Flint water crisis

The Flint, Michigan water crisis has become a poster child for environmental injustice, environmental racism, and inequitable resource distribution in the United States. It has also represented a case of bleak mismanagement of precious natural resources and the inability of the United States to adequately respond to the most basic human needs. The water crisis was but a grim manifestation of decades of racist land use policies and political realities, which can be traced back to periods of segregation and the white flight to the suburban sprawl.

Moreover, the Flint water crisis showcases the role government plays in colluding with polluters, with issues related to the not in my back yard (NIMBY) phenomenon also relevant in this case. As Bell (2012:28) points out, “environmental justice...concerns patterns of inequality in the distribution of environmental goods.” Flint residents lacked access to environmental “goods,” such as clean drinking water given the long-term contamination of the Flint River.

Environmental racism refers to “social heritage differences in the distribution of environmental bads, due to either intentional or institutional reasons,” (Bell 2012:25). In Flint’s case, private and public sector stakeholders did have a direct, intentional role to play in the lead contamination and violation of state and federal environmental and public health policies. The Flint water crisis represents the intersection of socioeconomic class and racial variables impacting access to clean drinking water: what could and should be viewed as a basic human right.

History and Background Although the Flint water crisis came to a head in 2014, it had been brewing long before that. The history of the water crisis and the sociological variables associated with it can be traced back to the founding of the city and its earliest attempts to centralize the public water system under the Flint Water Works Company in 1883 (Masten and Davies 2016:23).

In fact, Flint, Michigan has been using lead pipes for public water infrastructure since a 1897 city ordinance was passed mandating their use, long before the dangers of lead leaching into the water were known (Masten and Davies 2016:23). Lead is in fact one of the main components in the water crisis: being among the most dangerous contaminants found in Flint residents’ water. Flint, Michigan had once been the hub of the booming automobile manufacturing industry in the United States after the General Motors (GM) Corporation located its hub there.

When GM established Flint as its base of operations, it triggered the first white flight epidemic, which forever entrenched racist values, policies, and practices into the region. Flint was no different from any other American town or city in this regard, but Flint has become one of the most extreme examples of how sociological factors become inextricably linked to environmental policies.

As Ranganathan (2016:17) points out, the classical liberalist mentality that dominated, and continues to dominate, American political discourse has led to the widespread assumption that all public policy is inherently equitable. The Constitution does overtly support equity, but in fact, white flight and the Flint example shows how the most equitable policies are not borne out in reality. What occurred in Flint was that first, white residents moved out of the city in droves to seek an idealized life in suburban areas.

Flint therefore became a primarily African American town, which at first remained tied to the GM teat. GM and other area industries had long been polluting the local rivers and groundwater, which would have otherwise served as the primary water sources for the community.

When the Flint River became too contaminated to be the drinking water source for Flint residents, though, around the middle of the twentieth century, the city started to turn to other water sources in order to allow businesses to achieve their financial objectives unimpeded by pesky regulations.

At first, when water from the Flint River had been contaminated due to long-term “unregulated discharges by industries and municipalities” throughout the twentieth century, the city of Flint’s elected officials decided to purchase treated water from Detroit (Masten and Davies 2016:23). This provided a temporary solution to the problem of contaminated river water, and only deferred the underlying environmental concerns related to long-term pollution. At this point, lead pipes had not even become part of the public discourse and the lead issue was systematically ignored.

The Flint water crisis truly began in 2013. Precipitated by a municipal decision to switch the city’s water supply from its outsourced options back to the Flint River, an outlandish notion that flew in the face of all environmental policy recommendations and all common sense. By treating Flint River water at the Flint Water Service Center, the city glossed over the public health problems that would emerge almost immediately--within the next several months.

The decision to switch residents to river water was made primarily based on financial considerations rather than public health or safety ones, and the impetus for those decisions has been well documented in public records (Masten and Davies 2016:23).

Switching the Flint water supply to the river was known to be a misguided approach as a litany of hard evidence has emerged revealing that city and state officials, as well as stakeholders in the water industry were well aware of potential problems including corrosion, contamination, and bacteria (Masten and Davies 2016:23) Within months of the switch to Flint River water, residents complained in droves of problems like rashes, discoloration, and bad taste, and tests revealed the presence of Escherichia coli (E.

coli) and total coliform, which led subsequently to boil water advisories and violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) (Masten and Davies 2016:23). For years, testing remained conclusive: the water in Flint was unsafe. Yet nothing was done, and the situation remains unresolved, with several lawsuits pending (Gostin 2016). The Lead Issue Lead is a major aspect of the Flint water crisis. In fact, lead poisoning is one of the most important issues in environmental racism and environmental justice in the United States.

The prevalence rates of lead poisoning readily reveal inequitable patterns, depending on sociological variables. “Over half a million children in the US today are poisoned with lead, with poorer black children living in housing built before 1950 most at risk,” (Raganathan 2016:18). Flint’s water crisis is defined by the problems directly linked to lead poisoning.

As a result of government inaction, in Flint, Michigan, “all children under the age of six—nearly 9000 in total— are now being treated as if they were exposed to lead due to the contamination of the town’s water system,” (Ragnanthan 2016:18). Even trace amounts of lead can kill, but in Flint, levels reached those unseen almost anywhere else in the nation (Gostin 2016:5). Ranganathan (2016:18) also points out the problem with lead: it leads to “slow poisoning...felt for decades to come,” (Raganathan 2016:18).

The Flint wter crisis could result in transformative approaches to public policy in order to remedy the inequities and injustices related to environmental policy. Intersections of Race, Class, and Power Flint residents are “among the poorest in America, mostly African American,” (Gostin 2016: 5). Socioeconomic class, race, and access to power are key issues in the Flint water crisis, which is why this story has been frequently labeled as a “a classic example of an environmental injustice, as policies were set in motion,” (Sadler and Highsmith 2016:143).

It is not that the policies themselves targeted black communities or poor communities. The problem in Flint is more sinister than that, involving a complex web of poor decision making and genuine, criminal negligence. For example, residents of Flint—most of whom are African American, “had complained that their tap water was foul and discolored. But city, state, and federal officials took no heed” (Gostin 2016:5).

The problem with not taking heed, not paying attention when citizens exercise their rights—is central to the issues related to environmental justice. The problem in Flint highlights numerous regulatory failures “related to federal drinking water regulation, interpretation, and enforcement,” (Butler, Scammel and Benson 2016:93). The residents of Flint, unlike their white counterparts in the suburban communities surrounding Flint, experienced “disparities in municipal services,” (Sadler and HIghsmith 2016:143).

It is the differences between the Flint residents and their white counterparts outside of Flint proper that showcases the intersections between race, class, and power. Flint residents lacked access to the pathways to exercising their power as citizens.