- Twelve counties opposed the bond, 10 of which roughly make up the state of Jefferson territory in far Northern California.
The other two? Calaveras and Inyo.
- San Joaquin County voters were inclined to support the bond (59 percent), but were considerably less enthusiastic than other San Joaquin Valley regions (Fresno County weighed in with 76 percent support).
- The strongest support in California? Kings County, at 76.5 percent.
- Strongest opposition? Water-conscious Trinity County, at 70.4 percent.
Unfortunately for bond opponents, Trinity County accounts for just 3,456 votes, about .0006 percent of the more than 5 million votes cast on the bond.
Billionaires, Corporate Interests Dumped Over $16.4 Million into Prop. 1 Campaign
The election results show how the power of millions of dollars of corporate money in the corrupt oligarchy of California were able to defeat a how a grassroots movement of fishermen, environmentalists, Indian Tribes and family farmers opposed to Prop. 1.
Prop. 1 proponents, including a rogue’s gallery of oil companies, corporate agribusiness tycoons, Big Tobacco, health insurance companies and greedy billionaires, dumped over $16.4 million into the campaign, while Prop. 1 opponents raised around $100,000 for the effort. In other words, the Yes on Prop. 1 campaign outmatched the No on Prop. 1 campaign by a factor of 164 to 1.
In a state and country where corporations have the same rights as people, the political game is rigged so that Goliath is usually able to defeat David. The state’s voters, responding to the avalanche of pro-Prop. 1 ads funded by corporate interests, approved the measure by a vote of 66.77 percent to 33.23 percent
Voters throughout the state fiercely debated the pros and cons of Proposition 1, Jerry Brown’s $7.5 billion water bond, before they went to the polls on November 4.
While the pros and cons are important, an even bigger issue in any environmental battle or process is the money behind the campaign. The big corporate money spent on the water bond largely determines who the bond will benefit – billionaires, agribusiness, oil companies and corporate “environmental” NGOs, not the fish, wildlife or people of California.
The passage of Proposition 1 was inevitable considering the millions of dollars dumped into the campaign by Governor Brown and his collaborators – and the deceptive campaign ads run by the Yes on Prop. 1 campaign cynically employing fear-mongering over the drought to scare Californians into voting for Prop. 1.
Some of “Big Green” are bad actors too!
Contributions to Brown’s Yes on Props 1 and 2 Committee totalled $13,880,528.43, according to the latest data posted on the California Secretary of State’s website. (http://cal-access.ss.ca.gov/Campaign/Measures/Detail.aspx?id=1369617&session=2013)
The contributions feature millions of dollars from billionaires, corporate agribusiness, Big Oil and the tobacco industry – corporate interests that all expect a big return for their “investment” in the corrupt “play to pay” politics that rules California today.
Contributions to the committee from the period from October 1 to October 18 alone amounted to $9,537,048.90.
Expenditures during the period from January 1 through October 18 were $10,728,645.50, with $10,149,477.92 just from the period of October 1 to October 18.
But this isn’t the only committee that funded the Yes on 1 campaign. When you consider the other committees backing Prop.1 listed on the Secretary of State’s website, the total amount of contributions jumps by another $2,541,257.91 to $16,421,785.91!
The “California Business Political Action Committee,” sponsored by the California Chamber of Commerce, raised $550,000 for Yes on 1 and 2 during the period from January 1 to October 18, 2014.
The “Wetlands Conservation Committee, Yes on Prop. 1,” sponsored by Ducks Unlimited, Audubon California and the Nature Conservancy, raised $215,000 from January 1 through October 18.
Other committees backing Prop. 1 include:
- The “Conservation Action Fund”: $818,623.78
- The Sac Valley Water & Rice For Prop. 1: $44,499.00
- Think Long Committee, sponsored by the Nicolas Berggruen Institute Trust, Supporting Propositions 1 and 2: $250,000
- Western Plant Health Association, Supporting Propositions 1 and 2: $100,000
- NRDC Action Fund Ballot Measures Committee – Yes on Prop. 1; $9,514.27
- Environmental Coalition for Water and Wildlife Protection – Yes on Prop. 1: $102,000
- The Southern California District County Laborers PAC: $58,219.02
- The California Water Association Political Issues Committee – Yes on Prop. 1: $100,000
- Laborers Pacific Southwest Regional Organizing Coalition Issues PAC – Yes on Props 1 and 2: $293,401.84
While the committees backing Prop. 1 raised over $16.4 million, the Vote No on Prop. 1 campaign raised over $97,999, a small fraction of the money raised by Prop. 1 proponents.
In addition, opponents of Prop. 1 revealed that the Nature Conservancy donated $500,000 to the campaign.
“Prop. 1’s big dam projects will make very little new water, and the water will mainly go to unsustainable huge agribusinesses,” said Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta. “Most disturbing is the $500,000 that the Nature Conservancy has contributed to the Prop 1 campaign. The Nature Conservancy has benefited from the gifting of public lands in the Delta by the Department of Water Resources.”
She emphasized, “The Nature Conservancy turned a blind eye to oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico for the ability to manage wetlands, and pumps oil on its own lands. In California, they are turning a blind eye to the issue of how water exports will be accelerated from the Bay-Delta estuary if Prop. 1 passes, and how this water will fill Governor Brown’s Delta tunnels. They are supporting water policies that will serve special corporate interests in exchange for the opportunity to manage more conservancy projects in the Delta and throughout California.”
Source, Dan Bacher