Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

dojijosu t1_jcfjk0d wrote

How is this a partisan issue? Why is it only being championed by Democrats? Do Republicans not drink water?

26

photostrat t1_jcfsjtm wrote

Seriously. The type of people against this will only care when they or their children have cancer, in which case they'll scream why did you yet this happen to me.

16

dojijosu t1_jcg3uqn wrote

I don't know, man. COVID took out the second most prominent Republican in the state, and they accused the medical examiner of fraud (which they then did not investigate, though controlling both houses and the governor) and doubling down on reducing COVID protocols.

I don't think we live in the era of Dick Cheney changing his stance on LGBT when his daughter comes out anymore. For the NHGOP the poison is hitting the bloodstream.

8

dfresh429 t1_jckk7mp wrote

Because that is 100% on brand for republicans - they exhibit ZERO empathy - unless they experience an issue personally, they believe it doesn't exist.

3

XEssentialCryIceIs t1_jcfxezj wrote

Because money.

5

dojijosu t1_jcfybdr wrote

But you can't drink money. I just don't get it.

3

XEssentialCryIceIs t1_jcg1tdm wrote

But if you have enough money you can buy all the clean, PFAS free, drinking water you and your family could ever need and leave the contaminated stuff for the plebs.

10

dojijosu t1_jcg2m6a wrote

Sure, but wouldn't it be better, from a purely self-serving perspective, to spend taxpayer money to make the water you already get safe?

2

XEssentialCryIceIs t1_jcg47v0 wrote

I'm not convinced the extremely wealthy drink tap water.

I personally am one of those dirty, pinko, commie-socialist types, so I believe everyone is entitled to clean air, clean water, healthy food, safe housing, and medical care.

5

ericools t1_jctk9ux wrote

I wouldn't drink the tap water even without the PFAS stuff. Under the sink RO is pretty cheap and easy to install. You get cheap good tasting pure water.

What you absorb through the shower / bath is a bigger problem. Whole house RO is crazy expensive and basically zero houses or apartments have any kind of easy way to run just shower water through a system. You are stuck filtering all the water you flush down the toilet or otherwise wasted water.

Edit: It's at least avoidable in drinking water. It's basically impossible to filter other goods for it. Not just food. Things like fabrics, containers, cleaning products, shampoo, floss, those face masks everyone was wearing for a couple of years, tampons. You could be getting as much exposure from other sources as from your water anyway.

I don't have a solution. Just pointing some things out. I don't know if a ban would have much real impact, especially if it wasn't a global 100% enforced ban. It seems likely we may be able to mitigate the harm through biotech advances long before we can get the stuff out of our supply chain, if it's even possible to get it out of our supply chain.

1

dj_narwhal t1_jcgai9a wrote

If you show that the government can be used for good the entire house of cards that conservatives has built begins to fail. Luckily they have been gutting education for 70 years so their base cannot think about 2 different things at the same time.

5

sirspidermonkey t1_jch3513 wrote

> How is this a partisan issue?

Profits over people. It's simple as that.

2

Tullyswimmer t1_jcfvu3e wrote

Presumably because the Democrats are pushing for levels that are not only nearly impossible to test for, but might be nearly impossible to actually achieve... Thus giving them the ability to say things like "Do Republicans not drink water" if the Republicans don't support it (because it's unrealistic).

−10

dojijosu t1_jcfyobd wrote

I happen to know some of the "Water Warriors," and while I'm not an expert on the subject, I know the levels they are calling for are both testable and achievable.

But let's say they weren't. Then the reasonable Republican (of myth) would say "Woah there, my liberal friend. You've got the right idea, but you're doing it wrong. Watch how we conservatives do it right and get some progress where you got none."

That would be a huge win. But they just don't care.

9

Tullyswimmer t1_jcg0ezn wrote

>I happen to know some of the "Water Warriors," and while I'm not an expert on the subject, I know the levels they are calling for are both testable and achievable.

In a perfect world, they may be. If you don't consider the PFAS that's already in the soil from years and years of pollution, and if you don't consider the cost burden of building systems that could achieve those levels to the average homeowner's tap. Yes, it may, theoretically, be something that can be achieved and tested for. But it's not practical at this point. Most water test companies don't have equipment that can test for those levels. Such equipment does exist, certainly. But again, it's a matter of being realistic instead of idealistic.

>Then the reasonable Republican (of myth) would say "Woah there, my liberal friend. You've got the right idea, but you're doing it wrong. Watch how we conservatives do it right and get some progress where you got none.

And the reasonable Democrats (also of myth) would say "Oh, ok, that's a decent compromise."

But instead they can just come out and say that Republicans voted against their water protections and thus want no water protections whatsoever.

−5

dojijosu t1_jcg0v4f wrote

A compromise would be nice, but unnecessary for the Republicans to steal a lap on the Democrats. All they would need is a more manageable plan. But note that they haven't even proposed an alternative solution, just a lot of shrugging. They're content to, pardon the pun, poison the well.

6

AMC4x4 t1_jcgxdib wrote

That's the GOP playback in a nutshell lately. When is the last time any Republicans in national office actually came up with a workable plan to address any issue facing their constituents? It's either tax cuts or culture wars and talk about "the evils of government," and that's all they got.

3