Westlands, water, politics, and scarcity

On a recent trip to the Delta, the Peak Water studio crew saw this truck parked on Locke’s main drag:

As always, big government is the opponent, except when it isn’t.

Senator Dianne Feinstein’s announcement yesterday that she would be attaching a rider to a jobs bill being fast-tracked through congress is a sign of a politician acting on the behalf of a desperate constituency.

From the Fresno Bee:

I believe we need a fair compromise that will respect the Endangered Species Act while recognizing the fact that people in California’s breadbasket face complete economic ruin without help.

Her solution, extrapolated from her actions? The Endangered Species Act needs to be de-fanged, made more compromising. Endangered species will understand her conversion.

Perhaps the Pacific Legal Foundation has made a campaign contribution?

Feinstein’s statement no doubt rallied the many besieged San Joaquin Valley interests, including Tom Birmingham, the Westlands’ pit bull.

Sen. Feinstein’s new strategy comes on the heels of her key role in the creation of a National Academy of Sciences panel established to determine the “sustainability” of water and ecosystem management in the Delta. Optics suggest she might have been prompted by Westlands pomegranate farmers.

But back to her decision to threaten to attach a rider to a national jobs bill: That Sen. Feinstein would offer up such a political strategy is a sign of increasingly impatient, aggressive and historically contradictory behavior on the part of the Northern California Democrat, and/or her San Joaquin Valley/Southern California constituents.

It is a sign of the effects of scarcity on Cal Water’s constantly forming and fracturing coalitions and constituencies.

It is a sign that the Delta NAS panel may not be headed toward a set of conclusions that support the hope of Sen. Feinstein and those who convinced her to push for a counter view of standing biological opinions.

In many ways, her behavior is an attempt to find a way to adjudicate a complicated problem.

But unlike the measured political decisions of the Environmental Defense Fund, who are not very happy with Feinstein’s new strategem, and the Natural Resources Defense Council, both of whom supported this fall’s “co-equal goals” legislation, somewhat against their history and identity, Feinstein’s latest act is impulsive.

Sen. Feinstein’s impatience, if indeed she follows though on the implications of the quote above, may drive both environmental groups back into the fold, and California to its most divisive water positioning ever.

p.s. Here’s a letter from Rep. Napolitano on Feinstein’s “radical” proposal.