• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Next Round in Trump vs. California Fight: Water

Joined
Dec 18, 2017
Messages
696
Reaction score
192
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Next Round in Trump vs. California Fight: Water | Breitbart

The next battle between the State of California and the Trump administration — after clashes over the environment, “sanctuary” laws, and the border wall, to name a few — will be over water.
The Trump administration is embracing a proposal to raise the height of the Shasta Dam in Northern California, the Los Angeles Times notes, to provide additional water storage to the thirsty Golden State.
But California’s government is trying to stop the project, thanks largely to the influence of environmental groups that have staunchly opposed the construction or expansion of dams in recent decades. A local Native American tribe, the Winnemem Wintu, also opposes raising the dam.
The dam was first built during the latter years of the Great Depression, and was completed in 1945.


The state’s farming interests are intensely interested in the project. The Westlands Water District, which represents farmers in the relatively dry western portion of the agricultural Central Valley, is hoping that new water from the Shasta Dam will replace water that has been lost to state restrictions and to a federal judicial mandate that flushes water out to sea to protect the endangered San Joaquin Delta smelt.
As the Times notes, a former lobbyist for Westlands, David Bernhardt, is now Deputy Secretary of the Interior. And Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who represents part of the southern Central Valley, is in a position to bring farmers’ concerns to the fore.
Breitbart News reported several years ago that California Republicans were pushing for the Shasta Dam to be raised even under the Obama administration.
In an interview in 2014, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) complained to Breitbart News that the federal and state governments were both opposed to increasing water storage in California. “We are being governed by people who are out of their minds,” he said.
As Breitbart News noted, “McClintock suggested raising the height of the Shasta Dam from the current 600 feet to 800 feet, as originally designed. That, he said, would add nine million acre-feet to its existing storage capacity–double its present volume.”
The dam is located on federal land. But state law prohibits raising it. The federal government is pushing ahead with the project, regardless.
That means the clash will ultimately come down to the Constitution — and the courts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clearly the State of California's leadership is incapable of making rational and logical decisions in the best interest of the states population. Democrats will run the State into the ground, creating water shortages in the next prolonged drought the State lingers on the edge of.

The State has beeen screwing water out of the farmers who rely on the water for irrigation to grow for food for the rest of the nation. So there fore it is actually a nessesity for food security for our nation. The idiots who run the state clearly don't give a damn about not only the residents of the state, but the food they grow for the rest of the nation.

It is high time to give California orders from Washingto D.C. and the Trump administration. I believe in State's rights, but I don't believe for a second the left wing Democrats are capable of doing what is right for the State, or it's residences. L.A. will look ike Detroit in a decade or a bit more. Democrats are incapable of rational logical thought, and what is the right thing to do for thier own state.
 
Last edited:
Next Round in Trump vs. California Fight: Water | Breitbart

The next battle between the State of California and the Trump administration — after clashes over the environment, “sanctuary” laws, and the border wall, to name a few — will be over water.
The Trump administration is embracing a proposal to raise the height of the Shasta Dam in Northern California, the Los Angeles Times notes, to provide additional water storage to the thirsty Golden State.
But California’s government is trying to stop the project, thanks largely to the influence of environmental groups that have staunchly opposed the construction or expansion of dams in recent decades. A local Native American tribe, the Winnemem Wintu, also opposes raising the dam.
The dam was first built during the latter years of the Great Depression, and was completed in 1945.


The state’s farming interests are intensely interested in the project. The Westlands Water District, which represents farmers in the relatively dry western portion of the agricultural Central Valley, is hoping that new water from the Shasta Dam will replace water that has been lost to state restrictions and to a federal judicial mandate that flushes water out to sea to protect the endangered San Joaquin Delta smelt.
As the Times notes, a former lobbyist for Westlands, David Bernhardt, is now Deputy Secretary of the Interior. And Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who represents part of the southern Central Valley, is in a position to bring farmers’ concerns to the fore.
Breitbart News reported several years ago that California Republicans were pushing for the Shasta Dam to be raised even under the Obama administration.
In an interview in 2014, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) complained to Breitbart News that the federal and state governments were both opposed to increasing water storage in California. “We are being governed by people who are out of their minds,” he said.
As Breitbart News noted, “McClintock suggested raising the height of the Shasta Dam from the current 600 feet to 800 feet, as originally designed. That, he said, would add nine million acre-feet to its existing storage capacity–double its present volume.”
The dam is located on federal land. But state law prohibits raising it. The federal government is pushing ahead with the project, regardless.
That means the clash will ultimately come down to the Constitution — and the courts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clearly the State of California's leadership is incapable of making rational and logical decisions in the best interest of the states population. Democrats will run the State into the ground, creating water shortages in the next prolonged drought the State lingers on the edge of.

The State has beeen screwing water out of the farmers who rely on the water for irrigation to grow for food for the rest of the nation. So there fore it is actually a nessesity for food security for our nation. The idiots who run the state clearly don't give a damn about not only the residents of the state, but the food they grow for the rest of the nation.

It is high time to give California orders from Washingto D.C. and the Trump administration. I believe in State's rights, but I don't believe for a second the left wing Democrats are capable of doing what is right for the State, or it's residences. L.A. will look ike Detroit in a decade or a bit more. Democrats are incapable of rational logical thought, and what is the right thing to do for thier own state.

How can you spend that much time putting out a novel for a forum site, people get tiered of reading after a couple paragraphs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
It is high time to give California orders from Washingto D.C. and the Trump administration. I believe in State's rights, but I don't believe for a second the left wing Democrats are capable of doing what is right for the State, or it's residences. L.A. will look ike Detroit in a decade or a bit more. Democrats are incapable of rational logical thought, and what is the right thing to do for thier own state.

Can one really claim to be for "states' rights" while simultaneously stating that should only apply to Republican state governments?

Have you actually even looked into the reasoning of the other side? Do you really think it's just that liberals want people to be thirsty and miserable or can you see past your partisanship and admit there are two sides to every story?

If increasing the federal reservoir meant rerouting a river and destroying an important ecosystem, would you think that's irrelevant in the decision making process?
 
Can one really claim to be for "states' rights" while simultaneously stating that should only apply to Republican state governments?

Have you actually even looked into the reasoning of the other side? Do you really think it's just that liberals want people to be thirsty and miserable or can you see past your partisanship and admit there are two sides to every story?

If increasing the federal reservoir meant rerouting a river and destroying an important ecosystem, would you think that's irrelevant in the decision making process?

And you never address a single point in the article, originally from the LA times. :roll:

Who gives a **** about farmers and food on the left? Nobody because the State is being run by liberal idiots who care more about a tiny fish than the welfare of the States residents. :doh

The left has clearly left their logic and wisdom die on the vine. The left has fought every attempt to increase the water holding capacity in the State for 4 decades. :2wave:

And you say the left cares? Tell me another one.
 
How can you spend that much time putting out a novel for a forum site, people get tiered of reading after a couple paragraphs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Another liberal sticking your head in the sand. :doh Why is it liberals here always deflect, or attack the poster? I think it is because they are caught with their pants down around their ankles. California Agriculture is being harmed intentionally and your excuse is your to bored to read and comprehend? Wow just wow...
 
Another liberal sticking your head in the sand. :doh Why is it liberals here always deflect, or attack the poster? I think it is because they are caught with their pants down around their ankles. California Agriculture is being harmed intentionally and your excuse is your to bored to read and comprehend? Wow just wow...

I’m NOT a liberal, it’s was interesting to read but damn get to the point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I’m NOT a liberal, it’s was interesting to read but damn get to the point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The point is California needs to expand it's water holding capacity. Population growth has never been enough of a consideration to prevent water from becoming an issue, in the minds of the liberal Dems who run the State. Recently it has been a huge issue, but no one in the State's leadership seems to care about people, when they care more about some little fish....

Your cell phone is why this article looks long, it is but a couple of paragraphs...
 
Last edited:
The point is California needs to expand it's water holding capacity. Population growth has never been enough of a consideration to prevent water from becoming an issue, in the minds of the liberal Dems who run the State. Recently it has been a huge issue, but no one in the State's leadership seems to care about people, when they care more about some little fish....

Your cell phone is why this article looks long, it is but a couple of paragraphs...

FYI, people eat fish, so caring about the latter is caring about the former. I know you'd prefer we make no consideration for the environment whatsoever, but most Americans value not ****ing up nature and its ecosystems.
 
FYI, people eat fish, so caring about the latter is caring about the former. I know you'd prefer we make no consideration for the environment whatsoever, but most Americans value not ****ing up nature and its ecosystems.

Prove to me why a small smelt like bait fish no one eats is more ecologically more important than water for Cities, and most of all water for the "salad bowl" of California and food for the nations people?

Your deranged State Government can not. That is why Trump will step in and do it for you...
 
The point is California needs to expand it's water holding capacity. Population growth has never been enough of a consideration to prevent water from becoming an issue, in the minds of the liberal Dems who run the State. Recently it has been a huge issue, but no one in the State's leadership seems to care about people, when they care more about some little fish....

Your cell phone is why this article looks long, it is but a couple of paragraphs...

Don’t forget they protect illegals before Americans too!
Sorry for snapping at you, I got hangover from saint patties day!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Prove to me why a smelt like bait fish is more ecologically more important than water for Cities, and most of all water for the "salad bowl" of California and food for the nations people?

Your deranged State Government can not.

If you can show me "smelt like bait fish being ecologically more important than humans" was the sole or primary reason for the California state government to oppose this, I'll attempt to search for their reasoning and explain it to you.

Something tells me Breitbart of all people might not be accurately or honestly portraying the California government's reasoning and intentions. Perhaps they, and you, have a little bias in you and that's blinding your ability to listen to the other side?
 
If you can show me "smelt like bait fish being ecologically more important than humans" was the sole or primary reason for the California state government to oppose this, I'll attempt to search for their reasoning and explain it to you.

Something tells me Breitbart of all people might not be accurately or honestly portraying the California government's reasoning and intentions. Perhaps they, and you, have a little bias in you and that's blinding your ability to listen to the other side?



The original article is from the LA times. I wish you would actually read and comprehend an entire post.

The bait fish they are claiming to save by letting millions of gallons of water out to sea is a known story you should bone up on before you post.

Your way ahead of the knowledge you need to have, to post meaningfully. Time to bone up a bit.
 
Another liberal sticking your head in the sand. :doh Why is it liberals here always deflect, or attack the poster? I think it is because they are caught with their pants down around their ankles. California Agriculture is being harmed intentionally and your excuse is your to bored to read and comprehend? Wow just wow...

Why is it not up to CA to decide whether or not to harm their own agriculture? Is this dam and reservoir expansion affecting some other state?
 
Why is it not up to CA to decide whether or not to harm their own agriculture? Is this dam and reservoir expansion affecting some other state?

Because it is the NATIONAL interest for the farmers of California to get irrigation water, so they can survive, and help feed the rest of the nation. Farmers water has been diverted to the southern coastal area's of California for urban use for several years now. California agriculture has born the brunt of the water shortages. It has harmed farmers there greatly.

The left wing idiots who ran the State are not affected so they keep on denying there is a problem... In short they only govern for the best interests of a few coastal cities. To small minded to see anything else.
 
Because it is the NATIONAL interest for the farmers of California to get irrigation water, so they can survive, and help feed the rest of the nation. Farmers water has been diverted to the southern coastal area's of California for urban use for several years now. California agriculture has born the brunt of the water shortages. It has harmed farmers there greatly.

The left wing idiots who ran the State are not affected so they keep on denying there is a problem... In short they only govern for the best interests of a few coastal cities. To small minded to see anything else.

Nope, a state has the right to set water use policy within that state.
 
Nope, a state has the right to set water use policy within that state.

Donald Trump and a court of law will decide what will be done. That is the exact point of the thread. Did you bother to actually read the OP? Or then be able to comprehend what it says?
 
If the State would shed itself of the millions of illegals who reside within it's borders it would make a meaningful dent in the States water issues. Of course the liberal establishment will fight that tooth and toe nail.. Gotta protect all those voters that are housed in the sanctuary cities in the State.

Oh yea I guess that brings up the cutting of federal funds from those cities by Trump. ;)

Trump is living up to his promises. I for one am glad of it.
 
Donald Trump and a court of law will decide what will be done. That is the exact point of the thread. Did you bother to actually read the OP? Or then be able to comprehend what it says?

My point stands, just because more water is behind a taller dam (if the feds prevail in court) that does not mean CA has to use that water differently. CA has more of a housing shortage problem than a crop shortage problem.
 
Next Round in Trump vs. California Fight: Water | Breitbart

The next battle between the State of California and the Trump administration — after clashes over the environment, “sanctuary” laws, and the border wall, to name a few — will be over water.
The Trump administration is embracing a proposal to raise the height of the Shasta Dam in Northern California, the Los Angeles Times notes, to provide additional water storage to the thirsty Golden State.
But California’s government is trying to stop the project, thanks largely to the influence of environmental groups that have staunchly opposed the construction or expansion of dams in recent decades. A local Native American tribe, the Winnemem Wintu, also opposes raising the dam.
The dam was first built during the latter years of the Great Depression, and was completed in 1945.


The state’s farming interests are intensely interested in the project. The Westlands Water District, which represents farmers in the relatively dry western portion of the agricultural Central Valley, is hoping that new water from the Shasta Dam will replace water that has been lost to state restrictions and to a federal judicial mandate that flushes water out to sea to protect the endangered San Joaquin Delta smelt.
As the Times notes, a former lobbyist for Westlands, David Bernhardt, is now Deputy Secretary of the Interior. And Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who represents part of the southern Central Valley, is in a position to bring farmers’ concerns to the fore.
Breitbart News reported several years ago that California Republicans were pushing for the Shasta Dam to be raised even under the Obama administration.
In an interview in 2014, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) complained to Breitbart News that the federal and state governments were both opposed to increasing water storage in California. “We are being governed by people who are out of their minds,” he said.
As Breitbart News noted, “McClintock suggested raising the height of the Shasta Dam from the current 600 feet to 800 feet, as originally designed. That, he said, would add nine million acre-feet to its existing storage capacity–double its present volume.”
The dam is located on federal land. But state law prohibits raising it. The federal government is pushing ahead with the project, regardless.
That means the clash will ultimately come down to the Constitution — and the courts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clearly the State of California's leadership is incapable of making rational and logical decisions in the best interest of the states population. Democrats will run the State into the ground, creating water shortages in the next prolonged drought the State lingers on the edge of.

The State has beeen screwing water out of the farmers who rely on the water for irrigation to grow for food for the rest of the nation. So there fore it is actually a nessesity for food security for our nation. The idiots who run the state clearly don't give a damn about not only the residents of the state, but the food they grow for the rest of the nation.

It is high time to give California orders from Washingto D.C. and the Trump administration. I believe in State's rights, but I don't believe for a second the left wing Democrats are capable of doing what is right for the State, or it's residences. L.A. will look ike Detroit in a decade or a bit more. Democrats are incapable of rational logical thought, and what is the right thing to do for thier own state.

California's water battle also exists within the farming community. Old farms in the northern Delta are opposed to schemes to ship water south, i.e., the west side farms. Drive south along I-5 on the west side and you see signs deploring the lack of water sent to west side farms from the north. Not surprisingly, when Trump visited while campaigning, he said "there is no drought," though in his defense the heavens opened in the weeks that followed.

Years ago I worked with the farmworkers union. The growers I chatted with in the 70s said that the west side was the next big thing. True, but big ag decided to plant trees and vines rather than row crops. The former, of course, require water year round. So the state is asked to send subsidized water to bail out growers that acted foolishly.

This battle has been going on with the same irrationalities for generations. (See "Chinatown" for a tutorial.) There probably is no logical rationale for a city the size of Los Angeles to be there, or at least for its San Fernando Valley part. And, of course, both parties are to blame for the madness, as much of it occurred when the GOP was in charge.
 
Thank you for adding relevant points to this thread by sharing actual experience.. :)

Please add more of your experience if you will. I am not surprised that Ag is divided. We see that here with huge livestock operations vrs. row crop Agriculture..
 
The Delta Smelt is on the brink of extinction but places like the UC Davis-run hatchery are raising them in captivity. About 10% of our water supply is diverted to the Delta, but even that is not enough to stop the Delta’s warm, brackish and polluted water from being too inhospitable.

So do we send more water to the Delta? In 2014 half of our cropland went fallow when none of the water allocated under long-term contracts was delivered. So what happens if California can no longer produce in the amounts it normally has? No matter were you live in the USA you will know it.

California produces almost half of all the fruits, nuts and vegetables grown in the country. We lead the nation growing virtually all of the almonds, artichokes, dates, figs, raisins, kiwifruit, olives, clingstone peaches, pistachios, prunes, pomegranates, sweet rice and walnuts - 99 percent of walnuts, 97 percent of kiwis, 97 percent of plums, 95 percent of celery, 95 percent of garlic, 89 percent of cauliflower, 71 percent of spinach, and 69 percent of carrots and the list goes on for over 66 different crops.

We need water, restricting water usage is a band-aid not an answer, if we suffer so will the nations food supply. One thing I have often wondered about is if we can pipe oil from Alaska why can't we bring water from there or places like Canada. Just a thought of mine.
 
Thank you for adding relevant points to this thread by sharing actual experience.. :)

Please add more of your experience if you will. I am not surprised that Ag is divided. We see that here with huge livestock operations vrs. row crop Agriculture..

The only other strange thing I can think of right away was the curious attitude of some of the growers: they considered themselves champions of the free market, for example, but made do with subsidized water, set wages for everyone to pay, with warnings to report anyone paying more, imported cheap labor through the bracero system, (set up to deal with labor shortages in WWII but lasting til 1964, I believe--first successful strike was in 1965) didn't have normal overtime provisions (work week was 54 hours), no unemployment insurance, delayed worker's comp for years, could use the back-breaking short-handled hoe in Calif and Arizona only, saying one couldn't farm successfully without it til it was banned and they could, gave me grief for sending them black workers, and with a straight face supported a farm labor law that would have banned strikes for 60 days, longer than almost all harvests. And farmworkers were exempt from the National Labor Relations Board. In fairness, some of the growers were genuinely concerned about their workers welfare. But my fave story concerned one grower: the union contract required the growers to provide cool drinking water, so they decided to charge each worker 50 cents per day for ice. If a crew was say, 40-50 workers, imagine how much ice that could buy in 1970.
 
Last edited:
Can one really claim to be for "states' rights" while simultaneously stating that should only apply to Republican state governments?

Have you actually even looked into the reasoning of the other side? Do you really think it's just that liberals want people to be thirsty and miserable or can you see past your partisanship and admit there are two sides to every story?

If increasing the federal reservoir meant rerouting a river and destroying an important ecosystem, would you think that's irrelevant in the decision making process?
What is not a 'states right' issue about this? Do you think improved water capabilities for the state of California affects DC?

Its ****ing comical the number of people that would literally smash themselves in the face if Trump or conservatives said, hey, man...dont smash yourself in the face...thats bad for you.
 
FYI, people eat fish, so caring about the latter is caring about the former. I know you'd prefer we make no consideration for the environment whatsoever, but most Americans value not ****ing up nature and its ecosystems.

I have to agree with you on this one. I wonder if we could plant crops that require less water and make a compromise. There are other parts of the country that receive enough rainfall to grow crops that require more water. Most of these areas no longer grow crops because they were unable to compete with the slave labor exploited by the California farming industry. Maybe we can protect the environment and stop exploiting illegals at the same time. A win win situation.
 
Next Round in Trump vs. California Fight: Water | Breitbart

The next battle between the State of California and the Trump administration — after clashes over the environment, “sanctuary” laws, and the border wall, to name a few — will be over water.
The Trump administration is embracing a proposal to raise the height of the Shasta Dam in Northern California, the Los Angeles Times notes, to provide additional water storage to the thirsty Golden State.
But California’s government is trying to stop the project, thanks largely to the influence of environmental groups that have staunchly opposed the construction or expansion of dams in recent decades. A local Native American tribe, the Winnemem Wintu, also opposes raising the dam.
The dam was first built during the latter years of the Great Depression, and was completed in 1945.


The state’s farming interests are intensely interested in the project. The Westlands Water District, which represents farmers in the relatively dry western portion of the agricultural Central Valley, is hoping that new water from the Shasta Dam will replace water that has been lost to state restrictions and to a federal judicial mandate that flushes water out to sea to protect the endangered San Joaquin Delta smelt.
As the Times notes, a former lobbyist for Westlands, David Bernhardt, is now Deputy Secretary of the Interior. And Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who represents part of the southern Central Valley, is in a position to bring farmers’ concerns to the fore.
Breitbart News reported several years ago that California Republicans were pushing for the Shasta Dam to be raised even under the Obama administration.
In an interview in 2014, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) complained to Breitbart News that the federal and state governments were both opposed to increasing water storage in California. “We are being governed by people who are out of their minds,” he said.
As Breitbart News noted, “McClintock suggested raising the height of the Shasta Dam from the current 600 feet to 800 feet, as originally designed. That, he said, would add nine million acre-feet to its existing storage capacity–double its present volume.”
The dam is located on federal land. But state law prohibits raising it. The federal government is pushing ahead with the project, regardless.
That means the clash will ultimately come down to the Constitution — and the courts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clearly the State of California's leadership is incapable of making rational and logical decisions in the best interest of the states population. Democrats will run the State into the ground, creating water shortages in the next prolonged drought the State lingers on the edge of.

The State has beeen screwing water out of the farmers who rely on the water for irrigation to grow for food for the rest of the nation. So there fore it is actually a nessesity for food security for our nation. The idiots who run the state clearly don't give a damn about not only the residents of the state, but the food they grow for the rest of the nation.

It is high time to give California orders from Washingto D.C. and the Trump administration. I believe in State's rights, but I don't believe for a second the left wing Democrats are capable of doing what is right for the State, or it's residences. L.A. will look ike Detroit in a decade or a bit more. Democrats are incapable of rational logical thought, and what is the right thing to do for thier own state.
You don't sound like you understand state rights or federalism, much less support them. And it seems neither does Breitbart.

Unless impinging upon the citizens Constitutional Rights, it's really not any business of the federal government's business what Californians decide for themselves, is it? Your advocating for authoritarian centralized top-down government control, and that's not what our founders or Constitution provide for.
 
Back
Top Bottom