LMAO

Not even that is true. The damage doesn’t revert on its own.

Since they were only given 1/3 of the budget, they should announce that they’ll only be removing lead from low income districts (which the Republicans have red-lined into being largely black neighborhoods). See if fomo changes their minds.

It almost seems like Republicans want potential voters to imbibe neurotoxins that will negatively impact their IQ, harm their ability to concentrate, and make them more easily swayed by emotional appeals. I wonder why that could be?

This is my tin foil hat explanation. Also poor areas with more black and ethnic minority people are more likely to have lead pipes and it leads to increased crime and violence, thus further stoking racial tensions and increasing support for racist policy and therefore republicans

Which is the way the GOP likes it. Dumb people don't question their authoritarian rule.

I love how they say it could cost 47 billion dollars and this was only for 15 billion so they fight to say replacing the pipes is highly underfunded. The request was for 45 billion and his party demanded lower amounts and only allotted 15 then went on to call it underfunded now to try to get it canceled.

They say it could take years to get inner city places like Chicago all taken care of... So let me guess, their plan is to wait longer and hurt us more, doesn't that usually mean you would start immediately?

Maybe he should have said that Lead is black, and illegally coming to our country and stealing our jobs.

Should have led with "lead is woke" and they'd be tripping over themselves to ban it

Those people coming to read you water meter, nope, that's just a cover! They're actually putting lead pellets into a secret chamber to contaminate your water so all the tests upstream of you show its safe!

Considering all the conspiracy theories involving fluoride in the water supply, you'd think they'd catch on to the actually dangerous lead in the water supply and come up with conspiracies involving that instead.

Here's something wild: it was only banned for residential use. As long as the paint is labeled 'for industrial use only', manufacturers can go crazy with the lead. Despite the common misconception of lead exposure via paint being primarily due to "eating paint chips", it's mostly due to the inhalation and ingestion of the dust formed by friction and the gradual breakdown of lead paint. To get to the point, living downwind of any business that still utilizes legal lead paint means you may be exposed to lead.

Ingesting lead can and will kill you, and it will impair your cognitive functioning in the meantime. Lead was banned from automobile gasoline in 1975, but it was too late. There are small amounts of lead in the air and water, almost everywhere, that will remain for centuries and that were not there before cars,

Yeah but the market provides a solution! If you don’t want lead in your water, just buy bottled water, silly!

As an actual aviation professional, I'm going to object to "waterworks made of lead pipes: too expensive to fix. 100LL aviation gasoline: Rich people refuse to change."

First of all, rich people own jets, which don't burn leaded gasoline.

Aircraft tend to last longer in service than cars do; airplanes are expensive machines. You'll also find that they don't change very quickly because certifying aircraft components such as engines is a very expensive thing to do. Plus, YOU go get an insurance company to cover a new type of aircraft they don't already have accident statistics for.

But, things are happening. So lemme tell ya what has, is, and will be done to reduce and eliminate leaded gasoline from our skies:

1. The Light Sport rule. in 2004 new certification standards for aircraft, pilots and repairmen were created which opened up the small end of general aviation. We basically didn't have anything that resembled Europe's "ultralight" rules. USA's Ultralight rules (FAR part 103) more closely resembled Europe's "Microlight" rules. The vast majority of light sport aircraft are powered by Rotax 900-series engines, or Jabiru or the occasional Continental O-200, all of which can run on unleaded automotive gasoline. Every single hour of instruction I've given to a student has been on unleaded gasoline. There's a proposal right now to expand the Light Sport rule that will do anything from increase the scope of what can be certified as a Light Sport Aircraft, and to open their operating limitations. For instance right now as I type this it is illegal to operate a Light Sport Aircraft for compensation or hire except to provide flight training. They're looking to open them up to things like aerial photography, pipeline patrol etc. which would not only allow these operations to be performed on unleaded gasoline, but less gasoline overall. A Cessna 172 burns between 6 and 8 gallons of 100LL per hour, a Flight Design CT burns between 2.5 and 5 gallons of premium MOGAS per hour. Every operation that can switch to a Light Sport Aircraft can reduce their carbon footprint and eliminate their lead footprint.

2. Diesel engines. I've seen both Cessna and Diamond install turbo-diesels based on some Mercedes-Benz engine, intending to run these on Jet-A fuel which is and always has been unleaded. It's been slow going though; Diamond only offers this on their Twinstar model (and they had some issues with it for awhile; there were some made with Lycoming gasoline engines) and Cessna canceled theirs.

3. The EAGLE initiative has set a goal to Eliminate Aviation Gasoline Lead Emissions by 2030 by finding a fuel acceptable to replace 100LL in service. This is non-trivial, the testing on all the various engines in service on some surprisingly old aircraft, not only their power plants but the fuel systems as a whole is significant. Many airplanes can't tolerate ethanol as a fuel additive because it will react with sealants used in the tanks and lines, for instance.

So it is underfunded, because Republicans didn't want to fully fund the effort.

Also, when they talk about "homeowners" replacing their lead pipes, what they really mean is "landlords." Homeowners have an interest in replacing lead pipes because there will be an ROI when they sell, and also the improved quality of life (not spending money on lead filters or bottled water, no cognitive impairment, etc).

The losers in this situation are the corportate slumlords for whom it will cost more to replace water pipes, and who will not see most of the benefit. They'll have a hard time justifying raising the rent by saying "now the water is no longer toxic."

Having a nice buildup of lead in your body actually blocks the 5G signals that your COVID vaccine nanobots would otherwise be receiving from the government, actually!

Even Superman can't see through lead. Which means we should all be ingesting as much lead as possible to stop the guvmnt from tracking us.

First time?

There was a republican senator who once brought a snowball into Congress to prove climate change is a hoax.

There was once a republican congressman who claimed a woman's body would self abort the fetus if it was a rape.

I don't remember their names, nor do I care to.