This week will see likely legislative action on water issues…the cause being a good and needed one. But in the mosh pit of legislative compromise, what will we get as the end result? The voters will be asked to vote on a large bond of some sort, should a proposal survive the legislative process and win the 2/3 vote needed in both houses.
It’s sort of an ideological slide rule as you move the bond proposal slide to each side to find support that gets 2/3 of legislators to agree. Move the slide too far to the right, [money going mostly for building storage, dams, hard infrastructure only] Dems drop off like flies. Slide it to the left, [money mostly for ecosystem restoration as most previous water bonds have done, removing dams on the Klamath, acquiring more land, creating more commissions and more power for them over land and water use] and Republicans say ‘no thanks’. Place it in the middle and it’s not effective at doing anything, other than a dribble towards eco stuff as dam projects require a large commitment.
How excited are the voters to approve a likely $9B + bond that they aren’t sure produces $18B worth of new water when the bond is paid back. Looking at the amount of non-water supply-increasing spending in the compromise ideas floating out there, this during a a water crisis that is receiving national attention, and an epic state fiscal crisis, you have to wonder what will it take to get the legislature to collectively act to help it’s constituents. Does the tap really have to run dry in urban California to wake up the urban legislators, [and their voters] that oppose what us new water supply people advocate?
The voters of California will be faced with approving yet another large bond should one emerge from this discussion. The quality of the proposal will be vetted in campaigns for and against it in a 2010 election. We have very limited funding ability. Will it stand up to voters scrutiny? Will it be able to pass the test of taxpayer advocates as a good value for a much needed resource? Or will it be compromised so much that it just adds to the mountain of eco-debt and taxpayers are left holding an empty water jug once again.
Whatever emerges, it better be good or we’re just wasting everyones time.