Politics
California lawmakers reject proposal to curb well-drilling where nearby wells could run dry
Over the past several years, California’s water managers have seen a pattern emerge in farming areas of the Central Valley: Even as declining groundwater levels have left thousands of residents with dry wells and caused the ground to sink, counties have continued granting permits for agricultural landowners to drill new wells and pump even more water.
A bill that was sponsored by the California Department of Water Resources sought to address these problems by prohibiting new high-capacity wells within a quarter-mile of a drinking water well or in areas where the land has been sinking because of overpumping.
Despite support from Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration, the measure was narrowly rejected in the Senate last week after encountering opposition from the agriculture industry, business groups, local governments and water agencies.
Aggressive and impactful reporting on climate change, the environment, health and science.
The opposing organizations — which included the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Farm Bureau Federation and more than 30 other groups representing growers and water suppliers — said the bill was “too restrictive and may impede ways to achieve groundwater sustainability.”
Kristopher Anderson, a legislative advocate for the Assn. of California Water Agencies, told a Senate committee that the legislation would impose unworkable mandates and be “a blanket one-size-fits-all moratorium on approval of new wells that will harm local economies while failing to address these issues.”
After a brief debate, members of the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee rejected the bill in a 5-4 vote.
Assemblymember Steve Bennett (D-Ventura), who introduced the bill, said it was intended to address a significant loophole in California’s groundwater law. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, passed in 2014, created local agencies tasked with developing plans for curbing overpumping in many areas of the state, but left counties in charge of issuing permits for new wells.
That has led to a situation where there are “more straws going in while they’re trying to regulate the current straws,” he said.
In some rural communities, farmworkers and other residents have seen their wells run dry soon after growers drilled new wells to irrigate crops on nearby fields.
“Too many counties have been unwilling to protect the most vulnerable people’s wells because they don’t want to take on the most powerful people, who want to keep putting high-capacity wells in,” Bennett said. “We’ve been trying to get people to do something about it, and they refuse. It is the state’s responsibility to finally say, enough is enough.”
Parts of California have some of the fastest groundwater depletion rates in the world, and matters worsened during the last drought.
Scientists have also found that crops’ water demands are growing in the San Joaquin Valley because of rising temperatures driven by climate change, which is worsening the long-term water deficit.
In parts of the valley, falling water levels have caused the ground to sink at rates of more than half a foot per year. Land subsidence has required costly repairs of levees, canals and other infrastructure, with public agencies footing the bill.
“The counties that are approving the most high-capacity wells are the ones that have the most land subsidence in California,” Bennett said, referring to counties such as Tulare, Fresno and Kern. “It just does not make sense that we keep putting more — hundreds of new high-capacity wells — in areas that have significant land subsidence.”
Bennett has introduced similar legislation three times. He said the bill’s defeat this year means that “the status quo will reign,” allowing the drilling of more wells while land subsidence continues and water levels drop.
“A lot of families, particularly in the Central Valley, will have their wells go dry because we refused to take action,” he said.
The legislation was designed to bring permanent requirements similar to a 2022 temporary drought order issued by Newsom, which required counties and cities to secure verification from a local groundwater agency that permitting a new well wouldn’t be “inconsistent” with local plans. The order also called for agencies to issue a permit only after determining that additional pumping would not likely interfere with nearby wells or cause subsidence that would damage infrastructure.
In a recent report analyzing the effects of Newsom’s executive order, the Department of Water Resources said local agencies “took many approaches to gather relevant information on whether the issuance of a well permit could potentially interfere with nearby wells or contribute to land subsidence.”
But the report also concluded that the continued issuing of well permits in vulnerable areas, where other wells are at risk and the land has been sinking, indicate that in many respects the executive order “failed to achieve its goal.”
The report said residents in parts of Fresno, Madera and Tulare counties told state officials they’re concerned the drilling of more agricultural wells is putting their drinking water at risk, and that pumping for farms “has been prioritized over domestic well users.”
Drawing on the goals of the governor’s order, state officials decided to sponsor legislation that would give firm direction to local agencies.
The bill was supported by leaders of advocacy groups such as the Community Water Center and Clean Water Action, who argued in a letter that as the situation stands, local agencies responsible for managing groundwater have no power to stop new wells from being drilled, resulting in an “unregulated race to the bottom.”
Those who spoke in favor of the bill during the Senate hearing included Paul Gosselin, the Department of Water Resources’ deputy director of sustainable water management. He pointed out that more than 3,000 domestic wells have run dry throughout California since 2020, according to reports submitted to the state.
“Over the years, those rates of subsidence and dry wells,” he said, have been “ramping up to new historic levels.”
He noted that during flooding last year, the state was forced to spend millions of dollars raising the levee that protects the city of Corcoran because the ground has sunk dramatically.
“It’s not a hypothetical problem we have. It’s a real-world problem facing people,” Gosselin told the senators.
Gosselin called it a “drought resiliency bill” intended to complement the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. That law required local agencies in many areas to develop groundwater plans and curb overpumping by 2040.
There were several exemptions in the bill, such as allowing for the drilling of a replacement well, and easing the prohibition on drilling within a quarter-mile of a domestic well if there is a local ordinance aimed at preventing new wells from interfering with existing wells.
But that wasn’t enough to convince opponents. Fresno County supervisors called the bill an “attempt to fundamentally redirect groundwater management” from the original intent of the state’s law. A group of local agency managers called the California Groundwater Coalition said the proposal would add “burdensome requirements.”
Gosselin said the debate over the legislation brought a “good exchange of ideas.”
“The votes weren’t there to keep the bill going,” he said. “We’re hoping the dialogue and the issues that we raised in the legislation will continue.”
The Department of Water Resources is continuing to pursue other related efforts, including working with local agencies on drought plans and preparing a document outlining “best management practices” for curbing subsidence, he said.
Gosselin said state officials will continue to work with counties and local groundwater sustainability agencies to improve decisions on issuing permits for new wells to “hopefully avoid this continued cycle of increasing dry wells during drought periods.”
Experts shared differing opinions about the legislation.
“I think it’s critically important,” said Jay Famiglietti, a hydrologist and professor at Arizona State University’s School of Sustainability. Without this type of legislative change, he said, “it allows the continued drilling of deep wells that pump a tremendous amount of water.”
“So in addition to sustainability being at risk, we’ll see more and more shallower wells go dry,” Famiglietti said.
Behind the opposition to the bill, Famiglietti said there seems to be a “concerted effort” to drill more wells and delay restrictions. He called the opposition by the agriculture industry shortsighted.
“The state cannot achieve its sustainability goals without leadership from the agricultural industry,” he said. “We want food sustainability, and we need that water to grow food for generations to come.”
A pair of agricultural groups, the Community Alliance with Family Farmers and the California Climate and Agriculture Network, supported the bill.
Ruth Dahlquist-Willard, interim director of the University of California’s Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program, said some sort of policy intervention is needed, but “this type of ‘one size fits all’ approach usually hurts small farms, who have fewer resources to adapt to new policies and go through additional regulatory hurdles.”
If a well goes dry on a small farm, under the bill that farm would be treated the same as a large corporation or a hedge fund when trying to replace the well, she said.
Dahlquist-Willard said she hopes if similar legislation is proposed again, it will include protections for small farms.
Case 9:23-cr-80101-AMC Document 655 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/27/2024 Page 2 of 11
CASE NO. 23-80101-CR-CANNON
showing” that the affidavit in support of the Mar-a-Lago search warrant contains any material false
statements or omissions. The balance of the Motion cannot be resolved on the current record,
however, because of pertinent factual disputes, and thus the Court RESERVES RULING on those
issues as stated below, pending an evidentiary suppression hearing to be scheduled by separate
order.
DISCUSSION
A. LEGAL PRINCIPLES GOVERNING A FRANKS HEARING
The Supreme Court has expressed “a strong preference” for searches conducted pursuant
to a warrant and has directed courts to accord “great deference” to a magistrate’s determination of
probable cause. United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 914 (1984) (internal quotation marks
omitted); id. at 922 (“[A] warrant issued by a magistrate normally suffices to establish that a law
enforcement officer has acted in good faith in conducting the search.”) (internal quotation marks
omitted). To this end, affidavits supporting warrants are presumptively valid, Franks v. Delaware,
438 U.S. 154, 171 (1978), and courts should not invalidate warrants by interpreting affidavits in a
“hypertechnical, rather than . . . commonsense, manner,” Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 236,
(1983) (internal quotation marks omitted).
As enunciated in Franks, however, deference to a magistrate’s determination of probable
cause “does not preclude inquiry into the knowing or reckless falsity of the affidavit on which that
determination was based.” Leon, 468 U.S. at 914. This derives from the root assumption that,
when the Fourth Amendment requires probable cause for the issuance of a warrant, the showing
of probable cause will be “truthful.” Franks, 438 U.S. at 164–65. “Truthful” in this context does
not mean, however, “that every fact recited in the warrant affidavit is necessarily correct, for
probable cause may be founded upon hearsay and upon information received from informants, as
well as upon information within the affiant’s own knowledge that sometimes must be garnered
2
Former President Trump and President Biden have spent weeks in preparation leading up to their center stage appearances tonight for the highly anticipated CNN Presidential Debate.
The debate is the first of the 2024 presidential election cycle to include both men, and millions of Americans across the country are seeking answers to questions about critical issues important to voters.
However, Americans are also awaiting viral moments brought on by both the remarks and facial expressions of each presidential candidate, especially as neither nominee is a stranger to social media virality.
YOUNG TRUMP SUPERFAN BROUGHT TO TEARS WHILE MEETING FORMER PRESIDENT
President Biden and former President Trump will go head-to-head tonight in the first presidential debate of the 2024 election cycle. (Win McNamee/Getty Images/Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
A few times since Biden began his presidency, the incumbent has attracted hundreds of thousands of clicks for a number of speaking gaffes and a few falls.
In 2022, Biden was recorded falling off his bike while cycling in Delaware, which quickly circulated across social media platforms.
Last summer, Biden drew social media attention when he tripped and hit the stage floor during an Air Force Academy graduation ceremony.
Last weekend, Trump went viral during a moment shared with a young fan in Philadelphia where the child was wearing a Trump-like suit and wearing a wig. The kid met the former president, who signed and gifted him with a $20 bill, and the exchange was captured on video. It garnered nearly 900,000 views on X at midday on Sunday.
“I like that kid! So, if your parents don’t want you, I’ll take you,” Trump said in the video.
PRESIDENT BIDEN ALMOST FALLS WHILE WALKING UP AIR FORCE ONE STAIRS
Biden has gone viral for falling down several times since becoming president. (Fox News)
In 2023, following his arrest in Fulton County, Georgia, Trump’s mugshot immediately went viral and has since been used to decorate coffee mugs, sweatshirts and T-shirts, including those sold on his own campaign website.
While there will be no audience present tonight in Atlanta at CNN’s Midtown studio, and microphones will be controlled by media personnel, viewers everywhere will be looking at the candidates for clashing reactions to one another, especially the usually unabashed expressions provided by Trump.
Here are some of the most memorable facial expressions by the former president during previous presidential debates.
Trump reacts to Biden saying he has no COVID plan
During the Sept. 29, 2020, presidential debate between Trump and Biden, hosted by Fox News, Biden said of Trump during the COVID-19 pandemic, “He went on record and said to one of your colleagues, recorded, that in fact he knew how dangerous it was, but he didn’t want to tell us, didn’t want to tell us because he didn’t want us to panic.”
He added, “He didn’t want us. Americans don’t panic. He panicked,” and went on to say that Trump “still doesn’t have a plan” regarding next steps to combat the disease at the time.
Trump reacts to Biden saying he “doesn’t have a plan” during a 2020 presidential debate. (Fox News)
Trump reacts to a question about paying $750 in federal income taxes in 2017
During the same presidential debate on Sept. 29, 2020, Trump was asked by the moderator if he would tell Americans how much he paid in federal income taxes in 2016 and 2017, to which he responded, “Millions of dollars.”
He added, “And you’ll get to see it.”
In late 2022, Democrats revealed Trump’s tax returns and made his finances public to the American people, though Trump worked to stop them in court.
HILLARY CLINTON COMPLAINS IT’S ‘IMPOSSIBLE’ TO DEBATE TRUMP, ‘WASTE OF TIME’ TO REFUTE ARGUMENTS
Trump reacts to a question about his federal tax filings during a 2020 presidential debate. (Fox News)
Trump’s reactions during debate with Hillary Clinton
During a 90-minute CNN-hosted presidential debate on Oct. 9, 2016, in St. Louis, Hillary Clinton and Trump went head-to-head on topics including taxes, a travel ban on Muslims, Syrian refugees and two-faced politicians, among other topics.
Early in the debate, Clinton said, “It’s just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country,”
Trump responded ominously, “Because you’d be in jail.”
Later in the debate the former Secretary of State said, “Well, everything you’ve heard from Donald is not true. I’m sorry I have to keep saying this, but he lives in an alternative reality and it is sort of amusing to hear somebody who hasn’t paid federal income taxes in maybe 20 years talking about what he’s going to do, but I’ll tell you what he’s going to do.”
Trump reacts to energy policy statement from Biden
During the final presidential debate between Trump and Biden on Oct. 22, 2020, at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee, the former president and incumbent disagreed over energy policies when Biden said he wanted to move away from fossil fuels.
Biden said of Trump, “He won’t give federal subsidies to the gas, excuse me, to solar and wind,” to which Trump subsequently reacted with “Oooh!” a couple of times.
Trump reacts to Biden’s remarks during an ABC-hosted presidential debate in 2020. (ABC)
Trump reacts to Clinton and climate change remark
The first presidential debate between Clinton and Trump drew over 84 million viewers.
During the debate on Sept. 26, 2016, Clinton said of the former president, “Donald thinks that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese,” to which Trump subtly raised his eyebrows and followed with “I did not. I do not say that.”
CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Trump reacts to remarks made by Clinton regarding climate change during an NBC-hosted presidential debate in 2016. (NBC)
The earliest general election debate in a U.S. presidential contest is set to begin Thursday night, with President Biden and former President Trump expected to shower disdain on each other in a confrontation that will refocus attention on a razor-close campaign.
With polls tightening but still showing Trump with a narrow lead nationally and in most battleground states, the noisy showdown between two bitter rivals will be contrasted with the quiet setting — in a CNN studio in Atlanta, with no audience for the first time in recent debate history.
A majority of Americans have a negative view of both men, and a supermajority have told pollsters they wish they had other major-party candidates to choose between. But that does not reduce the stakes in the debate, set to begin at 6 p.m. PDT on CNN and other outlets.
Critics say that a principal challenge for the 81-year-old Biden is to show that he has the acuity and vigor to lead the world’s most powerful nation. He’ll likely to face tough questions about inflation that skyrocketed in 2021 and 2022 and an illegal immigration surge that hit a high at the U.S.-Mexico border in 2022.
Trump critics say one of his top challenges is proving he cares about Americans outside his fervent political base. He’ll likely be asked to explain why he continues to perpetuate the fiction that he defeated Biden four years ago and why he appointed Supreme Court justices who eliminated the right of women to have an abortion.
Many Americans surely will spend the early summer evening avoiding the tempest. Even some political professionals (at least those not employed by the Trump and Biden camps) have been cringing about the spectacle that is now at hand.
“Never have so many had such low expectations for the next leader of the free world,” said Mike Madrid, a Republican strategist in California who was a leader of the anti-Trump Lincoln Project. “Finishing the night without a broken hip or a racial slur would appear to be the barometer of success.”
Biden’s team made clear in an interview that the president plans to hit Trump on multiple fronts: “ripping away reproductive rights, promoting political violence and undermining our democratic institutions, and doing the bidding of his billionaire donors to fund tax giveaways to the ultra-wealthy and corporations by hurting seniors and the middle class.”
Trump’s supporters have a litany of complaints about Biden, saying the incumbent has a “terrible record” that includes “a border crisis, rampant inflation, disastrous foreign policy and a war on American energy,” according to Jessica Millan Patterson, chair of the California Republican Party.
Those who don’t like what they’re hearing from the two top contenders have another option: tuning in to a video stream from the campaign of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. It will show the independent candidate — still trailing badly in most polls — answering the same questions as the leading contenders. CNN refused Kennedy’s bid to be on stage with Biden and Trump.
Commentators and good-government groups have been yearning for a debate featuring real substance. But most also fear a reprise of the first debate between then-President Trump and Biden in 2020, when Trump talked over Biden repeatedly and moderator Chris Wallace could not restore order.
An exasperated Biden finally retorted: “Will you shut up, man?”
A nonpartisan group released a study last week that showed an escalating war of incivility in presidential debates — with interruptions escalating markedly in the Trump era. The organization, Open to Debate, counted a total of 76 interruptions by the two candidates in the first 2020 debate, though the vitriol decreased markedly in the second debate, with just four interruptions.
In an attempt to control Thursday’s give-and-take, CNN announced it will mute the microphone of whichever candidate has not been asked to answer a question.
Trump supporters have cast aspersions on the CNN crew and co-moderators Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, saying Tapper, in particular, has shown a bias against the former president. They have also complained that Trump will be unfairly muted.
At least one Democratic strategist, Dan Newman, said he understands why the Biden team wouldn’t want Trump shouting over the incumbent. “But it does limit one of the way Trump shows he’s … repugnant,” Newman said.
In a recent interview with Byron York of the Washington Examiner, Trump signaled that he’s not comfortable with the prospect of speaking in an empty studio.
“You have no audience to read,” Trump said. “To me, the audience is easier because it’s telling you what is going on, indirectly, with applause or not applause. This room is a sterile, dead room, which is I guess what they want.”
Trump also told York that he was “very aggressive” in his first 2020 debate with Biden but got “great marks” on a second debate, when he was less combative.
Trump has not shied from unfounded claims in the debate run-up. He has suggested that Biden will not be able to perform without some pharmaceutical enhancement.
“Look, he’s going to be jacked up on something, like he was for the State of the Union,” Trump told one campaign crowd, with no evidence. “He was jacked up. That’s why I called for the drug test.”
As to the tone he will set Thursday night, the presumptive Republican nominee for president said: “I’m probably going to look at the scene at the time. It’s like a fight. It depends on what the situation is.”
Aaron Kall, director of debate at the University of Michigan, said considerable uncertainty remains over how the two candidates, the oldest ever to face off for the presidency, will perform.
“The million-dollar question is whether Trump and President Biden have the self control to stay on task during the entirety of the debate or whether they could lose their cool,” said Kall, co-author of “Debating the Donald.” “Not knowing how the answer to this critical question will turn out is one of the main reasons tens of millions of Americans will tune in to find out on Thursday night.”
Tennessee Army National Guard puts on Boot Camp for students
Kinky Friedman, singer and novelist who fronted The Texas Jewboys, dies at 79
How the SCOTUS ruling on Idaho’s emergency abortion ban will affect patient transfers to Utah
Police investigating death of teen after incident at Vt. high school
First Lady Jill Biden visits Virginia Beach before debate, Trump to visit Chesapeake next
See it: Tesla crashes into Columbus convention center at 70 mph
Colorado Rockies game no. 116 thread: Zac Gallen vs José Ureña
Fox News Politics: Georgia the whole day through
Death of missing Oregon girl found in stream ruled homicide
At least 2 dead as tornadoes hit Alabama, damage homes across Southeast
The many faces of Donald Trump from past presidential debates
Serbian police shut down cultural exchange festival with Kosovo
At the border, migrants ‘wait and see’ as encounters with Border Patrol dip 40%
Supreme Court rules to allow emergency exceptions to Idaho's abortion ban
Bolivia foils coup attempt: All you need to know
-
News1 week agoNYC pastor is sentenced to 9 years for fraud, including taking a single mom's $90,000
-
Movie Reviews1 week agoFancy Dance (2024) – Movie Review
-
News1 week agoRead the Ruling by the Virginia Court of Appeals
-
Crypto1 week agoIdris Elba Promotes Cryptocurrency in West Africa – BORGEN
-
Politics1 week agoTrump targets House Freedom Caucus chair in intra-party Republican primary feud
-
News6 days agoTracking a Single Day at the National Domestic Violence Hotline
-
Politics7 days agoTrump classified docs judge to weigh alleged 'unlawful' appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith
-
News6 days agoSupreme Court upholds law barring domestic abusers from owning guns in major Second Amendment ruling | CNN Politics