I am serving on a Citizens League study group that is examining water policy issues in Minnesota. The Citizens League www.citizensleague.org has a reputation for doing quality work on public policy issues, and there is good reason to believe the conclusions of this study group will be taken seriously by Minnesota legislators. Minnesota voters passed a constitutional amendment in November that dedicates significant funding to clean water. Our study group is looking mainly at water policy governance issues, and will probably not make specific recommendations on technical matters of water clean up. I will outline the work our group is doing and would like to hear about what is happening in other states around water policy, and in general ideas about what sustainable, equitable, but also politically possible water policy should entail. More below.
Minnesota has some of the most abundant water resources of the lower 48 states. Our state's efforts to protect our water are pretty good, but of course they could be much better. We have work to do on agriculture, shoreline protection, land use planning, mining, the timber industry, the paper industry,water and energy production, non-point source pollution, and our 600,000 septic systems. OK, our efforts need to be a lot better. We did pass the Clean Water Legacy Act in 2007, see https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/... Voters approved a constitutional amendment November 4th that raises our sales tax by 3/8%, with the proceeds going to habitat (33%), water clean-up (33%), parks and trails (14.25%), and arts and cultural heritage (19.75%). see http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/...
By 2010 this will provide about 80 million dollars a year for water cleanup. That is enough to make a difference, and we want to use it wisely. I am hoping that when as a state we start spending serious money to clean up our waters, the things we now allow that contribute to further degrading our water will be easier to fight. The argument "It's ludicrous to spend lots of money on water clean up on one hand, while ignoring practices that undermine the clean water objectives on the other" seems convincing to me. Of course the 'pubs will try to turn it around and argue that spending money to clean up our waters is futile so "Why bother?"
Our policy study group is just getting a handle on the way we wish to approach the policy and governance issue. As an issue water is just so huge, touches so many aspects of our lives, and is impacted by so many things, it is difficult to address comprehensively. I am planning to go into more detail on the work of this study group in a follow up, but for now am interested in hearing what thoughtful, progressive folks have to say about what sort of guiding principles could be helpful to measure policy, rules, regulations and practices in water management against?
I proposed the following as a guiding statement for the work of the study group, and would like something like this to be proposed as an amendment to the state constitution.
"Water is life. Earth is our home because it is the blue planet, the water planet. Access to adequate clean water in our homes and in our lakes, streams and groundwater is a fundamental human right. Water is not merely a commodity. Private transactions in water must never violate the highest public trust, the public stewardship of our collective treasure, our state's water resources.
If you made it this far you probably care about the water. Water, energy, land use, agriculture and transportation are irreducibly intertwined. The way we deal with all these together will determine if we are to be successful addressing global climate change. Thanks for reading.