Below is my column today in USA Today on the Obama Administration’s decision to cut off water to legal marijuana growers. Notably, the business concern today for the rollout of legal pot sales in Washington is greater demand than supply. I previously wrote about how a little known board had effectively moved to end the debate over the Redskins name, an example of agencies increasingly intervening in social and political disputes. This move by the Bureau of Reclamation is a prime example of such intervention into political disputes and a troubling precedent for the future.
When voters in Washington state and Colorado legalized possession and sale of recreational marijuana in 2012, federal officials were not happy. They will be less happy Tuesday when pot officially goes on sale in Washington. Though the Obama administration has pledged to respect state laws, it is quietly going in the opposite direction by cutting off water to the growers. The idea seems to be that if the administration cannot dry up the public support for legalization, it will just dry up the plants themselves.
Like areas from health care to immigration, a sharp disconnect between voters and their government is growing by the day. The administration and Congress are losing the debate over legalization.
Many citizens do not see the logic or necessity in the crackdown on pot. Support for legalization is soaring. In 1987, only 16% supported legalization. That increased to 26% in 1996 and 43% in 2012. It now stands at 55%. Two states have responded with legalization, others have taken a smaller step of decriminalization, and 20 states have legalized medical marijuana over the opposition of the federal government.
Democrats’ dilemma
With other programs such as health care already endangering Democrats in the next election, the administration does not want to openly oppose the wishes of more than half of the population. With one hand, it allows state experimentation, while the other hand, the Bureau of Reclamation turns off the spigot by ordering irrigation districts not to distribute federal water to farmers breaking national drug laws. No water, no pot.
The use of water as a weapon is not new in the West, where “water wars” were once common among ranches and even states. The federal government began in 1902 to take control over such waters with programs to build dams and waterways. What began as a few dozen projects grew into a massive system, in which the federal government controlled a significant portion of the water in 17 states with the construction of more than 600 dams and reservoirs. It is now the nation’s largest water wholesale operation, supplying to more than 31 million people and one out of five farmers in the West. It is not just water. The government’s 53 power plants annually provide more than 40 billion kilowatt hours that support millions of homes.
Though some have long chaffed at federal control over this essential resource, the government has insisted that its projects are designed to simply maximize the use of the resource. Indeed, with the growing national crisis over the loss of drinking water and many states experiencing droughts, the role of a neutral federal agency has never been more important.
That is why this latest move is so dangerous. The government already coerces states by withholding money unless they follow federal mandates. If the feds can now withhold water or electricity, too, that stranglehold will tighten.
The government supplies the water that sustains 10 million acres of farmland, and the farms that produce 60% of the nation’s vegetables and 25% of its fruits and nuts.
In Washington, that translates to the water for two-thirds of the state’s irrigated land.
Legal hypocrisy
Bureau spokesman Dan DuBray insists that the agency “is obligated to adhere to federal law.” However, that position is inconsistent with the actions of the Obama administration in other areas.
I testified in Congress on Obama’s non-enforcement orders issued in areas such as immigration and drug enforcement. In addition, Obama has issued controversial orders that effectively amend federal laws in ways that Congress had rejected. It rings rather hollow for the administration now to claim that it has no choice but to take this action to indirectly support drug laws when it has ordered the non-enforcement of so many others.
This is even less plausible when one considers that the Justice Department has altered its enforcement of the drug laws in light of state legalization. The administration is directly curtailing enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act, but a water agency is changing its operations to enforce that same law by other means. The agency could have simply supplied water to every state neutrally. Instead, it is taking action to punish these states.
The shutting off of the water in Washington and Colorado for these growers is not about pot but politics. Carl von Clausewitz once observed that “war is the continuation of politics by other means.” The same can be said about the opening salvo in a new water war.
Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, is a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors.
Jill, SWM is dizzy from spinning so hard. The Rand Paul spin is hilarious. She hates Rand Paul, and all Republicans. When Obama is under attack, SWM goes on the offensive, firing @ will and often hitting her two feet.
I have a missing comment again! Would someone please try to find it? Thanks!
So SMM, Is it your contention that Obama is only doing this because he is frightened of Rand Paul or some other Republican? That’s a strange thing to say but if you think that’s the truth, would you mind delineating your thought process on that one?
Again Saucy, All true. Fracking is bad news, it just isn’t the reason for this decision by the Obama administration.
Here’s the reason given: “Marijuana growing remains illegal under federal law, so irrigation water from its dams cannot be used to grow pot even in states that have legalized recreational or medical use of the drug, the agency said….
“This is the policy decision,” DuBray said.”
A discussion about water use and fracking is a great idea. I would hope that people would not use that discussion to off track the real reason for this decision which has nothing to do with either of those worthy issues!
Having been in three fraking related earthquakes in Texas, I can verify that this is happening.
CA could effectively end water problems in the west. The refusal to use so much as a thin dime of So Cal’s unspeakable wealth to build out the desalination plants that are absolutely going to be needed, and cost more every year they are put off.
But they will pay for themselves once it occurs to someone to sell that water back to the thirsty SW states.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/14/rand-paul-backs-bill-that-could-lead-to-crack-down-on-states-where-voters-legalized-weed/ “Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has thrown his support behind legislation that Republicans could use to force President Barack Obama to crack down on legal marijuana in states like Colorado and Washington.
Speaking to Fox News on Thursday, the libertarian-leaning senator said he supported the Enforce the Law Act, which has been approved by the House. The legislation would allow Congress to sue the president for failing to faithfully execute laws.
Paul said that Obama appeared to be “writing his own laws whenever he feels like it.”
“He also does need to enforce the law. We write laws and he is just deciding willy-nilly if he likes it he enforces it, if he doesn’t, he won’t enforce it, and we really think he needs to be chastened, rebuked, and told that he needs to obey the constitution,” he added.” Rand Paul’s bill says that congress can sue the president if he does not enforce the federal laws. He wants him to crack down on the marijuana growers and users and the immigrants. Well, maybe, Boehner can add this to his law suit.
Jay wrote “Oklahoma Hit by More Earthquakes Than California”
We learned this decades ago at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal. Injecting fluids into the ground causes earthquakes because fluids reduce friction between rock plates.
SMM,
Lack of water out west and many other places is a real problem. It’s just not the reason for this policy and it is disingenuous to keep implying that it is.
This issue is most definitely about Obama and his DOJ. The reason given for denial of water use isn’t a concern over depleting the water shed. Here is the reason given: “Marijuana growing remains illegal under federal law, so irrigation water from its dams cannot be used to grow pot even in states that have legalized recreational or medical use of the drug, the agency said….
“This is the policy decision,” DuBray said.”
I was born @ night, not last night.
Come on, SWM!!
swarthmoremom wrote “The depletion of the Ogallala is primarily manmade”
I have commented on the subject of Ogallala-palooza a few times here.
The Ogallala Aquifer was filled when the glaciers retreated around 10,000 years ago. It was NOT filled with rainwater. When the philistines empty it, that part of the country will start to empty. The only viable cities will be ones lying on rivers.
Not to mention that fracking fills aquifers with the chemicals used in the process. Or that many Texans believe that the Earth is only 4000 years old.
Nick, Nothing to do with Obama….. When my daughter took a course on water law, I realized with the droughts and all, that there is a serious problem with the allocation of water resources.
Growing weeds with water isn’t a problem. Fracking with water is.
Oklahoma Hit by More Earthquakes Than California.
What’s the cause of an unprecedented earthquake epidemic in the state? Pumping water from oil and gas drilling back into the Earth has a lot to do with it.
Nick Spinelli,
I have deleted a comment for running afoul of our civility rule.
Saucy, I’m well aware Republicans, forgetting about the disastrous Prohibition era. thought they could control drug use. My point is, this is where one would hope Dems would be sane. But, they have another reason to love the War on Drugs, their love of bureaucracy. An unholy duopoly “bipartisanship.”
To think govt. bureaucrats could even come close to competing w/ the ultimate capitalists, drug cartels, is insanity. Where there is demand, there will be supply. And capitalists will provide it. Dems and Rep also have been tepid @ best @ working on the end of that equation that needs work, the DEMAND side.
Again, this issue is not about a concern about use of water. It is a policy decision about Federal jurisdiction over drug enforcement.
What’s really interesting is this decision isn’t about whether too much water is used to grow pots. Here is what the Federal govt. has to say about their own decision:
“Posted on May 20, 2014 at 11:24 AM
Updated Tuesday, May 20 at 6:52 PM
SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) — Marijuana growers in Washington, Colorado and other states cannot use irrigation water from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to grow their crops, the agency said on Tuesday.
Marijuana growing remains illegal under federal law, so irrigation water from its dams cannot be used to grow pot even in states that have legalized recreational or medical use of the drug, the agency said….
“This is the policy decision,” DuBray said.”
So this is not an environmental concern of the administration (which would be strange given it’s support for all kinds of dirty energy)! This is an attempt to stop pot sales to others by people who use it! Jeesh!!!
http://hppr.org/post/down-last-drop-texas-panhandle-water-crisis “James Mahan is a plant physiologist and an in-law to the Spinhirne family. He works at the USDA Ag Research lab in Lubbock. He says, “We’re headed for a brick wall at 100 miles per hour, and really, the effects of climate change are branches hitting the windshield along the way.”
The depletion of the Ogallala is primarily manmade. A combination of irrigated farming and Texas water rights are at the root of the issue, but the nature of the Ogallala itself is a factor.
No other state’s water law allows such unencumbered individual control. Basically, the law says if you own the land, you and only you own the water. The danger in that concept is becoming apparent as the Ogallala disappears. The law favors the individual above the needs of the community, and in effect, makes water conservation districts ineffective.” Marijuana or not……Water law is becoming an increasingly important area of the law. Some states like Texas have not been forward thinking in this area.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/legal-pot/water-guzzling-pot-plants-draining-drought-wracked-california-n149861 v “Bauer presented data to CNBC indicating that growers are drawing more than 156,000 gallons of water from a single tributary of the Eel River, in Mendocino County, every day.
The average marijuana plant needs about 6 gallons of water a day, depending on its size and whether it’s grown inside or outside, according to a local report that cited research. Pot growers object to that number, saying that the actual water use of a pot plant is much less.
Although the marijuana business has helped revive the local economy, residents may now be feeling the effects of living alongside growers. And, as growers—some legal, some not—face a severe drought, local law enforcement officers expect the fight over natural resources to intensify.
“I never want to see crime increase, but I have a feeling it will, because of the commodities that are up here,” said Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Downey. “When we get to the end of the grow season, which is August and September, the need for enhanced water availability is gonna be there, and I don’t think the water’s going to be there, so you’re going to see people, I believe, having some conflict over water rights.” “
SWM – I have a little trouble with the 6 gallons a day. Illegal grows in national forests are drawing off creeks and using a lot less water.
saucy – an how long have we been fighting the war on poverty? And losing?