Seymour Stalls Senate Action on Water Bill

Carrying out his earlier threats of delay, Sen. John Seymour (R-Calif.) blocked all legislation from moving through the Senate chamber Tuesday in an attempt to prevent major reform of California water policy from becoming law.

Seymour began a one-man filibuster by requesting that Senate clerks read the entire contents of a 396-page omnibus water package containing dozens of reclamation projects for 17 Western states.

The move, which bottled up legislation for more than six hours, was expected to be the first in a series of parliamentary tactics orchestrated by Seymour to withhold consideration of a House-passed water measure before the Senate recesses this week for the remainder of the 102nd Congress.

“We have now spent 18 hours nonstop trying to prevent this bill from coming to a vote,” Seymour said Tuesday evening. “I am going to go as long as I can because this bill is an economic disaster for the state of California.”

It was unclear late Tuesday whether Seymour’s efforts will succeed.

The House set the stage for a showdown with California’s junior senator shortly after 1 a.m. Tuesday by passing a compromise measure on a voice vote that could reallocate millions of acre-feet of water generated by the federal Central Valley Project, primarily for the benefit of the environment and cities.

Rep. George Miller (D-Martinez), chairman of the Interior Committee, called the bill the “most sweeping reform of California water policy in a half century.”

Miller said he was confident that the Senate would wait out Seymour’s stalling tactics to approve the bill and send it to President Bush for his signature.

“I think for now Seymour is going to carry out the role of obstructionist because that is really the only role that is left for Central Valley farmers,” Miller said. “Congress made a conscious decision on a bipartisan basis to change the Central Valley Project. The choice now is between change and no change.”

But two prominent members of the Bush Administration--Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan Jr. and Agriculture Secretary Edward R. Madigan--have raised objections to the bill and may recommend a presidential veto.

Seymour, acting on behalf of the California agriculture community, has vowed to do everything in his power to stop the legislation. He called the House-Senate conference committee measure “a poison pill for California jobs that we will not swallow.”

The most controversial part of the massive water legislation would drastically alter water deliveries from the Central Valley Project, which controls 20% of California’s developed water through 20 dams and more than 500 miles of diversion canals, reservoirs, pumps and other facilities. The project supplies water for about one-third of the state’s 9 million acres of irrigated farmland through a series of federally subsidized contracts signed 40 years ago.

The Central Valley Project Improvement Act, negotiated last weekend between House and Senate conferees, would make saving threatened fish and wildlife a top priority. It calls for devoting 800,000 acre-feet of water to meet the project’s new environmental purposes and establishing a $50-million annual fund to finance fish and wildlife restoration activities.

The legislation would also enable urban water agencies such as the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California to purchase water through the Central Valley Project from willing sellers. Such transfers are prohibited under federal law.

Carl Boronkay, MWD general manager, predicted that the bill would provide large amounts of water to California cities.

“If managed properly, California has ample water supplies to take care of the reasonable needs of cities, farms and the environment for some time to come. Passage of this bill is a crucial element of good water supply management,” Boronkay said.

Most of California’s largest businesses also support water transfers, said James R. Harvey, chairman of Transamerica Corp. and a member of the California Business Roundtable.

“We think this is a major step forward,” Harvey said. “There is lots of water. Let the free market determine where the water goes rather than some politician.”

Agriculture lobbyists contend that the bill would destroy California family farms, particularly during years of prolonged drought. They cite a Department of Interior analysis of the legislation that found no Central Valley Project water would have been delivered to irrigators over the last three years.

“The Central Valley’s existence is tied to water,” said Phil Larson, a farmer in the Fresno County city of Kerman. “No water means no farms, no jobs and no future.”

The legislation also would:

* End the practice of automatically renewing highly subsidized, fixed 40-year contracts for Central Valley irrigators. Current contractors would be guaranteed only one additional contract of 25 years.

* Replace fixed prices for water subsidies with a three-tier pricing system that discourages heavy volume use and encourages conservation.

* Reduce the amount of all new water contracts to meet other project purposes, such as providing relief for threatened fish and wildlife. For the first time, the Central Valley Project would be directed to restore fish and wildlife habitat destroyed by project operations and set a goal of doubling historic fish levels.

Despite its support by many state interests, the legislation is strongly opposed by California Republican Gov. Pete Wilson and Seymour, the former state legislator Wilson appointed in 1990 to replace him in the Senate. Other opponents include Central Valley members of the California congressional delegation and Republican House members.

Rep. Calvin Dooley (D-Visalia) said he and other California lawmakers succeeded over the last week in delaying Tuesday’s House vote to give Seymour a better opportunity to kill the measure in the Senate.

When the Senate moved to take up the water package early Tuesday afternoon, Seymour interceded and asked for a reading of the complete bill. He had remained on the floor continuously since Monday evening assisting Sen. Alfonse D’Amato (R-N.Y.) in his efforts to filibuster the tax bill.

Seymour hopes to continue bottling up the Senate long enough so that weary lawmakers eager to return to their home states agree to either compromise on the bill or set it aside. He could be assisted by Nevada senators seeking to delay a scheduled Thursday vote on the energy bill.

If the water bill comes to the floor, Seymour is unlikely to get much help from his Western Republican colleagues. That is because the water package contains major projects for Utah, Arizona, the Dakotas and other states.

The drama could play out through Friday or Saturday, Seymour said. The Senate was scheduled to recess last weekend.

Wilson, who succeeded in blocking a Central Valley Project reform measure in the Senate two years ago, issued a stinging letter attacking the bill to his former colleagues in the Congress last weekend.

“As California struggles to deal with almost 10% unemployment and the loss of over 700,000 jobs during the current recession, it is simply inexcusable to cripple our agricultural sector by the cavalier passage of this measure.”

Seymour, who is running against Democrat Dianne Feinstein for one of two California Senate seats up for election this year, has been a persistent advocate for Central Valley irrigators who want to protect their continued supply of federally subsidized water. Seymour raised $563,976 in campaign contributions from agricultural donors and Central Valley residents through June 30, according to a Times study.

“Seymour is just repaying his campaign contributors,” Miller said. “That is all that is going on here. The campaign contributors have become more important to him than the future of California. That is what Gov. Wilson is doing.