The “EPA did it’s job…” these are the words of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy on the Flint, Michigan lead-poisoned water crisis. State and local officials are rightfully to blame for what has happened in this community of just under 100,000 residents, which has been steadily losing nearly 50% of it’s population since 1960. The median household income in Flint is $24,834, nearly half Michigan’s $48,411 median household income. Furthermore, 41.5% of residents live below the poverty line in this majority African American city (56.6% Black, 35.7% White, 3.9% Hispanic).
Although the head of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has already resigned, calls for additional resignations and even criminal prosecution of government officials, including Governor Rick Snyder, are continuing.
But how far up the chain does the blame go? That’s a great question, and I’m glad you asked. Unfortunately the answer is not an easy one. Now here is where federalism rises to the occasion. Our system of federalism sets up a separation of government levels that becomes very convenient in cases like this. Susan Hedman, the head of EPA’s Region 5 which covers Michigan, says her department was made aware in April 2015 that Flint water was not being treated with chemicals to prevent lead leaching and avoid water contamination. However, the agency did not alert the public of this concern. Yet, they did follow “proper protocol” by repeatedly prompting Michigan’s DEQ to implement chemical treatment.
According to Hedman, “it is important to understand the clear roles here, communication about lead in drinking water and the health impacts associated with that, that’s the role of DHHS (Department of Health and Human Services), the county health department and the drinking water utility.” Often, federalism allows the different levels of government to blame each other for inaction and oversight as they typically operate in silos rather than in concert with one another. At which level of government should the blame lie? In my opinion, all, for various reasons. In this case, the state and federal governments must own their responsibility to uphold the standards embedded in their names, quality and protection.
This sad saga continues. Read more about the EPA defending it’s handling of the crisis here.
7 thoughts on “When federalism fails: EPA knew about Flint”
UPDATE: EPA Region 5 Administrator, Susan Hedman, offered her resignation effective Feb. 1 Amid Flint Water Crisis.
And where is this polluted water going ?
I’m Thinking Rain Barrels and other ways of melting snow for water and other water capture devices. I have been thinking about this for a while. I’m a nature lover, and nature provides. I know there is some serious snow that is about to hit the east coast and it has to have already crossed Flint, so hmmm, lets collect natures bounty.
The word is the problem could have been solved for about $100 a day. So the city saving $36,500 was valued more than the lives of residents 😦
1. I wonder if this is a US Money issue ( Our History Proves it’s always about money )
2. How do you get lead out of water ?
3. how is there Lead in the water. Hmmmmm
You make a really great point about the money connection. The decision for Flint to leave Detroit water system and return to it’s own system was a financial decision. On the other two, there were chemicals they could add to the water at the treatment plant to avoid lead pipe corrosion (many of the service lines going into homes are leaded pipe, which is how lead got into the water).
Oh Dear Lord, so it’s an old pipe system. Which is another money hurdle. I take it someone doesn’t want to spend the money to upgrade the piping.