Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Privatization of Water

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-10 02:26 PM
Original message
The Privatization of Water
Who says wealth doesn’t trickle down? As the nation’s redundant masses tremble, Oliver-Twist-style, before the spectacle of a Democratic-run Congress deciding whether merely to reward quarter-millionaires or the full-scale kind with lavish tax cuts, they might do well to consult the sobering tale of billionaire enclosure of central California’s water supply. It’s hard to see just how the nation’s owning classes will produce additional helpings of gruel (or at least low-wage service-sector jobs) if they’re so deeply averse to spreading around something as essential to agriculture, health and sanitation as water.

This saga, retailed in dogged and sobering detail by Alternet’s John Gibler, concerns the enterprising private takeover of the Kern Valley water bank—a crucial source of irrigation for the region’s large-scale agribusiness outfits.
Technically, the water is also an indispensable public good for all the central valley’s residents, especially given the generally parched condition of an agricultural empire plonked down in a near-desert climate averaging five inches of rainfall a year. But Stewart and Lynda Resnick, the Beverly Hills billionaires who preside over the inland agricultural conglomerate of Roll International—America’s leading purveyors of almonds, pistachios and, most famously, the celebrity-branded POM Wonderful elixir of youth—understood back when they began amassing land in the western and southern end of the San Joaquin Valley in the late 1980s that the existing, New Deal-era network of dams and irrigation couldn’t be counted on to supply irrigation for their own particularly water-starved holdings. So they—or rather, the executive and legal team at their subsidiary, Paramount–quietly set about snapping up area water reserves for themselves.

When the dust had settled—or moistened, as the case may be—Paramount had…

engineered the takeover of nearly 20,000 acres of state property where the California Department of Water Resources had invested $74 million to turn a depleted aquifer alongside the Kern River into an underground reservoir, or water bank, capable of storing one million acre-feet of water. After a series of backroom negotiations, the state signed over the Kern Water Bank to five water districts and a private company. The private company, the Westside Mutual Water Co., is a paper company owned by the Resnicks, and the water districts are controlled by agribusinesses, including Paramount.

Smaller growers and public officials are suing to loosen the Resnicks’ stranglehold on the region’s supply, alleging that the vast reservoir is drawing water away from neighboring wells, and harming the region’s already overstrained environmental carrying capacity. In a recent BusinessWeek dispatch on the water fight, Adam Keats, an attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, the lead plaintiff in one such suit, laid out the Paramount business model thusly: “They've divided up the spoils. They have their own philosophy and theory about how the world should work, which involves them getting very rich on our resources."

To judge by Stewart Resnick’s rhetorical counterblasts, it’s hard to see where that rather bald analysis misses the mark. "The ones who are complaining are saying, 'You have the water and we want the water.' Well, that's great. There are guys in Beverly Hills who have land and I want that land. Maybe they bought it for $10,000 and now it's worth a million and I'd like some, give it to me." Yes, because so many state residents need Beverly Hills real estate to drink, shower and clean their dishes in. But as Alternet’s Gibler notes, the analogy fails to hold in another way—the fruits (and nuts!) of the Paramount agricultural combine have appreciated handsomely, even as the California real estate market that Resnick tacitly endorses as a model for food cultivation has flatlined:

With the takeover of the Kern Water Bank, a public asset that could have been used to supply clean water to nearby farmworkers’ towns—and as a drought-relief water bank for both small towns and farmers—was instead used to safeguard the water supply of almond and pistachio trees in the desert for a Beverly Hills billionaire couple. Since taking over the Kern Water Bank, Paramount has more than doubled its production of almonds and pistachios, becoming the largest grower and processor of the nuts in the world. And the Resnicks made the Forbes list of billionaires.

California’s vast inland farming industry has bulked into its present immense scale based on the upward consolidation of land holdings and scarce water resources—a process that also entailed no small amount of payoffs to lawmakers and appropriation of state-financed public facilities, as noted in magisterial detail by journalists Mark Arax and Rick Wartzman’s indispensable history, The King of California.

But the Resnicks—who have cultivated a distinctly Versailles-inflected profile as liberal philanthropists, art collectors, and all around bon-vivants—have clearly reveled in the refinements they’ve introduced to the water-and-dirt foundation of their holdings. Lynda had previously been best known for a late-90s legal run-in with the estate of Lady Diana, which took issue with the unlicensed marketing of People’s Princess memorabilia from the Franklin Mint, which the Resnicks then owned, as the handiwork of so many “vultures feeding on the dead”—a jibe that had to hurt, given that Resnick had paid $135,000 at auction for Diana’s beloved high-collared “Elvis dress” just prior to the Princess’s demise. But Lynda—who had also paid out a cool $211,000 for a string of Jackie O’s fake pearls at a 1996 auction, and proceeded to adopt them as a model for another Franklin Mint line of mournographic tchotchkes—has clearly built up a more expansive self-image as all the pistachio and pomegranate pelf has kept rolling in. As Amy Wilentz has reported, Lynda has composed a vanity essay extolling the Resnick’s art-stuffed domestic compound in Beverly, noting that the home’s exterior is "topped off on all four sides with rows of balustrades through which a queen might peek out and utter, ‘Let them eat cake.'"

http://www.theawl.com/2010/12/the-privatization-of-water
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC