American Newspapers apparently okay with shredding of the US Constitution

It took all of a day after the party to celebrate the shredding of the US Constitution — otherwise known as the signing of the Affordable Health Care for America Act — for the local newspaper to try to eviscerate our local congressman for his opposition to the recent health care bill in Congress.

This doesn’t come as a surprise that an American newspaper would say something negative about a Conservative Republican congressman. And sadly, it’s no surprise to those of us who do follow the Visalia Times Delta and Tulare Advance Register here in Central California that their editorial board is as naïve as they are. In fact it’s actually pretty comical to watch them try to be relevant when they have proven themselves irrelevant time and time again.

In the grand scheme of things, the Central Valley of California has benefitted over the past year or so in an ironic sort of way with respect to water and politics. Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh have highlighted the water issues impacting California’s Central Valley, and our own Congressman here in the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., has been eager to give voice to a region of the United States that is disappointingly ignored in both the state and US capitol buildings.

Last week during the debate leading up to the vote on the health care bill, and in the days since it was approved and signed, Rep. Nunes made numerous appearances on local and national television and radio. This apparently caught the eye of the editorial writers at the Visalia Times Delta, who lambasted Nunes in the March 24^th edition for using “some of the most extreme language of any Republican in trying to block passage of the Affordable Health Care for America Act.”

In a telephone conversation I had later the same day with Nunes’ chief of staff, Johnny Amaral, we laughed over how naïve and infantile the editorial board writers appear to be. Of considerable note to Amaral was how the editorial contrasted Nunes to Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich. While it was no surprise that Nunes would vote against the Affordable Health Care for America Act (the title itself would be laughable if it wasn’t so offensive to the intelligence to the millions of Americans who openly opposed the bill), to be placed in the same sentence with Stupak, who stood firmly on principle until someone showed him the money, is hilarious in its naïveté. As Amaral put it, “Stupak is the laughingstock of Washington DC right now.”

The VTD’s point throughout the editorial appeared to be Nunes’ firm opinion on the bill — not just that he voted against it, but that he couldn’t be swayed to vote in favor of it. This seems to be consistent with past editorials that have chided Nunes for being too partisan in his opinions on various matters. But, as Amaral noted in our phone conversation, Nunes wasn’t the only one voting no on the health care bill. Every Republican in the House and even several dozen Democrats voted against the bill. So in the grand scheme of things, this health care bill remains the most partisan piece of significant and sweeping legislation passed in the history of the United States.

The editorial also chides Nunes for apparently not bringing home the pork to the district and gaining “nothing from his opposition” to the bill. Apparently the editorial writers figure that Stupak gained a lot from his early opposition to the bill, even though he played the appropriate part of an expensive whore, holding out for the right price. In fact that was the accusation made against Nunes’ fellow California representatives, Dennis Cardoza, D-CA, and Jim Costa, D-CA. The consummate spineless moderates that they are, they played their cards close to the vest until very late in the game, and as a result, were “awarded” with a 25-percent allocation of farm water to their already dead agricultural districts. Not quite Sen. Mary Landrieu’s “Louisiana Purchase” deal, but nonetheless offensive to many here in the Golden State, including the wealthy farmers who have bankrolled Cardoza and Costa’s campaigns in the past. Of course Costa and Cardoza deny being “bought” with this allocation of farm water, but it sure stinks given the timing of the whole deal.

The editorial also criticized Nunes for accusing the Democrats of “totalitarian” tactics as they rammed through the health care bill.

Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif.

“On television, his Web site and the floor of Congress, Nunes used some of the most extreme language of any Republican in trying to block passage of the Affordable Health Care for America Act,” the editorial states.  “Nunes called the Democrats’ tactics ‘totalitarian,’ referred to health-reform supporters as ‘communists’ and predicted America’s decline into socialism.”

What else do you call it when the President of the United States forces an issue so unpopular, and the House of Representatives resorts to unconstitutional tricks, in order to pass something that most Americans don’t want? By what other name do you ascribe those who support forcing people to buy health insurance or go to prison? For all his faults and all the baseless criticisms of President George W. Bush, at no time during his two terms did he even come close to attempting to force such an unpopular piece of legislation down the throats of the American public. Even Bill Clinton knew when to give up on his attempts to socialize the health care system in America.

Nunes deserves much credit for trying to encourage his colleagues to live within the proper constraints of the US Constitution. To accuse Nunes of using “extreme language” when his language was true and to the point is offensive to everything this country was founded upon. For those interested in reading some “extreme language,” I’d invite you to read the Declaration of Independence because many of the complaints the colonists had against King George pale in comparison to the treason committed by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., President Barak Hussein Obama and the others who supported this piece of legislation. And while you’re at it, continue by reading the US Constitution and other historical documents from the founding of this country and then report back on how folks like Rep. Nunes are somehow misrepresenting their constituents.

Biting the hand that feeds us: Trail extension will kill farms and reduce public safety money

Discussions are under way in Tulare County, California to force farmers between the cities of Tulare and Visalia to sell prime agricultural land for a $3 million fiasco that will further erode our ability to be agriculturally self-sustaining in America. Worse yet for local officials, taking this land for public use forever removes the property tax income collected from that private property and forces county supervisors into further budget cuts on necessary public safety needs such as fire and law enforcement.

Extending the Santa Fe Trail, a walking and bicycling trail in the city of Tulare, approximately 10 miles through county property to the City of Visalia is estimated to cost $3 million. Because government projects typically come in over budget projections, who knows the direct cost such a project will have as unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats begin to insert their pet ideas to this project?

A local newspaper article on the subject reports that farmers along the affected route are not happy, not because they will likely be underpaid for the fair market value of the land, but because it will severely impact their ability to farm in the area. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to be schooled on what happens when cities and other urban uses encroach on farms. Or, talk to farmers who have had schools built within their spheres of influence and have had to severely curtail best management practices such as tilling and pesticide use.

Before long the issue comes back to the whole idea that we’re incrementally destroying our ability to be agriculturally self-sustaining in the United States. But more dangerous on a local level is that such a move will reduce the amount of property tax revenue the county can collect. In an age where county officials are cutting vital public safety services to police and fire protection, this is not the right direction to go.

County officials need to explore regions of the county where this $3 million could be better spent for the masses. For example, the entire community of Earlimart could use new streets. Sadly, converting some of these streets to dirt would be an improvement over what they have there right now. Or do county officials realize that there are three elementary schools and a number of businesses and many more residents who could benefit from better roads? I encourage Tulare County Supervisor Pete VanderPoel to take a drive through the community of Earlimart and pay particularly close attention to the streets leading to the three schools there. They’re in such bad repair right now that they’re directly responsible for increased vehicle damage and repair costs.

VanderPoel needs to do all in his power to stop this move to expand the Santa Fe Trail and make that money available to better serve a great number of residents in his district.

Farm water a national security issue

The ability to capture water to irrigate farms has always been a human consideration. Even with water storage facilities such as Shasta Lake and its 4.3 million acre feet of storage, water policy in California allows most of the water captured in storage facilities in California to flow out to sea unused by the agriculture which feeds and sustains the United States and much of the world. ©Todd Fitchette

I have long argued that our battle over water for agriculture has much larger ramifications than the economy of California’s Central Valley. The cheap and ready access to irrigation water is not only vital to for the existence of farms and families in California, it’s imperative if we’re going to remain a sovereign nation.

Discussions over water have become a crusade here in Central California. The reason it’s become such an issue (again) is because the bureaucrats who control the flow of irrigation water believe that protecting the Delta Smelt, a tiny fish with no commercial value, is more important than growing the crops we eat and export.

Farmers have long been innovators in many ways. In fact farmers from around the world will gather next week at the World Ag Expo in Tulare, CA to consider the purchase of new technologies that will further make them more efficient. They’ve had to be more efficient. Profit and loss margins tend to be thin in agricultural production, and in most cases are reliant on things out of control of farmers: the weather and world markets dictate whether farmers will even have a crop and what those crops will be worth once they’re harvested.

It doesn’t help when bureaucrats and do-gooders looking for a cause change the rules after the bets have been placed. You could rightly understand the outrage people would have in Las Vegas if the house called for the bets, and after the bets were placed, the house completely changed the rules in their favor and swept the table clean. That’s what happens on a regular basis as the federal government repeatedly violates the contract it has with farmers to provide water in the Central Valley. These failed water deliveries and cutbacks always happen after predictions of water are made and farmers have borrowed money from the banks to plant their crops. But lately farmers have stopped planting in California’s fertile Central Valley because the predictions of water deliveries have continued to drop to levels unsustainable for agricultural production.

Agriculture has always been the lifeblood of our nation. Even after the industrial revolution moved people off the farm and into the factories, we’ve been self-sufficient when it comes to our food production. What’s even more remarkable is that fewer and fewer people continue to produce more than enough food for the rest of us here in the United States.

Ours isn’t a problem of a lack of water in California, but a lack of water when and where we need it. Much more water falls on California each year through rain and snow than we’re able to store. The ability to collect more of that water and make it available for agricultural and urban uses doesn’t take any water away from the Delta. In reality, it would stabilize flows through the Delta by giving us the ability to slow the runoff and release it in a more controlled manner. There’s another phrase for this: it’s called flood control.

Before Shasta Dam was built, much of the Sacramento Valley was uninhabitable during certain times of the year. Now with facilities like Shasta and Keswick dams, we’ve not only allowed agriculture to flourish in the Sacramento Valley, but we’ve allowed for urban development as the flood plains became livable thanks to the ability to control the flow of water down the Sacramento River. As an added perk, we created a whole host of recreational opportunities for people.

While we could do well to increase the storage capacity of lakes Shasta, Keswick and Oroville, we need similar storage facilities along the west slopes of the southern and central Sierra — facilities that would collect and store water for farmers and cities alike. Water that could even be used to restore the San Joaquin River.

We can do what it takes to build the storage and conveyance systems necessary to provide ample water for agricultural production and urban uses, or we can let a very loud minority have its way and kill agriculture in California. If this happens, we’ll cede our agricultural self-sufficiency to other countries that likely won’t have the best interest of the United States at heart when we go begging for food.

Farmers must better educate the public

Today's dairy cow eats better and is healthier than ever because she is under the regular care of a veterinarian. ©Todd Fitchette

For all that American agriculture provides those who live here, particularly in the Central Valley, you’d think that people would be less ignorant about it. Then again there’s little wonder why Americans are so detached from their supply of food and fiber. After all, it’s so easy to go to the grocery store and pick through a dozen different brands of the same thing; fruits and vegetables are in plentiful supply, the dairy case is consistently stocked with a growing list of items and the remaining shelves and bins have even more choices.

Add to that the ever-decreasing list of people who make their living producing our food and fiber and it becomes a simple issue of numbers. The farmer does what he does in near anonymity. You may even know this farmer; you might go to church with him and his family, or you might shop the same local grocery store, but even then there’s a large disconnect between you and the farmer because you don’t buy your groceries from the farmer. He sells his produce, dairy products, meat, vegetables, etc. to someone who processes the raw commodities; that person likely sells them one more time before hiring someone to transport the finished product to the grocery store where they’re neatly stacked on shelves for you to buy.

That’s likely the root of the problem: farmers don’t sell their goods to the end-user; they don’t have the connection with the end user. That’s not necessarily bad, it simply illustrates a hurdle that the ag industry must overcome if it’s going to better promote itself. While it may be interesting to some, and useful in a sense for agriculture to promote itself in terms of dollars and jobs, the vast majority of the public likely doesn’t care much that American agriculture accounts for about 4 percent of the nominal gross domestic product, according the US Department of Agriculture, or that in California’s Central Valley, agriculture’s economic impact is recorded in the tens of billions of dollars.

While farmers have worked to educate themselves, have made strides in becoming more efficient in their practices, and have even joined forces to lobby their elected representatives, they’ve done little at best to educate their customers — the American public — about just what it is they do, how they do it, and why what they do is so important.

Farm Bureau promotes American agricultural products as the best and safest, but unless you’re involved with Farm Bureau in some way you wouldn’t know that. Somehow that “best and safest” argument has not permeated American culture to the point that it impacts agricultural policy from the federal to the local level. It’s taken for granted until an outbreak of disease-causing bacteria makes headlines and evening news broadcasts and even then it’s missed in the hysteria and hype that reporters can bring to the issue. In some cases those outbreaks can be directly traced to imported food — think tainted frozen strawberries from Mexico several years ago that made it into USDA school lunch programs. Still, other outbreaks may very well have come from U.S. produced food, such as more recent headlines that blamed spinach, lettuce and tomatoes. As detrimental to health and safety that those issues were, instances such as those are more the exception than the rule. Even so, issues such as this make an even stronger case for a more concerted effort of education and promotion by the American agriculture industry.

As cities continue to push their boundaries and pave over farmland and interest groups work to further legislate and restrict farming practices at the ballot box, we’re in danger of pushing our food production across the border and overseas. The end result will be the total abdication of our food production to nations that don’t have our best interests at heart. We have a tremendous land grant college system that puts university research on farms and ranches, helping American agriculture provide the best and safest food of any nation on Earth.

Our national sovereignty rests on our ability to feed and clothe ourselves with what we produce and export another large part of this production. A cursory look at America’s failed energy policy illustrates this point. How many more imported barrels of oil will it take before we completely forfeit our sovereignty? If we cede our food production to other nations, we will lose more than a safe and ample food supply.

American agriculture has a lot going for it. Instead of complaining that the public simply doesn’t understand, help us understand what you do, why you do it that way, and how those practices provide me with a safe and bountiful supply of food.

Democrats create environmental hazard

Follow the bouncing ball on this one folks…

Today’s 50-plus mph winds along the I-5 corridor in California’s San Joaquin Valley kicked up enough dust to stop traffic, cause illnesses, snarl traffic, cause vehicle accidents and generally wreak havoc on the region. While the act of nature was not a direct result of politicians in Sacramento and Washington, the size of the dust storm certainly was.

You see, this land has been sitting fallow now for an entire growing season, and should still have crops planted on it. Why, you ask, was thousands of acres of the richest farmland on the planet left fallow for an entire growing season? It’s simple: farmers had their water allotments stripped from them last year by a government beholden to environmental activists who believe it’s more important to protect a prolific species of fish than it is continue to grow the food that feeds this nation and provides jobs for thousands of people in the Golden State.

So to put it bluntly, Rep. George Miller, D-CA, Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, and others including Rep. Jim Costa, D-CA, are directly to blame for millions of tons of top soil that became airborne in places like Mendota and Firebaugh and brought traffic to a stand-still on a major interstate.

So the next time you feel like voting Democrat, look around you at those who suffered asthma attacks and had to be hauled away in ambulances because of the public health hazard created by blowing dust that could have been contained had Democrats allowed farmers to irrigate the crops that feed the world.

It’s not the point, but if it works…

KMJ Radio’s Ray Appleton almost had another stroke, this time on the air, as he expressed his outraged over a San Francisco Chronicle article that accuses Central Valley Republicans of trying to “steal” Democrat voters by targeting Latinos in their efforts to get more water for agriculture.

While this might be a legitimate strategy of some political pundits, linking this issue to the fight over farm water here in the Valley is, as Mr. Appleton put it: “Fightin’ Words!”

The issue to restore water flows to Central Valley farms has been, in the classic sense of the term, a true bipartisan effort here in the Valley. It hasn’t mattered what political viewpoints people bring to the debate, the end has and remains water, and more of it for Central Valley agriculture. While Appleton (a Republican) and Rep. Devin Nunes (also a Republican) have taken up the cause to turn on the spigots to Valley farms, others such as Comedian Paul Rodriguez, a Democrat and Central Valley farmer, along with a host of other Democrat Latinos — many of them farmworkers — have literally stood beside and marched along with Republicans with one goal in mind: to restore water flows to Valley farms. The tough thing is that while politics has not been the object of this effort, the sad fact is that this issue must be played out in the political arena if water is going to flow once again to Central Valley farms.

One glaring irony in this issue has been the behind-the-scenes efforts of Democrat politicians, including Rep. Jim Costa, D-CA, to derail efforts for more water. Still that hasn’t deterred folks like the Latino Water Coalition and Appleton from pushing ahead.

While Appleton’s outrage is completely understandable and shared by many, the article by Chronicle Staff Writer Joe Garafoli does point out a very obvious fact: Democrat leaders could care less about the Latino population here in the Valley; Latinos, to the Democrats, are mere pawns in their effort to gain dictatorial control of California and the United States.

This seems more apparent to a growing number of Americans of all shades that the Democrats aren’t really out to help the little man as much as they’re out for their own power and their own gain at the expense of those they claim to support.

If Garofoli’s opinion comes true, then it’ll be the fault of local Democrats, including those claiming kinship with groups like the Latinos and Portuguese here in the Valley, who will wind up driving voters away from their cause and towards the Republicans.

Hannity part 5 of 5

Hannity part 4 of 5

Hannity part 3 of 5

Hannity part 2 of 5