SACRAMENTO - Team Poizner Communications Director Jarrod Agen issued the following statement today in response to Meg Whitman’s television ad in the Central Valley.
“Meg Whitman’s millions cannot hide the fact that she fought for the delta smelt over farmers when she contributed $300,000 to the liberal Environmental Defense Fund and when she supported Barbara Boxer in 2004. Despite this latest ad, voters won’t be fooled because they already know Meg Whitman is no friend to the Central Valley.”
Whitman Gave $300,000 To EDF, Which Opposes Waiving The Endangered Species Act And Allowing Water Flows Into The Central Valley:
In 2008, Whitman Gave $200,000 To The Environmental Defense Fund, Specifically To The Center For Rivers And Deltas. “She gave $200,000 to the Environmental Defense Fund for a project aimed at rescuing the Delta, but as a candidate she has sided against environmentalists in the debate.” (Ken McLaughlin, “Latest Tax Returns From Meg Whitman’s Foundation May Raise Further Questions About Her Environmental Record,” The [San Jose] Mercury News, 11/18/09)
* Whitman Already Gave $100,000 To The Environmental Defense Fund’s Center For Rivers And Deltas In 2007. “Whitman in June joined farming interests in calling on Congress to suspend the Endangered Species Act to give more water to farmers and less to the endangered Delta smelt, a finger-sized fish seen as an indicator of the overall health of the Delta. But in 2007, her foundation contributed $100,000 to the Environmental Defense Fund for its Delta project.” (Ken McLaughlin, “Latest Tax Returns From Meg Whitman’s Foundation May Raise Further Questions About Her Environmental Record,” The [San Jose] Mercury News, 11/18/09)
The Fresno Bee’s News Blog: “The EDF is one of the groups involved in limiting water deliveries from the Delta for agriculture to protect endangered species.” (Tim Sheehan, “Whitman Brings Her Campaign To Fresno Chamber,” The Fresno Bee’s “News” Blog, www.fresnobeehive.com, 2/9/10)
EDF Headline On Website: “Water Is Too Cheap And Supply Is Limited.” (Environmental Defense Fund, “A Water Crisis in the West, www.edf.org, 8/4/09)
* NOTE: “The problem with water in the West is not just that supply is limited, but that it is too cheap.” (Environmental Defense Fund, “A Water Crisis in the West, www.edf.org, 8/4/09)
EDF Criticized The Wall Street Journal, Arguing That It Was Not A False Choice Between Fish Versus Jobs. “The Wall Street Journal’s editorial ‘California’s Man-Made Drought’ (Sept. 2), buys into the false choice of fish versus jobs. It is disappointing that the Journal, given its financial focus, fails to address or even acknowledge opportunities for market-based solutions to improve water use efficiency. The editorial also ignores many salient aspects of water management in California.” (Spreck Rosekrans, “The Wall Street Journal Buys Into A False Choice,” Environmental Defense Fund’s “On The Water Front” Blog, blogs.edf.org, 9/3/09)
EDF’s Cynthia Koehler And Center For Rivers And Deltas’ Laura Harnish Said Waiving The Endangered Species Act For Fish Would Not Secure The Economic Health Of The Central Valley. “The premise behind the waiver proposal — that problems facing San Joaquin agriculture will be resolved if the massive pumps that move water from the Delta to the Valley are turned back on and the water flows again — is an appealing one. Putting aside the question of whether pumping more water would mean the demise of our salmon and other fisheries; would ending endangered fish protections secure the economic health of the San Joaquin Valley’s agricultural sector? The answer is no.” (Cynthia Koehler and Laura Harnish, Op-Ed, “The Water Debate We Are Not Having,” Huffington Post, www.huffingtonpost.com, 6/3/09)
According To EDF And Center For Rivers And Deltas, “Protections For Endangered Fish Are Not The Major Cause Of Farmers’ Water-Related Pain.” “Protections for endangered fish are not the major cause of farmers’ water-related pain. Officials estimate that without restrictions on pumping to protect endangered fish, farmers who receive water from the State Water Project might see their irrigation allocations reach 35 percent this year instead of 30 percent, while allocations for south-of-Delta farmers using the federal Central Valley Project would see an increase in their allocations from 10 percent to 15 percent.” (Cynthia Koehler and Laura Harnish, Op-Ed, “The Water Debate We Are Not Having,” Huffington Post, www.huffingtonpost.com, 6/3/09)
EDF And Center For Rivers And Deltas Reiterated That Eliminating The Endangered Species Act Protections Would Not Restore Economic Vitality. “So while we acknowledge that protecting fish somewhat reduces the amount of water available for San Joaquin farming, and that this has economic impacts, the question remains: would eliminating endangered species protections restore economic health to the Valley? Again, the answer is no.” (Cynthia Koehler and Laura Harnish, Op-Ed, “The Water Debate We Are Not Having,” Huffington Post, www.huffingtonpost.com, 6/3/09)
EDF Argued That The Farmers Had No Right To Sue In The Case As Individuals. “A direct action by petitioners against the United States is inconsistent with the exclusive exchange of performance obligations between the bureau and the district.” (Brief for Natural Resources Defense Council, et al. as Respondents, Orff v. United States, 545 U.S. 596 (2005) (No. 03-1566))
What we have found
-
THE JIG IS UP, BRESS
WE HAVE FOUND YOUR BACKERS
GIDNEY AND CLOYD!!!
BRESS LIVES ON GOOF GAS!!!
10 hours ago