“Reservoir closure in Year No. 4…” was the headline in the Hollister Free Lance. An invasion of zebra mussels forced the closure of San Justo Reservoir, a popular local recreation area, in early 2008. It will remain closed until at least next fall while the state and federal governments do an environmental review of the plan to remove those pests. If the review of takes another couple of years and dump trucks full of money, it’s no problem – for them. While we’re waiting, we’ll have time to ponder Governor Brown’s proposal to exempt the bullet train from the annoying and expensive environmental lawsuits the rest of us have to suffer. It took almost 300 years for America to come full circle. We thought we rid ourselves of royalty during the American Revolution – but it seems we just traded King George for King Government.
Love them or hate them there is no denying federal environmental rules and especially the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, pronounced “See-qua”), are large and expensive impediments to jobs and growth. For the environmentalists, or anyone opposing almost any project, the costly and obstructive provisions of CEQA are just tools they can use to leverage what they want, and many times that has little to do with the environment. However, this discussion is not about the pros and cons of CEQA, it’s about the government imposing very restrictive rules on its citizens but attempting to exempt itself without good cause. Isn’t a job a job and a kangaroo rat a kangaroo rat?
Shouldn’t the government comply with the rules they force on everyone else? I think so. I’m no absolutist. I can see emergencies that can, reasonably, justify circumventing almost any rule, but the bullet train is hardly in that category. Politically, the driving force behind the bullet train is union jobs – and there has to be a political motive behind it because it never made sense economically. Now – with the governor’s idea of exempting the train from the standard environmental protections – it makes no sense environmentally either.
The albatross around the bullet train’s neck has always been its costs; or rather, the difference between its low-balled estimated cost and the sure-to-be-a-lot-higher actual cost. Most thinking members of the public realize the two are very separate. But let’s just use that lie to set the table, not to condemn those who merely want to buy votes, an old American tradition.
There has always been a practical limit to the lies the government can tell about a project’s estimated cost; however, the current crippling economic conditions have reduced that limit. Now, every time a supporter arbitrarily removes a mere $40 billion or $50 billion from the estimated cost of the bullet train people what to know why and they rely on the governor, the Supporter in Chief, for justification.
There is no doubt that either removing or severely restricting the ability of the public to file environmental lawsuits will both speed the project and significantly reduce costs. Wouldn’t the same logic apply to every Californian from those who wish to build solar generating plants to those who merely want to build a small hotel? Why does the government believe that the environmental regulations are too expensive for them, but affordable for everyone else?
In my old-fashioned view of America’s organizational chart, the people, not the government, are on top. If there are benefits to be awarded and exemptions to be made, they should go to the people first; King Government can wait.
Marty Richman is a Hollister resident whose column runs Tuesdays.
