California Drought: Just Nature, or All Part of the Plan?


For the past week or so in California, the Left has been hailing Governor Moonbeam, Jerry Brown, as some sort of shining example of leadership because he has used his executive power to order a 25 percent reduction in water use in the state.

As he has gone about the circuit of news shows in the Golden Brown State, Governor Moonbeam has made ample threats of fining businesses and individuals who are deemed water wasters.

This has only increased the hagiographic drivel and drool coming out of the state’s newsrooms.

It’s a good thing history has no place in California, or else Governor Moonbeam’s decree would not come across as the charge of a hero, but as the desperate act of a scoundrel who’s on the verge of being caught.

To be fair, Moonbeam’s not the only villain who has helped bring California to the brink of true disaster. If we could catch and hold every last person responsible, they would fill entire stockyards.

Everyone who has lived in California is aware that it is by nature a largely arid state. For every year of plentiful rainfall, there is normally one to three years that are on the lean side. Several of those years together constitutes the regular droughts that are characteristic.

It’s only by storing water and moving it from water-rich mountain regions to other parts of the state that California gets by. And it’s important that California does get by, because it is the major food producer for much of the country and even some foreign nations.

What that means is that one of the foremost duties of any elected official should be to make sure the state’s farms and ranches have ample water, while keeping the state’s major cities well-supplied.

Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina weighed in Monday on the water crisis, pointing out that “despite the fact that California has suffered from droughts for millennia, liberal environmentalists have prevented the building of a single new reservoir or a single new water conveyance system over decades during a period in which California’s population has doubled.”

Fiorina noted that as much as 70 percent of California’s annual rainfall “washes out to sea.”

Being California, the common sense approach is the last thing tried, so instead of wisely managing and growing the state’s water system, the so-called leaders in Sacramento have for decades been not only blocking expansion, but dismantling what was already in existence.

In previous, wiser generations, the state had long-range plans that would have secured plentiful water for its residents. If the plans made in the 1950s would have come to fruition, California would have twice its present storage capacity and at least three times as much stored water as it does today.

But starting in the 1970s, most water development plans were blocked by the state’s environmentalists, usually led by wealthy individuals who already had vast tracts and senior water rights.

In recent years, environmentalists have used the courts, the state Legislature and Congress to redistribute water from people and agriculture and pumped it back into places like the Sacramento River Delta, usually in the name of protecting some sort of fish, such as the Delta Smelt, a 3-inch anchovy that isn’t even native to the area.

“In California,” Fiorina said, “fish and frogs and flies are really important — far more important apparently than the 40 percent unemployment rate in certain parts of central valley. So the Senate and the president could waive some of those water restrictions. They have been asked to do so, and they have refused to do so.”

The state’s arid ecology is well-known, so the lack of action on the part of government adds up to one obvious conclusion: The state’s leaders have deliberately not prepared for the severe drought that was inevitable.

What would that benefit people in charge? Moonbeam has made that answer obvious, as he spent much of the past week talking about fines and penalties. The state of California has a long list of environmental restrictions already, and what better excuse than a “hundred-year drought” (worst ever in all of history!) to tighten the state’s control over individual lives?

“It is a man-made disaster,” Fiorina said of the drought. “California is a classic case of liberals being willing to sacrifice other people’s lives and livelihoods at the altar of their ideology. It is a tragedy.”

Liberal governments thrive on crises to expand their agenda, and the occasion of an extended drought is seen as an opportunity to increase government officials’ power. Read Brown’s own words about the new drought restrictions and try not to hear the drip-drip of saliva pouring from his jowls:

“This executive order is done under emergency power. It has the force of law. Very unusual. It’s requiring action and changes in behavior from the Oregon border all the way to the Mexican border. It affects lawns. It affects people’s — how long they stay in the shower, how businesses use water. … Each water district that actually delivers waters — water to homes and businesses, they carry it out. We have a state water board that oversees the relationships with the districts. Hundreds of them. If they don’t comply, people can be fined $500 a day. Districts can go to court to get a cease and desist order. The enforcement mechanism is powerful. In a drought of this magnitude, you have to change that behavior and you have to change it substantially.”

Or, you can elect a responsible, reasonable, non-fascistic government that will build dams and desalinization plants, and generally prepare the state so that this situation never happens again.

That’s what sane voters would do.

The sheeple who live in California on the other hand? …

Previous Rick Santorum Makes a Point that Makes Liberal Heads Spin
Next California Water Crisis is a Man-Made Disaster

Comment