data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6cc45/6cc455388c24eeef0b94a017e8ed2a164fa1f7ed" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/133f7/133f7cb0120b4c257fe6a60d4ae7fb80462bff33" alt=""
Introduction
People not having safe drinking water access and sanitation.
S.624 Title: A bill to provide 100,000,000 people with first-time access to safe drinking water and sanitation on a sustainable basis by 2015 by improving the capacity of the United Stated Government to fully implement the Senator Paul Simon Water for the Poor Act of 2005.
Who is affected by the issue?
Poor people through out the world with out clean and safe water access.
The poor people through out the world, access to safe drinking water and sanitation
Not having safe water to drink (which is a basic need of life) they would also would need it for sanitation and for hygiene needs as well
This could cause family members to get sick which could have some members to not be well enough to work or even cause them to die
Not having proper sanitation could cause a very unsafe place to live with parasites being everywhere and not having proper water access to keep clean would cause huge outbreaks.
What is the economic impact of the issue?
Tax prices could go up in order to fund this cause, which would not help out the economy in the US
The US would benefit with international relationships. This would also help out the economy in the countries that need the water by improving the over health with better water access
What is the social impact of the issues?
Everyone everywhere will eventually be paying for water if we don’t act on this, which implies that people will not be able to pay for the water access, which will cause people being ill and dying. This could also cause mass riots and fights just to get access for water.
This would create fewer illnesses due to getting safe/clean water access. The US would also create alliance with these countries that we are helping out.
What are the barriers?
The funding to get labor over there to fix the water issues. How much would the taxes increase and would this cause tax payers to get mad.
Having alternative ideas to prioritizing water. Alternative plans for funding.
Where the funding will come from
Increase taxes
This is not yet an issue for our community because we have the access to safe/clean water still.
There was the Senator Paul Simon Water for the Poor Act of 2005, which addressed the same subject.
It is still in the senate.
Allies & Opponents
Politicians, some citizens
The tax payers
Your Recommendation
Right now I do not think that it is a good idea for our economy at this point to have this bill passed. But I do think that this is a good idea for the future when our economy is stronger. Just at this point in time I do not think we have the funding for this and we just plain have enough problems here in the US to solve.
Please feel free to give me any insight on any of the questions. This was a little difficult for me so my feelings will not be hurt!!
"It's not easy to be Green."-Kermit
1.
Goal: Promote health for all through a healthy environment
Short update: The safe drinking water; community water systems increased 55% towards the targeted goal (8-5)
2.
Progress: The proportion of the population served by community water systems meeting EPA standards (8-5) increased from 84 percent to 90 percent, achieving 55 percent of its targeted change by 2003. Notably, 90 percent of the U.S. population is served by such water systems.
Disparities: None
Opportunities and Challenges: The passage of the Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act in October 2000 amended the Clean Water Act to (1) establish a national grants program to improve consistency of water quality standards, beach monitoring, and public notification approaches and (2) strengthen national information collection. EPA established its BEACH program to promote greater consistency in beach health programs and to provide better information to the public.
Emerging Issues: Beach monitoring programs are typically run by local health agencies, and programs vary by location. Monitoring results are inconsistent because agencies use different indicator organisms and varying monitoring frequencies.
3.