The House voted overwhelmingly Wednesday afternoon to force the Environmental Protection Agency to tell the public when a city has lead in its drinking water.
By a vote of 416-2, the House approved a bill introduced by Michigan Reps. Dan Kildee, a Democrat, and Fred Upton, a Republican, called the Safe Drinking Water Act Improved Compliance Awareness Act, which aims to prevent future lead water crises.
The EPA has been ripped for sitting on its hands despite having proof that water in some Flint homes had very high levels of lead in their drinking water. An EPA researcher in February 2015 tested one home that had so much lead in its water that it was past the level considered hazardous waste.
But, when those findings were brought to the regional EPA administrator, Susan Hedman, they were not released publicly. When the results were made public in June, Hedman apologized to state officials and emphasized that they were only a preliminary report.
She then directed the researcher who had been working in Flint to defer to state authorities and to no longer speak about what he found.
On the House floor Wednesday, Kildee said the stronger set of requirements for public disclosure could prevent future crises.
“We’ve never dealt with anything quite like this,” he said, “something so fundamental as clean drinking water. When you turn on the faucet, you expect that water to be safe for you and your children.”
The entire Michigan delegation signed on to the bill. Sens. Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters, both Michigan Democrats, have introduced companion legislation in the Senate.
Rep. Todd Rokita, R-Ind., and Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., were the only two lawmakers to vote against the bill.
Upton said people need to have confidence that their government will tell them when they face a public health crisis.
“All folks want is the peace of mind to know the government is looking out for them and their water is safe,” he said.
Rep. Mike Bishop, R-Mich., said the bipartisan nature of the bill shows how much of a major issue it is that the EPA felt it couldn’t speak up and instead left it in the hands of state bureaucrats.
“The anger and frustration is palpable. And it should be,” he said.
