While California Dreams: A weekly update on the goings-on in Sacramento

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

Key bills and issues we’ve been following during the past week and beyond

By Jackie Goldberg
Teacher
Former Member of the California Assembly

Well, the traveling legislators are back at work in Sacramento, but the Governor went to China when they returned.

“Dam, dam, dam” insists the GOP in ultimatums to the Dems. on the Water Bond—tough stance threatens to derail a water bond for February.

“Nyet, no, nunca, never” are the GOP responses to both the Governor’s and the Dem. leadership Health Plan legislation—tough stance threatens to derail any progress in Special Session on Healthcare reform.

Water

While Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland) says he may put a water bond package to a vote on the Senate floor as early as next Tuesday, E. J. Schultz of the Sacramento Bee reports that hope may be “fading” for a water bond on the Feb. 5 ballot. According the his article, Assembly Member John Laird, (D-Santa Cruz) said, “We probably have one chance to put something on the ballot and have it pass. We shouldn’t feel pressure to do something by a deadline.” The pessimism seems to stem from the GOP state legislators who insist they will block a ballot measure if it does not have $ 5.1 billion for dams in central and northern California. For more on this please click here.

H-m-m does this “cowboy”, get tough, GOP stance sound familiar? It does to those who followed the impasse on the state budget this summer in the Senate.

The Sierra Club is opposed to building any new dams in California, regardless who pays for them. They argue that the best and most cost effective dam sites have already been used. And they add that dams produce “much less water at a higher cost than more environmentally beneficial alternatives such as urban water use efficiency and recycling.” For more on why dams are not a good idea, click here for Jim Metropulos’s excellent article. As for the Fresno Bee, they too have an analysis of the issue of dams, with a somewhat different point of view. To see this please click here.

Others commenting on the water issues point out that neither the Governor’s bond or Perata’s bond would pay for the construction of a peripheral canal. No one wants to discuss the politically dangerous topic of moving water from north to south. Speaking for the southern part of the state, the L.A. Times editorial of October 1st gives the Governor high marks for tackling the water issues. But, they are quick to add that the Governor’s “solution isn’t complete.” The Times want the Governor and “his opponents ...[to] begin talking about a peripheral canal’s benefits and pitfalls, in straightforward terms that Californians can comprehend.” To see more on this, please click here.