Bill Overview
Title: Get the Lead Out of Assisted Housing Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses the removal of lead from drinking water in federally assisted housing. Specifically, the bill requires the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to require specified testing and remediation with respect to water service lines containing lead; authorizes HUD to inspect all sources of lead contamination in federally assisted housing and to mitigate sources of lead exposure; establishes a grant program for states and local governments to create inventories of water service lines containing lead and to test for lead in the drinking water at child care facilities, schools, and public water fountains; and allows recipients of certain HUD assistance to use such assistance to replace water fixtures and service lines containing lead.
Sponsors: Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: People living in federally assisted housing affected by lead
Estimated Size: 4600000
- Federally assisted housing often serves low-income families, who may not have the resources to address lead contamination on their own.
- Children are more vulnerable to lead poisoning, and this bill includes provisions to test for lead in drinking water at child care facilities and schools.
- HUD provides housing assistance to millions of individuals in the United States, directly impacting those communities.
- Lead contamination in water is a global issue; however, this bill specifically targets U.S. federally assisted housing.
- The bill also impacts local governments and states as it establishes a grant program for them, although indirectly.
Reasoning
- The policy specifically targets federally assisted housing and aims to address lead contamination. Thus, residents in such housing are directly affected, with children being particularly vulnerable. The interviews include a mix of residents from different demographics, including families with children and elderly individuals, to capture varied perspectives.
- The policy's impact might not be uniform across all demographics within federally assisted housing as some units may be more affected by lead contamination due to older infrastructure. The interviews simulate different levels of impact based on potential variations in exposure.
- Some residents could see an immediate improvement in wellbeing, particularly if their homes or nearby water sources are prioritized for remediation. Others may see a more gradual improvement, parallel to the phased cleaning efforts given the budget constraints.
- Not everyone will be impacted directly within the first year; therefore, the simulated interviews also include individuals who might experience future improvements.
- Considering the budget constraints, the simulated interviews account for the financial limitations and focus on high-impact areas first. Hence, initial improvements might not be widespread across the entire population.
Simulated Interviews
Teacher (Newark, NJ)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about the safety of drinking water for my kids. This policy seems like a necessary step.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired (Chicago, IL)
Age: 72 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Lead issues haven't affected my home, but it's good that others will benefit from this.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Construction Worker (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure how this will affect me directly, but less lead is good for all.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Nurse (Detroit, MI)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm relieved to hear about this policy. We're planning to have children soon, so water safety is crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Freelancer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 31 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Fresh water is a daily need. I'm glad federal assistance is addressing this.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Social Worker (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see the struggles firsthand. This policy could make a huge difference for families I work with.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Mechanic (Cleveland, OH)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy is effective, my grandkids deserve safe drinking water.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Student (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Water quality has been a concern. I'm happy to see action being taken.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Warehouse operator (Cincinnati, OH)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's about time we address this issue. It's scary to think the water might be unsafe.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Librarian (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm always worried for my parents' health. Safe water is non-negotiable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)
Year 2: $200000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $220000000)
Year 3: $200000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $220000000)
Year 5: $150000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $170000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Key Considerations
- The scale of implementation required across the country in federally assisted housing units.
- Potential to significantly improve public health by reducing lead exposure for vulnerable populations.
- Coordination required between federal, state, and local agencies to effectively implement the provisions of the bill.
- Potential for long-term cost savings through health improvements in affected populations.
- Some housing units may require extensive retrofitting, which could increase costs.