Urgent Call-to-Arms!!!!

F

Flutterby

Active member
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
RO Number
14378
Messages
9,320
"On Friday, the U.S. House of Representative passed the 2011 Continuing Resolution, a must pass spending bill, to keep the Federal Government funded. Language included in this base bill, however, would defund the implementation of biological decisions made for reduced Delta pumping, thereby allowing record level of water exports from the Delta to resume.

While some House Representatives, like Congressman Devin Nunes (CA - 21st District), are calling it a water restoration measure, this backdoor attempt to thwart the implementation of sound Delta management principles, would bring the final death blow to several Delta fisheries which are on life support presently.

The Continuing Resolution, however, must now go to the Senate and pass through the Senate before March 4, 2011. Please call Senator Feinstein and ask her to strip this Delta killing provision from the 2011 Continuing Resolution.

Remind her that the California and Oregon salmon fishing industry is tied to the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Please also tell her that the Delta farming community, a multi-billion dollar annual economy, is also tied to Delta water quality. We cannot fix the water challenges in Central Valley communities by destroying working Delta farms and California's fishing communities. Available State and Federal funding resources must be used to create water self-sufficiency in each region of California and to reduce dependence on Delta water exports.

Senator Feinstein's office numbers are as follows: (202) 224-3841, Washington D.C.; (415) 393-0707, San Francisco; Los Angeles (310) 914-7300; (619) 231-9712 San Diego; and 559-485-7430, Fresno."
email: http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs.Emailme

www.restorethedelta.org
 
Why wouldn't the endangered species act prevent such a thing from happening?

I'm not good at figuring out how Gov-ment things work. What are they trying to do?
 
I have already done it! It sure shows you how money talks.
Please folks, make a call and voice your feelings about this VERY important issue.
 
Senator Feinstein made her position on this issue pretty clear yesterday.

"House Republicans seem to think there are simple solutions to California's water problems," Feinstein said in a statement. "That just isn't the case. Their idea to defund the San Joaquin River settlement, approved after 18 years of litigation, would likely send California back to the courtroom."

Pulling funding for the delta smelt would put the state in an even bigger bind, Feinstein added, because the fish's protection is mandated under the 1973 Endangered Species Act.

"House Republicans would leave intact legal requirements to protect endangered species, while at the same time defunding the federal government's ability to comply with that law," she said.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/02/14/MNL01HN13L.DTL#ixzz1E4JcosE4
 
Playing the devil's advocate here; Why should the federal government pay for the funding of a state problem? Beleive me I am all for the funding but....

We need to start cutting spending in the federal government. This is not going to be the only project on the chopping block, in CA or otherwise. Unfortunately CA needs to cut the budgets as well. It is a lose/lose for the delta no matter how you slice it but we as a state and a country can not continue on the tax and spend program.

I know some will say "cut other programs", but there in lies the crux. "Don't cut my program" when said on a whole results in more of the same. State legislatures and law makers need to find less costly or no cost ways to fund their projects. Here's one, don't want the water going do the canals, shut off the valves. I know that is a little simplistic but it is the kind of thinking they need to start doing.

Liz - I know this will likely hotter than a hen on the top row of a chicken coop but: If the fresh water flows south to the central valley (where water flows produce grows) and beyond but what of it. I do believe there is plenty of salt water in the ocean to take up the slack. The fact that it will entirely change the ecosystem of the delta is one of the issues. However, the delta will remain, and it will adapt.

Just my .2 cents as a soon to be Marylander.
 
John, personally I want the Delta to remain as it is. If it becomes a salt water marsh, all the fauna and flora will change. True it will still be available to boating, but there are much much bigger issues which I believe are more important.

What will the millions of Delta and Bay Area folks who currently get their drinking water from the Delta do? Should we favor pumping fresh water to be to resold by a private company for a HUGE profit to water plants in an arid desert over providing fresh water for fish, Delta farmers and drinking water? Really???? Perhaps you need to think through the cost of your 2 cents.
 
quote:
Originally posted by yzer

Senator Feinstein made her position on this issue pretty clear yesterday.

"House Republicans seem to think there are simple solutions to California's water problems," Feinstein said in a statement. "That just isn't the case. Their idea to defund the San Joaquin River settlement, approved after 18 years of litigation, would likely send California back to the courtroom."

Pulling funding for the delta smelt would put the state in an even bigger bind, Feinstein added, because the fish's protection is mandated under the 1973 Endangered Species Act.

"House Republicans would leave intact legal requirements to protect endangered species, while at the same time defunding the federal government's ability to comply with that law," she said.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/02/14/MNL01HN13L.DTL#ixzz1E4JcosE4
Click to expand...


Thank you yzer! I had not read this statement.
 
Liz - I sorted of figured that is the way you would see it. And that is fine. It is your right. My point was, is that we should not need to spend money (federal or otherwise) on it. Who is selling the water? Why? Who are we to say we have more of a right to fresh water than the person that lives in the central valley? Should we tell them, "hey, don't like it move here"? I think if you were born, raised and lived in Bakersfield you would feel different.

To me the bigger issue is, where do we draw the line? If we fund preservation of the Delta then we have to fund preservation of everything that everyone in every state wants preserved. Quite frankly I can think of a whole lot better uses of my money. Now if the state wants to fund something and the citizens are willing to pass a measure to support and fund it I say go for it. But expecting a hand out from the federal government is not right.
 
Westlands Water District is a group of investors from SoCal who finagled a special Federal Water deal many many years ago which allows them to purchase "federal" water in NorCal at a very cheap price and they in turn sell this water at huge markups to the farmers in the Fresno area. BTW, the Federal water system [tr]was built and is maintained with taxpayers money. Your money and mine.

Why should we save the Delta? Here is a good website that answers that question.
http://restorethedelta.org/?page_id=26

BTW, your arguments all sound very reasonable on the surface. Unfortunately, it shows how little you know of the entire picture. I think if you do your homework, your attitude may be different.
 
No it won't change my feelings about throwing more good money after bad. I am tired of paying for everyone's pet projects. That is how we got here in the first place. I know you don't think I understbut I do. I understand I paid nearly as much in state and federal taxes that if it where someone's income the would make 10 dollars an hour. And then I got the results from my CPA and had to pays more.

Look, you need federal dollars because the state can not afford it. I am saying the federal government can not either. Where will all these projects be when folks say screw it like they have in CA and not o move their money out of the country.

And if the big water finagled a contract then big government can finagle it back.
 
If you are paying $10/hour x 2088hours/year=$21K because a CPA is preparing your taxes you might want to give him the boot and use online tax prep software; I used it this year and it was easy and worked well. I got to deduct self employement health insurance premiums and got a make work count tax credit too. As for the San Joaquin and Delta restoration I would like to see the Federal gov't fund the deal that was brokered last year to restore San Joaquin salmon runs so I can catch some. The House bucked their own Speaker yesterday to cut a redundant GE engine from the F35 that was good. There is a lot more they can cut from that public trough of contractors along that corridor between Dulles airport and Wash DC, there are so many businesses along that toll road with both feet in the public trough.
 
"there are so many businesses along that toll road with both feet in the public trough"

Not just there but everywhere in the country. I was happy to see that as well. Personally I think we should be buying aircraft. Not funding proprietary component development of them.

Actually I guess I paid a bit more than a $10 an hour salary. And my wife paid about the same. Trust me when I say we have as many deductions as we can. Including the maximum amounts to retirement funds. If a CPA can not get me any more deductions, (legally), than I doubt an online tax place will.

"I would like to see the Federal gov't fund the deal that was brokered last year to restore San Joaquin salmon runs so I can catch some."

This is what I am talking about. Another federal program for a local project. How does it benefit those of us in the rest of the country? If CA wants it and can pay for then have at it. Otherwise keep your hands out of my pockets. Sorry to be so blunt but that is what it really is.

I know I am not going to change your minds on this so I will stop trying. I am just tired of everyone saying, cut out the f'ing government spending, but not on my program.
 
John, here is some info that you might find interesting. You see, it isn't about saving money after all......

"The House leadership wants to defund the biological opinions, salmon protections, and San Joaquin River restoration. But they haven't touched water, power, and crop subsidies and direct crop payments. So clearly, these defunding proposals aren't about saving money or making government smaller. They're about targeting environmental protections, especially for fish, to benefit a small but politically powerful segment of California's economy.

And do we need to explain again how adequate fresh water flows in the Delta are good for jobs in the Delta farming community and California's fishing community?"

Here is the entire article: http://restorethedelta.org/?p=729
 
I just downloaded the Federal budget in Excel put it in a Pivot Table so I could see Bureau of Reclamation, Corps of Engineers and TVA subcategory "Water Resources" and they total almost $10 billion dollars annualy. These 3 entities only benefit water and power generation in the West and the South (mostly hydro but in TVA's case they have some old nuclear power plants). I don't know that we could get $10B in savings immediately but giving those facilities and operations to the states so they can decide if they want to privatize or operate and letting the water and power prices float to market rates would be a an interesting excercise for a transition team to model.

I like the idea of having state control of the Federal pumps in Tracy, we'll have to get along with our fellow citzens and the farmers in the south but we won't have to drag our interests through the Feds. It would have to be looked at by our new attorney general but there may be some flexibility in getting out of old water contracts if one were to setup a new Calif entity to take over from Bureau of Reclamation (like John alluded to above the state governement may be able to use his word finagle some water rights back).
 
DD, an interesting proposal.....however, politically Westlands has 90% of the power in this state, so it would never happen as you suggest. It isn't about getting along with each other; it is about powerful special interests having taken over political power of all decisions about our water in CA.
 
from the sidelines what bugs me about reading this is CA sends more to the FEDs than CA receives back. Or to say it correctly, the FEDS take more from CA then the FED return. So when I hear a CA taxpayer say they don't want to take FED money... I hear them say send MY tax money to another state.

Wise up people, saying no to FED money coming back only benefits the other states and they will not even send you a thank you card for the money you left on the table.

The only way to stop the cycle is to stop asking for things you are not willing to spend money on. You want clean air and water - to save all the little critters and plants... well who do you think pays for it? I know, cut the other person's program - not mine! Save the Delta but don't charge me for it and don't take the FED money... and you wonder why we have a financial problem!

Funny thing is the "common folks" understand you have to pay for what you ask for. it's the "business professionals" that understand you can ask for something and have someone else pay for it! In this case it will be all of your kids that will be paying the bill and have no Delta to enjoy.

Not my kids, I did my part for the world and refused to breed. Therefore, I reduced my environmental impact, still pay taxes, did not request a bailout and nice to just about everyone I meet. All I ask is for as many of you to be as sociably, environmentally and financial responsible as possible so I can enjoy what is left of this small part of our world for the short time I have left.

That's why I love boating, nothing is more relaxing that floating on the water and nothing teaching you how small you really are as the power of the sea. And most boater understand and are wonderful people to be with. Rethink this Delta issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top