Water Committee Torpedoes Bipartisanship

by Assemblyman Kevin Jeffries - North County Times, Sept 27, 2009

Californians rightfully expect their political leaders to rise above partisan differences to solve major threats to stability of the state. That is why I was honored to participate in a recent effort at bipartisanship ---- The Joint Legislative Conference Committee on Water Legislation.

At our first meeting, the committee agreed to work together over Labor Day weekend to solve big water problems: Sacramento-San Joaquin delta environmental restoration, water storage, water conveyance and funding for all of the above. Sadly, the promise of "working together" was quickly crushed, as was any chance of passing this legislation by the legislative deadline.

It began with Democratic leaders, who control the committee process, restricting the selection of bills to be discussed.

The committee leaders decided to limit the foundation of our bipartisan discussion to five bills: SB12 (Joe Simitain, D-Palo Alto), SB 229 (Fran Pavley, D-Agoura Hills), SB 458 (Lois Wolk, D-Davis), AB 39 (Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael) and AB 49 (Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles and Huffman). Notice a pattern here? None of these bills were authored by, or even supported by, Republicans.

It is not as if there were no bills addressing water issues authored or supported by Republicans from which to choose.

AB 900 (Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles) and SB 261 (Robert Dutton, R-Rancho Cucamonga, and Denise Moreno Ducheny, D-San Diego) both received overwhelming bipartisan support. Each was voted off the floor of their respective houses without a single "no" vote. And state Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto, offered language from his SB 361 ---- a bipartisan water bond supported by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Over that weekend, it became clear that these bills provide the only comprehensive solutions for conservation, governance and funding for water projects. But did any of these bills made it into the "bipartisan" Conference Committee Report? Of course not.

This effort illustrates the differing views of bipartisanship. I believe that ideas and concerns from both sides should be discussed, weighed and incorporated into proposals to move California forward; and that the best starting point is where agreement already exists. The Democratic legislative leaders believe that their ideas should serve as the foundation for discussion and that Republicans should just be happy to have a seat at the table.

Advocates for a bipartisan solution feel like Charlie Brown in the "Peanuts" cartoon series where Charlie wants Lucy to hold the football for a field goal kick, but Lucy yanks the ball away whenever he tries.

Charlie wants to believe Lucy really means it when she says "You can trust me; this time will be different. I promise not to do what I did last time." But then, just as Charlie Brown charges to the ball, ready to nail that kick, Lucy pulls the ball away once again.

I know exactly how Charlie Brown feels in that cartoon, lying on his back in bewilderment. Disappointed, but not surprised.

Republicans are dedicated to creating a healthy, prosperous California. We keep trying because we know if this state does not secure clean, reliable water supplies for families, food, farms and factories, it will be impossible to attract investment, stimulate new job creation, and maintain stable property values. By restoring reliable water supplies, our economy can become strong enough to sustain enormous costs of delta habitat restoration. Our plan would capture, store and convey water throughout the state more efficiently and environmentally safely than ever.

A truly bipartisan deal would treat water supply certainty co-equally with habitat restoration in the bay delta. These goals are clearly addressed in the trio of bipartisan bills Republicans have asked to be included in the final proposal. And while Democrats say they have the same co-equal goals, their delta bills, which made up the final conference committee report, focus only on delta ecosystem restoration without providing solid assurances for reliable water supplies.

As the Governor now considers calling a special session of the legislature to address these critical water issues, we Republicans remain ready and willing to work with our Democratic colleagues. But that means that our ideas and our concerns must be a part of the discussion and the eventual solution. We don't expect to get everything we ask for. But we also don't expect to get none of what we ask.

Bipartisan means both parties at the table, working together to come up with solutions that both can support. Issues as important as the future of water policy in this state demand this sort of approach.

If this is the type of bipartisanship my friends across the aisle are interested in supporting, I'm still in. But if they just want to write their own bills behind closed doors and then try to present the result as a product of bipartisanship using the conference committee as window dressing, they can count me out.

Assemblyman KEVIN JEFFRIES has served a combined 16 years on local water boards and now represents the 66th Assembly District, which covers Western Riverside County, including the communities of Lake Elsinore, Wildomar, Murrieta and Temecula, and portions of North County San Diego, including Fallbrook, Bonsall, Valley Center and Julian.