Water industry remains skeptical of Trump Administration's performance

Water industry professionals remained skeptical about the Trump Administration’s performance through Q2 of the President’s first year back in office.

In a follow-up poll conducted by WaterWorld following President Trump’s first six months in office, roughly 54% of respondents felt “very negative” about the administration’s performance thus far. 26% of respondents held a “very positive” opinion, with 7% feeling “somewhat negative,” 8% “somewhat positive,” and 4% feeling “neutral.”

For comparison, in Q1 50% of respondents felt “very negative,” 29% felt “very positive,” both “somewhat positive” and “somewhat negative” received 8% of respondents’ votes, and 6% felt neutral about the administration’s performance over the first few months in office.

Responses remained split and comments were polarized with a focus once again on government funding, the environment and regulation. Found below are comments that highlight each of the key talking points mentioned above.

Comments on funding varied, much like they did in the Q1 polls. Talking points included potential cuts to the SRFs and EPA as well as how tariffs will impact supplies.

“The Big Beautiful Bill was passed and there were provisions to improve water quality and upgrade aging infrastructure. It was likely underfunded given the scope of the need but it was something. What they have not addressed is what the intention is for the LCCR Lead and copper rule that the Biden administration left us with and what the intention is for utilities regarding the private service lines that are made of these materials. It is unlikely that the survey will find lead given that a typical lead service line will have copper stubs on each end,” said a respondent in municipal government, “neutral” on Trump.

“The pause and removal of the federal SMARTwater grants via the Bipartisan Infrastructure Project has halted many projects nationwide. Tariffs have also caused many customers to not go forth with water metering projects as well due to rising costs,” said a respondent in OEM, “very negative” on Trump.

“They are moving at breakneck speed on their agenda which will ultimately fuel what I believe will be great growth in our economy, which will benefit all of us, especially small businesses. Adjusting trade unfairness is much needed. It has caused some uncertainty in pricing etc., but it is becoming apparent as they secure large trade deals with major partners that this will be a huge net benefit in the long run,” said a respondent in other*, “very positive” on Trump.

“I've been very disappointed that he has put tariffs on items that are needed for construction projects while also decreasing funding for those projects and somehow still adding to the national debt,” said a respondent in engineering/consulting, “somewhat negative” on Trump.

“Tariff uncertainty is causing unwarranted chaos,” said a respondent in other*, “somewhat negative” on Trump.

“The media is just so negative towards Trump, we can't just continue to throw money at everything and think it's going to be better including the water sector,” said a respondent in municipal government, “somewhat positive” on Trump.

Environment

Comments on the environment were more one-sided than the other categories, with a focus on what deregulation means for the nation’s waters.

“Not a huge fan of presidents generally, but i have seen no policy changes which negatively impact actual water quality. You have to get past all the freaking out to investigate the facts,” said a respondent in other*, “very positive” on Trump.

“Destructive to protecting our water and the environment. A mammoth setback for our nation and the world,” said a respondent in other*, “very negative” on Trump.

“Very concerned about any rollback of environmental regulations that will affect drinking water and definitely concerned that the Federal government promotes unscientific thinking about fluoride use with little regard to public health,” said a respondent in municipal government, “somewhat negative” on Trump.

“Many government agencies, water agencies included, got sidetracked on unimportant issues and Trump is refocusing them,” said a respondent in engineering/consulting, “very positive” on Trump.

Regulation

Talking points on regulation varied and included comments on deregulation contrasted with government overreach.

“Regulations are good but too many restrict and actually hamper clean water. The Sackett ruling is one example of an organization that went too far in limiting individuals use of their own land. The Arsenic ruling is another,” said a respondent in other*, “somewhat positive” on Trump.

“Infrastructure - water and other - has been prioritized in the past several presidencies. Democrat promises always sound good but are never delivered. Trump seems totally indifferent to infrastructure when it’s falling apart everywhere. This is a product of not understanding it, insulation from it all of his business life, and refusal to listen to those who could give good advice. The FAA is a "poster agency" that needs modernization instead of lip service, roads are bad everywhere and water & sewer - especially sewer - is in deplorable condition,” said a respondent in state government, “somewhat negative” on Trump.

“I believe that for far too many years there has been Government overreach, and it is time that the Government gets back to what it was created for. The security of our nation,” said a respondent in engineering/consulting, “very positive” on Trump.

“This administration's slash and burn first, (maybe) ask questions later approach to policy and agency work, not to mention funding critical programs, is going to cripple American R&D and data science, including within the water sector,” said a respondent in municipal government, “very negative” on Trump.

EPA

Comments on the EPA focused on staffing issues, including layoffs, as well as the current regulatory landscape.

“Has made big changes in the EPA on the positive side of things, so now we need to do our part and make changes as well,” said a respondent in other*, “very positive” on Trump.

“What are we to do if he gets rid of the EPA? We have worked so hard for clean water and air,” said a respondent in municipal government, “very negative” on Trump.

“Attempting to dismantle the EPA? Really? REDUCING WATER STANDARDS,” said a respondent in distribution, “very negative” on Trump.

“Not bad first 6 month. EPA changes makes me nervous but they are being more logical than the previous EPA,” said a respondent in other*, “somewhat positive” on Trump.

“Cutting the EPA and other related contamination programs is going backwards from the direction we should be heading in to protect clean drinking water. The uncovering of contamination is only getting worse as we start to increase monitoring,” said a respondent in other*, “somewhat negative” on Trump.