Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) is a jerk
Back in October, the Army Corps of Engineers said that it would work on rewriting the manuals that guide how water is shared throughout the ACT (Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa) river basin. Given the current situation, that seems like a very good idea.
However, Senator Shelby is doing his best to prevent that. To quote from the article on 11Alive:
Georgia lawmakers are blasting Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama for slipping language into a massive end-of-year spending bill, blocking the federal government from updating the manuals that guide water-sharing in the region.
I realize that he wants to keep more water in his state, but this is a bit overboard. Given that the governors are at least trying to work together, this seems really short-sighted. To quote Senator Saxby Chambliss, it’s “mind boggling”.
December 19th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
I laughed at your headline here Mickey.
That is a pretty jacka$$ thing to do though.
December 19th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
The senator I mean, not the headline.
December 19th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
As a current Georgia resident, prior Alabama resident, Shelby is doing his job preserving Alabama water rights, like it or not.
Metro Atlanta must face the future and embrace either serious water conservation or totally cut off new water hookups.
The Atlanta Metro area is not going to get water from the Tennessee River, the Savannah River, or any other inter basin transfer.
Atlanta metro’s Clayton County (see: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/11/one_atlanta_sub.php )
has a solution. The plutocrats (if you think this is a Disney reference, please leave now) of Atlanta Metro refuse to accept a change.
The French Foreign Legion saying “March or Die” is applicable here - either Change of Die. Guess what - the rest of Georgia does not care - repeat - does not care.
December 19th, 2007 at 6:46 pm
I’m not totally clear on what the revising of water manuals would accomplish. It seems the only true way out of this shared crisis is through an interstate compact borne out of fair negotiations between the states. Yet this move just serves to underscore exactly how difficult, if not impossible, it will be for AL-GA-FL to ever reach a consensus. Especially in times of want, we are likely to see further instances shady dealings and “mind-boggling” selfishness from all parties involved.
-st
December 19th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
Like so many in the Atlanta area, I’m an outsider who relocated here with my family because of the economic opportunities. Since I bought a house (admittedly modest) and I’m invested in the long-term welfare of this community, I guess I’ve got a place at the table in this conversation.
The water-level statistics posted here seem very important, but they are somewhat difficult for a layman to understand. I would like to pursue a bit different slant in my post. I understand everyone’s frustration with the current situation, and I myself am quite worried about the immediate situation as well as the long-term viability of the metro area and my ability to stay here.
So consider the following: (1) economic decline of Atlanta would have far-reaching effects that would influence those who say they don’t care, and such effects would readily cross state lines; (2) we must begin now to treat water as a precious resource; (3) there is probably enough water if we don’t squander it; (4) many people find this a desirable place to live but will leave if they are forced, with potentially serious economic consequences to themselves and the area as a whole; (5) our elected officials need to revisit “to whom they owe what”, get serious about this issue, and show some true leadership — which sometimes means making unpopular decisions.
December 19th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
This issue is at the core of the water wars when ACE made an unauthorized 10% allocation to Atlanta without congressional approval.
This is a good link to understand that FL and AL want GA to address it’s unbridled growth, lack of conservation, and lack of planning before they concede more of their water.
http://www.wmbb.com/gulfcoastwest/mbb/news.apx.-content-articles-MBB-2007-12-14-0016.html
December 19th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
Although I think he meant Alabama and not Mississippi.
December 19th, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Lol JohnC. An opinion piece from the obviously unbiased mayor of Apalachicola who doesn’t even know which three states are involved in the water war. A mental giant obviously. I couldn’t even give it a serious read after he kept calling Alabama Mississippi.
December 20th, 2007 at 12:32 am
Mickey isn’t your headline a little redundant? “(R-AL) is a jerk”
I mean you don’t need both the “R” and “jerk”. Either one would have provided awareness and sufficient information.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:33 am
Sen. Shelby has always been human garbage, but if fellow Repub Senators like Chambliss cannot handle him, then how are average Georgians going to be able to deal with his stupidity?
December 20th, 2007 at 7:03 am
I lived in Alabama for 20 years and never voted for the man. They just named a new science building at my alma mater after that prick.
One of the things that might keep me in the Great Lakes region needs no further explanation in this sentence.
December 20th, 2007 at 8:18 am
Folks are leaving out the media article fact that Shelby was/is willing to forgo blocking the corps manual development, if they will produce a 25 year forecast of expected water consumptions by geographical location. Is a good forecast a bad idea? What’s really going on here folks?
December 20th, 2007 at 9:03 am
I think what I found kind of suspect is that the governors are trying to get together to work something out, and this guy throws a monkey wrench into the works.
I’m not saying the governors are doing a great job, nor that the senator was trying to be malicious, just that it seems the wrong time to put up a road block to a solution.
The 25 year forecast is an excellent idea. But would have to be funded. And then the study would have to be done. And then reviewed. And that will take years. There are, no doubt, some changes that can be made to the Corps handbook now, not willy-nilly, but based on years of documentation that already exists.
It really does seem like a poorly timed, jerk-like thing to do.
December 20th, 2007 at 9:10 am
Shelby just does whatever his masters tell him to do. Google illegal naked shorting, he is helping the garbage criminals steal our countries wealth. Shelby is bought and paid for and we are talking at the highest levels. his goal is to help water become “property” and this will surely help.
Don’t laugh at those that bring up martial law, thats the ultimate goal of neocons and Shelby works for them. Be warned people.. Mickey please don’t censor this. Vote Ron Paul 2008 and start sending these miscreants to prison.
December 20th, 2007 at 10:11 am
I don’t hold out much hope for the negotiations anyway. In a negotiation generally when one party has something another wants, the other party offers some compensation (or some threat). I’m not aware of any compensation being on the table. The only threat is the threat of carrying forward in the courts. If we just think three reasonable people are going to sit at the table and come up with a reasonable compromise because it is the right thing to do I think we are being a little naive. Which governor will give up a bit of his position and why? His voters will scream if he gives up anything without getting something in return.
I think this will have to be settled in the courts and should be heard by the courts as quickly as possible.
December 20th, 2007 at 11:32 am
I agree 100% with George Cole. I too am a current Georgia resident who is from Alabama. In fact, I am in Alabama right now enjoying my water! Senator Shelby is doing what Senators are supposed to do: act in the best interests of their State. He’s a great senator….I run into him at lunch on occasion here in Tuscaloosa. Metro Atlanta and Georgia leaders and residents need to quit whining and instead solve this problem without expecting other states to give them more than their fair share of water.
December 20th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Carol says”
“Metro Atlanta and Georgia leaders and residents need to quit whining and instead solve this problem without expecting other states to give them more than their fair share of water.”
Carol, as I’ve said in other forums on this site, Atlanta is NOT the source of the current problem.
Atlanta’s net usage (water removed minus water returned to the river after it has been cleaned/treated) is estimated at roughly 200 million gallons per day, which is a tiny fraction of the total water being released by the Lake Lanier reservoir.
The source of the problem is the drought, and perhaps also a lack of insight on the part of those who continue to block attempts to solve this problem.
December 20th, 2007 at 1:01 pm
I wonder why the ACE didn’t get congressional approval before increasing Atlanta’s share of water by 10%?
Georogia is probably going to lose that deal, which will be waste of 17 years. Why not just do what a is legal in the first place? Why not plan ahead for your own growth?
Georgia has already flip flopped and is now embracing conservation because this will be part of the agreement between the three states.
Georgia and the ACE can’t just ignore federal law.
December 20th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Carol says: “Metro Atlanta and Georgia leaders and residents need to quit whining and instead solve this problem without expecting other states to give them more than their fair share of water.”
Carol, what is Atlanta’s fair share? How does one determine fair shares of water? As Prootwadl says above, the amount of water consumed by metro Atlanta is tiny. Why should AL and FL get more water than GA?
December 20th, 2007 at 1:46 pm
Good thing we have Saxby and Johnny in D.C. to catch this kind of crap!
December 20th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
[...] Mickey at Atlanta Water Shortage is pissed — I repeat, pissed — at Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby and his earmark-slippin’ [...]
December 20th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
Carol your boy Shelby is a crook. google illegal naked shorting with shelby’s name. when the stock market crashes, and it will…. Go ask shelby for your money back. LOL LOL LOL now that is funny. that crook will be halfway to argentina by then with his neocon thugettes.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
Carol - “Metro Atlanta and Georgia leaders and residents need to quit whining and instead solve this problem without expecting other states to give them more than their fair share of water.”
Actually aren’t we the ones giving them water? There is a difference between us giving them less and them giving us something. Georgia gets ZERO water from Alabama or Florida. It’s a cute rhetorical trick to say that we are asking them to “give Georgia” more water. Sorry, it doesn’t fly with me.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
JohnC Says:
“Georgia and the ACE can’t just ignore federal law.” Or maybe I should say Judge JohnC. Because obviously even though this whole mess is a jumble of legal issues yet to be decided by the courts, JohnC has decided what is legal. and…..
“Georgia has already flip flopped and is now embracing conservation because this will be part of the agreement between the three states.”
You’re making me puke just a little inside my mouth. Just a tiny bit.
First isn’t that what you have been crying about? Then you are pissy when you get it? Second - remember we have been under some level of watering restrictions for years. Even when the lake was full and it was raining constantly.
December 20th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
I suggest everyone read the Fresh Loaf blog posted above for some more background on Shelby’s ties to this issue.
As I understand it, the research has already been done, as part of the 10-year “comprehensive study” conducted by the Corps and the tri-states at the beginning of the Water Wars. This was the “unique experiment in information as negotiation” that was meant to preclude lengthy litigation in the courts. Projections for demand were made all the way out to the year 2050. Yet the states basically ignored the research they’d devoted themselves to for a decade, and gave up on negotiating. Hence, the continued stalemate.
It’s important to realize that interstate water allocations have succeeded in fairly apportioning the resource among other states in the past. We need look no further than the Delaware River Basin compact for an impressive example of equitable water sharing in action. Water scarcity is a new problem for the southeast, but it has been experienced and solved by other regions of the US through interstate compacts for a long time. The Tri-States are being extremely selfish, shortsighted, and obdurate in their attitude towards fair negotiations, and this will be their undoing.
It’s also important to understand that abandoning this decision to the “courts” eventually means the Supreme Court, as this will be where the final allocation decision would end up if not handled by the states themselves. Congress is the only other entity that can forge such contracts, aside from the Supreme Court. This is not an eventuality that any of the states desire, nor does the Court wish to deal with it. It’s too complex and regional an issue to hand off to some arbitrary, uninvolved “decider.” And any further complaints, which there would most surely be, would wind up right back at the Justices’ table. A very poor, but perhaps inevitable, solution to this problem.
-st
December 20th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
ST - I think there will have to be an unbiased decision maker. None of the governors look ready to give an inch. Even if they know it is the right thing to do, they will take political heat at home if they look like they “lost” in the negotiations. Take the recent example of Governor Crist who walked away from the last negotiation agreeing to flow reductions. When he got home and started taking heat, his reasonableness quickly ended. Remember we are dealing with politicians - not statesmen.
December 20th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
I think an unbiased decision maker wouldn’t be a bad idea. The difficulty would be getting Georgia, Alabama, and Florida to agree to be bound by that person or group’s rulings.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:48 am
You are right, there, rkolter. Redressing future controversies would always revert to a Supreme Court decision. And there will assuredly be future controversy. Litigation would be as terminal a problem as the water crisis itself. And it is costly, time-consuming, and an issue that the Court has explicitly stated it wishes the States to take up themselves.
The best models currently in practice for management of a multi-state river basin involves a co-operated “regulatory commission” including representatives of each state, plus a federal representative. The federal role, in this case, is advisory and functions to ensure the decisions of the board comply with federal statutes.
The benefits of a regulatory commission are several (here I’m paraphrasing from an important book on the subject, “Interstate Water Allocation”):
Benefits: Regulatory powers –
- Ability to require long-term conservation
- Mediation to reconcile water-use disputes
- In times of drought: commission takes over operation of major reservoirs and can ban nonessential use
- The commission’s staff serves as extension of state agencies; experts from engineering to PR help states in their missions.
**Federal involvement across compacts has shown to be undependable and various in policy – no uniform national policy towards interstate water**
-st
December 21st, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Is the 18% loss of water from Atlanta leaky pipes part of Georgia’s long term conservation?
I’m not sure why it’s such a challenge for some of you to look at both sides of the issue, without making personal attacks.
RichS, I dind’t make that up. You can google the water wars and learn for yourself that the ACE 1990 allocation of 10% to Atlanta should have been approved by congress. I also said Georgia would “probably’ lose, because this is what I have read by experts. Then Georgia will have to take it to congress.
here is one link right off the top, there are many others. sorry i don’t have time to do all your research for you.
http://www.alabamarivers.org/current-work/water-wars/water-wars-background
Once again you personal attacks don’t provide any useful information. You are an inhospitable individual, and if my post bother you that much, then don’t read them.
People are here to discuss the issues not me. You may devalue my post but other may appreciate a balanced approach, and can make decisions for themselves, based on both sides of the issue.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:19 pm
JohnC - I’m cracking up here. Seriously laughing out loud. I LOVE getting under your skin. You’re like the little brother that I never had.
But seriously - yes Atlanta does have a problem with their water & sewer infrastructure. They are in the process of a massive multi billion dollar overhaul. They started the process maybe five years ago and we have discussed it in this forum before. So yes there is a problem and it is being addressed. I would consider it very relevant if Atlanta wasn’t going to extraordinary measures to fix it already. Could the process be faster? Possibly. I can’t say when the estimated completion date is, nor if your figures are a couple of years old when the process was in earlier stages.
And I read your link. It summarizes a good bit of legal arguments - none of which have been decided by the courts. I’m not sure what you wanted me to read there.
December 21st, 2007 at 11:38 pm
RichS,
I can’t find the same link that went into the details of the pending federal lawsuit by Al and Fl.
Essentially, the major decision in federal court is due early next year over the ACE decision to increase Atlanta’s share of Lanier by 10%. I thought everyone knew about this pending ruling?
Anyway, the judge was hammering the ACE for this because it was the first time the ACE did this without congressional approval. Although, Georgia thinks if it loses this case, it will go to congress and get the increased 10% anyway.
I hope the three states can reach an agreement soon.
It’s a shame it’s gotten to this point.
February 1st, 2008 at 9:43 am
[...] to Craig for the link) Despite Sen. Richard Shelby’s ridiculous objections, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plan to move forward on updating the operating manuals for the [...]