Austin's Water Treatment Plant 4

At a time when government at every level is looking for easy spending cuts, there is a unique opportunity for a double win. Austin is looking to build a new water treatment plan to respond to what is seen as an increase in peak water demand. Unfortunately, water is not produced out of a vacuum; it has to be taken from a source, in this case Lake Travis, which is fed by the Colorado River.

Water sources like the Colorado are not inexhaustible sources. Like everything else in the world, they are a finite resource and must be treated with care if we want to be able to reap benefits from them for decades to come.

According to Clean Water Action, Austenites can expect to save $124 million dollars by putting in a “ramped up” water conservation plan over the next decade. Clean Water Action also goes on to detail that in the past when Austinites have been called to conserve water during the 2009 drought, the response was overwhelmingly positive and water use has dropped significantly during summer months. Conservation CAN work in this city.

I think Austin as a whole is well known for having the somewhat liberal ethic of being environmentally conscious and conservation minded—something that makes me immensely proud to live in Austin. I think that saying no to a water treatment plant and giving up a few day to day conveniences in the name of being environmentally conscious is something that has Austin written all over it. We need to be a shining example for the rest of Texas of how conservation can work and how citizens can collectively come together and decide to be responsible about using natural resources.

Build it and they will come...

 

[This is a response to "METRO RAIL PICKING UP STEAM" from A GREAT CITIZEN]

...is what I told a staunch libertarian not too far back when we were discussing the plans for the MetroRail, which at the time was still in its planning stage. He had insisted that this was just another example of wasteful government spending and cited polls showing that rider ship would not be anywhere near a reasonable level-- people would rather ride in their cars.

Naturally, I was thrilled to read your blog and realize that the statement I made to my libertarian friend was more than just a tongue-in-cheek movie reference. Despite polls showing that people had only a lukewarm interest in riding the MetroRail, once it was put right in front of their faces it was too good to resist. I think the MetroRail is an excellent step towards planning for the future infrastructure of an incredibly fast growing city. In 10 years, when gas prices are $10 a gallon and the population of Austin is far greater than I-35 can sustain, we will be glad that we started expanding a network of rails before we hit a crisis point in public transportation.

You made a compelling argument for the growing popularity of the MetroRail. The only thing that I would add to your blog is that this issue can be tied in with a larger ideological dilemma facing both Texas and the US. There is something we can learn from this situation.

Investments in our society aren't just lavish, nice things to have; investments are practical NESCITIES that will yield a GREAT return in the future. Conservatives are always calling for fiscal responsibility, but I think fiscal responsibility means more than just limiting spending. Fiscal responsibility means that sometimes we have to SPEND money on our future in a way that will either SAVE us money down the line or GENERATE economic potential. The MetroRail represents both. Greater access to downtown Austin is great for local businesses (especially during SxSW, as you already mentioned) and establishing an infrastructure of rails before demand goes through the roof will allow for better planning and more efficient spending.

Taxes: an investment in our future

As the Texas legislature is pushing through major budget cuts, I think it's important to understand why we need tax funded social services in our society and what we stand to loose by cutting these services. I personally admire the effort on the part of the GOP to move towards a balanced budget. While I think increased spending is necessary during times of crisis and economic downturn, I think the default state of the budget needs to be sustainably balanced. However, I disagree with the GOP on how this should be done. While there is certainly room for making cuts and streamlining a certain amount of bureaucracy, I tend to think that a major component of balancing the budget needs to come in the form of increased revenue, namely taxes.

In Texas, it's no secret that a politician mentioning a tax hike is committing political suicide. This is understandable; people want to hold on their money! We want to buy things to enrich our lives and be able to provide for our families. In my mind though, there is no greater way to enrich our lives or provide for our families future than to ensure a better tomorrow for the society we live in. If I have a family, I want them to be raised in an affluent society with low crime rates and high graduation rates. Living in a healthier society will yield benefits for everyone.

I think quite often, the value of education, social programs, and even entitlements are overlooked for the immediacy of saving a buck. Like any other investment, the taxes we pay to improve our society do not always provide immediate returns. However, in the long run, serious social change is going to cost money. If we want the society around us to be a nicer place, it will come at a price.

But I don't think we look at taxes in that way-- at least not in Texas. Instead of looking at taxes as an investment, many people see it as an unnecessary burden. As the Texas legislature moves to close a $27 billion deficit by making huge cuts to education, healthcare, and environmental protection, we need to be asking ourselves how these cuts will affect the future of our society. Will that extra bit of income we save on taxes really matter if the society we live in is poorly educated, sick, and polluted?