Fat won't make water bond float
If California lawmakers and the governor are earnest about addressing the state's water problems, they should break out the butcher knife and hack away at the fat loading down a stalled, $11 billion water bond.
With the flaccid economy and state finances in distress, they recognized the bond measure had no chance of passing in the November general election and, wisely, removed it from the ballot and shelved it until 2012.
The bond's ostensible purpose was to fund a series of projects to improve the state's water storage and conveyance plumbing, with particular focus on the fragile Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the heart of California's water supply. Such steps are necessary to sustain our burgeoning population and vital farm industry.
As usual, lawmakers couldn't resist loading the bond measure with billions in pet projects, some of which are camouflaged to conceal the fact that they had absolutely nothing to do with California's water needs, and everything to do with pleasing special interests.
For example, the Los Angeles Times reports state Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, called attention to a $100 million earmark that was directed toward the "Lake Tahoe Basin watershed" for "projects consistent with the Lake Tahoe Environmental Improvement Program." Closer inspection reveals this item's "exciting priorities for the future" included a water taxi for the lake.
Lake Tahoe is a magnificent gem that faces a number of ecological threats, and the region is a major tourist draw. But, come on. A $100 million "waterborne transit system" for a watershed that doesn't drain into the California delta, contributing not one drop of water to the system in question?
Yep, courtesy of Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who, according to the Times, assisted Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger as the water bond took shape last year.
Other legislators wanted a piece of the pie for projects in their districts -- museums, visitor centers, nature trails -- all nice luxuries, but difficult to justify as essential to fixing the California delta.
This kind of nonsense is a major tributary to governmental gridlock. It inhibits effectiveness, insouciantly wastes taxpayers' hard-earned money and rightfully earns their contempt. But it's how things get done in large legislative bodies.
In order for Lawmaker A to get support for his bill from Lawmaker B, the former often must do a political favor for the latter. Lawmaker A agrees to tack on a spending earmark for Lawmaker B's special project, which might not have any legitimate connection to the main bill.
This is vote-buying, one of the common results of the two-thirds vote requirement. It's easy to see how appealing this can be for free spenders, but even self-described fiscal conservatives are known to get in on the action.
California voters are far more concerned about the economy than about water, and Sacramento leaders know a certain loser when they see it. But even if things improve substantially over the next two years when the bond measure comes back around, too much fat could still make it a nonstarter.
Legislators and the next governor had better go on a pork-free diet if they hope to drink from the cup of success.
