Water Wars and Courage

Mike Saccone has an excellent article in the Grand Junction Sentinel on water as a potential issue in the November contest between Mark Udall and Bob Schaffer. It essentially says that old news is...old news.

It does, however, reinforce a theme that we have often repeated here. Mark Udall is a coward when the interests of his favorite special interest, the environmentalist lobby, conflict with the interests of Coloradoans:

[ Josh ] Penry said an examination of [ Mark ] Udall’s voting record shows he also has made some bad decisions on water.

During a July 2000 vote on the House Resources Committee, [ Mark ] Udall voted “present” on a more than $343 million water storage project that drew from the Animas and La Plata rivers.

Penry, who worked for the bill’s sponsor, Congressman Scott McInnis, R-Colo., said everyone was stunned upon hearing Udall’s vote.

“Mark Udall didn’t vote yes, he didn’t vote no,” Penry said. “He voted present.”

Penry said that vote shows that Udall’s priorities on water storage are much closer to groups opposing all water storage than those of widely revered Congressman Wayne Aspinall, D-Colo.

We say that it was just another example of a lack of courage by Mark Udall. Does it remind anyone of Mark Udall's refusal to buck the environmentalists to authorize the needed forest roads to create fire breaks in our dead and dying pine forests, even when that refusal has already cost lives and will cost more?

Can anyone say "Mark Udall, (D-Sierra Club)?

Acting Against the Public Interest

Our son married into a very liberal family. Since we often have joint grandparent events we see each other often. His inlaws live on a ridge at the top of Coal Creek Canyon. They have a view to die for, perhaps 200 square miles of unbroken forest.

Today, we had lunch and had occasion to talk about the refusal of the environmentalists like Mark Udall to cut fire breaks until there is a fire. It defies common sense, and even staunch liberals can see that. Will that change their vote?

They've been life long liberals, but even liberals can see when politicians are acting against their interests. Less dedicated liberals might shift their votes. These people won't.

Clear Cutting

It is hard to understand why the environmentalists oppose clear cutting dead forests to establish fire breaks to stop or slow down a massive forest fire.

If forest fires are contained by creating hasty fire breaks in its path, and environmentalists like Mark Udall's Sierra Club and the Wilderness Society do not object to that, why would they oppose well planned deliberate fire breaks.

This opposition makes no sense. It needlessly puts firefighter's lives at risk because the fires will be fought, and they will be fought with fire breaks.

Perhaps Mark Udall will take time from his busy schedule to explain why he opposes deliberate fire breaks and does not oppose hasty fire breaks.