Thursday, August 4, 2011

Journal Sentinel Water Editorial Can't Wish Away Politics

The Journal Sentinel offers an editorial calling for the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to do a thorough, fact-based review of Waukesha's application for a diversion of Great Lakes water.

No argument there.

But the editorial wishes for something that cannot possible take place:

The review should focus on issues of science, technology and economics - and not on political matters.
That is because every agency and participant on staff or in management who is called upon to weigh in on the application's merits, and its ultimate failure, success or implementation - - the DNR, The Waukesha City Mayor, Common Council, and Water Utility, and similar agencies and officials in three potential water-selling lakefront cities, and the Town of Waukesha, with its elected officials and direct, citizen-democracy, and seven other Great Lakes states' regulatory agencies parallel to the Wisconsin DNR, and all eight Great Lakes Governors - - each and everyone of these organizations and key members is either an elected official or reports to one.

And don't forget that there will be formal consulting input inserted into the process by non-voting governmental bodies in two Canadian provinces and by First Nation tribes, too.

That means thousands of political calculations and decisions will be made throughout a years-long politicized process because the authority over these waters is shared across a giant region where the Great Lakes water resources themselves are mutually managed and 'owned.'

This all began years ago with intensive politicking that created the Great Lakes Compact under which Waukesha's precedent-setting application has been produced - - and, in fact, there wouldn't even be a Waukesha application eligible for review without the active and successful lobbying (politics in action) by Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle's representatives to persuade negotiators from Minnesota to New York State to create a specific diversion exemption under which a community that is entirely outside of the Great Lakes basin - - like Waukesha - - could ask for a diversion in the first place.

Of course, this is a political process, and while the newspaper is right to urge the DNR to be thorough and scientific (read: fair) about its review there will be politics galore surrounding the application as it moves forward, or stop.

That's because what's at stake is who gets to use a limited and valuable resource held in trust for so many competing groups.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I wonder if it's just a subconscious bias on the part of the JS Deciders. You know, how conservatives (who are not really conservative in any real sense of the word) have that irrational fear of SCIENCE. It is not opinion or ESPECIALLY religion that is an ever shifting sand upon which NO ONE should build a house - it is SCIENCE
And this Bible passage is solid PROOF that god wants Waukesha Republicans to have lots and lots of nice water, science be damned ~
"Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the great street of the city."

See? Ya don't need Science.

btw I wrote a rant the other day (but deleted before posting) re: how I think they (like Tonette and Scotty et al) want to gut the public AODA support system to force-fed religious groups to those in need. Counties are already having to quietly lean on religious groups because they're already over extended. I know of a "situations" i.e. where the client strenuously objected to being "handed off" to a religious residence facility because it was religious and not only religious but openly hostile and disrespectful to his own non-Christian faith. on intake the facility director dressed down the client's faith, to his face insisting he abandon it. not making this up. Case worker looks the other way, needs to place the guy, his files are bulging and feels the guy is a bad annoying case anyways so, yanno, he wants to clock out and be done for the day. He feels his job sucks, because it does, and it's only gonna get worse. Client needs help from the case worker so he kinda sucks it up and tries to cope, to not complain too much to the case worker, tries to man-up and get thru it. But...Client gets alienated by the religious zealots, runs back to the streets to use out of frustration and desperation and hopelessness, ALL THE MONEY spent on his rehab now becomes a waste. Tripped up by one irresponsible decision on the part of "management" Because the recovery was not seen thru to a reasonable end. Actually sabotaged by today's rampant Short term thinking, lack of real awareness of the human condition in favor of story-book fantasies.
So, it will shoot up the prison population too as recovery needs go unmet in an increasingly competitive world, as more doors slam shut and people literally have NO PLACE TO TURN and crime escalates.
Refusing to provide chemical dependency services will do more damage to society than decriminalizing everything. Looking at the largest picture - chem dependency support is a defense to the society as a whole -NOT simply playing namby pamby nursemaid to bad boys and girls. Human history has proven that in any society there will be those who choose to profit by selling escape and happiness to others, to the other's physical and mental detriment, and to the detriment of the culture as a whole. And while some people will be able to use recreationally - there will ALWAYS be those who addict more quickly than the general population. those people who will pay the rpice for the rest of the cultures' casual Use and happy bon vivant Friday Night Bullshit.
If the "dealers' can't be stopped anymore than damaging storms can be stopped, then similarly you have to plan and provide for on-going "clean-up and "damage control" same as after Acts of Nature. Sadly this time it is Human nature.
That is only mature planning. but people don't wanna do that. They prefer illusion


btw -I don't see any WI political geniuses pointing out what a huge symbolic dump Walker is taking on the memory of NANCY War-on-Drugs REAGAN via this move
Nancy Reagan...Just Say No
Scott Walker...Just Say YES!!
(I don't have time to read thru all that to see if it was too rambling, hopefully it made a point in some kinda way.)

Anonymous said...

I don't believe for 1 freak'in second that this was written by the J/S editorial board. It's the exact same mantra spewed by the Waukesha Water Utility Board an the Waukesha Common Council: "We don't want any politicians on the negotiating committee". Hence, 3 unelected city officials, now 2 because Lori Curtis Luther became the former city administrator, were appointed by the naive Common Council in Waukesha.
Sorry ladies and gentlemen, deals done on a handshake just don't happen anymore.

Annie K. - Put the coffee mug down.