By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Despite strong bipartisan support in Congress, the “Finish the Arkansas Valley Conduit Act” was vetoed by President Trump, hindering the project’s progress. The legislation aimed to provide local communities with no-interest federal loans to cover their share of the Arkansas River Valley conduit, a project designed to deliver clean water to southeastern Colorado. The bill faced opposition from Trump who cited concerns over taxpayer funding, even though the Congressional Budget Office estimated a minimal cost. This decision drew criticism from both Republicans and Democrats, who viewed the veto as potentially retaliatory, jeopardizing a critical infrastructure project designed to provide jobs and safe drinking water to over 39 communities.
Read the original article here
President Trump decided to veto a bipartisan bill designed to fund a clean water pipeline in southeastern Colorado. This act has ignited a wave of strong reactions, and it’s understandable why. This bill, passed unanimously by both the House and Senate, proposed a solution to deliver clean drinking water to approximately 50,000 residents, a basic necessity, and one that is essential to public health.
The estimated cost of the project was relatively modest, pegged by the Congressional Budget Office at less than half a million dollars for the federal government. That translates to roughly $10 per person to ensure access to water free of contaminants, particularly those with carcinogenic properties. Yet, Trump dismissed this as an unwarranted “handout” and a misuse of taxpayer funds, as he declared in a veto message. His actions, from the viewpoint of many, seem to reflect a pattern of prioritizing political vendettas and personal interests above the well-being of American citizens. The claim that this was a wasteful expenditure is hard to fathom when considering the fundamental nature of the project.
This veto is especially striking because it targeted a project with such clear and positive implications. Providing clean water should be a non-negotiable priority. The fact that the bill enjoyed complete bipartisan support underscores the widespread recognition of its importance. This isn’t just about politics; it’s about a basic human need. To deny this is to deny a fundamental right.
The veto may well be more political than anything else. Some speculate it is connected to the state’s reluctance to pardon Tina Peters, a former election official who had legal troubles. The president has a history of retaliating against those who don’t align with his personal preferences or political agenda, and here, in Colorado, the response to his requests apparently led to the veto. It’s a blatant example of the abuse of power.
Trump’s stated justification for the veto, that his administration is committed to preventing taxpayer money from being used on unreliable policies, rings hollow to many. His administration’s policies, notably the substantial tax cuts, have dramatically increased the national debt and benefited the wealthy. The contrast between this and the rejection of a project costing less than half of what he likely spent on a round of golf is stark.
There is a sense that the administration views anything that doesn’t directly benefit them or their allies as unimportant. This behavior can be seen throughout his term, from his response to the state’s leaders’ opposition to his personal requests, to his attempts to undermine environmental protections. It’s a pattern of putting personal grievances above the interests of the American people.
The irony isn’t lost on some that Trump, who has supported pipeline projects for the oil industry, would reject a project to provide clean water to a community. Some of his supporters may not see the contradiction, but for many, it highlights the hypocrisy that they perceive. The fact that a project offering a basic service is sidelined is alarming.
The ramifications of this veto extend beyond just one pipeline. It’s likely that the veto will be overridden, as the bill passed unanimously. However, what this event truly shows is Trump’s willingness to use his position to punish those who defy him. It’s a case of the president weaponizing his authority.
In conclusion, this veto is more than just a political decision; it’s a commentary on priorities. It has left a mark of disappointment and anger. It’s hard to imagine why anyone would deny a population clean water. The fact that he did indicates that the focus is on something other than the well-being of the American people.