UFW President Slams California Water Bonds

UFW President Slams California Water Bond 

by Dan Bacher 

Arturo Rodriguez, president of the United Farmworkers Union (UFW), today blasted the $11.1 billion water bond on the November ballot in an op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle. 

"The water bond that was recently approved by our lawmakers will give agricultural companies billions more in subsidized water," said Rodiguez. "The state treasurer has asked the right question: Why aren't these giant ag industry operators paying for their water like everyone else?" 

Rodriguez's eloquent slam against the water bond rammed through the California Legislature by Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger completely negates the argument of corporate agribusiness "Astroturf" groups, such as the Latino Water Coalition, that the battle against the water bond and the peripheral canal is a conflict of "fish versus people" or "fish versus jobs." 

In reality, the campaign to restore the Delta, stop the peripheral canal and defeat the water bond is a conflict between the vast majority of people - including farmworkers, fishermen, Delta family farmers, California Indian Tribes and environmentalists - and greedy agribusiness corporations that don't care about the health and safety of their workers or the thousands of workers and fishermen unemployed because of the Central Valley salmon collapse. 

"The $800 million per year in annual bond payments required under the new water bond is more than California spends on health care for farmworkers and their children, more than the entire worker-safety budget, more than on farmworker housing, more than on pesticide regulations and food safety. In fact, it's more than all those things added together," noted Rodriguez. 

Why is the UFW opposing the bond? "We don't believe that the giant agriculture corporations should get more subsidized water until farmworkers get the right to protect themselves, including the right to clean and fresh drinking water," explained Rodriguez. 

"We see a clear and ironic link between a state government unwilling to enforce its own laws protecting farmworkers, a governor vetoing legislation to allow farmworkers to protect themselves, and a Legislature that bemoans budget cuts while giving the agriculture industry water subsidies at a cost of $800 million every year," said Rodriguez. 

Last year SEIU and the Teamsters Union put $1 million into a UFW "war chest" to fight Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's water bond. The groups fighting the peripheral canal and water bond were eagerly awaiting an official announcement by UFW against the water bond - and that announcement took place today. 

In the New York Times on April 17, 2009, Rodriguez condemned the Latino Water Coalition's "March for Water" for being a "farmer march orchestrated and financed by growers.” 

The UFW joins a growing group of conservation, fishing, environmental, tribal and family farming groups opposed to the water bond's bailout to corporate agribusiness. Everybody who cares about the future of California fisheries and Delta farms and the thousands of jobs that depend on them must applaud Rodriguez for speaking out against the budget-busting water bond! 

To read the article, go to: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/02/22/ED7U1BUUH3.DTL. 

Water deal requires a passage of bonds

A major water bill has been passed by the California  Legislature, led by local leader Darrell Steinberg.  It includes a 10.1 Billion water bond. We will vote on this bond proposal  in 2010.

Bonds are sold, and then  they must be repaid.  That is, in a future year, we will be paying billion for the bonds, plus interest.  This will repayment of debt will  come out of the budget before we pay for schools, health care, etc.

This water bill and the bond issue were crafted by Governor Schwarzenegger,  Senator Darrell Steinberg, and Speaker Karen Bass.

I see that major Republicans helped to pass this water bill; Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee and  Senator Denis Hollingsworth.  And, I recall that they voted against adequately funding the schools in the budget votes.  

So, I will vote against their  water bonds.

Now, Democrats too voted for this bill - including Steinberg.

They currently  have a 13 % approval rating by the public.

Although I voted for Steinberg,  he has not managed to lead during this state’s fiscal crisis.  Or, more precisely, he has tried to lead but failed to get the necessary votes of the governor and the Republicans.

  Well, we can play this game too.

Perhaps we should start a campaign;  If they will not support  quality education for the children, we  will not vote for their subsidized water.

No money for schools- no money for water bonds.

Schwarzenegger signs Delta Death Warrant

Schwarzenegger Signs The Delta's Death Warrant 

by Dan Bacher

After an all night session, the California Legislature on November 4 passed a water package including an $11.1 billion bond that provides a clear path to the construction of the peripheral canal and more dams. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger then signed the bills that he described as "an historic legislative package to reform and rebuild California's water system" during a series of press conferences and highly choreographed photo opportunities over the past week. 

While Schwarzenegger and Darrell Steinberg lauded the package for being an “historic compromise,” Delta legislators, fishermen and Indian Tribes slammed the legislation for leading to the destruction of the Delta, its farms and its fish. 

"Water is the lifeblood of everything we do in California," said Schwarzenegger. "Without clean, reliable water, we cannot build, we cannot farm, we cannot grow and we cannot prosper. That is why I am so proud that the legislature, Democrats and Republicans, came together and tackled one of the most complicated issues in our state's history. This comprehensive water package is an historic achievement." 

Schwarzenegger praised the efforts of his Democratic collaborator, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, to push the water policy and bond package through the legislature. "He has been a tireless leader, a relentless advocate for the environment and a true statesman,” said Steinberg. 

Steinberg claimed the legislation enacts “landmark improvements to the environment and investments in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta – the heart of California’s water supply system – to ensure the restoration of the Delta’s fragile ecosystem while enhancing water reliability for all Californians.” 

“Over the last several decades, numerous efforts to comprehensively address the state’s water problems have consistently failed,” Steinberg gushed. “But the Senate this week rose to the occasion, overcoming enormous regional, philosophical, and political obstacles to forge an historic, bipartisan compromise.” 

On October 11, Schwarzenegger issued a proclamation calling for the legislature to meet in an extraordinary session to address California's water crisis, in effect strong arming the legislature to pass the water package that he wanted. 

While the Legislature approved the water policy and bond measures, they killed a bill by Assemblywoman Alsyon Huber that would prohibit the construction of a peripheral canal around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta without a full fiscal analysis and a vote of the state legislature. 

“I offered up a simple bill, a common sense approach,” Huber stated. “Unfortunately, my bill was killed without a hearing.” She vowed that she will resubmit this bill so it will have a full debate. 

“I opposed the water package because it creates a new layer of bureaucrats who will make decisions on water that will impact the communities I represent, without allowing us to have a voice, “ she emphasized. “I opposed the bond, especially because of the billions in pork for LA. This dead of night pork giveaway is exactly why voters give us low marks.” 

Water and Water Bonds

The Sacramento Bee Forum has two major pieces on the Schwarzenegger proposed Water Bonds.
Several of the key Republicans supporting this approach voted to block passing of the budget this year.
They used their minority votes to block the passage until they got the budget they wanted. - No new taxes_.  This led to $6.1 B cut in public school funds and devastating cuts in higher education.
In return, I will vote against their water bonds.
The state can not afford to borrow money by selling bonds.  Bonds become due. Existing bonds will soon use 10% of the state's revenue. ( More than high education).  More bonds lead directing to more cuts in health, education, and public safety.

Water bonds and school funding

A major water bill has been passed by the California  Legislature, led by local leader Darrell Steinberg.  It includes a 10.1 Billion water bond. We will vote on this bond proposal  in 2010.

Bonds are sold, and then  they must be repaid.  That is, in a future year, we will be paying billion for the bonds, plus interest.

This will come out of the budget before we pay for schools, health care, etc.

I see that major Republicans voted for this Water Bill. And, I recall that they voted against adequately funding the schools. So, I will vote against the water bonds.

Now, Democrats too voted for this bill - including Steinberg.

Well- they have a 13 % approval rating by the public.

That is about right. I don't find their opinion very convincing.

Perhaps we should start a campaign;

If they will not support  quality education for the children, I will not vote for their subsidized water.

No money for schools- no money for water bonds.

What do others think ? Is this  viable position?