Associated Press

ALBANY, N.Y. — A federal study shows municipalities nationwide need more than $300 billion worth of essential upgrades to long overlooked water and sewer systems over the next 20 years.

The need is acute in Northeastern states with older systems like New York, which needs $29.7 billion worth of improvements, U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer said Wednesday. But he said that price is a "just a drop in the bucket" compared to the higher cost of continuing to upgrade parts of sewer and water systems when emergencies strike. He is pushing a bill that would counter planned funding cuts in the federal transportation bill now being negotiated in Washington.

"EPA found that the nation's 53,000 community water systems and 21,400 not-for-profit, non-community water systems will need to invest an estimated $334.8 billion between 2007 and 2027," stated the federal Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment, which is updated every four years.

The National Association of Counties' 2008 report estimated the need for water and sewer upgrades at $300 billion to $450 billion nationwide and the federal stimulus project provided just a fraction of that as the recession reduced local governments' revenues.

"This is a very serious concern," said Carolyn Berndt of the National League of Cities. "Many communities have a long-term plan to replace all their underground water infrastructure, but even if they do a couple percentages of pipes a year, it's still going to take over 100 years for some of them to replace it all."

She said local governments have been paying more than 95 percent of the cost of water and sewer upgrades since the 1990s as federal aid has declined. Schumer said federal aid covered 75 percent of local costs in the 1980s and 1970s.

"It's a huge undertaking," Berndt said. "Some of these pipes are 100 years old. That's why they continue to see water main breaks."

The group supports Schumer's effort, which comes as Congress works to cut spending.

—Copyright 2012 Associated Press

Hope for the Everglade Snail Kite: Army Corps Agrees to Evaluate Forward Pumps on Lake Okeechobee

"The Everglade Snail Kite is a system-wide indicator species for Everglades restoration success. In order to comprehensively protect Kite habitat and the Greater Everglades Ecosystem as a whole, water level declines should be dealt with through water restrictions and water conservation measures. Audubon urges that citizens, businesses, and agencies respond to these steps dutifully when drought conditions are identified to avoid the need to use temporary forward pumps when water is most scarce."

"A bill that would exempt proposed state water rules from legislative ratification passed the House on Friday, less than two weeks after it was filed.

Florida's springs and rivers are becoming choked with weeds and algae. Scientists say nitrogen and phosphorus from a variety of sources are to blame for the problems.

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection in December adopted rules to impose limits on nitrogen and phosphorus. They are intended to replace federal rules that utilities and industry groups oppose as too costly."

A retirement home for Burmese pythons has been established in northern Palm Beach County, now that the federal government has banned imports and interstate commerce in the snakes.

The Burmese Python Initiative has been set up by a group of reptile dealers and hobbyists concerned that owners may abandon their snakes if their owners go off to college or take any step that would involve a move to another state. The organization plans to use the facility as a temporary haven and adoption service for the pythons and two other newly banned species, the African rock python and yellow anaconda.

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. -- A burgeoning population of huge pythons - many of them pets that were turned loose by their owners when they got too big - appears to be wiping out large numbers of raccoons, opossums, bobcats and other mammals in the Everglades, a study says.

OUR OPINION: Stop the assault in Tallahassee on rivers, lakes

By The Miami Herald Editorial

HeraldEd@MiamiHerald.com

This land is your land, this land is my land — or so the old folk song goes. In Tallahassee, though, public lands and lakes, rivers, streams and beaches seem to be under assault from various quarters that want to privatize what has been public domain since Florida became a state in 1845.

This latest assault seeks to “clarify” what constitutes the “ordinary high water line” for submerged land along lakes, rivers and streams. Odd such a clarification would be needed as court after court has ruled for more than a century that lakes, rivers and streams (along with beaches) belong to the public, period — and that the public part starts at the high-water mark based on the rainy season.

TAMPA, Fla. -- The Republican presidential race waded, at least for one night, into the grainy details of U.S. policy toward sugar.

Newt Gingrich's answer to a question about it during a GOP debate Monday night stood out in part for its wonkiness and downright oddity.

"I found out one of the fascinating things about America, which was that cane sugar hides behind beet sugar," the former college professor said, launching into a lecture of sorts on the U.S. industry when asked about subsidies for the sweet ingredient. "And there are just too many beet sugar districts in the United States. It's an amazing side story about how interest groups operate. In an ideal world, you would have an open market."

Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, followed up by saying "we ought to get rid of subsidies and let markets work properly." The other two candidates, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul, weren't given a chance to reply.

Blogs and Twitter feeds lit up with the exchange, with some observers using it to highlight similarities between Gingrich and beet farmer Dwight Schrute on "The Office." Gingrich, in his younger years, has been compared to the sitcom character.

Pop culture aside, the exchange shed light on a largely unknown facet of American policy: Congress' role in sugar dates to the birth of the country.

Import tariffs were imposed on sugar beginning in 1789 to give incentive to American-grown product. An added layer of complexity came in 1934, when controls on domestic sugar production were put in place.

In short, current sugar policies favor beet sugar growers in the Great Plains and Upper Midwest and cane sugar growers in Florida and Louisiana, keeping the prices of U.S.-grown sugar artificially high and limiting the amount of foreign sugar that can be imported.

"It's a Soviet system what we have for sugar," said Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute. "It's not a market system."

The Government Accountability Office last looked into the issue in 2000 and found that U.S. sugar prices, at times, were three times the world market price. Critics say that fact hurts much larger industries such as cereal companies, bakers and candy companies, who rely on sugar for their products.

Those industries cheered at the mere mention of existing policy during the debate.

"I think it's time has come and gone," said Susan Smith, a spokeswoman for the National Confectioners Association, which represents candy, gum and chocolate makers and opposes current policy. "Sometime, 80 years ago, there might have been a reason. But now, not only does it hurt companies who have sugar as an ingredient but there's also a huge consumer cost."

The GAO estimated U.S. sugar policy cost consumers $1.9 billion in 1998 and resulted in $900 million in net losses to the U.S. economy. Nearly all the benefits, the report argued, went to the wealthy owners of U.S. sugar companies.

Both Republicans and Democrats have squandered chances to change the policy. An analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group, shows the sugar industry has given about $2.1 million in campaign contributions in the 2012 election cycle.

"It's very much a bipartisan racket," Edwards said.

Judy Sanchez, a spokeswoman for U.S. Sugar Corp., the nation's largest cane sugar grower, said the policies in place keep American companies from going out of business. She said sugar policy has "zero cost" to taxpayers.

"Face it: Sugar is given away for free in restaurants, where they charge you for water, they charge you for an extra slice of cheese on your hamburger," Sanchez said. "The sugar is so affordable that it's given away for free. That's because American sugar policy works."