No one can accuse Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick of not looking out for his constituents who live along flood-prone sections of the Delaware River.I can (here and here).
Last week, Fitzpatrick sent a letter to Gov. Rendell asking him to push for an agreement with New York City and New York, New Jersey and Delaware officials that would require water levels in three reservoirs in the Catskill Mountains - reservoirs which ultimately feed the Delaware River between Pennsylvania and New Jersey - be kept at 85 percent or below.I read this prior paragraph and I find myself wondering who writes this stuff. This is a paragraph that could have been written by Jerry Seinfeld, because it says absolutely nothing. Also, as it turns out, today is a dry but somewhat overcast day; they could have at least bothered to write this in such a way as to indicate that Ernesto has passed us by at this point.
That's a perfect way to somewhat mitigate the flow of the river during times when the reservoirs are at capacity and heavy rains have nowhere to go but into residents' living rooms, which happened along the river as recently as June and which periodically occur along the Delaware.
But during times of drought? That's another story for the residents of New York City who rely on the reservoirs for much of their drinking water. Lowering reservoir levels may help those in Fitzpatrick's district, but such an action could be disastrous for the 8 million people who call New York home.
Now, it's pretty obvious Fitzpatrick doesn't have any constituents living in the Big Apple, and he was elected to work and speak up for the residents of Bucks County's 8th District, some of whom living along the river are quite weary from worrying about two feet of water in their homes and flooded streets every time it rains hard. Another bout with Mother Nature could be in store this weekend as the remnants of Tropical Storm Ernesto pass by.
But look at the issue from New Yorkers' point of view. Eight million or so people use a lot of water every day. Just a week or two of dry weather, at any time of year, puts a strain on reservoirs used to supply potable water to the city.That is precisely why, assuming the involved players in New York City even consider Fitzpatrick's proposal at all, they will spent very little time do so. They will no doubt recognize this as another PR stunt in short order.
There is some question just how much a voluntary lowering of the reservoirs would help in the event of flooding along the lower Delaware River. Why 85 percent? Why not 90 or 75? Keeping the reservoirs at 85 percent capacity would help some potential flood victims, but at what cost to the peace of mind of those living up river who depend on the reservoirs for their very existence?These are good questions that the editorial doesn't bother to answer.
Fitzpatrick's heart is in the right place; he's looking for ways to help those he represents. But as Carol Collier, Executive Director of the Delaware River Basin Commission points out, flooding vs. drought is a very complex problem that will require a complex solution.You've got to be kidding me. Didn't Reagan also say "his heart was in the right place" also when he was trading arms for hostages? This is a completely and totally subjective statement and it doesn't mean a damn thing to the residents flooded along the Delaware River.
Also, it's obvious that the Courier Times Editorial Board didn't read my post the other day when I pointed out that asking New York City to reconsider its revenue capacity was way down on the list of Carol Collier's recommendations (unlikely that they would, I'll admit).
We recommend that Gov. Rendell look at Fitzpatrick's suggestion as part of the answer. At any rate, we're sure New York officials will have plenty to say before anything is done.Nothing is going to be done on this proposal...take that to the bank. This is an election-year stunt by Mikey, and it's kind of pathetic that the Courier Times didn't bother to acknowledge it as such.
No comments:
Post a Comment