“The moment a leader allows himself to become the primary reality people worry about, rather than reality being the primary reality, you have a recipe for mediocrity, or worse.”
“The moment a leader allows himself to become the primary reality people worry about, rather than reality being the primary reality, you have a recipe for mediocrity, or worse.”
The Political Panel’s Murray Mandryk and Stefani Langenegger discuss the controversy over the province’s $1.4B carbon dioxide capture project with Morning Edition host Sheila Coles. You need to watch it.
This reminds me a lot of some of the Devine mega projects that never worked as promised which this Saskatchewan Party seems to still be in love with. This is the first one they made happen and it’s really not working nearly as well as they promised. As Murray Mandryk said, maybe Wall should not has been as smug as he has been.
Also as Mandryk says, maybe you can’t effectively capture coal in western Canada. As Langenegger points out, SaskPower rate payers are actually subsidizing Alberta oil companies to get oil out of the ground. This project is a big mess.
If you want to read more, check out James Fallows in The Atlantic on clean coal from 2010.
So according to his mother, Margaret Trudeau, soon to be Prime Minister Trudeau will not be moving into 24 Sussex Drive because it is in need of dire repairs. That’s a good thing and I am glad Trudeau has made that decision.
Of all of Harper’s decisions, the fact that he would not vacate 24 Sussex Drive when the National Capital Commission begged to move out for repairs really bugged me. As Harper would say, “It’s fine for my family” and it probably was but by refusing to let the needed repairs done on his watch, he made the problems worse and as any home owner would know, more costly.
According to numerous media reports over the years 24 Sussex has problems with the roof, is drafty, doesn’t have central air, and needs to be rewired. If it wasn’t the home of the Prime Minister, it would be torn down and condos built on the property. If was in Saskatoon, it was be torn down and turned into a parking lot (it’s like we elected a Joni Mitchell song for Mayor). It needs to be refurbished.
Who decides when to do this? Right now the Prime Minister has final say on this but I have long said that the National Capital Commission should (they already manage the properties but as we saw, the PM can over rule them). When it is time, every 30 years or so do so significant upgrades to 24 Sussex Drive, the Prime Minister and the family get the heave-ho and are moved to Harrington Lake for a while or another appropriate residence. The same goes with Stornoway or even Rideau Hall.
The Prime Minister’s residence is too important of symbol and Canadian Heritage to fall victim to political whims of the Prime Minister. Give them a budget, a long term mandate and don’t mess with their funding.
Glad to see that Trudeau is taking the first step towards this but there is a lot of work to be done.
Since the editor of the site is the same as the publisher, I am given tremendous latitude in who I endorse around here.
In Saskatoon West where I live, I have a choice between:
Of the three, the NDP were the only ones that knocked on my door. A gaggle of Conservatives walked by my door, looked at the address, checked their database and kept walking. Apparently they were not interested in either Wendy or my vote in this election. I wasn’t even robo-called called by the Conservatives or the Liberals. So yeah, thanks for the effort teams.
For me the decision comes down to the Liberals and the NDP, both parties are outside of my federal comfort levels. I have serious problems with both of their platforms but nothing compared to the problems I had with the Conservative campaign.
I also have been poorly served by Kelly Block’s office. When I used to contact Carol Skelton’s office, I always got a personal follow up from Skelton, even when she was a minister. The one time I contacted Kelly Block’s about a serious issue, I was sent Conservative Party talking points by an assistant.
I have watched Randy Donauer as a city councillor and I was greatly disappointed in the change I saw from the time he announced his candidacy until now. He was always a fiscal conservative which is needed but to see him pander that almost exclusively in council meetings was frustrating. From the time that he announced his candidacy, I called on him to resign his seat on council (just as I did when Councillors Paulsen and Hill did when the ran for the Liberals) which is the same as other some other cities require.
As for the Conservative record.
I grew up in a Conservative household. I was part of PC Youth. I still defend Grant Divine when push comes to shove but I can’t defend this record. Part of me thinks that if another Conservative government had acted like this, Stephen Harper would start his own party… oh right, that is exactly what he did do.
I thought Lisa Abbott has run a great campaign. So great that it may cause an unfavourable vote split between the Liberals and the NDP but that it the first past the post system. She has run the best Liberal campaign I have ever seen in Saskatoon West since I moved here in 1984. Her candidacy (and the Justin Trudeau campaign) have made Liberals relevant in Saskatoon West for the first time ever. I can’t speak highly enough of how she carries herself in this campaign.
As for Sheri Benson, she has been working on issues that political parties ignored during this campaign. Poverty and homelessness for years through the Saskatoon United Way. She has brought different social agencies together (it’s like herding cats but harder) and brought focus to issues that few care about. If Lisa Abbott has been helped by the Trudeau campaign, Benson has probably been hurt by the mediocre NDP campaign (the phrase “You NDP’d that up” for when you should win but don’t is now entering our lexicon).
If I lived in Saskatoon Grasswords, I would vote for Tracy Muggli and in Saskatoon University I’d vote for Cynthia Block. Both are excellent candidates that deserve to be in Ottawa.
Living in Saskatoon West, I am going to endorse Sheri Benson. She has shown the ability to move local issues that few cared about forward and that is what we will need in Ottawa. In a minority government, all parties will need people who can bring people together. Sheri will do that for the NDP.
That being said, I have a tremendous amount of respect for Lisa Abbott for her campaign. She would also make a great MP from what I have seen and if either one of them are unsuccessful, I hope they run again either provincially or federally.
I was asked a few times today if I was going to run for Mayor in 2016. The answer is no. I have no political aspirations and have no desire to be a politician. That and I don’t like ties or suits. Even if I did, big boned and balding politicians generally don’t do that well… wait a minute, we do really well in politics.
I have very little respect for career politicians. There are many people I know (and we all have our lists) that desperately want to be elected to something and want to remain elected for financial, prestige, or even retirement reasons (I have heard of politicians whose entire retirement planning is based on getting elected and then government pension). They see politics as a career and as a path to greater political power. I don’t aspire to that. I have control of the both the TV remote and the Apple TV remote at home. I’m good.
I have a lot of respect for those that are public servants. Those are people who are drawn to the service of their city, province, and country and that is the main motivating factor for them. The problem is that most politicians start out that way but it’s a fine line until you transform into a politician where re-election comes before doing what is right. Some public servants can be elected for decades and serve only the public. I think of the Joe Clark’s, John Crosbie’s, or the countless MP, MLAs, and councillors that care far more about constituent issues and the big picture than party politics or personal gain. They avoid the meanness that defines many politicians and they genuinely love their jobs. I think they are great but I still wouldn’t want to be one. I simply lack the desire to compromise on things and in our system, it is based on compromise and doing things you hate.
Then you also have the campaign fight. That can’t be a lot of fun. I remember door knocking a couple of decades ago and a guy came to the door with a shot gun, I was bit by a stray dog, and some naked women answered her door. No wonder Atch stands on the streets and waves at cars. Who can blame him? If I was him I’d have a small portable fence with me at all times. If someone from the media questioned me, I’d have them stand outside the fence and deal with the dogs.
I was out with some candidates and councillors years ago and they were talking about lawn sign stake storage and what a pain that is. So let me get this straight, you win office and instead of celebrating, you have to clean out your shed and build extra storage for the stuff you need for the next campaign. Wendy would not be pleased with that. We have a small house, we don’t have a lot of storage. She’d be out campaigning for Atch or Charlie Clark on the provision that they took all of the lawn sign stakes when I lost.
I’d be going, “How does the other campaigns get all of these leaks from?” and Wendy and Mark would be avoiding making eye contact with me as they easily moved stuff in and out of our shed. Okay, that would be hilarious but still.
Also, the being recognized in public part is both good and bad. Bad when someone tells me how stupid I am in front of my kids. Good when they say nice things to me but I still find myself going, “please don’t punch me in the face” when someone goes, “Aren’t you Jordon Cooper?”. Of course I could just be like one councillor who makes me go, “I thought they quit council” the rare time they speak.
I guess I could run against Darren Hill but here is a list of his accomplishments in office and my position on them.
Darren Hill’s Record in Office
Jordon Cooper’s Position
Avenue B Diverter in Mayfair
Thought it was a good idea
Thought the Cosmo deal was a costly mistake
Disagrees with 33rd Street Bridge and says it would be built over his dead body.
We agree with that too although I hope no one has to die to stop it.
Wears colourful socks
Wears plain socks
Wears colourful ties
Has a tie just like Rob Ford’s NFL tie but has NHL logos on it. Wishes he had a tie like Rob Ford’s NFL tie. Would also wear a MLB tie. Now that I think about it, that is a solid three tie rotation.
Suggested that we wait a few years to buy a new city website when prices were lower.
Tweets at celebrities
Does that actually work? (update: Darren says it does.)
Tweets at City Council Meetings
Tweets about confidential in-camera meetings that he read about in The StarPhoenix.
Ran for the federal Liberal Party after two terms as councillor.
Criticized Hill, Paulsen, Olauson, and Donauer for doing the same thing and not resigning their seat.
Non committal about in Council Twitter Wall.
Totally in favour of Twitter wall. Really, really in favour of a Twitter wall. Have I mentioned how badly I want City Council to have a live twitter wall.
That would be a riveting debate. I can see the moderator saying, “So the only area where you truly disagree is men’s socks. Well let’s go back to that issue once more and Mr. Cooper, could you tell us where you got that NFL logo tie from?”
So after reading that chart over, I am not running in Ward 1 or anywhere else in the city since I live in Ward 1. Darren is doing a fine job… well there was the vote where he voted to “right size the bridge” that was waste of tens of millions of dollars. Nor do I ever aspire to being on Saskatoon City Council not now and not in the future. Here is why.
Outside of Wendy and the boys, not many people have seen how sick I have been this summer. It has scared Wendy and even made me wonder from time to time if I was going to make it. I have never been so sick in my life and it hasn’t been fun. Today my vital signs were so out of whack, the nurses freaked out and that happens all of the time. There is no way I am strong enough to make it through a campaign even if I did want to. I have never seriously considered it but I need get rid of the MRSA infection in my ankle and then get healthy again.
I have been married with 18 years this week to Wendy and for the first time since we have been married, her depression and mental health issues are under control. You have no idea how many times I have said, “next summer” will be better (well actually about 16 summers). To actually have a summer trip go well and her depression be managed was a huge thing in life but we have a lot of catching up to do.
Those lost summers have come with a price of me being there for Wendy and not having the time to spend with Mark and Oliver. It’s why next summer is being spent in the backcountry of Banff and Kootney National Parks. The only door knocking I plan to do is at the door of a mountain tea house at the end of a long hike (I hope I don’t get bit by anything)
I don’t know how politicians handle their commitments to the public and family. Is there a less family friendly job then being a politician at any level? For this I am not being sarcastic, I can’t imagine how hard it is to juggle all of that well. I enjoy being a dad.
So my plans are set for election night 2016, vote and watch Monday Night Football while writing about those that did decide to run. That is my goal for 2020, 2024, and 2028. It is also my goal for any and all provincial and federal campaigns. I have even a less of a desire to be told how to vote by a government or opposition whip who got the job because they are difficult to deal with in Question Period.
So yeah, I am never running for public office but thanks for suggesting it. Throw your support behind someone that wants the job, there are some good ones out there, support them.
I guess because I have always assumed that Mulcair would not win this election and that the Orange Wave was a one off election result, that he would hold on. Then again, I am not a partisan New Democrat and kind of missed this.
If — as the polls are suggesting — he leads the NDP back to third place, Mulcair is unlikely to get another kick at the election can.
The New Democrats have a long and unbroken record of federal defeats and almost as long a history of giving their leaders a second or even a third chance. But a defeat this time would feel different to many party loyalists for they were asked to put quite a bit of water in their ideological wine on the way to their latest bid for government.
To make matters worse, if the NDP ends up back in third place, it will not be because it stood against the Conservative anti-terrorism act or opposed Canada’s military role in its mission against Islamic extremists in the Middle East, or even because it stood against a niqab ban.
From the New Democrat perspective, those would all be good hills to die on.
What has really ailed the Mulcair campaign has been an excess of prudence and a failure to cast the party as a compelling, convincing agent of change. On that score, the Liberals did not steal the ground from under the feet of the New Democrats. The latter left it vacant for Trudeau to occupy.
Whether Mulcair himself would want to stay on for very long if he is defeated in the election is an open question.
Over the campaign, the NDP leader has sometimes been hard-pressed to conceal his contempt for the skills of his Liberal rival. It is hardly a given that he would want to play second fiddle to Trudeau in opposition to another Conservative government or that he could be a happy camper propping up a minority Liberal government.
Also, if you are Harper or Mulcair, columns like these are the worst thing you want to read anytime but especially this close to the election.
Trudel needed 24 paragraphs to dismiss that request. Nearer the end was a sentence that could be used to summarize the whole affair. “I find,” she wrote, “that the appellant has not demonstrated that refusing his application for stay would result in irreparable harm to the public interest.”
Here is some of the background of the decision from Maclean’s Magazine
That finding is based, in part, on the government’s own convoluted defence of its actions. What might otherwise be considered a ban on the wearing of the niqab during the citizenship oath has been presented to the court as an expression of “a desire in the strongest possible language.” So the ban is not quite a ban, insofar as citizenship judges have the discretion to allow someone to wear a niqab during the oath; despite the policy’s use of the term “must,” the government has been arguing that there is some room for a judge to decide that a woman need not remove her niqab.
The trouble here is that the minister, Jason Kenney, in this situation, does not have the power to unilaterally fetter the discretion of citizenship judges. Thus, if the ban were said to be mandatory, the government’s case would be moot.
The Federal Court’s Justice Keith Boswell found that the policy was mandatory in nature—and also in contradiction with legislation that allows for the greatest possible religious freedom in swearing the oath—and the Federal Court of Appeal found no reason to differ with Justice Boswell on that point. But the argument that the policy is optional has now been used by Trudel to dismiss the government’s request for a stay.
“Presuming that the appellant is right that the policy at issue is not mandatory and citizenship judges can apply it or not . . . how can one raise a claim of irreparable harm?” Trudel writes—irreparable harm being the standard for a stay. “It is simply inconsistent to claim, on the one hand, that a policy has no binding effect on decision-makers, but that irreparable harm would result if that policy was to be declared unlawful on the other.”
Furthermore, Trudel notes, “Citizenship and Immigration Canada had valid guidelines and procedures to ensure that citizenship candidates take the oath prior to the adoption of the policy. These guidelines and procedures are undisturbed by the finding that the policy is unlawful. There is no legislative or regulatory void.”
That is, procedures already exist to ensure an oath is duly sworn.
Some of you have asked me if I was going to write about Donald Trump in The StarPhoenix. The answer is no and I’ll get to the reason in a minute.
People are outraged that Donald Trump can get away with what he is saying unchallenged and that people still like him. They want to know why this is happening. My answer is that it has always been happening, we just expect more from a Presidential candidate.
Look closer to home. Of course there was Rob Ford but in Saskatoon we had Jim Pankiw who gained a lot of support when he ran for Mayor and had late in the race, a realistic chance of winning and beating Donald Atchison.
After being elected in 1997, Pankiw wrote a letter in 2000 to the president of the University of Saskatchewan, Peter MacKinnon, condemning the university’s affirmative action policies and comparing its supporters to those of the Ku Klux Klan. After attacking the most respected institution in Saskatchewan and it’s President, he was re-elected by largely rural voters in the next election.
Jim Pankiw was kicked out of Reform Party caucus by Stockwell Day in 2011 and then when Stephen Harper won the leadership of the Canadian Alliance, was the only member of the caucus revolt that Harper didn’t allow back in as he was alleged to have assaulted a local aboriginal lawyer.
His federal political career dashed, he decided to run for Mayor of Saskatoon, despite not living in Saskatoon and was going to sit as a MP and be mayor. That too was against the rules. The rules for being Mayor of Saskatoon are clear. You have to live in Saskatoon. He did not and there was the epic cover of the The StarPhoenix that showed him getting his paper outside of the city limits one morning. The electoral officer said he didn’t meet the qualifications to be mayor and of course it is against the law to be a MP and part of another elected body at the same time. Pankiw thought it would be a swell idea.
His main issue was a stance against aboriginal rights and that attracted a lot of supporters. In the end he finished in third place,behind the incumbent Jim Maddin.
In 2010, he decided to run again. Here is how CBC covered it.
Pankiw is known for his controversial comments about aboriginal people, some which have resulted in human rights complaints.
He didn’t back away from those comments Thursday, saying he would be campaigning against "race-based" government spending policies. He also called Saskatchewan First Nations chiefs "racists."
"I don’t think Indians should have special race-based privileges," Pankiw said. "I think we should all be equal. Do Italians have special race-based privileges? Chinese people? Ukrainians? Germans? Not that I know of, but Indians do."
After all of that and almost no campaign, he finished with over 7,000 votes.
So explain that too me. For years people summed it up as some people in Saskatoon are stupid but we saw it again in Toronto with Rob Ford getting elected and even after all of the scandals, Doug Ford doing reasonably well in the election. So what gives?
One word. Resentment.
Jim Pankiw, Rob Ford, Donald Trump and to a degree Sarah Palin and other Tea Party candidates represent those that are resentful and frustrated where they are in life and their desire to blame someone. They supporters are almost all white, lower middle class, and struggling. They are thrilled that someone is speaking their language and frustrations at being left behind. More importantly they are giving them someone else to blame.
In Saskatoon, it is aboriginals. With Rob Ford, it was City Hall and bureaucrats, and with Donald Trump, it is “illegal immigrants” and now women.
Why does it work? It unlocks this deep down racism and biases in many voters, especially when times are tough. I heard it all through the Pankiw mayoral campaign about all of the advantages that aboriginals have. Free housing on the reserves, lots of money from the federal government, free education, free dental. It’s almost as if Caucasian males are the ones that are disadvantaged.
This is why it works when times are tough and things like unemployment is high or there is income disparity in a region or country. People see someone of a different race and immediately blame race for why they have that job they want. It ignores the fact that the person is probably better qualified than they are.
I used to think it was education based but I have even heard University of Regina social work graduates complain that all of the jobs in their field “are reserved for aboriginals”. Breaking it down, that isn’t true and often the situation is that we have too many graduates for the amount of jobs in Saskatoon and they are frustrated and angry but the racism comes out.
So instead of owning up reality, people act like treaty rights or hiring practices like affirmative action are are unfair advantages. For those that are never going to look past that what Pankiw or Trump is spewing, sounds great. It isn’t their fault that things are tough, it is aboriginals or illegal immigrants that are making it bad. By cracking down on them, then the problems of a bad economy, lack of training, or an unwillingness to adapt will go away.
Of course the fact in Pankiw’s case, none of the aboriginal issues were municipal jurisdiction and he couldn’t do anything about it if he was elected or in Trump’s case, cracking down on illegal immigrants and villanizing Mexican workers would hurt the U.S. economy is irrelevant. What matters to so many voters is that it isn’t their fault and someone else can be blamed.
It came out that Fox News backed down because they thought that the feud with Trump was hurting the network. Almost overwhelmingly people who wrote and tweeted were supportive of Trump’s remarks rather than Megyn Kelly. I am no Kelly fan but those were incredibly crude remarks to say or even think about a women and yet Trump doubled down on them.
Why doesn’t this hurt Trump? Well because the people that support him, believe that stuff.
Wendy reminded me of people we know that brag that he kept track of menstrual cycles of women employees because he thought they were unstable. Sexism and misogyny is alive and well in parts of this country as well. Look at the response to the Bill Cosby or Jian Ghomeshi allegations where the women were initially blamed, the FHITP clips online and live television, and just some of the vile comments that women experience on their weblogs. Last week I saw a guy with a FHITP hat on while in the mall. What kind of lack of self awareness does that?
There are many men out there who are afraid of strong women leadership. It may not show up on polling because someone doesn’t always want to come across as sexist on the phone but it does come out in the polling booths and it will hurt Hilary Clinton on election day.
So what do you do about it? I have been thinking of Atchison’s comments a couple months ago to the report of racism in Winnipeg. His answer to CBC was Atchison like but he mentioned the economy is dealing with racism. Atch wasn’t right but he wasn’t wrong either. When does racism or things like anti-Semitism get worse? Periods of recession and depression when people are losing their job or their place in life. As long as insecure people feel threatened, crazy politicians will try to exploit it with some success.
The other thing about this phenomenon is during those times, the media is ignored. The StarPhoenix kept reporting on Pankiw and even Fox News is critical of Trump but when someone has biases towards a race or for a candidate they think is speaking the truth, it doesn’t matter what the paper or a television network says. That is where guys like Pankiw or Trump find their appeal, the voice the thoughts that racist people with common sense know not to say and then Trump, Ford or Pankiw go and make it sound legitimate. That is why it is so disheartening to not hear the rest of the GOP stand of up to Trump. His campaign will hurt a lot of minorities for a lot of years because they are giving credibility to racists and misogynists everywhere.
I don’t think Donald Trump is that serious about running for President. He has a skeleton staff, isn’t running any TV ads, and isn’t even trying to get his name on the ballot in some areas. It seems like he is using the GOP bully pulpit to make a name for himself and make his own brand worth more more than trying to become President of the United States. In the last debate when he said that he wouldn’t rule out running as an independent which means that Hillary (or as I hope for, Larry Lessig) would become President.
This seems much more about the massive Trump ego than public service. As long as the fans keep showing up, he’ll keep running.
As I am at most times early in a campaign, I am struggling with who to vote for. Here are my thoughts so far after watching the Maclean’s Leader’s Debate and the first week of the campaign.
New Democratic Party
This is separate from all three parties but in the U.S. in both the GOP and the Democratic party, they have adults who spend their lives on making careful and well thought out policy decisions. In Canada, we seem to leave those decisions to political hacks which is why we get these half baked policy ideas that make no sense to anyone other than pollsters. When talking about foreign policy, defense, or the economy, those wise voices creating policy, tend to be important and we really lack that here.
I don’t know how I am going to vote but none of the three campaigns get me that excited and to be honest, seem to be doing what Allan Gregg said after the 1988 campaign. The Tories went after the really stupid voters. Sadly that worked and it seems like all three parties are targeting that demographic right now.
Hey, I am pretty much sitting out this campaign. I’ll wait to see how the campaign platforms come together to decide if I will write a local endorsement but until then, it won’t be that political around here. I have friends who are candidates for different parties and I respect them for making the effort of going to Ottawa to do what the PMO tells them what to do and when to do it.
I did great a quick election guide for all candidates in Saskatoon. You can find it here. It lists all of the campaign contact information for all of the campaigns, except for Kevin Waugh (and I can’t find his yet). So if you want to check out a campaign in Saskatoon, it’s all there for you.
Okay, this is about Olivia Chow but it can be about any politician.
So Chow abandoned the federal NDP to run for the Mayor of Toronto. After peaking early, she ran a horrible campaign and was easily defeated by John Tory.
Now she wants to be an MP again, a position she resigned, caused a massive expense as a by-election, and now wants her seat back since her Toronto adventure didn’t work out.
That stuff drives me crazy. I know other politicians do it but if you lose interest in a job once, why go back to it? Why should voters who were not compelling enough to serve the first time welcome you back?
We all know how this will turn out. Chow will beat Adam Vaughn and probably end up in cabinet. It will still bug me then.
So some states are double counting their water supplies which you now, leads to problems like they are having now.
Yet California and Arizona — the two states water experts say are facing the most severe water crises — continue to count and regulate groundwater and surface water as if they were entirely separate.
“States have their own take on this. Or they choose to not address it at all,” said Stanley Leake, a hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey and a leading expert on properly accounting for the connection between ground and surface waters in the West. “In some cases they pretend that there is no connection.”
Leaders in California and Arizona acknowledge that their states have done this, at least in part to avoid the grim reckoning that emanates from doing the math accurately. There is even less water available than residents have been led to believe.
If these states stopped effectively double-counting their resources, they would have to change laws, upend traditional water rights and likely force farmers and cities to accept even more dramatic cuts than they already face — a political third rail.
“The politics of water are more challenging than any other issue the state faces,” said Fran Pavley, a California state senator who helped draft a much-praised package of state laws passed last year regulating groundwater withdrawals for the first time.
Tucked into Pavley’s package was a little-noticed provision that explicitly prohibits California state regulators from addressing the interconnection between groundwater and surface water in local water plans until 2025, a compromise meant to give local water agencies a leisurely runway to adjust to a new way of counting.
Pavley said the prospect of more immediately acknowledging the overlap between ground and surface waters threatened to derail the legislation entirely, triggering fierce opposition from the Agricultural Council of California, the California Chamber of Commerce and other industry groups.
So politics is getting in the way of science. Basically by draining rivers, you drain aquifers. By draining aquifers, you cause rivers to dry up.
The West has consumed these resources ravenously, as if they were bottomless. By 1965, scientists measured that parts of the aquifer beneath Las Vegas had dropped by more than 75 feet. Arizona officials estimated the state’s aquifers had dropped by as much as 500 feet by 1980. By 2004, USGS scientists estimated — based on modeling — that the region south of Denver had drawn down water levels by more than 900 vertical feet.
In some places, so much water has been drained from underground, the effects can be seen with the naked eye. A USGS scientist’s 1977 photograph near the town of Mendota in central California uses a telephone pole to show how the ground had effectively collapsed, sinking some 30 feet.
Anyone who recognized these telltale signs would worry that the West’s groundwater was approaching a state of crisis. But even as the drought began and then worsened, with surface water vanishing, the West dug in and doubled down — replacing dwindling reservoirs with new water pumped from underground.
Today, the Colorado River states consume more than 21 billion gallons of groundwater each day — adding up to 1 1/2 times the flow of the Colorado River itself each year.
In 2009, Jay Famiglietti, now a scientist researching underground water in partnership with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, set out to quantify just how much groundwater had been lost over time.
NASA had a pair of satellites that gathered data on subtle changes in the Earth’s mass by measuring almost indiscernible shifts in gravitational forces during orbit. Famiglietti and his team of doctoral students at the University of California Irvine, where he also teaches, thought they could tease out which parts of those gravitational shifts were due to a changing volume of water inside the Earth’s crust.
The team determined that aquifers were shrinking at an astonishing rate in Asia, North Africa and across the globe. The western United States stood out.
“It was among the worst in the world,” Famiglietti said. “The rate of decline is much steeper than the rate of decline of the reservoirs. While everyone is looking at the surface water, no one is looking at the groundwater, and it’s disappearing at a rapid clip.”
Famiglietti and his team determined that some 13 trillion gallons of water had been lost from underground reservoirs in the Colorado River basin since the NASA satellites began collecting data in late 2004. To put that figure in perspective, it’s nearly 1 1/2 times the total capacity of Lake Mead — the nation’s largest reservoir and the West’s most important — and as much water as the state of Arizona uses in six years.
The research suggested the seven-state Colorado River basin region was actually using about one-third more water each year than its river budget alone allowed. In separate research Famiglietti looked at California’s aquifers — which lay outside the Colorado River basin — and found that they had also been severely diminished, having dropped by about 7 trillion gallons since just 2011.
The U.S. is screwed. Of course those aquifers also come into western Canada so it’s going to have an impact on all of us.
Regardless of your politics, this is a really good attack ad. Also, I think Illegal Campaign Contributions would be an amazing name for a band.
1. I have been asked many times lately if I am running for public office. The answer is never. Seriously, I am never running for office so stop asking. I don’t take politicians seriously and I find myself laughing at many of their first world politician problems. I could never do it. Well I could but it would in the same way The Onion covers the world news. Then again can you do a Ralph Klein and not drink? I don’t think you can and I don’t drink.
2. There will be a interesting races for Saskatoon City Council. If Randy Donauer and Eric Olauson win, that will create vacancies in Ward 5 and 8. If Charlie Clark runs for Mayor, that opens up Ward 6. At one time I thought because of the transit lockout that Ann Iwanchuk might be vulnerable but that has come and gone and no one cared so her seat is safe. Yes I hear rumours that this person is running or that person is running but during the last election I heard that I was a part of slate of candidates that Darren Hill was running. If there was a slate, I wasn’t on it.
2a. As for by-elections for Donauer’s seat (if he wins) whoever wins that would be kind of vulnerable because of a lack of time they would have to establish themselves. I think as Mairin Loewen and Ann Iwanchuk showed, it also means that your campaign machine is still ready to go. It could even be an advantage. Although I doubt anyone who has to run back to back campaigns would think of it as an advantage.
3. I was really uncomfortable seeing both Eric Olauson, Randy Donauer and Troy Davies bill the City of Saskatoon $700 each for the Mayor’s Cultural Gala. (the report is here) Not only did they charge their tickets but also for their dates. I know it’s not against the rules but since that is the case, something is wrong with the rules. That is taxpayers money for what is largely an evening out. It was also the eve of locking out the transit workers and causing a lot of hardship for a lot of people. The optics of it are horrible and in Olauson and Donauer’s case, it really damages thei credibility as a fiscal hawk when he is lined up at the taxpayers trough. Do as I say, not as I do.
3a. I was also uncomfortable glancing at the 2013 expenses and seeing Troy Davies submit a bill for a Synergy 8 event, a charity he helped found. It’s only $75 but it is an event his organization put together. I am not saying it is against the rules (apparently it isn’t), I am just shocked we allow that kind of thing. It is like council voted themselves a social fund and all them are using it.
4. Speaking of fundraisers, apparently your city councillor doesn’t really want to support your cause as they billed a lot of fundraisers big and small to the city. If they don’t want to go, why go and why charge the taxpayers for it? How can this not be against the rules? It looks like we are paying them to go to social events to be seen. This is called campaigning. Why is this allowed? Look at who wrote them.
5. I am also a bit disgusted with taxpayers paying for councillor domain names and hosting. I have long said that a system like darrenhill.saskatoon.ca or anniwanchuk.saskatoon.ca would work for councillor sites at a cost of nothing to the city. Not only do we pay (a lot) for domain hosting and registration but then those same domains are used as election tools which are essentially promoted by taxpayer money during their time in office. Again, not allowed in other many other cities but here we are, allowing it here. Of course some the expenses are high because I think that some are being taken advantage of. When I mean, some, that is us again.
6. Take a look at Darren Hill’s travel expenses for 2014. I love that he included a trip that did not cost taxpayers money. Next year I want him to submit a line in there for a Slurpee that someone bought for him. It actually makes some sense. He travels for SUMA and to avoid the perception he is flying on our money, he reminds us that he flew on someone else’s money. Still, I want to see a comped Slurpee in there.
7. Even weirder in the expenses is that all councillors have to submit a line by line expense report while the mayor submits a lump sum? Someone explain that to me. Yes the majority of his expenses go to pay Richard Brown. That is fine and I have no problems with that but why not be transparent with the rest of your expenses. If you don’t have anything to hide, then why not make it available. If you do have something to hide, why submit the expense. It’s really weird that we have one standard for councillors and one for the mayor. At executive committee, he was asked to provide a breakdown on his expenses, he said he would “consider it”. Transparency in action folks.
7a. It reminds me of the issue around the Mayor publishing his schedule. Other Mayors do it and it is both really interesting and really boring but it is done to show who is lobbying the mayor. After saying he would not do this because his day-timer was bought with his own money (and totally missing the point), he did it once leading up to the last election and hasn’t done it since.
7b. When I bring up transparency and accountability with councillors, they generally tell me that other councils are worse in some area. I agree. Look at Winnipeg. It may be worse in all areas. Yet what happened to aspiring to be the best at something or the most transparent? Seriously why wouldn’t the Mayor want his expenses broken down or his schedule published? Other politicians do it and somehow democracy survives.
8. So on one extreme is Toronto where mayoral campaigns debate every hour or so (I kept expecting Chow, Ford, and Tory to show up at the Rook and Raven one night to debate) to the Saskatoon example of one debate. I would love to see a middle ground (slanted heavily towards the Saskatoon model) of 3 to 5 debates on different issues. I’d watch a debate on the future of downtown, poverty issues on the westside, urban planning, and transportation/transit. I wonder if we can make that happen for this election. I’d also love to see a debate over a beverage and wings. Something casual where tough policy questions are asked and candidates are given time to answer. I may be the only one who is there. Well me and the city councillors because they can expense their meal, their parking, and their mileage….
9. If Randy Donauer loses his federal election, I can’t see it hurting a re-election bid in Ward 5. Darren Hill was destroyed when he ran federally and was re-elected handily in Ward 1. I am told by all candidates that a local campaign is worth about 3% in terms of winning votes. If you blow a close campaign, you blame yourself but at least you got close, you get blown out, chances are it’s the party leader or platform (or a really unpopular federal/provincial govt).
10. Everyone asks me about if Pat Lorje can win again in Ward 2 which is odd since I live in Ward 1 (no one is voting for her in my ward I know that!) Professor Dave McGrane called the leak thing “inside baseball” which means that it is really important to politicos and the media but not that important to voters. My take is that it will enrage those that won’t vote for her. I think the bigger danger for any long term incumbent is the population growth and change in the ward. If enough new people come in, then for all intents and purposes, you lose the advantages of incumbency.
11. Personally I think Lorje is vulnerable to a Karl Rove strategy of running against a candidates strengths which is a strong base in Montgomery and Caswell A campaign that was about the noise from South Circle Drive, failure to stop the wind turbine, the new apartments that Montgomery hated, the new location of the city yards, lack noise walls along tracks, 33rd Street widening, and crime in Caswell. Instead of trying to get voters to come out in King George, you try to keep her voters from voting. You saw it in Alberta. A lot of Progressive Conservative voters stayed home and that hurt them in close races. It’s a lot easier said that done but I’d expect a couple of candidates to run, especially one from the businesses on 20th Street.
12. I love the debate going on between Toronto Chief City Planner Jen Keesmat and Mayor John Tory. Two different visions of the Gardiner Expressway (Keesmat is right) but they are able to co-exist. This is what you get when you have a strong independent city planner. Saskatoon’s has always been part of the City Hall administration which as the city grows, it may be beneficial for more independence rather then the “one voice” strategy that now exists in City Hall.
13. I don’t get the lawsuit for the South Circle Drive delays against Stantec construction. It says that Stantec didn’t supervise the project closely enough and therefore it was delayed. Umm, then who from the city was supervising Stantec and are they responsible? Why wasn’t Stantec replaced (or penalized) when things started to go bad? Of course there are some other lawsuits that are happening with other developers. Do we not have the capacity in the city to even tender out and supervise the projects we need? I’d love to hear the other sides from this.
13a. When you don’t hire FTEs like councillors Olauson and Donauer hate, you have to hire outside companies like Stantec which not only cost much more money but also lack accountability. You aren’t saving money by cutting FTEs you are costing the city more.
14. The city has a problem with 15% vacancy rate downtown (that doesn’t include the old police station). Where is City Council on this. A strong downtown is important to all us but I haven’t heard anything from City Admin, Council, or even SREDA. Is there a plan being executed to help with it? Do they disagree that it is a problem? Is there even a plan to fix it?
15. I can’t get excited about the glut of hotels. A couple of years ago Tourism Saskatoon was saying that the lack of hotels was a major problem for the city. Now we have a glut which happens when you have a boom, developers from all over scramble to build, especially in areas like the airport business area. Then there is a glut and that will remain until our population grows again and there is a shortage. The good news? Our hotel rates will finally be closer to Calgary’s rather than Manhattans.
Okay, those are just some random thoughts I have been thinking. Let me know if you agree or disagree with them below.