Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
July 17, 2008
5. Agencies, Programs, People –
How We Can Save Our Country's Water
AlterNet- 7/16/08
Schwarzenegger and Feinstein Offer Up Another Round Of Water Bond Talks, Legislature Responds With Timely Water Package
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How We Can Save Our Country's Water
AlterNet- 7/16/08
While some are proposing a new national water commission, others have a different idea that is less talk and more action.
With a new presidential administration and a new Congress taking office in January, advocates from all perspectives are looking at opportunities to translate a mandate for "change" into specific national policy reforms. Watch your step as the avalanche of recommendations begins to cascade toward
Among the proposals already in the hopper is a congressional bill that would create a new national water commission or, more precisely, the "21st Century Water Commission." Introduced by Rep. John Linder (R-GA), H.B. 135 moved out of House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure's Subcommittee on Water and Environment in May, and has the support of Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA), who introduced companion legislation in that chamber.
Linder's bill would establish a nine-person commission with a $9 million budget and a three-year deadline to assess the nation's water availability and demands, with a focus on the pressure points of the country in which fast-growing populations are encountering drought and other supply constraints. The legislation explicitly would not create new national water policy, but would provide data, financial incentives, and strategies for stronger and farther-looking state policies.
Comparing the initiative to the interstate highway system of the last century, Rep. Linder proclaimed this bill a first step toward "a roadmap that states can use to form their water policy." The national glove box is already crammed full of road maps for our waterways. As Steve Malloch of the National Wildlife Federation remarked at a water policy meeting in
What we need is movement on key state and federal policy reforms to combat the most important factors affecting our nation's water resources -- rapid growth in dry regions and global warming. Since the last National Water Commission completed its work, culminating in a well-researched and prescient report published in 1973, "Water Policies for the Future," subsequent gatherings of experts -- many focused on the arid West -- have produced library shelves full of reports and white papers reaching remarkably consistent conclusions.
For a summary of these policy recommendations and an analysis of the most promising areas for reform today, see the Western Progress report, "A New Western Water Agenda."
Many of the most urgently needed reforms in water policy will take place in state legislatures or at the local (county, municipality) level. But federal policies can encourage improvements through a combination of incentives and regulation. At a hearing last November, for example, water experts such as the Pacific Institute's Peter Gleick and National Wildlife Federation's David Conrad testified in favor of convening a new national water commission to address a wider array of concerns than is currently captured in mandates of H.B. 135.
Responding to these suggestions, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) offered an amendment to H.B. 135 that would increase the size and budget for the commission, and (most importantly) charge it with analysis of the effects of climate change on our water resources. In a May 12 blog for the American Water Resources Association, Michael "Aquadoc" Campana, praised these amendments as improvements to the commission proposed by H.B. 135. The director of the Institute for Water and Watersheds at
These are all important issues that deserve attention. But the question remains. Do we need a new commission to revisit these questions? Or do we need to look more seriously at how we might mobilize the political will to implement the remarkably consistent menu of ideas that has already emerged from such gatherings of water experts over the past several decades?
At a Natural Resources Law Center conference in
As a contributing writer to the Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission's report (and a participant in a few other smaller initiatives along these lines), I can attest that these processes are cumbersome, political, and cumulative. I find Neuman's arguments compelling and provocative. While a new national water commission could undoubtedly shed new light on old water problems -- particularly the effects of climate change on limited water resources -- progressives must step up early and remain engaged throughout the process to make sure this investment pays off in positive policy reform rather than more shelf art.
Whatever the outcome of this November's election, it is clear that voters are interested in real change and practical solutions. Let's start with some movement on water policy -- not more talk, but long-overdue reforms to move us toward a national goal of sustainability.#
http://www.alternet.org/water/91728/?page=entire
Schwarzenegger and Feinstein Offer Up Another Round Of Water Bond Talks, Legislature Responds With Timely Water Package
By Traci Sheehan, Executive Director Planning and Conservation League
Last Wednesday Governor Schwarzenegger and California Senator Diane Feinstein unveiled yet another iteration of a multi-billion dollar water bond, and urged the legislature to take action to place the water bond on the November 2008 ballot.
This new $9.2 billion proposal was presented as a "compromise." Indeed, their proposal is $2.6 billion less than the Governor's last proposal. However, this latest proposal still contains many of the most controversial elements of previous failed attempts to put together a water bond.
Most notably, the measure includes provisions that would limit future legislative oversight for water storage projects and projects affecting the Bay Delta, including the unprecedented continuous appropriation of $3 billion for water storage projects. If approved, the water bond would bypass the legislature and grant allocation authority to the defunct California Water Commission (which is a commission entirely appointed by the Governor and which currently has no appointed members).
The proposal also includes confusing language that seems to limit the Legislature's ability to engage in a solution to fix the Delta by requiring a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to change or amend any portion of the proposal's directives regarding the Delta.
The Legislature has responded with a water package of its own that does not include a new water bond. President pro Tempore Don Perata (D-Oakland) and Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) announced Monday they will push a two-bill package including SB 1XX which would allocate existing funding to improve water storage and enhance water reliability, and AB 2175 (Laird/Feuer) which would establish requirements to reduce per capita water use in the state by 20% by 2020.
While the jury is still out on Governor Schwarzenegger and Senator Feinstein's proposal, the Planning and Conservation League, as well as several other environmental, fishing and environmental justice organizations support the legislative package proposed by Senator Perata and Assemblywoman Bass. Both SB 1XX and AB 2175 provide timely solutions to ease the water challenges facing
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/07/schwarzenegger_77.html
DWR's California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff, for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader's services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost2.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news. DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of
No comments:
Post a Comment