August 19, 2008 05:51 PM UTC
McCain Getting Hammered Over Water Comments
47 Comments- by: Colorado Pols
We’ve talked in the past about Senate candidate Bob Schaffer’s ties to Referendum A, the failed water infrastructure ballot initiative that was perceived on the Western Slope in particular as a “water grab” by the Front Range. Which was a big deal, but nothing compared to the ire raised by somebody outside Colorado wanting to raid the state’s water. Has anybody written a book about all the people who died in Colorado’s history over water rights, both intra- and interstate? We’d like to read that.
As a diarist reported over the weekend, GOP presidential nominee John McCain provoked the wrath of just about every political figure in Colorado by suggesting in an interview that a key treaty governing distribution of water from the Colorado River between upstream states (that’s us) and downstream consumers (that’s Arizona and California) should be renegotiated. In doing so he was articulating the natural position for a Senator from Arizona, since they have all these people down there after all and they need water. It’s very reasonable to assume that he would have a similarly “expansive” view of water rights as President. The problem for McCain is that it’s political suicide to take that position in Colorado, and he needs Colorado to win in November.
Democrats and allied groups jumped all over McCain’s comments yesterday, press releases from the Colorado Democrats and the League of Conservation Voters both follow after the jump. And this morning, editorial boards around the state weighed in. From the Grand Junction Sentinel:
McCain and a campaign spokesman both said that in his comments about the compact, McCain was speaking primarily of continuing the conversations among state authorities that led to a new agreement last year on how to allocate water in the river during droughts.
That’s well and good. But McCain also suggested the compact may need some modification “to adjust to the realities of higher growth.”
To many ears, especially in Upper Basin states, that sounds suspiciously like he’s saying those states that have grown the most – California, Arizona and Nevada – deserve more water from the river, one of the very things the 1922 compact sought to prevent.
Sen. McCain owes it to Coloradans and all residents of the seven Colorado River Basin states to tell us exactly what he would seek to do with the compact if he is elected president.
And the Denver Post, in a particularly blistering editorial:
John McCain proved to be a uniter not a divider with his suggestion that the 1922 Colorado River com- pact be renegotiated to allocate more water to his home state of Arizona as well as Nevada and California.
McCain’s comments in an interview with Charles Ashby of the Pueblo Chieftain united practically every political figure in Colorado, regardless of party, to denounce the GOP presidential candidate’s proposal.
“Over my dead body,” snapped Colorado Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar.
“Over my cold, dead, political carcass,” echoed Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer.
“On this issue, [McCain] couldn’t be more wrong,” Democratic Senate candidate Mark Udall said…
…in recent years, the Colorado’s flow is getting even sparser. Some scientists argue that global climate change is drying up the river; others argue that the basin is simply entering another of its periodic drought cycles. But all camps agree the river is producing less and the problem is likely to get worse – meaning still less water in the future for Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico.
The river’s reduced yield was what prompted former Interior Secretary Gale Norton to begin the review that led to the implementation agreement cited by Ritter. Far from allocating more water to the lower basin states, the new pact requires them – especially California – to start living within their allotments under the compact.
The new rules recognize that Arizona, Nevada and California have benefitted from extra water in the past in wet years because Colorado and its neighbors didn’t have enough reservoirs to store all their allotments. Such surpluses are unlikely to recur in the future.
McCain’s comments were thus not only political poison in Colorado, they displayed a disturbing ignorance of the realities of the West’s scarce water resources.
To say Westerners are disappointed in McCain would be an understatement. For the first time since Barry Goldwater’s and George McGovern’s 1964 and 1972 disasters, we finally get a son of the Rocky Mountain states running for president. And on the region’s most vital issue – water – McCain unthinkingly mumbles the same parochial tripe he doubtless delivered dozens of times to rave reviews at luncheons of the Phoenix Rotary Club. [Pols emphasis]
Bottom line: this was a very costly mistake for McCain. It seems the only defense being offered for this mind-boggling gaffe (he said this in Colorado? Seriously?) is that McCain didn’t actually mean what he said. But lame backpedaling won’t work this time: the water issue is a zero-sum game. His state gets more, we get less. That’s what he said he wanted. And like we pointed out originally, that’s a very natural position–accurately representing his constituency as a Senator from Arizona.
But wasn’t he going to win Arizona anyway?
For Immediate Release:
August 18, 2008
Contact: David Sandretti, 202-785-8683 or
david_sandretti@lcv.org
McCain All Wet On Western Water Compact
Outrage Seen In Colorado, New Mexico and Other Upper Basin States
DENVER, CO – League of Conservation Voters Senior Vice President and Colorado native Tony Massaro issued the following statement in reaction to Senator John McCain’s suggestion that the Western Water Compact be renegotiated to give additional water rights to Arizona and California. Link to article: http://www.chieftain.com/artic…
“John McCain’s outrageous position that the Western Water Compact should be renegotiated will set off a wave criticism that will come crashing down on his hopes to carry Colorado and New Mexico. It’s one thing for a Senator from Arizona, or even California, to try to rustle water from the states of the upper basin, but for a candidate for President, it is stunningly tone deaf.
“His position threatens to start a new water war at a time when the seven states of the compact have recently agreed to and are implementing an allocation agreement in peace and harmony. The people of Colorado and New Mexico have every reason to be outraged.”
# # #
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Contact:
Matt Farrauto
(303) 623-4762 x118 Office
(505) 235-0419 Cell
mfarrauto@coloradodems.org
August 18, 2008
WOW! MCCAIN IS REALLY WRONG FOR WEST
Republican Senator’s Words and Actions Continue to Dismay
Denver, CO – Today, Chairwoman of the Colorado Democratic Party Pat Waak reacted with dismay to recent reports of McCain’s many missteps, and his total disconnect with western values and Colorado families.
Incredibly, John McCain expressed his desire to renegotiate Colorado’s sacred water compact, which caused a bipartisan stir. McCain betrayed his interest in exporting Colorado’s water to Arizona, failing to heed the advice of Mark Twain who said, “In the West whisky is for drinking; water is for fighting.”
“It’s bad enough that John McCain represents four more years of failed Bush policies,” said Waak. “He has no plan for solving the energy crisis, he wants to dismantle the successful Social Security program, and he thinks it would be okay to spend 100 years in Iraq while terrorists reorganize in Afghanistan. We agree to disagree on many issues. However, Mr. McCain has lost his marbles if he thinks we’ll let him gamble away our water.”
On Saturday, when asked what defines someone as “rich” on Saturday, Senator McCain said anyone who makes more than $5 million dollars. Under John McCain’s definition, if you’re pulling down $4 million a year, you’re part of the middle class-and you need help.
“Whether McCain was being serious or glib, his economic policies prioritize and profit corporate interests over regular Coloradans,” said Waak. “Our country needs a new vision and dramatic change, not more of the same.”
McCain’s tax relief plan leaves out more than 100 million middle class families and gives even more to the corporations already making record profits. Reports also say McCain is still considering Phil Gramm as a potential Treasury Secretary — the same man who said we’re only going through “a mental recession” and that Americans struggling to cope with soaring prices are “a nation of whiners.”
Waak continued, “Under a McCain administration, you’d have a president who says we’re better off today than we were eight years ago, and who thinks he’s helping the middle class when he gives tax breaks to people making almost $5 million. And you’d have Treasury Secretary who thinks we should all stop imagining that families are up against tough times.”
Meanwhile, after nearly three decades in Washington, John McCain can’t see or won’t acknowledge what’s obvious to everyone – that lobbyists aren’t just part of the system in Washington, they’re part of the problem.
McCain, whose lobbyist-funded campaign is being run by Washington lobbyists, holds a fundraiser with one of Jack Abramoff’s closest associates, Ralph Reed, tonight.
###
As a young urbanite from Chicago, he knows what the West needs on natural resource and public lands issues. I’m still laughing at that one Pols . . .
Than someone who has a direct bias in where our water should go. I guarentee Obama would never say that our water should go to Illinois.
Just look at the map; to get water to Illinois it would have to be pumped UP. But to get to the Sea of Cortez, it flows DOWN.
Any fool can see that!
to divert attention away from your senile candidates stupidity.
Senator of the west doesn’t know that the seven states actually worked out a new agreement in 2007. What a stupid, out of touch politician.
Step out of the box for a minute and the assumption that if I don’t like Obama I’m for McCain. I think McCain is a nightmare too and am baffled, yet again, that we are supposed to believe that either of the candidates is the best our country has to offer. They aren’t.
I was just saying that it’s comical for Pols to say that Obama has any clue about public land and water issues. Why should he? He’s an urban Senator 1,000 miles from large public land states. Other than the shitload of WY, MT and CO coal his state burns for the bulk of their electricity, there just isn’t any connection to the west.
but that somehow doesn’t counterbalance McCain’s ignorance of the issue. You would think a Senior Senator from the West would have get a clue on this issue and how it effects the region, not just his special interest developer friends in Arizona.
I will posit that Obama knows quite a lot about water issues. The Great Lakes are a very big target for thirsty Eastern states. Last year in particular was a major effort by Georgia and other Southern states to tap what they see as a big drinking barrel. The Great Lakes States also have a pact to prevent other states from taking more then any negotiated pact allows. ONe of the original starts was when Chicago wanted to divert the Chicago River from flowing into Lake Michigan to flush their waste water into the Mississippi River. At the time their waste water was flowing into their drinking water intakes.
IIRC there have been Western States considering a pipeline from the Great Lakes to the West to solve our water problems too. And, that is a non-starter too.
Just because the Senator is from a state of the Great Lakes Region does not mean he has never addressed water issues.
Every four years, politicos in the West rant that the candidates don’t pay attention to so-called “Western issues.” There is arguably no bigger Western issue than water, and it is refreshing to see a presidential candidate finally state an opinion on the subject. Albeit, it probably isn’t the best opinion from Colorado’s standpoint, since the state has nothing to gain from any renegotiations of the Colorado River compact. Still, it is an opinion.
What I would really like to know is who McCain and Obama might nominate to serve as their Interior secretaries. Arguably, the Interior secretary has as much influence over the West as the president himself, since so much of the West is public land administered by that department.
Obama’s choice: Brian Schweitzer
McCain’s choice: Larry Craig
…Craig’s interior?
Obama has a good selection of candidates for Interior; heck, he could think outside the box and go for Will Shafroth. The bench is deep and none of the Dem choices are bad AFAIK.
McCain’s been a mixed bag on environment and land issues, but unlike Bush, I doubt he’d go for an Inhofe or a Pombo.
Never in a million years. Unless you are joking (I think you are) you spend way too much time on Pols.
But I imagine if you asked Obama he’d say “Will who?”
I was pointing to Will more as a note that the Democratic bench for DOI positions is really, really deep.
Shafroth spent years building up GOCO and then with Colorado Conservation Trust. He’s got more than a little experience with land conservation.
He’s got a whole lot more cred than the past several Republican DOI Secretaries, and Babbit was only Gov. of Arizona before becoming Secretary of Interior under Clinton.
did a lot for land conservation. They gave the feds much of the Grand Canyon and then never balked at paying admission when they visited.
I figured that being in a Democratic administration Babbit had more to offer than being Governor.
The rest of my point stands, though.
My friend in Wyoming said everyone there is certain their gov will be either Energy or Interior Secretary. Funny, since because of his state’s economy he’s the most pro fossil fuel democrat in the country. I just don’t see it.
is there any chance of a Dem replacing him in the Land of Dick Cheney?
As I understand it he’s term limited and would have to get the state supreme court to overturn the limit (they did so for state legislators a few years back) in order to go for a third term. Not out of the realm of possibility I suppose.
Water is the most significant commodity in Colorado and always has been.
The Denver Water Board controls the majority of the rights, if I’m not mistaken. It’s been decades since I was involved with a company selling water rights.
No water equals no real estate development.
I’m sure that McCain knows this, but maybe he treated it like his bomb Iran song.
Probably it’s how he truly feels.
There is truth in humor.
he sends out his apologists to say that he didn’t really mean what he said. Just another example of McSenile babbling meaningless drivel and then hiding from his actions. You know he screwed up big time when both the Post and the News write meek rebukes.
DailyKos has a diary up on this.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
McCain’s lobbyst run campaign always seems to know “what he meant.” And when he gets off his talking points, it’s not his fault! I find it amazing the so-called party for personal responsibility spends a lot of its time running around blaming other people for their problems.
Equals further GOP implosion on the Western Slope.
Can’t wait for the Singleton mandated non-endorsement endorsement. If it follows the 2004 Bush non-endorsement endorsement pattern we can look forward to 99% reasons why McCain is lame, (trigger happy on war, belligerent foreign policy, wrong on western water policy, same tax, economic and anti-regulatory policies that got us where we are today, etc.) numerous positives on Obama followed by one McCain positive (experience? Never mind he obviously hasn’t learned much from it and his lack of control over his own chaotic campaign shows no leadership or executive skills) and then a nonsensical McCain endorsement.
Then, if we are unfortunate enough to witness a McCain victory and subsequent deepening of the hole Bush made such a nice start on, we will be treated to four years of editorials criticizing the editorial page pick. These editorials will helpfully cite the very same things that made up the negative 99% of the Singleton decreed endorsement.
Or we could believe the 99% McCain negatives and the Obama positives this time and elect Barack Obama.
(Sort of like the equally lame-ass endorsement of Tancrazy last time he ran for Congress.)
Also recall our own Bob Ewegen and Julia Martinez co-authored a counterpoint editorial rebutting the offical endorsement of Bush. That was definitely a WTF moment in Denver Post editorial history.
and several signs said: “We love you, Bob and Julia.”
A rare expression in my case, but considerably less so for Julia.
dovetail nicely with Bob Schaffer’s support of the referendum A water grab and Josh Penry’s sell out of DNR water resources to out-of-state interests with Amendment 52? When you decide that you will just represent special interests instead of the citizens of Colorado, you should expect what you have coming in the outrage by Colorado voters. And speaking of Penry being a day late and 3 billion dollars short, lthe DS reports that Penry is back humping fire hydrants again with his late and failed attempt to get the PUC to address his demands concerning EXCEL plant closures. Where was Penry when this was in the planning stages? Just the kind of piss-poor representation we’ve come to expect from Penry.
Maybe Penry is hoping that his excuse for Schaffer supporting Ref. A might work for himself also when it gets called on his support of Amendment 52 on down the road. As Penry was quoted in Mike Saconne’s report: “A paper endorsement of Referendum A won’t hurt Bob Schaffer,” “It was bad policy, but it is also long since bygones.”
Yep, Josh, just keep hoping everyone has a short memory.
Sure McCain made a big mistake when he said anything about water. You all believe Obama’s camp when he makes a mistake. But you all doubt McCain’s camp when they said.”McCain was speaking primarily of continuing the conversations among state authorities that led to a new agreement last year on how to allocate water in the river during droughts.”
Water is Colorado’s problem why doesn’t Ritter propose a way to keep Colorado water in Colorado. It runs downhill folks if we don’t stop it.
Owens had a stupid plan give me money and I will build it.
Here is the problem, Colorado has water right now and people forget about water restrictions. Water is not an issue for most voters. I hope the Obama campaign makes a big deal of this water comment it will not help Obama.
Ritter has been working on it since he got into office with the Governors from seven other states.
so he works with the other six. Just quibbling.
That hurts being wrong when telling someone else they’re wrong. Thanks Bob!
…I’ll buy it! See you in Illinois manana!
…how did this comment end up in this thread? I wasn’t even readin’ over here. Crazy internet…I will NEVER forgive Al Gore.
Gore or Bush?
Just asking…
n/t
Sounds good that he is working with other states but when it comes down to it take care of your home first. If we build the dams and hold the water we can send it down stream but we need to be sure that Colorado has water.
More building in Az or CA is not our problem. We need to honor our current agreements but Ritter needs to put together a way to build reserviors and then we help the other states.
Unless Colorado is strong and has water we can not help others.
please look into the issue first.
And as for the other state’s special interests who want our water, take that issue up with John McCain and his Arizona Developer friends.
This would be a great question to raise in one of the three presidential debates, if we could get one of the Eastern moderators to do so.
You ask him yourself at a town-hall meeting. I’m sure he’ll have one in Denver before the election.
it would be better if the question (and it is an excellent one) could be posed to both candidates in one setting, so no one can say it was asked differently on separate occasions.
but 99.99% of people outside of the 7 states couldn’t care less about the answer. Hell, most people in the region wouldn’t know what they were talking about…
It is a legitimate question, and McCain at least deserves a chance to “clarify” his position. I doubt there will be a scenario where this question could be asked of both of them at the same time–unless they do a Western debate.
Honestly Drew, I will try to press the Obama campaign to address this issue. If I figure anything out, I will let you know.