Diary of a Mad Voter: Joan McCarter
McCain’s Water Woes
For a Senator from a Western state, John McCain is showing some serious disconnectedness from the issues that matter out here. Is he really running for President of the United States, or President of Arizona?By Joan McCarter, 8-19-08
McCain set off a firestorm last week when he suggested that the 86 year old agreement that allocates the scarce resource of the Colorado River among the seven states of the Colorado Basin “obviously needs to be renegotiated” because of “new realities of high growth, of greater demands on a scarcer resource,” he didn’t mean it should, you know, be renegotiated, really, to make sure that the high growth states of California, Nevada, and Arizona got more of that scarce resource. But that’s sure how it sounded to the people of Colorado.
So here comes the McCain campaign with what he “really” meant:
Tom Kise, the McCain campaign’s Colorado spokesman, said McCain was not proposing that the 2007 agreement be reopened or any immediate talks on the compact.
“He’s talking about ongoing conversations, conversations that happen this year, next year, 10, 20, 30 years down the road,” Kise said.
Kise said McCain knows global warming is changing water conditions in the West, and that means the states need to talk. “As long as water is going to be an issue in the West, there should be an open conversation among all parties,” Kise said.
Frankly, that’s hard to buy. There is no other reasonable interpretation of his statement that the Compact should be reopened because of the reality of growth in the Lower Basin. Certainly he is not suggesting that the Lower Basin states should cede some of their rights. And as to the states needing to talk, well, they have.
Considering he’s a Senator from one of those seven states in the compact, you think he’d have somewhat of a better grasp of the actual policy making on the issue in his state. See, the seven states’ governors came together last year to address current changing water conditions. In fact, they came up with an agreement:
The agreement was signed April 23 in Las Vegas by representatives of the Colorado River basin states of Colorado, Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. The agreement proposes reducing deliveries of Colorado River water to Arizona and Nevada when storage in Lake Mead drops below certain set levels, thus reducing the risk of shortages in Colorado. The agreement would reduce the risk of shortages in the lower Colorado River by coordinating Hoover and Glen Canyon dam operations. The agreement also proposes a system for storing in Lake Mead water saved through conservation efforts or the development of new water sources.
That new agreement was not a renegotiation of the compact. It only deals with a subset of all of the issues that would have be addressed in a full renegotiation. As Colorado water expert John Orr argues
It took 18 months to get the agreement. Seated at the table were the basin states, of course, but unlike the days when the Colorado River Compact was hammered out, there were many more groups present, all with legitimate concerns. Native American tribes, Reclamation, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, power authorities, water utilities, irrigators and more all wanted a say, and many were allowed input. The landmark agreement — signed by Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne in December 2007 — dealtonly with the issues during dry years. Environmentalists didn’t get any relief from the agreement regarding water for endangered species or for the protection of the riparian environment. Attempts to simulate natural river flows were also not part of the agreement....
A renegotiation would probably require prioritization of water uses, perhaps a hierarchy of needs. What crops to grow? Irrigation, industry or suburbs? Continued unbridled growth or restraints on growth? Would a new compact eliminate out-of-basin transfers? The drying up of farms will continue — in Colorado and Arizona — to provide water to the cities and suburbs. What do we do for rural farming communities? The issues are legion.
Into the middle of all this stumbles McCain, ignoring--or completely ignorant of--the fact that the seven governors (including California’s, Nevada’s, and Arizona’s) decided that those states needed to work on how to find some of their own water in periods of drought and water emergencies, and ignoring the fact that this was a complex and difficult set of negotiations.
His campaign is in full damage control over the issue now. We’ve seen that before, when McCain tried to reverse his long support for using Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste dump. In May, he campaigned in Nevada, telling Nevadans implausibly that he was now all for some sort of “international repository.” But plenty of Nevadans, including the Las Vegas Sun don’t buy it.
McCain is an enthusiastic supporter of nuclear power and a fervent backer of Yucca Mountain as a suitable storage site. The evidence is plentiful:
- In 2002, when final approval was assured after 20 years of debate, McCain told his home-state newspaper, The Arizona Republic, that the Nevada dump site would help the federal government resolve “one of the most important environmental, health and public safety issues for the American people.”
- Just over a year ago, he was described as adopting a mocking tone when he told the Deseret News in Utah: “Oh, you have to travel through states ... I am for Yucca Mountain. I’m for storage facilities. It’s a lot better than sitting outside power plants all over America.”
- Less than three weeks ago, Reuters ran a piece that said McCain “supports the Yucca Mountain storage facility and believes opposition to it is harmful to U.S. interests.” And the piece quoted one of his advisers as saying, “The political opposition to the Yucca Mountain storage facility is harmful to the U.S. interest and the facility should be completed, opened and utilized.”
So in the past few weeks, McCain has experienced an epiphany and decided there should be some sort of international repository for the fuel that he had so long wanted to come here? This is believable?
It is believable? Any more believable than when he says he didn’t really mean that the growth in Lower Basin states means they should be getting more water out of the Colorado, even though that’s sure what it sounds like he was saying. Given that McCain has also said that he’s wouldn’t be comfortable with Yucca Mountain waste traveling through Arizona one gets the feeling that he’s gotten so used to pandering to the voters of his home state that he’s forgotten he’s running for President.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.



Comments
Don't forget that McSame carpetbagged in Arizona after he married Paris Hilton. The only thing McSame knows about the water rights issue is that he used it to demean the sweet and popular Rose Mofford in 1988 when she came to Washington for what was supposed to be a meet and greet. McSame talked his buddy James McClure into hammering Mofford with a bunch of water questions more fit for a hydrologist.
As McSame's former friend Pat Murphy recounts:
"During lunch, McCain said, almost with mischievous glee, that he had slipped some highly technical questions to [James McClure] to ask Mofford — questions she wouldn't be prepared to answer or expected to answer."
"Flabbergasted, I asked McCain why would he want to sabotage Mofford's testimony, when in fact the CAP was the nonpartisan pet of Republicans and Democrats — such as far-left Udall and far-right Goldwater — since its inception."
"His reply, as near as I remember, was, 'I'll embarrass a Democrat any time I get the chance.'"
"The lunch continued in strained chit-chat. We then walked back to McCain's office, where a few reporters, all of them from Arizona papers, as I recall, were waiting. One said there was a rumor McCain had tried to sabotage Mofford's testimony, to which he said something like, 'I'd never do anything like that.'"
You can read more of that story about McSame's "character" here:
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2008-08-07/news/postmodern-mccain-the-john-mccain-some-arizonans-know-and-loathe//2
>>>>>>>>>>
As a result, the governors of those states should get together to talk about how best to use this precious resource, he said.
"I don't think there's any doubt the major, major issue is water and can be as important as oil. So the compact that is in effect, obviously, needs to be renegotiated over time amongst the interested parties," McCain said while on his way to the Aspen Institute. "I think that there's a movement amongst the governors to try, if not, quote, renegotiate, certainly adjust to the new realities of high growth, of greater demands on a scarcer resource.
"Conditions have changed dramatically, so I'm not saying that anyone would be forced to do anything because I'm a federalist and believe in the rights of states," he added. "But at the same time there's already been discussion amongst the states, and I believe that more discussion amongst the governors is probably something that everybody wants us to do."
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I guess after you read Kos and HuffPo we will get your reguritation of political pap. What I get from reading McCain's whole quote, in context, is that he is talking about a conversation among the affected parties. By dropping the coma I believe you changed his meaning. As I read it "obviously" refers to the Compact's existence, not to "renegotiated." The coma makes all the difference. Nowhere do I read that Colorado or any other state will be required to give up water they want to keep.
By the way, if you are genuinely concerned about western water please write about how Pickens intends to rape the largest water source in the US for his commercial profit. It is part and parcel of his energy plan that Pelosi is invested in, endorses, and Obama is snuggling up to. That would be worth while and in the interests of protecting western water rights.
---------------
“Over my cold, dead, political carcass,” Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer said.
“The compact is the only protection Colorado has from several more politically powerful downstream states,” Schaffer added. “Opening it for renegotiation would be the equivalent of a lamb discussing with a pack of wolves what should be on the dinner menu.”
--------------
ps.
By the way, McCain also has no problem with oil shale for CO, for those of you that might not know, oil shale extraction takes unimaginable amounts of water.
McCain is a federalist who is for states rights. He isn't going to touch Colorado's resources.
That's not what Colorado Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Shaffer says, he said of McCain:
“Over my cold, dead, political carcass,” Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer said.
“The compact is the only protection Colorado has from several more politically powerful downstream states,” Schaffer added. “Opening it for renegotiation would be the equivalent of a lamb discussing with a pack of wolves what should be on the dinner menu.”
Who should I believe? The Republican candidate for Colorado's Senate seat, or a guy named Jesse on New West?
Doug, my bone is with Joan over her cherry picking his comment and changing the punctuation to achieve a result I find disappointingly misleading. By putting back that punctuation and viewing the entire text of McCain's comments, including his position that state's rights are paramount, I am reasonable certain that McCain meant to suggest the need for a conversation about possibilities concerning water. As to what Schaffer said and why he said it, political theater needs a villain, real or manufactured. All of this can be solved by a newsy asking McCain whether he really meant a renegotiation or a conversation about possibilities. But it is just too much fun for partisans to joust a straw man... especially when that spectacle takes the heat off their champion who is getting in bed with a guy who really does intend to take western water and sell it for billions.
You have got to be kidding me, do you have any idea how ridiculous that drivel about political theater sounds?
Please.
Schaffer said “Over my cold, dead, political carcass,” because John McCain threatened Colorado's water.
John McCain is from a more populous low basin desert state long after Colorado's water. It is ingrained in McCain to want to seize it.
As Colorado Republican Bob Schaffer said: “The compact is the only protection Colorado has from several more politically powerful downstream states. Opening it for renegotiation would be the equivalent of a lamb discussing with a pack of wolves what should be on the dinner menu.”
McCain doesn't honor that compact. His comments reflect that, so does Schaffer's reaction.
You're right we can go back and ask McCain again what he meant and he will likely (if he has any political sense at all) change his position, but the point is that he said it. He said it in a forum that reflects his real thinking.
Or is this another moment where McCain doesn't speak for the McCain campagin?
Nope.
McSame just came out preaching that he wanted abortion settled at the Federal level and not left to states.
After some flip-flopping, he feels the same way about same-sex marriage.
I don't know his stance on the Oregon Assisted Suicide Law, but I suspect it mirrors his Decider Bush, who fought this tooth and nail in a decidedly anti-Federalist fashion.
Medical Marijuana.
McSame is Federalist when it fits what he and the other extreme right-wing wants, when it doesn't, he is not.
There are a whole host of issues where McCain is not a federalist.
Increasingly, he is an agent of the right wing of the Republican Party. And I don't take kindly to a bunch of southern Bible thumpers telling me what to do.
I've got my priorities in life: God, Family and Community (sometimes community might even me country).
But I'll be damned if I need the federal government and a bunch of southern Jesus freaks coming in here and telling me how I ought to go about it. The mandate is in the word of God, not the law of Man. It should stay that way.
“Senator McCain has no interest in reopening the compact. Senator McCain believes as I do that a compact that’s been worked out between the governors and between the states is the right way to go. States are the ones who build these kinds of understandings. The federal government shouldn’t meddle in that compact."
Yesterday, a Federal Judge struck down a proposed change to the Clean Air Act by the decidedly anti-State's Rights/pro-corporate welfare Bush cartel that would have limited States' ability to regulate air pollution in their states. I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that McSame supports the Decider and is not a Federalist in this instance either.
For those of you who are NOT a Mad Voter with an agenda to promote Barry Hussein and who also ~ please correct me if I'm wrong in your regard, Joan ~ do not live in Colorado and are unfamiliar with the political activism of the editor of the Pueblo Chieftain, you might want to at least take the time to read the entirety of what they did publish without the additional editing provided in this article.
I believe the "over my dead body" quote should be credited to Senator Ken Salazar, who is a Democrat/Colorado ~ but either way it might have been wise to find out if either Salazar or Schaffer actually spoke to McCain about his supposed comments made to that reporter for the Pueblo Chieftain ... if one might assume that everything a "reporter" reports may or may not be factual.
Since I wasn't there I do not know ... which I might presume would be true in your case also, Joan?
Of course, were it not the INTENT of this article to be "a political hatchet job" ~ as Craig has stated ~ then I would have to wonder why a verbatim copy of the letter McCain sent to Senator Wayne Allard, a Colorado Republican with whom he has communicated frequently over the years on water issues, was not given equal time on NewWest.net ... but I suspect we all know the answer to that, right? Right! Tom Kise, McCain spokesman in Colorado, said the letter speaks for itself, and he had no further comment. So how much easier could it possibly have been to offer NewWest.net readers "the rest of the story"? ... if one was naive enough to think that either is or should be the fair and equal way to discuss any political issue.
But THANK YOU, Joan, for sharing your deepest and inner-most thoughts and feelings with us in this article. It would certainly not have been appropriate for us to have had to guess what your personal motivations might be when you are so adept at expressing them for us.
I just hope you will not take offense when I lock my headgate and sit on top of it with a sawed-off shotgun if Barry Hussein traffics through my neighborhood today or at any time in the future.
That sounds like what racists used to do when Martin Luther King Jr. marched for equal rights. Maybe you could throw a few rocks as well...
But you're totally out of line to accuse Martin Luther King, Jr., of stealing water! Shame on you!!!
And for whatever it's NOT worth to a floundering person ~ or to a fish, as the case might be ~ I could care less if Barry Hussein is a PURPLE people eater if he comes lookin' to mess with my water rights!!!
Obviously you have not been swimmin' with any of the fish in the West, have you? ... or have you just been flounderin' around in your own contained space growin' what you're smokin' in a national forest somewhere?
Either way
On ANY day
I'll shoot OR throw a rock
At ANY fish
Who tries to dish
MY water at my lock!
... even if he is a flounderin' flounder ... so you might ought to remember that ...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2519869/Barack-Obama-death-threats-Man-charged.html