Skip to main content

Water

              I saw Michael Moore on TV promoting his new movie last week, and I was reminded that not only is he from Flint, Michigan, but that community still has to use bottled water. It’s been years (at least 5, I forgot the exact number) since that community was able to trust their taps, and still nothing is being done to fix it. This fact is infuriating as someone who cares about the well-being of the whole country, but there is nothing I can do.

              Later, as I was reading about California’s 22nd congressional district, one of the facts that was part of the headline was not mentioned or discussed until 4 paragraphs down; part of the San Joaquin Valley does not have drinkable water, either.

              This was a shock. My home state, which I am so proud of, has this problem. There are people in my own state, with one of the top 10 world economies, where people have to use bottled water to do everything. The only way I was able to find out about it is because it is used to talk about something other than the president during a congressional election. Is this the only way we are going to hear about domestic tragedies, if it is politically motivated? How do we turn sympathy into action? It sickens me that this place that I rave about on a regular basis is letting our own residents live on bottled water…here…in California. This is not to be borne.

              I decided to do a quick Google search about cities in the US without clean drinking water, and there are dozens at first glance.  Diving deeper, there are at least 2 million people in this country without potable water. The estimates are between 12 and 48 states have tainted water supplies, and this affects between 2 and 140 million Americans. I will use the smallest figures because I want to avoid sensationalism and overstating the problem. I still don’t think the fact that three small states’ worth of residents not being able to drink their water is conscionable.

              I was hoping to find that someone, somewhere, cares enough to try to fix this problem in at least one affected area. I was saddened to find that there is nothing systematic in the works to solve, or even alleviate, this problem. I wanted to see why Flint still has to use bottled water, and I was only able to stomach some of the congressional hearing. The state government said it was the EPA’s fault, and the EPA said it was the state government’s fault. I spent some time on the EPA’s website to see what they have done to address this problem after the Flint blame game in congress. The governmental organization, which maintains that the oversight of water supplies is in their purview, has done nothing in this last year to clean the water. The closest they came was to reprimand a couple of companies that had tainted the water they used and were told to stop. That’s it. A governmental organization charged with protecting the environment, and they slap a couple corporations on the wrist. This is wholly inadequate.

              Now, the ability to clean water supplies is not a simple task, and the polluters are many, some with loud voices and deep pocketbooks. In light of the IPCC’s newest report on climate change, it is essential that we discuss and deal with this problem before there isn’t enough water for everyone to drink in this country. I know that sounds catastrophic and inflammatory, but I’m not overstating the problem. Water is one of the fastest ways to die from lack of something (next to oxygen and related issues).

              What does water have to do with social change? Everything. It is a long-standing psychological principle that people have to worry about their survival needs before they can focus on emotions or other people. The presence of drinkable water is one of those most basic needs. If the country is going to move forward and have an independent, informed electorate, at least 2 million people will need their water supply cleaned. I don’t want to see this nation that we see as so wonderful and advanced to start having issues that only developing countries are known for. Oh, wait, we have a homelessness, poverty, discrimination, hunger, and potable water problem throughout the nation. Never mind; we’re already there. So I guess the first step will be admitting that these problems exist domestically, and that they are not small problems. The next step would be to find a way to solve these very basic issues, or to admit that we are not the great country we have been lauding for decades and let the people die. Just saying it, even though I cannot imagine a world where that latter move is our decision.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What If We Addressed Problems Holistically

What If… We treated problems holistically instead of individually?               One of the things I realized early on in my adult education was the relationship between seemingly disparate ideas. My bachelor’s degree focused on the relationship between biological equilibrium, environmental factors, and the mental reaction of individuals. From the beginning, I knew that it was folly to think that any of these categories could be studied in a vacuum. It did not take long for me to realize that it was not only in my own specialty that this was true, but in many other aspects of life. Yet, the compartmentalized view of the world is how the general populace perceives its environment, and social problems in particular.               As an educator, I found myself unable to teach only the subject with which I was tasked. I found the need for students t...

The Viral Candidate - Housing

Am I actually running for president? Not now. I am reasonable enough to know that an idea borne of frustration at lacking a candidate that represents me and my family is not going to change the world. But an idea can change the world, and these generations are the ones most capable of doing so. I am going to dream of a world where no one is hungry, thirsty, or at the mercy of the elements. If I was running for president, I would need to explain my platform, get feedback, and adapt it to the needs of each community. The problem is most people focus on one or two issues and try to solve them independently. What I have learned as a science teacher and a student of the social sciences is that many issues are intertwined and need to be addressed as a whole, instead of in parts, if they are going to be any good for the average American.               For example, I want to tackle homelessness. That is a doozy and requires so...

Musing on the News - Book Bans

                 Time published an article on 4/20 titled “New Report Finds That Book Bans Have Reached Their Highest Levels Yet.” As an avid reader I am immediately bothered by this, but I think it is worth explaining why.               First, over half the country is functionally illiterate, and even more don’t like to read, so who are we banning books for, anyway? It’s not like online ads that subliminally change your thinking. If you want to read a book, you have to physically get it, let someone else know what you’re reading (checking it out of a library or buying it in a store), and spend hours reading the material, depending on how fast you read. Reading is also self-selecting, as you can figure out by the book cover and back if you want to spend the time to decipher its contents. Reading social media and news is anonymous (except for the data points being collected on ...