Recognize the water grab for what it is, and fight it to the end
Water grab moves drought to us
When the State Water Resources Control Board approves the pending water grab, I hope we can take the gloves off and call it what it is – a certain Southern California agency, through strategic political ties, laying claim to our rivers and aquifer, which is God’s gift to all Central Valley residents.
If this happens, we’ll go the way of Owens Valley. I encourage readers to pull up the Wikipedia page “California Water Wars.” I know the main talk is about our rivers, but the rivers and our aquifer are interconnected community resources. As the recent drought reminded us – that which the rivers can’t provide, the aquifer will. But only for a limited time.
The twin-tunnels project can only happen if the environmental impact on the Delta can be masked, hence the need for our water. This will shift the environmental impact to our area, blurring the line between cause and effect. This is a critical time in our Valley’s history. I encourage fellow residents to get involved, become single-issue voters and move across party lines to combat this assault on our region.
Michael Sweeten, Turlock
Denham will fight for our water rights
I’ve been farming here for awhile now. The profession requires a lot of hard work, but it has treated me well and taught me many life lessons. Due to the state’s plan to take 40 percent of our water, I’m truly worried about our local economy and the livelihoods of many. This is not only my concern, but that of my neighbors as well. After noticing that Josh Harder didn’t think it was worth his time to attend the water rally in Sacramento, he’s certainly not equipped to fight for our water rights. Denham’s fought for our water and has always been a straight shooter – something I appreciate.
Zachary Fowler, Hughson
System itself creates the fraud
A common preconception about our social services, from disability insurance to Medicaid, is that it’s susceptible to fraud and because of fraud, it ought to be reformed by cutting funding and restricting eligibility (all of which limit services). This preconception came up in a conversation I had with a former employer about a current employee applying for services, which the employer claims she’s doing fraudulently.
Understanding the context of her experiences and the condition of the poor and working class ought to place outrage on the conditions that create the inability to meet one’s needs. The concern for fraud is irrelevant when considering whether financially and emotionally taking care of your immigrant mother, who has cancer and is undergoing chemotherapy when cancer has already taken the life of your father, raises questions not about the culpability of individual cases of desperation, but systemic structures that create the desperation.
Adam Navarro, Newman