Our new president and Congress have inherited a bushel basket of problems, one of the toughest being the federal budget: the deficit, spending priorities, taxing.

Amid all that, we have the little matter of $500 billion that needs to be spent in the next 20 years or so to renew drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. No one denies the work has to be done. So, where will we get the money?

During the presidential campaign, we heard the usual noises about how we need a federal spending freeze and how we can’t raise anyone’s taxes. We also heard about the supposed evils of “spreading the wealth around” and about socialistic politicians who want to take money away from Joe the Plumber.

By that line of thinking, we have private enterprise over here, believing that government spends too much, and a bunch of freeloaders over there, waiting with their hands out for government largesse.

Not that simple

But guess who is leading the charge for a significant and long-term increase in government spending. It looks like ... Could it be? ... By golly, it is: Joe the Plumber! Actually tens of thousands of Joe the Plumbers, and hundreds of thousands of others in related professions.

Yes, private enterprises — business owners and people who work for them — are pushing for federal investment in our water and wastewater systems, which of course at some point means higher taxes or user fees. They’re doing it under the auspices of well-known socialist organizations, such as the Associated General Contractors of America (AGC), the National Utility Contractors Association (NUCA), and the National Association of Sewer Service Contractors (NASSCO).

These organizations don’t represent the plumbers who go to houses to fix sinks and toilets, but they do represent people who install and rehabilitate the large-scale plumbing of our municipal sewer and water systems. That is, they look a lot like Joe.

Sustainable funding

Just look at what a couple of these subversive organizations are saying. Here’s the AGC on its issue advocacy Web pages: “Congress has cut funding in recent years and should restore funding levels for the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Funds (SRFs) to a minimum of $1.35 billion and $850 million, respectively. Even with these historical funding levels the SRFs are significantly under funded.

“AGC supports creation of a long-term, sustainable, off-budget source of funding for clean water by creating a trust fund to finance construction and maintenance of this critical environmental infrastructure.”

Here’s NUCA: “NUCA serves as chair to the Clean Water Council (CWC), a construction industry-based coalition that takes a lead role toward passage of water infrastructure legislation. The CWC is a group of 30 national construction contractors, suppliers, manufacturers, engineers and other associations [that] works on all levels of the legislative process to promote water infrastructure funding. ...”

It’s an investment

You’ll note that all these are mainly business organizations — not mayors or public works directors or wastewater treatment superintendents who naturally would want more funding for their operations.

These groups and their members understand something basic about government spending. Bill Clinton was perhaps the first president to try turning the pejorative “tax and spend” into the more positive “invest and grow.” He didn’t have much luck with that, but he was in fact on to something.

Properly focused government spending can be without question an investment — one that is not only good but necessary. Money invested in safe, clean, reliable drinking water and effective sanitation creates jobs that can’t be outsourced — jobs that pay high wages and comprehensive benefits and support families. In the bargain, it protects public health and improves the quality of life for everyone.

Maybe that’s why there’s substantial public support for investments in sewer and water, and for that matter other public facilities. Here’s AGC again:

“Recent polling shows that 86 percent of Americans support legislation by the U.S. Congress that would create a long-term, sustainable, and reliable trust fund for clean and safe water infrastructure.”

So it turns out that not everyone hates the thought of government spending. And a great many people don’t mind spending that has the effect of “spreading the wealth around.” In fact, an awful lot of people like it and know we need it. Even — and perhaps especially — Joe the Plumber.

Comments on this column or about any article in this publication may be directed to editor Ted J. Rulseh, 800/257-7222; editor@mswmag.com.