By Wayne Lusvardi

Almost out of nowhere, the Obama Administration has opened up discussions for possibly privatizing the model asset of the New Deal, the Tennessee Valley Authority, to bring in revenues to the federal government and reduce the long-term national debt.  Part of President Obama’s strategy is to divest and decommission 59 coal-fired power plants in Tennessee, Alabama and Kentucky and replace them with green power.

The TVA is a massive rural redevelopment project of 46 dams and hydropower stations, 59 coal fired power plant units, 14 natural gas fired power plants, five nuclear power plants and navigation channels sprawling over Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, North Carolina and Kentucky. The TVA reports an $11.6 billion annual budget for 2013 but a projected net loss of $183 million.

Would Obama privatize the Central Valley Project too? 

The question for California quickly becomes: Could Obama also propose to privatize the Central Valley Project that delivers water to farmers in California’s San Joaquin Valley?

The federal Central Valley Project is not the same as the State Water Project, which was built five decades ago through state bonds.

To give an idea of the magnitude of the CVP, it delivers about 6 million acre-feet of irrigation water to about 3 million acres of farmland in the central San Joaquin Valley.  By comparison, the State Water Project supplies only about 1 million acre-feet of water to farmers.

In the 1930s Great Depression era, the federal government built the Central Valley Project when California was broke.  The federal government had to take over the state water plan to stimulate the agricultural economy and bail out California.  Also, by building a separate water system for farmers that was not under state control, the long-term water disputes between farms and cities were lessened.  The CVP carries water to the Sacramento Delta, which is pending a major re-engineering called the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. 

Unlike the TVA, the CVP does not have coal-fired power plants that the Obama Administration wants decommissioned and replaced with green power purportedly to reduce air pollution.  Tennessee air quality is graded as spotty patches of “C,” “D,” and “F.”  California air quality is graded as “F” for most of the Central Valley.

Central Valley Project has only 1/15th the Budget of the TVA

The CVP is not as large as the TVA.  It has 20 dams and reservoirs, 11 hydropower plants, and 500 miles of major canals.  It has a $174.1 million annual budget.   The entire budget for the Central Valley Project is less than the operating deficit for the TVA.

The CVP’s congressional budget appropriation is offset by $39.6 million in fees collected from farmers to fund the San Joaquin River Restoration Project ($1 billion unfunded by Congress, but temporarily funded with $9 million in discretionary funds) and the Indian Water Rights Settlement Account ($26.7 million).

Recovery from farmers of the original capital outlay to build the CVP is projected to fall short by $330 to $390 million by the payoff date of 2031.  Auditors have warned that “the repayment shortfalls could become significant enough to require political intervention.”

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the proposed San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act, H.R. 1837, would have accelerated farmers’ repayments by $221 million.  Republican Reps. David Nunes (R-Tulare), Tom McClintock (R-Elk Grove), and Jeff Denham (R-Merced) authored and supported H.R. 1837.   H.R. 1837 is sitting in the U.S. Senate without any action taken by California’s two Democratic senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.  Feinstein and Boxer oppose H.R. 1837 because it would de-fund the San Joaquin River Restoration Act, a $1 billion jobs program to re-wet the dry portions of the San Joaquin River to restore salmon runs.

H.R. 1837 is best chance at reforming Central Valley Project

It would be much more difficult to privatize wholesale water storage and delivery systems compared to retail water companies. The California Public Utilities Commission regulates private retail water companies, but not wholesale government water agencies. In 2001, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California pulled back from buying outsourced water from a private supplier, fearing complications to its water rate structure from the deregulation of its monopoly.

It is unlikely the CVP would be privatized for many reasons.  One big reason is that it does not have so-called “dirty” coal-fired power plants that are a target for elimination by the Obama Administration.

H.R. 1837 would have eliminated the Central Valley Project from being a jobs program and vehicle for politicized reparations.  By contrast, Feinstein’s “Bandit River” restoration project would likely:

* Take away more private sector jobs than gained.
* Require more expenditures to enlarge levees.
* Take away water from farmers without any plan to “restore” it with new supplies.
* Result in high salt content in water and seepage to farmlands.

The Obama-Feinstein-Boxer plan for managing the Central Valley Project has been to regulate first, think later.  Stated differently: the policy of the federal government has been to create jobs programs first and only later deal with the consequences to farmers and farmlands.  This is what I explained in my earlier article, “Salmon eating farmers along the the San Joaquin River.”

Alas, the Central Valley Project is not going to be privatized anytime soon. But it could be reformed so that restoring fish to the river doesn’t end up destroying farm jobs.

By Katy Grimes

SACRAMENTO — The 11th Commandment, according to the gospel of former President Ronald Reagan, is an unwritten rule in the Republican Party discouraging public attacks on other Republicans, particularly GOP candidates. “Thou shalt not speak ill of any Republican,” is not intended to discourage debate over ideology, philosophy or policy, but to prevent GOP candidates from launching into personal attacks on each other.

For the most part, the California Republican Party convention held last weekend in Sacramento may have started with an attack on one party candidate, but continued and ended on an upbeat, positive note.

A rousing convention — for CA Republicans

By the last day of the three-day convention, most of the women attendees — except the under-30 crowd — were worn out and had kicked off the killer high heels and slipped into sensible flat shoes. Jeans and Sperry’s replaced the men’s dark blue suits. But even on Sunday, after all-day working sessions and late-night parties and receptions, the 1,300 attendees were still enthusiastic and working hard.

The election of new party Chairman Jim Brulte ushered in a new, distinctive feeling of cohesiveness missing in the party for several years, along with a sense of a new era of leadership.

Brulte’s overwhelming election on Sunday, to loud cheers and visible relief, is a message to the state. Brulte isn’t just any CRP Chairman — he’s a former Assembly and Senate leader, and a well known down-to-business butt-kicker.

The state Republican Party has not only suffered devastating losses in recent years. There has been a glaring lack of cohesiveness, spotty communication, dismal voter registration and lackluster outreach and inclusiveness.

Who is Brulte?

A former assemblyman and state senator, Jim Brulte served 14 years in the California Legislature. He was in the Assembly from 1990-1996, and the Senate 1996-2004, term-limited out both times.

After the Republican Party election Sunday, Brulte promised to step up communications, make sincere connections with California voters and make the party more competitive in upcoming elections.

Brulte has a daunting job ahead.

“The Democrats are borrowing 46 cents of every dollar,” Brulte said. “This has to stop. We Republicans have to get outside of our comfort zone and deliver our message of individual liberty and responsibility.”

Nasty infighting

While there was plenty of support for Brulte and a new and much-needed cohesiveness, there were also problems in paradise.

The good news was San Francisco County Republican Party Chairwoman Harmeet Dhillon was elected as the CRP Vice-Chairwoman — the first woman in the history of the California Republican Party to be elected to the office. But the bad news was her ascension was not without nasty party infighting.

Dhillon, a San Francisco attorney, was widely supported by many California Republican leaders for the vice-chairman’s seat. However, she was recently viciously slurred, and called a “Taj Mahal princess” and Muslim terrorist sympathizer — by a Republican.

“Vera Eyzendooren, the president of the San Bernardino County Federation of Republican Women— an official party group — slammed Dhillon in a recent Facebook post, which included a photo of an Islamic terrorist who beheaded two people,” Carla Marinucci of the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

“I was told by one of Harmeet’s friends that because of her religion, her loyalty is to the Muslim religion,” Eyzendooren wrote on Facebook. “So she will defend a Muslim beheading two men without any hesitation……she is not a Republican.”

Dhillon, a devout Sikh, immigrated from India when she was a child.

Fortunately, Eyzendooren’s outrageous and ignorant comments were vehemently denounced earlier in the week and again during the convention by Republican leaders. “Blatant racism has no place in the party of Lincoln,” said a joint statement from outgoing California GOP Chair Tom Del Beccaro, Senate Minority Leader Bob Huff and Assembly Minority leader Connie Conway. “We strongly denounce this hateful speech in this and any other venue.”

Brulte denounced the slur as well.

This is a teaching moment and an important opportunity for Brulte to put an end to the flame-throwing, ignorant, power-seeking faction of the state’s Republican Party. Far too often, this faction seeks opportunities for power, although most of them tend to be moderate crony capitalists. The infighting and vicious attacks have been a problem for many years, but have escalated in recent years through vociferous bloggers and local Republican groups. Perhaps under Brulte’s leadership this divisive faction will be exposed and marginalized.

Looking ahead

“We have to stop talking to each other,” Brulte said. “If we are going to be successful at winning elections, we have to get out of our comfort zone and stop only talking to the choir and going and talking to the people who don’t necessarily share our views, because if we share not only our head, but we share our heart, we will make converts.”

“Twenty-nine percent of California is Republican,” Brulte told delegates after his election. “But 100 percent of 29 percent does not get us to 51 percent.”

Brulte promised to help Republicans regain seats in the state Legislature, saying Democratic control of both houses and the governor’s office “is a recipe for disaster.” Brulte asked delegates to close their eyes and imagine the California they want to see 10, 15, 20 years from now, “And imagine the America you want to see. Is there anyone in this room that actually believes Harry Reid, Barack Obama, Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsom can make that happen?”

“There is a fundamental difference between their vision and ours,” said Brulte. “Because the state run by Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsom is a recipe for disaster.”

By Wayne Lusvardi

Mark Twain once wrote: “Don’t tell fish stories where people know you; but particularly, don’t tell them where they know the fish.”

The farmers in the California Central Valley know that environmentalists have been making up a big fish story for quite some time about agricultural water contracts negatively impacting the purportedly endangered Delta smelt fish.

The farmers know the fish better than the environmentalists.  You can’t tell any big whopper fish stories around farmers.  But you can try to get away with them in court.   But even a liberal court didn’t fall for such yarns.

The liberal U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that 41 federal water contracts in the Central Valley Water Project did not violate the Endangered Species Act.  Chief Judge Procter Hug ruled in the case, National Resources Defense Council vs. Ken Salazar, Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior, that the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation did not have to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service over any alleged negative impacts to the purported endangered Delta smelt fish in renewals of agricultural water contracts.

According to Brandon Middleton, attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires federal agencies to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service before undertaking an action that may negatively affect a protected species.  Relying on legal precedent, Hug ruled that Section 7 only applies to discretionary federal actions.  Because prevailing law mandates the renewals of water contracts, the bureau had no obligation to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Agency.

To further squash this big fish tale, the court also ruled the environmentalists had no legal standing to even challenged the water contracts on such grounds.  Standing is defined as: “the ability of a party to demonstrate to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law of action challenged to support that party’s participation in the case.” The water contracts in question even contained a “shortage” clause that provided for the Bureau of Reclamation to provide more water for the smelt.

Middleton said, “The farmers had much to lose even though they didn’t gain that much in this ruling.”  If the ruling had gone against the water contractors, farmers might have had to give up water already under contract and on which agricultural production loans and other financial obligations had been made without any re-compensation.  Middleton elaborated that, what the environmentalists were trying to do was go beyond challenging any physical impacts on the smelt by large pumps in the Delta as part of the Federal Central Valley Project.  The environmentalists wanted to penetrate to the legal contracts that lay behind the water pumping.

No Bearing on Repealing Feinstein’s Water Grab Act

However, Middleton doubted this ruling would have any bearing on the provision in Democratic Calif. Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s H.R. 146, the San Joaquin River Restoration Act of 2009, to “mandate” agricultural water contractors to go through an environmental clearance process as a condition of renewing their long-term water contracts.  Such a clearance could permit the environmental mitigation shakedowns of farmers.

Feinstein’s act was a grab of water from Central Valley farmers for commercial fishing, recreational and real estate development interests in the San Joaquin Valley area.  Feinstein’s Democratic Party controlled both houses of Congress and the presidency in 2009.  Nevertheless, she could not overcome the farm lobby in Congress in her own party to get the San Joaquin River Restoration Act passed.  Eventually, Feinstein’s bill was attached as a “rider” on the Omnibus Lands Act of 2009 and ramrodded over opposition in her own party.

Recently, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Tulare, authored H.R. 1837, the San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act, to repeal Feinstein’s one-sided law. The bill is still sitting in the U.S. Senate, where it has been blocked by Feinstein and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and opposed by Pres. Obama.

Farmers know that, if it weren’t for the Central Valley Water Project providing water to agricultural water districts, the Delta smelt fish wouldn’t have as much reliable water or habitat.  And that is no fish story.