California
Related: About this forumHuge Delta water deal backed by Dianne Feinstein, Jerry Brown, Kevin McCarthy
WASHINGTON -- Californias most senior Democrat and most powerful Republican in Washington are teaming up to extend a federal law designed to deliver more Northern California water south, despite the objections of some of the states environmentalists.
While controversial, the language in their proposal could help settle the contentious negotiations currently underway in Sacramento on Delta water flows the lifeblood of California agriculture as well as endangered salmon and smelt.
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, the House majority leader, are leading the push to fold an extension of expiring provisions in the 2016 Water Infrastructure for Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act into the year-end spending bill that Congress must pass this month. And on Friday, they won the endorsement of Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown.
The legislation would make hundreds of millions of federal dollars available for California water storage projects as well as desalination and water recycling programs.
Read more: https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article222443740.html
JayhawkSD
(3,163 posts)And I'm wondering why people in 49 other states should have their tax money spent for me to obtain drinking water.
And don't give me the "we send more money to Washington than we get back" bit. Two wrongs do not make a right.
We are a nation divided against itself. Fifty greedy states all digging in the money trough, each wanting more for itself than the other guy gets. "A nation divided against itself cannot survive."
stopbush
(24,378 posts)Yawn.
CA produces 25% of the nations food. Could there possibly be a national interest in having water to grow those crops?
JayhawkSD
(3,163 posts)The money paid for those crops should take care of providing that water.
stopbush
(24,378 posts)And if the water is not diverted and the crops do not grow, who do you imagine is going to pay for non-existant crops? And if federal funds are not used, who pays for the water? The citizens of CA alone? Why should I pay for water to grow crops for other states? If CA farmers grew only to supply CA with food they wouldnt need all that water.
Of course, we can always raise the prices on produce shipped to other states and let their residents pay for the water indirectly.
The water should be diverted, and the people who are growing the crops should pay for it. They in turn should add that cost to the price of the food they sell so that the people who eat the food pay for the cost of production. That way people who eat food grown in Ohio don't pay for food grown in California. It's not rocket science.
The government should not be in the food growing business. They should only be in the business of doing what private sector cannot do for itself, such as national defense.