The Stop Harmful Discharges Act would help immensely ... guest blog

The Stop Harmful Discharges Act would help immensely | Guest column
Peter Girard Published 10:14 a.m. ET Nov. 1, 2018 | Updated 10:15 a.m. ET Nov. 1, 2018
Peter Girard

Would we get less toxic algae if protecting people’s health were required by law?

Of course we would. The real question is, Why isn’t our health already a priority for the government agencies that decide whether to discharge toxic algae and pollution into our rivers?

Our toxic water sickened and killed dogs this year, made people choke and closed beaches. Medical researchers warn that just breathing air near the water boosts our risks of dying from ALS, Alzheimer’s Disease, Parkinson’s Disease and liver failure.

Our government is poisoning us.

Legislation introduced this summer can change that. The Stop Harmful Discharges Act (HR 6700) would force agencies “to include public health and safety as the primary consideration” in the central and southern Florida system that controls our water.

The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers met with U.S. Rep. Brian Mast, R-Palm City, at Stuart City Hall on Aug. 17, 2018, for a public meeting on how Lake Okeechobee is managed. Mast has filed a bill, the Stop Harmful Discharges Act, that would make public health and safety the primary concern in managing Lake O levels.Buy Photo
The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers met with U.S. Rep. Brian Mast, R-Palm City, at Stuart City Hall on Aug. 17, 2018, for a public meeting on how Lake Okeechobee is managed. Mast has filed a bill, the Stop Harmful Discharges Act, that would make public health and safety the primary concern in managing Lake O levels. (Photo: ERIC HASERT/TCPALM)
In other words, put people first.

We’ve been told that agencies already do that when they flush Lake Okeechobee into coastal communities to prevent a dike breach. But even this hollow excuse isn’t true — they routinely dump more water into the lake at the same time, actually making the dike less safe. That’s not putting people first.

The Stop Harmful Discharges Act does something else important: It requires agencies to manage the whole system together, instead of like an unconnected set of projects and measurements that make it hard for lawmakers and the public to see exactly where our water goes. We deserve to know that.

MORE: Health should be priority for Corps, Mast says

What the legislation doesn’t do is just as important: It doesn’t disrupt Everglades water-quality standards, it doesn’t disrupt existing agreements with the Miccosukee and Seminole tribes, and it doesn’t disrupt Everglades restoration.

Also, it doesn’t tell experts how to do their jobs. That’s crucial. When we put a man on the moon, the executive order didn’t tell NASA how to build a rocket. The Stop Harmful Discharges Act was drafted with input from policy experts and senior Army Corps officials, but the responsibility to execute it will fall to professionals.

And it won’t be rocket science. They’ll be asked to make it a last resort — not the first option — to discharge polluted water into communities where it can fuel toxic blooms. It’s their job to figure out how to do that without breaking existing laws.

Nothing in this legislation should divide a community whose river is poisoned year after year, but the opposition we’re hearing explains a lot about why these discharges have gone on for so long.

The introduction of the Stop Harmful Discharges Act required us to overcome a shameful tradition of political indifference, which comfortably switched between parties over the years. It required us to care more about what the bill said than who said it. It required us to put aside vanity and ask for help solving a problem that’s haunted us for generations.

The debate over this legislation isn’t honestly confronting the real reasons why we never solve this problem. Instead, we hear pleas for silence because if we try to change water policy, corrupt state agencies will punish us with junk solutions like deep injection wells, or they’ll take revenge by illegally dumping polluted water into the Everglades. Or sugarcane lobbyists will somehow turn the policy against us. Or because the exact wording might not be quite perfect. Or because the words came from the wrong people.

None of these is a good reason to stay quiet and let our government turn a blind eye to the human health impacts of its water management decisions. We deserve better. Every one of us — every family, every business owner, every taxpayer, every visitor, every Democrat and every Republican — deserves clean water.

Peter Girard is a spokesman for Bullsugar, an environmental activist group.