By Craig McDermott
While working on this week’s legislative schedule post, I came across a bill that is being heard in committee on Monday (Energy, Environment, and Natural Resources, 2 p.m., HHR1) where I don’t have a clear understanding of the impact of the bill’s provisions.
Among other things, HB2325 would adjust the formula for determining the amount of lead allowed in pipes that carry drinking water.
The bill was introduced by Rep. Frank Pratt and co-sponsored by Reps. TJ Shope and Rusty Bowers (Rs one and all, and none known as a strong advocate for “good government”…though they may express a different opinion on the topic 🙂 ).
What I don’t understand is the true impact of the change to the formula, and with the ongoing water quality disaster in Flint, Michigan (and the mass lead poisoning of the children and other residents there), this is something that merits close examination by people who have more knowledge in this area.
I’ve tried reaching out to people I know who might have expertise in this area (or, at least, might know people who do), but it is Saturday.
In other words, any volunteers?
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It may just be a coincidence but the Resolution Copper Project in Pinal County just announced that they will be building a copper plant about 10 miles outside of Florence. A 20 mile long pipeline is to be built which will pipe copper concentrate and water from Superior to the plant where it will be filtered and made ready for shipment.
This is more serious problem the humans of the planet earth are facing:
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange/archives/2016/01/22/zona-politics-how-will-climate-change-affect-us-in-the-years-to-come
lead is not only problem 10 people have died of legionnaires disease in flint making republican governor snyder a murder.
Had you followed the bill’s link, which you included in the post, you could have read the bill’s summary, which states that this lowers the allowable lead level and conforms AZ law with federal law. But then you would have lost the excuse to bash Republicans.
Senator, most experienced lege-watchers know better than to take legislative summaries at face value. I can’t remember any that were outright lies, but they usually put as much emphasis on a clause that moves a comma as they do on one that contains a substantive change in the law.
Also, the bill changes a hard limit to a “weighted average”, which sounds like a way to fudge the numbers.
How appropriate that you made this comment on the same weekend that the X-Files returns.
While I think that simply insulting the messenger when someone expresses an opinion that differs from yours is lazy (rhetorically speaking), at least you didn’t actually disagree with my point about the legislature’s (and legislative staff’s) lack of regard for openness and honesty when discussing public policy proposals.
John, with YOU, we never lose our excuse to bash Republicans. 🙂
Per the legislative summary/fact sheet, this is about conforming Arizona law to a 2011 federal law that reduced allowable lead levels. Who is ready to testify under oath that the bill actually does conform statute to the revised federal standard?
Craig’s absolutely correct about whether or not to take anything coming from the Republican side of the legislature at face value. Ned Creighton, when I worked for him, harped on that point frequently.
My concern is how either the federal law or state statute could be enforced.
That AND the fact that any bill Rusty Bowers puts his name on is legitimately subject to suspicion immediately.
Clarification, Ned didn’t trust any of the fact sheets from the legislature.
It looks like a strike everything vehicle.