Advocacy Project: Issue Overview

Problem:

Schools water and water outlets containing lead

This is an amendment to the S-875 Safe Drinking Water Act to require additional monitoring of contaminants and for other purposes.

Whom does the issue affect?

This issue affects students who attend the school and staff that work at the school the most. The school loses due to the money that would come out of the budget to test the water and outlets for contaminants. The students, staff would gain the most knowing they have safe drinking water. The community would also gain from having less health problems due to drinking water. The company that tests the water and water outlets would also gain business from this amendment.

What are the consequences of the issue?

High doses of lead can damage the nervous system, kidneys, and blood system and can even be lethal. Continuous low-level exposure causes lead to accumulate in the body and cause damage. It is particularly dangerous for babies and for small children because their bodies and brains are growing rapidly. These health issues would also cause emotional stress to families and friends. Other contaminants may also cause cancer and reproductive complications. Consequences for society include increased health issues in the community and increased health expenses.

What is the economic impact of this issue?

The economic cost would fall on the school budget would have to cover the cost for the increased monitoring of the water. Which would cut into spending for other things in the school. The economic gain would be increased health and less medical expenses for students, staff, coaches, and other people who use the school’s drinking facilities.

What is the social impact of the issue?

If this bill passes it would result in healthier and happier individuals, families, and communities. Without the worry of contaminants in their drinking water it will relieve stress. The cost of the issue would be less healthy individuals, families, and communities. More emotional stress to individuals, families, and communities due to not knowing if drinking water is safe.

What are the barriers?

The biggest barrier is the financial barrier. You would have to find money to pay for the inspections and money to replace equipment if a problem occurs whether it comes from the government or funded by the school.

Another barrier could be proving to people that this is a serious issue that needs to be dealt with. Some people may think there are better ways to spend the money.

What are the resources?

Some resources we would need are a company to test the water and water outlets. They could then present the results in a meeting open to the school or community to attend. If you held a meeting you could inform people that there is a need for this and figure out the funding for the project.

History of the issue:

Lead is rarely found in source water, but enters tap water through corrosion of plumbing materials. Homes built before 1986 are more likely to have lead pipes, fixtures and solder. However, new homes are also at risk; even legally “lead-free” plumbing may contain up to 8 percent lead. The most common problem is with brass or chrome-plated brass faucets and fixtures, which can add significant amounts of lead into the water, especially hot water. With the amount of old school buildings still being used, monitoring the contaminants closely is important to ensure safe drinking water.

The first Safe Drinking Water Act was born after four years of work by Congress to develop a national program that would ensure the quality of America’s drinking water. For the first time, the 1974 act authorized the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to set standards for any contaminant in public water systems that adversely affects public health. Passing the proposed bill would further monitor drinking water contaminants to ensure safe drinking water in the schools.

Allies and Opponents:

Allies would be the students, staff, and other users of the schools. Other allies would be community members, the company or inspectors that would do the inspecting and repairs of the water system, and also parents who have children that attend the school.

Opponents could be the school, government, or the community depending on where the funding is coming from.

My recommendation:

Please vote “yes” to require additional monitoring of contaminants in schools.

References:

http://www.nesc.wvu.edu/ndwc/pdf/OT/OTw99.pdf

http://water.epa.gov/drink/info/lead/index.cfm

http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/objectiveslist.aspx?topicId=12