Dear editor,
It would require a lot of time to wade through Rogers’ corporate contributions list to figure out which ones, likely, told him to vote no on the recent Water Resource Development bill. It passed in the House with a 399-25 vote. Rogers was one of the 25 no votes.
This bill would authorize 31 Army Corps of Engineers water resources projects, including navigation, flood control, environmental restoration and natural disaster damage projects. The bill, as amended, would authorize the Army Corps of Engineers to provide additional assistance to any community in any state in which the president has declared an emergency as a result of the presence of chemical, physical or biological constituents, including lead or other contaminants in the water system, for the repair or replacement of public and private infrastructure, and would authorize the appropriation of $170 million for such assistance.
Think Flint, Michigan—where each of its 98,310 citizens have been subjected by city and state officials to using river water that was not properly treated. The lead exposure from the water causes health effects that include impaired cognition, behavioral disorders, hearing problems and delayed puberty.
It baffles the mind to consider how our District 3 representative could justify this kind of vote to his constituents. This has Corporate Interest written all over it.
Sincerely,
Karen Barwick
Letter to the editor: Does Rogers really represent District 3?
