Water and Ink

Water is the lima beans of California politics. Everybody knows how important water is to this arid land. Everybody understands it is water, captured from the northern mountains and moved south by canal, that makes the desert bloom--and that lubricates urban growth. Water is precious. Water is the stuff of history. Water is good for you. Water also is a bore.

Now not everybody will admit this, just as not everybody will cop to slipping lima beans under the plate when the cook looks away. The average Californian--if any such person exists--has some notion of the basic hydraulics involved with California water. They might nod knowingly when some writer or pol trots out Twain’s now tired aphorism about whiskey being for drinkin’ and water for fightin’.

They probably are aware that for some Californians water is, in fact, a blood sport, and that the battles have raged across centuries. Water warriors, the combatants are called. They fight over salinity in the delta, temperatures below Mt. Shasta, toxic ponds in the western San Joaquin. It’s all quite interesting, to them. Those not directly involved--most Californians--come as spectators to the engagements, feigning interest.

All of which is an overly long prelude to a sad announcement about this particular column. It is about California water and politics. And there now will follow a five-minute intermission, allowing those so inclined to make tracks for the sports section. . . .

*

And so, lima bean lovers, on to the story: Something odd is at work on the California water front. The various water factions--farmers, environmentalists and urban water agencies--amazingly have come together as allies to put on the November ballot a $1-billion bond measure. Proposition 204, the “Safe, Clean, Reliable Water Supply Act,” would finance a multitude of good works: restoring the delta, shoring up flood control systems, cleaning water supplies, saving fish, and so forth.

The list of supporters is almost comical in its breadth. Bill Clinton endorses Prop. 204, as does Bob Dole, as do Pete Wilson and Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein. The Sierra Club endorses it. So does the Kern County Farm Bureau. And Apple Computer and Paine Webber and the Mission Viejo Co. and Western Boaters Safety Group and, one imagines, Mr. Rogers and Barney, Sonny and Cher, Mick Jagger and Paul, George and Ringo.

And yet, despite all its good intentions and extraordinary coalition of official supporters, Prop. 204 does have a problem. No, it has several problems. It is about water, yawn. It is about bonds, yikes, a funding device increasingly viewed by voters as synonymous with taxes. And it has landed on a ballot overloaded with noisier campaigns. A large segment of the voting populace still knows nothing about Prop. 204, which might be its biggest problem of all. It’s tough to go cold into the booth and spring for a billion-dollar bond measure.

What has happened to Prop. 204 is the downside of the political environment so lovingly created by the masters of wedge issues and fierce partisanship. With a ballot dominated by an emotional, get-out-the-vote proposition, and deep with shake-out-the-money special interest issues, and crowned by an investor-rich presidential race, what chance can a water bond measure have of breaking through?

*

A true tale from the Prop. 204 campaign trail. They scheduled a press conference for last Wednesday at the Ferry Building here. Mayor Willie Brown came to add his name to the list of supporters. He was joined by Jim Costa, the state legislator responsible for putting Prop. 204 on the ballot, a Chamber of Commerce representative, some water bureaucrats and environmentalists. All arrived on time at 11:45 a.m., reviewed their roles, took their places, and waited for the reporters to show up.

None ever did--a press conference record for non-attendance that will never be broken.

“It was certainly frustrating,” said the Sierra Club’s Dan Sullivan, a participant. “When we actually agree on a positive step, it seems like the public, the press, doesn’t pay attention. Attention only gets paid to sharp conflicts.”

Campaign insiders give Prop. 204 a 50-50 chance. For starters, a third of all voters automatically reject any and all bond measures. With 15 propositions on the ballot, many frustrated voters simply will go into the booth firing no’s. Also, it is a lot of money, and legitimate questions can be raised about the measure, not that any of these have received much attention, either. Finally, once again, it is about water, something of concern to Californians only in times of drought.

It was raining Tuesday up and down California, not a good omen for the water people.