In my last post, I looked at environmental racism and classism through the specific example of the water crisis in Flint, Michigan. However, Flint is not a unique case, in fact, it is indicative of the larger problems at work. Poor communities of color in America are especially vulnerable to water and air pollution — and not by accident. This week, I will present some key statistics everyone should know that demonstrate the national scale of this issue, and how it has been institutionalized in our society.

1. There is strategic, disproportionate exposure to facilities that release toxins.

According to a study conducted by the University of Michigan, “on average, people of color comprise 56% of the population living in neighborhoods with TRI facilities.” TRI facilities are facilities on the Toxic Release Inventory. They can include hazardous waste sites and polluting industrial facilities, both of which can be dangers towards public health. This not at all by accident — these poorer communities are intentionally targeted as hosts for facilities that emit dangerous toxins and pollutants. Often, weak zoning laws and low property values make these communities the ideal locations for these facilities. These areas also tend to lack a culture of “NIMBY-ism” (NIMBY is an acronym standing for Not In My BackYard; it refers to local advocacy against proposed development which is considered harmful or disruptive). This lack isn’t because these communities don’t care, but because they lack the resources and political clout to combat the large companies which wish to develop.

2. Children of Color are more vulnerable to lead poisoning.

According to a 2011 study conducted by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, “11.2 percent of African American children and 4.0 percent of Mexican-American children are poisoned by lead, compared with 2.3 percent of white children.” As I learned when writing my last blog post, lead poisoning has serious health consequences, from severe brain damage to developmental and emotional disorders, to lifelong chronic pain. These health issues not only can ruin the life of a child but place significant stress on the family, not only emotionally but financially. The cost of medication and treatment could be very high and without good health insurance that family could end up with serious debt. This creates a vicious cycle — a family in debt cannot afford to move to a safer, cleaner home, where their children would be less vulnerable to lead poisoning.

3. Water contamination is significantly more common in poorer, low-income communities.

Despite the national outrage and shock regarding the Flint water crisis, there are communities all across the nation that do not have access to safe drinking water.  In rural communities and migrant farmworker communities, residents are forced to drink discolored, contaminated water that could cause a myriad of health effects — especially in young children. In the Navajo nation, indigenous people have been suffering for years due to a water supply tainted by uranium mining in the 1950s. In cases like this, often the government does not intervene as it was forced to in Flint, and citizens can’t afford to subsist off of expensive bottled water. Again, the resulting health effects can cripple both the community and the families with it.

What I find most shocking about these facts is that many of them have clear solutions. We can provide aid in emergencies while altering the institutions (like gentrification, healthcare, environmental regulations) that allowed these problems to occur in the first place. Of course, these things take time, but right now we aren’t doing anything. In fact, we are moving backward. In 2017, President Trump proposed removing the office within the EPA that addresses issues of environmental justice. As the 2020 election comes closer, keep an eye on which campaigns care about environmental justice, because it is crucial that we begin to elect people who care about these issues and will begin to address them with the urgency they deserve.