Mr. Speaker, today I rise because I believe that working Americans deserve a Federal budget which is compassionate, decent, hopeful, and accountable to their needs. Yet the budget shortchanges many environmental programs designed to…
Mr. Speaker, today I rise because I believe that working Americans deserve a Federal budget which is compassionate, decent, hopeful, and accountable to their needs. Yet the budget shortchanges many environmental programs designed to protect public health and improve our communities' quality of life. It cuts funding for environmental justice programs by 28 percent and cuts funding for clean water infrastructure by $199 million. It also fails to address the more than $300 billion gap in drinking water infrastructure, funds for brownfields cleanup and redevelopment at less than 20 percent of what Congress has authorized, and zeroes out funding to bring more green space to our communities.
These cuts, Mr. Speaker, have very real implications on the quality of our health and our communities. Let us first consider the 28 percent cut in funding for environmental justice. For decades minority and low- income communities have lived in close proximity to industrial zones, power plants, toxic waste sites. These are the communities
nationwide whose health and quality of life are negatively impacted most by environmental injustices. For example, 5.5 million Latinos live within a 10-mile radius of a power plant, and 68 percent of all African Americans live within 30 miles, the range where health impacts are most severe. Over 70 percent of all African Americans and Latinos live in counties that violate the Federal air pollution standards, compared to 58 percent for nonminorities.
The administration is allegedly committed to protecting low-income and minority communities; yet the budget is just one of several actions taken recently which puts this commitment in doubt. Last year the Bush administration proposed removing race and income as considerations of environmental justice. Removing these considerations, in my opinion, would significantly disadvantage those communities which are already disproportionately affected by environmental toxins and the least able to defend and empower themselves.
Most recently the Bush administration proposed changing toxic reporting requirements to benefit polluting industries at the expense of the health of this Nation's communities. In California, the State I represent, this would include nearly 60 ZIP codes, over half of which have at least 45 percent minority residents and large proportions of people living well below the poverty line.
This budget also shortchanges our water infrastructure and water providers. It cuts funding for the Clean Water Revolving Fund by $199 million and funds safe drinking water infrastructure at 10 percent below last year's level. Yet our water infrastructure needs at least $300 billion invested just to maintain current services.
President Bush's budget fails to adequately address the more than 119,000 confirmed releases at underground storage tanks, like the more than 1,000 in my congressional district alone, and that is in Los Angeles. In the interim the onerous burden of shoring up our water infrastructure and protecting supplies falls on our cities, our States, and ultimately the water providers.
The budget fails the one in four Americans that live within 4 miles of a Superfund site, including 10 million children under the age of 12. There are three such sites in my own community. In fact, EPA itself admitted publicly the serious problems facing Superfund site cleanup. On December 2, 2004, then Assistant Administrator Thomas Dunne noted: ``For the last 3 years, we haven't started cleanup at some new sites. If we assume that EPA's budget will remain flat for the foreseeable future, construction funding could be delayed at more and more sites. Within a few years, unfunded cleanup work could total several hundred million dollars.''
Yet President Bush's budget is $100 million less than the request which was made in 2004 and $20 million less than the fiscal year 2005 request.
Ultimately, the budget forces our country to continue to fall behind in its commitment to clean water, further disadvantages environmental justice communities like the one I live in, and passes the buck to our States. The Bush administration is putting its own policies above science, above the needs of public health, the environment, and our communities, and yet this administration is not being held accountable. Not once in the last 6 years has the Bush administration defended its budget in front of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Not once. It is well past time for this administration to defend its policies on environmental justice, water infrastructure, brownfields, and Superfund sites, where failures such as these will be even more costly for our country.