WATER

Why Texas Needs Federal Funding

for Water Infrastructure
Fact Sheet • April 2009

O ur nation’s water infrastructure and economy are bound together. Aiding

the former will help the latter. Unfortunately, these days, both are treading
troubled waters.

In communities in Texas and across the country, drink-

ing water and sewerage systems are straining under the
weight of decades of federal government underinvest-
ment. In recent years, the State Revolving Funds were
financed at some of the lowest levels in history. For fiscal
year 2008, Texas received only $98 million, a mere 8.1
percent of the $1.2 billion that the state’s water and sewer
systems need.1

As the troubles with our water infrastructure mount, the

country’s economy slides deeper into recession. Texas’s
January 2009 unemployment rate reached 6.4 percent,
or about 756,100 people, up from 4.4 percent a year ear-
lier. One in 16 people in the labor force are now unem-
ployed.2

Investing now in water and sewer systems to generate sol-

id economic growth can lead the state out of the recession.
Every federal dollar invested in infrastructure yields a
$1.59 return to our states.3 The National Utility Contrac-
tors Association estimates that for every $1 billion spent
on water infrastructure, nearly 27,000 jobs are created.4

The economic stimulus legislation passed by Congress in

February 2009 provides more money to water infrastruc-
ture than the country has seen in recent years, but this
one-time allotment cannot cure the problems plaguing
many communities. In fact, the bill provides water and
sewer systems with less than one-third of what the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency estimates we should spend the state received only $67.1 million in federal funding6 –
each year just to maintain them. enough to finance 14.9 percent of its needs.

Texas’s Water Infrastructure Funding Gap:
Texas’s water needs outpace its current ability to fund
projects by a large margin.
For the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) pro-
gram, the state’s most recent Intended Use Plan lists 77
projects at a total cost of at least $451 million.5 In 2008,
Federal contributions to Texas’s drinking water funding
efforts have decreased by 4.3 percent since the Drink-
ing Water SRF was implemented in fiscal 1997 and 28.7
percent when adjusted for inflation.7
For the Clean Water State Revolving Fund program,
which goes toward wastewater infrastructure, the state’s
most recent Intended Use Plan lists 66 projects at a total
cost of $762 million.8 In 2008, the state received $31.1
million in federal funding9 – enough to finance 4.1 per-
cent of its needs.
Federal contributions to Texas’s wastewater funding
efforts have decreased by 66.8 percent since the Clean
Water SRF was fully implemented in fiscal 1991 and 79.0
percent when adjusted for inflation.10
Job Creation: Fully addressing Texas’s currently listed
water needs of $1.2 billion would spur 32,346 employ-
ment opportunities, according to National Utility Con-
tractors Association estimates for job creation from water
infrastructure investments. That could put back to work
one of every 23 unemployed people in the state.
Water Quality: According to EPA’s 2006 National
Water Quality Inventory assessments, 38 percent of the
state’s river miles, 37 percent of its lake waters and all of
its ocean and near coastal waters are impaired.11
Beach Closings: A report by the Natural Resources
Defense Council shows that Texas experienced 532 beach
closing/advisory days lasting six weeks or less in 2007,
an increase of 12 percent from the number in 2006. Ag-
ing and poorly designed sewage and stormwater systems
cause many beach closures.12
Legislative Solutions: A comprehensive, long-term
solution is a dedicated source of public funding for water
infrastructure. This would help communities in Texas and
across America keep their water clean, safe and afford-
able. It would unburden overtaxed state and municipal
governments of the cost of water infrastructure repairs.
Such an investment also would create employment op-
portunities and give our economy a much-needed boost.
Two legislative solutions exist.
Clean Water Trust Fund: A federal water infra-
structure trust fund bill will be introduced during
the current legislative session. As with the trust fund
for highways and airports, we should have a Clean
Water Trust Fund to provide municipalities with the
funding they need to keep our water safe and clean
for future generations. The trust fund should distrib-
ute money to publicly owned water and wastewater
systems. It also should ensure that funds be made
available for research and implementation of green
infrastructure and conservation practices.
National Infrastructure Bank: Related to the
trust fund is a proposed national infrastructure
bank to raise and distribute the money necessary
to upgrade drinking water and wastewater systems,
highways and other underpinnings of our nation’s
prosperity. Policy-makers should strictly limit private
sector involvement in water infrastructure to financ-
ing only. The public should maintain ownership and
control of public water and sewer utilities because it
does a far better job of management and operation.
Endnotes
1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.
“Tentative distribution of Drinking Water State Revolving
Fund appropriation for fiscal year 2008.” May 19, 2008; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. “FY 2008
Clean Water State Revolving Fund Title VI Allotments.” January
28, 2008; Texas Water Development Board. “SFY 2009 Drinking
Water State Revolving Fund Intended Use Plan.” January 12,
2009 at 39; Texas Water Development Board. “SFY 2009 Clean
Water State Revolving Fund Intended Use Plan.” August 25, 2008
at 23.
2 United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
[Press Release]. “Regional and state employment and
unemployment: January 2009.” March 11, 2009.
3 Schwartz, Bernard L. and Schwenninger, Sherle R. “A Public
Infrastructure–-Led Economic Recovery Program.” December
4, 2008; Zandi, Mark. Chief economist and co-founder, Moody’s
Economy.com. Testimony on Economic Stimulus For Small
Business: A Look Back and Assessing Need For Additional Relief.
U.S. House Committee on Small Business. July 24, 2008.
4 National Utility Contractors Association. [Press Release]. “New
CWC Report Demonstrates Immediate Economic Impact of
Water/Wastewater Infrastructure Investment?” January 28,
2009.
5 Texas Water Development Board, January 12, 2009 at 39.
6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 19, 2008.
7 Ibid; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.
“Distribution of DWSRF funds.” June 23, 2006; Sahr, Robert C.
“Inflation conversion factors for years 1774 to estimated 2019.”
Oregon State University, Political Science Department. January
16, 2009.
8 Texas Water Development Board, August 25, 2008 at 23.
9 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, January 28, 2008.
10 Ibid; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.
“Clean Water State Revolving Fund Allotments.” April 4, 2007;
Sahr, 2009.
11 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. National
Assessment Database. Available at www.epa.gov/waters/305b/,
accessed February 6, 2009.
12 Dorfman, Mark and Kristen Sinclair Rosselot. National Resources
Defense Council “Testing the Waters 2008: A Guide to Water
Quality at Vacation Beaches.” National Resources Defense
Council. 2008 at 76.
For more information:
web: www.foodandwaterwatch.org
email: info@fwwatch.org
phone: (202) 683-2500 (DC) • (415) 293-9900 (CA)
Copyright © April 2009 Food & Water Watch