prevent lead exposure from contaminated drinking water. The legislation would be paid for by reprogramming $250 million from the federal Advanced Vehicles Manufacturing loan program, the $25 billion initiative that provides debt capital to the U.S. automobile industry.

In a ¬¬ news release announcing the legislation, Inhofe sharply criticized the Obama administration's handling of what he now calls the "crisis we face across the nation due to a failure to address aging water infrastructure." Los Angeles, Baltimore and portions of Ohio are facing similar water and infrastructure issues, he said.

"Using these existing, authorized programs is the fiscally responsible thing to do not only for Flint but also for the entire nation facing a water infrastructure crisis," Inhofe said. "These programs provide low interest loans to the states, local governments and other water suppliers to help address critical water infrastructure needs, and when the loan is paid back, more communities can receive funding."

The Inhofe/Stabenow legislation has several co-sponsors including Sens. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.; Rob Portman, R-Ohio; Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio; Gary Peters, D-Mich.; Dick Durbin, D-Ill.; Mark Kirk, R-Ill.; Jack Reed, D-R.I.; and Richard Burr, R-N.C.

Inhofe had originally planned for the legislation to be added as an amendment to the Energy Modernization Act (S. 2012), which is also pending in the Senate following the failure of lawmakers in that chamber to vote for cloture to limit debate on the bill. That legislation, introduced in September by Energy & Natural Resources Committee chair Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, would improve and create energy efficiency programs.

But Senators recently agreed to keep the Flint legislation separate from the energy bill after concerns were raised about it, knowledgeable sources said this week, according to knowledgeable sources. The staff in Inhofe's office could not be reached for comment.

The bill's sponsors now want it to be added as an amendment to H.R. 4470, a bipartisan Flint aid bill, passed by the House on Feb. 10 and sent over to the Senate for consideration. That bill was introduced on Feb. 4 by Rep. Dan Kildee, D-Mich., and has 77 co-sponsors.

But some lawmakers have placed a hold on the Flint bill after the Congressional Budget Office found the budget offset in the bill was an earlier emergency funding measure without an offset, the sources said.

For reprint and licensing requests for this article, click here.
Infrastructure Michigan
MORE FROM BOND BUYER