The Subcommittee on Water and Power held an oversight hearing last week in Washington to examine the FY 2012 budget request for the Bureau of Reclamation. Subcommittee Chairman Tom McClintock made the following opening statement at the hearing:

With today’s hearing, the Water and Power Sub-Committee will begin the process of restoring abundance as the principal objective of America’s Federal water and power policy. We meet today to receive testimony from the Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Geological Service on their plans for the coming year. We do so in conjunction with our responsibility under the Federal Budget Act to provide guidance to the House Budget Committee as it prepares the 2012 budget and with our responsibility under House Resolution 72 to identify regulations and practices of the government that are impeding job creation and burdening economic growth.

In my opinion, all of these hearings and all of the actions stemming from them must be focused on developing the vast water and hydro-electric resources in our nation. The failure of the last generation to keep pace with our water and power needs has caused chronic water shortages and skyrocketing electricity prices that are causing serious economic harm.

In addition, willful policies that have deliberately misallocated our resources must be reversed.

California’s Central Valley, where 200 billion gallons of water were deliberately diverted away from vital agriculture for the enjoyment and amusement of the 2-inch Delta Smelt is a case in point. These water diversions have destroyed a quarter million acres of the most fertile farmland in America, thrown tens of thousands of farm families into unemployment and impacted fruit, vegetable and nut prices in grocery stores across America.

In Northern Arizona, 1,000 megawatts of hydroelectricity – enough to power a million homes – has been lost due to environmental mandates for the humpback chub.

In the Klamath, the federal government is seeking to destroy four perfectly good hydroelectric dams at the cost of more than a half billion dollars at a time when we can’t guarantee enough electricity to keep refrigerators running this summer. The rationale is to save the salmon, but the same proposal would close the Iron Gate Fish Hatchery that produces 5 million salmon smolt each year.

(more…)

Recently, I wrote an article stating that our national political discussion has moved beyond philosophy.  Many voters think that government has lost any semblance of common sense when it comes to spending.  Economically, the discussion lacks common sense as well and there is no place where that is more evident than California.  So much so that, in my view, the election of Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer – along with Barack Obama – will lead to unemployment north of 16%.

Now, the prediction business is, of course, fraught with danger – but not looking ahead is a worse crime in my view.  Two years ago, I said that the economy would be bad for 6 years if Obama was elected.  I said that because the markets understood then and know now that a big government agenda was not the cure that was needed.  They intimately understood what Ayn Rand said years ago that “the cure that is always offered . . . is more of the same poisons that caused the disasters.”  Sure enough, the same poisons have been tried for the last two years and the consensus among the fair minded is that the US economy will be bad for years to come.

One overlooked reason for the national trouble ahead is what government has done to the California economy. The California economy has been crippled because its #1 industry, agriculture, has been crippled by environmental policies that have placed the fate of an imported bait fish over the needs of farmers, employees and families.  By shutting off the water supply to farmers, government is strangling Central Valley farming which is why locals state that “Water = Jobs.”   But the effect hardly stops there.  California is over 16% of the national economy.  So the real equation is “Water = Farming = Jobs = the California Economy ≈ National Economy.”  Put another way, you cannot cripple the California economy and expect the National economy to recover.  All combined, Jerry Brown, Barbara Boxer, the Democrat controlled Congress and Barack Obama will only makes things worse.

(more…)

California is facing nearly The Toughest of Times.  We face historically high unemployment, perennial budget crises and more.  Don’t think it could get any worse?  Think again.  If Jerry Brown is elected, in one short stroke, he could deal a potentially crippling blow to the California economy before it gets a chance to get back on its feet.

Even for a committed political observer, volunteer and commentator such as myself, it seems implausible – but true – that the stakes for elections grow with each successive election.  For California, the 2010 gubernatorial election unquestionably could be the most important election ever – and not necessarily for a good reason.  If Jerry Brown is elected, he and his fellow Democrats could deliver a devastating blow to California.

We well know that California’s unemployment rate is above 12%.  We also know that well over 100,000 people are leaving California on a yearly basis.  Beyond that, California faces an exodus of businesses – large and small alike.  So it can be no surprise that state revenues have declined nearly $40 billion over the last three years as a result of the declining taxpayer base.

We also well know why California is having a tougher time than many other states.  In recent years, California is consistently ranked near the bottom of states in which to do business.  According to Joseph Vranich, president of JV Executive Consulting Inc. in Irvine:  “It’s no mystery what causes companies to leave California: High taxes, undue regulation, workers’ comp costs, a legal environment stacked against businesses and lengthy and costly construction permitting requirements.”  Indeed, California finished tied for last in the Country in Forbes’ Overall Tax Burden survey measuring tax burdens and structure.

(more…)

In the category of least surprising, and therefore most anti-climatic, decisions of all time, Jerry Brown announced that he is running for Governor of California. He did so through an Internet video. Certainly I realize how fashionable the Internet is for candidates – but Brown’s choice of venue to announce his campaign was probably less hip than hiding – much like his virtual absence from the campaign trail the last few months.

Quite frankly, the former media-hound Brown has been hiding because he has nothing relevant to say. Indeed, the most important issues of the day all run counter to Jerry Brown’s current policies. Let me count the ways . . .

1. The Budget/Taxes.  In this perennial saga, California has yet another $20 billion+ budget deficit. The Democrats and their Union patrons want more spending and higher tax rates. The Republicans, including their statewide candidates and Brown’s Republican opponents, want less spending and lower tax rates. The California voters, according to the Field Poll (never known to lean to the Right), want lower spending not higher taxes. What’s the current version of Jerry Brown to say under those circumstances? Other than saying he will leave it up to the voters to raise taxes (the so-called leader is asking to be led), he has remarkably little to say – and that is one reason he avoids the press and limelight so assiduously – including campaign announcements devoid of those annoying press questions like – would you veto a Democrat sponsored tax increase bill?

2. Jobs. Nevada is the Nation’s #1 business development State. California is either last or second to last when it comes to being employer friendly because of high tax rates and the nation’s most onerous regulatory burden. See the correlation anyone? California, like the nation, faces a simple choice: government jobs or private sector jobs. Government jobs cost money California does not have. Private sector jobs require tax relief and lower regulations. Brown can’t advocate more spending very well and he can’t seriously claim he will go against the unions and the Democrats in the legislature when it comes to taxes and regulations. So what’s the current version of Jerry Brown to say under those circumstances? Remarkably little.

(more…)

Ten minutes prior to the start of a December 15^th, 2009 board meeting of the Riverside Community College District in California, board members are handed a 52-page document filled with millions of dollars in projects to be funded by the district’s taxpayers, who themselves are struggling under the state’s 12.4% unemployment rate.  The document, a draft Project Labor Agreement (PLA), will commit long-term construction and ancillary projects for the next several years to labor unions.

At least twenty-three members of the public, many of them local private business owners who oppose the PLA, have attended to publicly comment on the proposal.  Two of the board members have never even seen the PLA prior to today, and have asked for a special session to review it.  Despite opposition from the public, and the concern voiced by those two board members, the remaining three board members have moved that the Board of Trustees authorize Chancellor Greg Gray to negotiate the final PLA with the Riverside and San Bernardino Building and Construction Trade Councils. Board Trustees Virginia Blumenthal and Janet Green dissented.

So, without adequate time for all to review the draft, without any backup analysis provided to justify the use of up to $350,000,000 in Measure C taxpayer funds, without giving the public reasonable time to voice their opinions, and with an unemployment rate of over 12% when non-union workers are in even greater need of jobs than union workers…why would three of Riverside’s five board members vote to move forward with a final negotiation anyway? Why the rush? Residents and business owners in Riverside are wondering the same thing, and hope to have the chance to weigh in before the PLA’s final draft is signed.

(more…)

California has long been the land of fruits and nuts – and now runaway federal courts.

Of course, a long time ago, in a place far, far away, the legislatures of individual States of these United States, had a far greater say in the lives of their citizens.  Indeed, for the first 150 years of our existence, the federal government – the Congress and the Courts – had little to say or do in the lives of Americans – the Civil War excluded.

With the advent of the Democrats’ Big Government New Deal, of course, all of that changed.  The Roosevelt Democrats increased the federal budget tenfold – but not without the considerable help of a very activist Supreme Court.  Recall that Roosevelt threatened to pack the Supreme Court which then proceeded through resignations and reinterpretations to redefine our Constitution.  The result was a Big Government takeover the like of which the Supreme Court originally struck down during Roosevelt’s first term.

It also was the dawning of the age of the activist courts which threatens our Liberties to this very day.  Thomas Jefferson, of course, warned us of this possibility.  According to Jefferson:

The great object of my fear is the federal judiciary.  That body, like Gravity, ever acting, with noiseless foot, & unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step, and holding what it gains, is ingulphing insidiuously the special governments [i.e, the states] into the jaws of that which feeds them.

(more…)