DC sewage disaster: Why are climate-obsessed Democrats silent on this mess?

as Washington, DC area As the snow melts this spring, the lead-up to the 250th anniversary of America’s birth will bring renewed interest in D.C.’s monuments, parks, and waterways — symbols of national continuity and civic pride. However, along the Potomac River, the melting ice will also bring something else: the unmistakable stench of raw sewage.

After a catastrophic malfunction occurred in one of the main sewer lines. Hundreds of millions of gallons Gallons of untreated sewage spilled into the river, making it one of the largest sewage releases in U.S. history. Environmental damage is immediate, visible and inevitable.

Yesterday, President Donald Trump He announced that he would contact the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to assist with cleanup and response efforts, a commendable move. Whatever one’s policy, federal intervention signals recognition that this is not just a minor bureaucratic accident, but a major environmental crisis. In contrast, the governors of Maryland and Virginia and the mayor of Washington, D.C. – all Democrats, some aspiring to higher office, and who routinely advocate aggressive climate policies – have remained silent. For leaders who often talk about environmental justice and public health, their silence has been staggering.

Obama-era greenhouse gas rules end as EPA’s ZELDIN signs ‘largest regulatory action’ in history

One might expect such a disaster, occurring just miles from the seat of federal power, to dominate the national environmental dialogue. Instead, I struggled to break through the noise. There have been no comprehensive reckonings on aging infrastructure, no ongoing cycles of outrage, and no urgent moral declarations from the Climate Foundation.

The muted response is especially striking when compared to the strength of the reaction to a very different development in environmental policy in the same week that sewage spilled into the river surrounding the country’s seats of power.

This week, the Trump administration announced its decision to rescind the EPA’s 2009 “hazard finding,” the legal determination that greenhouse gases threaten public health and well-being. The response from progressive leaders and advocacy groups has been swift and dramatic. Former President Barack Obama He warned that reversing that outcome would make Americans “less safe, less healthy, and less able to fight climate change.” Major media outlets portrayed the move as a fundamental assault on science and politics Environmental protection.

The juxtaposition is revealing. A Historical sewage spills in a major American river—an event with clear, measurable consequences for ecosystems and public health—has barely registered in the national discourse. On the other hand, the regulatory transformation whose effects will gradually unfold and remain contested has been treated as an existential emergency.

Over time, federal emissions rules have produced an expanded system of “off-cycle credits,” which reward automakers for technologies that reduce emissions under specific test conditions rather than across a vehicle’s full life cycle. One of the most obvious results is the now ubiquitous stop-start feature that turns off a car’s engine at red lights and restarts it moments later.

This feature is widely disliked by drivers, but its popularity with regulators has little to do with consumer experience. Mechanical and automotive analysts have raised growing concerns that frequent shutdowns and forced restarts are putting additional strain on motors, batteries and operating systems. This pressure leads to higher maintenance costs, increased frequency of mechanical failures, and shorter vehicle lifespans – results that conflict with the environmental goal of reducing resource consumption over time.

Like paper straws that decompose before a drink is finished, these measures provide the appearance of environmental action while shifting the costs and inconvenience to consumers. Once included in Regulatory frameworksHowever, they are rarely subject to the same scrutiny that accompanied their accreditation.

EPA Administrator Zeldin: We’ve finally demolished Democratic climate madness

This pattern reflects a broader trend in the progressive environmental movement: “following the science” often means invoking scientific authority to justify new mandates, but less often using evidence to reevaluate whether those mandates are working as intended. Organizational success becomes a matter of compliance and symbolism rather than measurable environmental improvement. Environmental concern turns into performative concerns – focusing on clear controls on lifestyle – while less ideologically appropriate problems receive less attention.

The silence surrounding the Potomac sewage spill underscores this point. Infrastructure failure does not lend itself to moral theatre. They involve governance, maintenance, budgeting, and long-term efficiency – areas where shifting responsibility is difficult and where political rewards are limited.

Click here for more Fox News opinions

Public confidence depends on consistency and proportionality. When policymakers devote enormous amounts of energy to marginal regulatory changes while downplaying severe environmental crises Under their jurisdictionSkepticism is not sarcasm, it is common sense.

Ecology should guide priorities, not serve as a selective rhetorical tool. If leaders want Americans to accept costly and destructive regulations in the name of environmental protection, which they routinely do, they are beholden to public evidence that all environmental harms are taken with the same seriousness.

Click here to download the FOX NEWS app

Hundreds of millions of gallons of Drainage in the river They should require at least as much urgency as the exhaust pipe rules.

As the nation approaches an important anniversary meant to celebrate progress and stewardship, the contradiction is hard to ignore. Real environmental protection means fixing broken pipes and maintaining infrastructure, not just rewriting regulations. It means accountability for local failures as well as federal debates. This means recognizing that sometimes the most pressing environmental threats are not abstract carbon models, but the raw sewage flowing through the United States’ capital.

Click here to read more from Bethany Mandel