Author fights back against lawmakers on the brink of backsliding into major health crisis: 'This is not a partisan issue'
Silas House didn't plan on becoming the face of a fight against water pollution, but when a bill showed up that could weaken protections across his home state, he spoke up.
The Kentucky-born author joined other residents and environmental advocates at the edge of the Kentucky River to push back against Senate Bill 89, as reported by Louisville Public Media. The bill, already passed by the state Senate, would change how Kentucky defines "waters of the commonwealth."
That shift could mean many small streams, creeks, and even groundwater would lose state-level protection, which is a move that House, along with local residents like Madison Mooney and conservation leaders like Gerry James, say puts people's health and drinking water at risk.
"Our creeks and rivers, no matter how small, are all connected. We all live downstream," House said during a press event organized by groups including the Sierra Club, according to Louisville Public Media.
Growing up in Eastern Kentucky, House says the creeks near his home were a place to play, explore, and connect with nature. That experience made him value water as part of the "commons" — a shared resource that everyone relies on and has a responsibility to protect.
"This bill breaks that code," he said.
Under SB 89, water would only be protected if it's considered "navigable" under federal law. But most people in rural areas don't rely on big rivers since they are relying on small streams and private wells.
A 2019 report by the U.S. Geological Survey found that about 43 million Americans use private wells for drinking water, which are often more vulnerable to contamination and less strictly regulated than public water systems.
And in Kentucky, the risks are real. According to the Kentucky Center for Investigative Reporting, many parts of Eastern and Western Kentucky depend on groundwater, and that water could lose state protections if SB 89 becomes law.
Mooney also worries about the cost of cleaning up water once it's polluted.
How often do you worry about the quality of your drinking water?
Never
Sometimes
Often
Always
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
"Water systems in Eastern Kentucky are struggling with aging and out-of-date infrastructure as it is," said Mooney, a Martin County resident who works with local water groups. "Large-scale pollution, which this bill will allow, doesn't only destroy our creeks. It makes drinking water unaffordable for Kentuckians."
Those concerns aren't unfounded. A 2024 report from the American Water Works Association found that protecting drinking water at the source is one of the most cost-effective ways to keep water safe, with over 60% of utilities already implementing or working on source water protection plans.
"This is not a partisan issue," said fellow speaker Gerry James of the Sierra Club. "It's about the health of our communities."
Helping out on issues like this doesn't have to mean taking legal action or showing up at governmental buildings. Local and national groups doing this kind of work often rely on donations to stay active — whether they're fighting pollution, improving access to clean water, or pushing for stronger protections in their communities, as the Sierra Club often does.
You can also make an impact by choosing to support brands that are trying to make more eco-conscious choices for the environment.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
32 minutes ago
Trump's military parade is a US outlier in peacetime but parades and reviews have a long history
Troops marching in lockstep. Patriotic tunes filling the air. The commander in chief looking on at it all. The military parade commemorating the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary and coinciding with President Donald Trump's 79th birthday will be a new spectacle for many Americans. This will not be the first U.S. military parade. However, it is unusual outside of wartime, and Trump's approach stands out compared to his predecessors. The Army had long planned a celebration for its semi-quincentennial on June 14. Trump has wanted to preside over a grand military parade since his first presidency from 2017 to 2021. When he took office a second time, he found the ideal convergence and ratcheted the Pentagon's plans into a full-scale military parade on his birthday. The president, who is expected to speak in Washington as part of the affair, pitches the occasion as a way to celebrate U.S. power and service members' sacrifice. But there are bipartisan concerns about the cost as well as concerns about whether Trump is blurring traditional understandings of what it means to be a civilian commander in chief. Ceremonial reviews — troops looking their best and conducting drills for top commanders — trace back through medieval kingdoms to ancient empires of Rome, Persia and China. The pageantry continued in the young U.S. republic: Early presidents held military reviews as part of July 4th independence celebrations. That ended with James K. Polk, who was president from 1845 to 1849. President Andrew Johnson resurrected the tradition in 1865, holding a two-day 'Grand Review of the Armies' five weeks after Abraham Lincoln's assassination. It came after Johnson declared the Civil War over, a show of force meant to salve a war-weary nation — though more fighting and casualties would occur. Infantry, cavalry and artillery units — 145,000 soldiers, and even cattle — traversed Pennsylvania Avenue. Johnson, his Cabinet and top Army officers, including Ulysses S. Grant, Lincoln's last commanding general and the future 18th president, watched from a White House viewing stand. The Spanish-American War was the first major international conflict for a reunited nation since the Civil War. It ended in a U.S. victory that established an American empire: Spain ceded Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Guam, and the U.S. purchased the Philippines for $20 million. Puerto Rico and Guam remain U.S. territories. New York City hosted multiple celebrations of a new global power. In August 1898, a fleet of warships, including the Brooklyn, the Texas, and the Oregon, sailed up the North River, more commonly known today as the Hudson River. American inventor Thomas Edison filmed the floating parade. The following September, New York hosted a naval and street parade to welcome home Rear Adm. George Dewey, who joined President William McKinley in a viewing stand. Many U.S. cities held World War I victory parades a few decades later. But neither Washington nor President Woodrow Wilson were the focal point. In Boston, a million civilians celebrated 20,000 troops in 1919. New York honored 25,000 troops marching in full uniform and combat gear. On June 13, 1942, as U.S. involvement in World War II accelerated, about 30,000 people formed a mobilization parade in New York City. Participants included Army and Navy personnel, American Women's Voluntary Services members, Boy Scouts and military school cadets. Scores of floats rolled, too. One carried a massive bust of President Franklin Roosevelt, who did not attend. Less than four years later, the 82nd Airborne Division and Sherman tanks led a victory parade down Manhattan's Fifth Avenue. Gen. Dwight Eisenhower, the Allied commander during World War II, rode in a victory parade in Washington, D.C. In 1952, Eisenhower would join Grant and George Washington as top wartime commanders elevated to the presidency following their military achievements. Other World War II generals were honored in other homecoming parades. The U.S. did not hold national or major city parades after wars in Korea and Vietnam. Both ended without clear victory; Vietnam, especially, sparked bitter societal division, enough so that President Gerald Ford opted against a strong military presence in 1976 bicentennial celebrations, held a year after the fall of Saigon. Washington finally hosted a victory parade in 1991 after the first Persian Gulf War. The Constitution Avenue lineup included 8,000 troops, tanks, Patriot missiles and representatives of the international coalition, led by the U.S., that quickly drove an invading Iraq out of Kuwait. The commander in chief, George H.W. Bush, is the last U.S. president to have held an active-duty military post. He had been a World War II combat pilot who survived his plane being shot down over the Pacific Ocean. Veterans of the second Iraq and Afghanistan wars that followed the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks have not been honored in national parades. Inaugural parades include and sometimes feature military elements. Eisenhower's 1953 inaugural parade, at the outset of the Cold War, included 22,000 service members and an atomic cannon. Eight years later, President John F. Kennedy, a World War II Naval officer, watched armored tanks, Army and Navy personnel, dozens of missiles and Navy boats pass in front of his reviewing stand. More recent inaugurations have included honor guards, academy cadets, military bands and other personnel but not large combat assets. Notably, U.S. presidents, even when leading or attending military events, wear civilian attire rather than military garb, a standard set by Washington, who also eschewed being called 'General Washington' in favor of 'Mr. President.' Perhaps the lone exception came in 2003, when President George W. Bush, who had been a National Guard pilot, wore a flight suit when he landed on the USS Abraham Lincoln and declared the end of major combat operations in Iraq, which U.S. forces had invaded six weeks earlier. The aircraft carrier was not a parade venue but the president emerged to raucous cheers from uniformed service members. He put on a business suit to deliver a nationally televised speech in front a 'Mission Accomplished' banner. As the war dragged on to a less decisive outcome, that scene and its enduring images would become a political liability for the president.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
David Hogg Takes Multiple Swipes at Democrats: 'Asleep at the Wheel'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. David Hogg took multiple swipes at Democrats as he announced that he will not fight to hold onto his leadership role in the Democratic National Committee. Hogg decried "a serious lack of vision from Democratic leaders, too many of them asleep at the wheel" in a lengthy thread on X on Wednesday night, adding that three Democratic House members have died this year after being reelected in November, giving Republicans an expanded majority. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) had voted to nullify the February 2025 elections that appointed Hogg as vice chair, citing procedural violations. In his Wednesday posts he also criticized the "crisis of competence and culture" that protects complacency and rewards seniority. It "has already cost us an election and millions of Americans their rights. Let's not let it cost us the country," he said. "We must change the culture of our party that has brought us here and if there is anything activism or history teaches us it's that comfortable people, especially comfortable people with power, do not change. In this moment of crisis, comfort is not an option." David Hogg attends the Fast Company Innovation Festival 2024 at BMCC Tribeca PAC on September 17, 2024 in New York City. David Hogg attends the Fast Company Innovation Festival 2024 at BMCC Tribeca PAC on September 17, 2024 in New York City. Eugene Gologursky//Getty Images for Fast Company This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.
2 hours ago
Democrats look for reinvention and a new playbook against Trump in key committee race
WASHINGTON -- House Democrats are quietly engaged in a behind-the-scenes race for a key committee position, the second time in as many months that the party has had to fill one of the most prized positions in Congress. Four Democrats are running to be the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, an investigative panel with public clout, subpoena power and an expansive portfolio. The position is open due to the death last month of Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia. While Democrats in the minority have little power to shape the committee's work, the ranking member position comes with an enormous platform — and the possibility of becoming chair if the party wins back the majority in next year's midterm elections. Whoever wins will immediately be squaring off against Republicans as they prepare for splashy hearings this summer on immigration enforcement, LGBTQ rights and former President Joe Biden's age and mental condition while in office. As they hear from the candidates, Democrats are weighing many of the factors that were in play late last year, when Connolly, a veteran member of the committee, fended off a challenge from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. A look at how the race is shaping up: The debate over Biden's age coincides with a reckoning over seniority and generational change happening across the Democratic Party. Four House Democrats are running for the position: Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts, the acting ranking member; Jasmine Crockett of Texas, a viral sensation; Robert Garcia, a former Los Angeles County mayor who has pitched colleagues on a government reform agenda; and Kweisi Mfume of Maryland, former president of the NAACP and civil rights advocate. While Lynch is the most senior of the four, Democrats broadly said they are more open to breaking from seniority than they were in December, when Connolly, then 74, beat out Ocasio-Cortez, 35, for the job. Democrats are interested in how the candidates would communicate with the public, how they would help support lawmakers in battleground districts — and of course, how they would challenge President Donald Trump and his administration. Crockett, 44, has pitched herself as the candidate best able to compete with Trump's pugnacious and attention-grabbing style. Democrats, Crockett has argued, often fail to connect with voters and explain why the president's actions may be harmful. She believes she can. 'It's a matter of bringing that in, having a hearing and making sure that we are translating it and amplifying it,' Crockett told MSNBC in an interview. 'Communications has to be a full-on strategy.' Garcia, 47, has focused on government reform and effectiveness, a key issue for Democrats after the Trump administration's blitz across federal agencies and mass firings of federal workers by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. Mfume, 76, has attracted support from members impressed by his longtime stewardship of the nation's oldest civil rights group. He returned to Congress after decades leading the NAACP following the death of a previous Democratic Oversight chair, the late Congressman Elijah Cummings, a fellow Baltimore Democrat. Lynch, 70, has styled himself as the acting chair and the lawmaker best positioned to take on the committee's chairman, Republican James Comer of Kentucky. 'There are some members who speak to a very narrow audience, and that's great,' Lynch said. 'We want them to be energized and animated. But that same person is not going to go to the Rust Belt with people that are farmers, moderates, conservatives,' Lynch told The Associated Press. 'You need different voices to appeal to different constituencies.' 'I think I have a better chance of bringing back the blue-collar working people, and I have less of a chance of appealing to very younger people who are intensely invested in social media,' Lynch said. The vote for Oversight ranking member is scheduled for June 24 and will be conducted by secret ballot. All four candidates are speaking before multiple caucuses this week, including the New Democrats and the progressive caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. While many Democrats are undecided, others have made up their mind. Some who are privately stumping for their candidate believe it will be a tight race. That makes the public forums and private pitches even more crucial in the run-up to the vote. House progressives are divided over their preferred choice. Three members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus — Crockett, Garcia and Mfume — are vying for the ranking member seat, which makes it unlikely the caucus will back a single candidate. 'We're looking for folks that could expose this kind of corruption and hold Trump and his billionaire donors accountable,' said Rep. Greg Casar of Texas, the Progressive Caucus chair. Rep. Brad Schneider, chair of the centrist New Democrat Coalition, said he's weighing two factors: which candidate could best help Democrats win the 2026 midterm elections and whether they can successfully lead investigations into the Trump administration and 'try to repair some of the damage that's been done.' 'The committee can be a flash point, or it can be a very effective place for us to make our point, and we want to know who's going to do best in that role to make sure the committee works to help us secure 218 (members) next November,' Schneider said. Some Democratic caucuses have traditionally prized seniority as a clear and reliable way for lawmakers of color to rise through the ranks. There has never been a Hispanic Oversight chairman and only one Black chairman, Elijah Cummings. 'The CBC has always stood for seniority,' said Rep. Hank Johnson of Georgia. But Johnson noted that the Black Caucus has at times 'deviated' from that norm. He said many in the caucus are open to a conversation about age. 'So, Steve Lynch, I think, is the next senior member. And but as I said, other factors have to be considered and I'm sure that, along with myself, other CBC members are going through that process,' Johnson said. 'Since I've been here, seniority has had weight,' said Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, who said he was undecided on which candidate to back. 'But seniority is not the only thing. And there are times and circumstances where the person with the most seniority has not won. Whether that's one of these times or not is what we're going to see.'
