​​​​​

​

*Breaking News* On Twitter_VS_Political

L&SS-IS

​By Catherine Davis | Commentator, ​Chief Editor, L&SS

Message @https://twitter.com/listenstudyhome

​January 3, 2020

Listen & Study Services' Commentary:



Oh boy, the confusion surrounding this supposed 'New California Residential Water bill is astronomical' to say the least. 

As a former Southern Californian, born in Illinois, I spent most of my childhood frollicing in and out of lawn sprinklers just having the time of my young life without a care in the world - until, the water usage bans of the 70's came along and put a stop to many of our summer water fun. Those laws stipulated fines and penalties for adults who watered their lawns during the day (at high noon when the temperatures were above a specific high amount and lawns were scorching hot- this law made since to me, I obeyed it). The state also banned spraying leaves off, trash, or any other things off sidewalks; which caused waste of water/runoff down a sewer drains that drained waste water into the Pacific ocean.

As an adult in my 20's, I remember thinking about conserving water or catching and storing large amounts of it for future use, in my garden if I start one, only to be told doing so was against the law and if I got caught, meant lots of big fines.

Cut-to-2020 and I am living in Illinois where there are no such water waste laws to deal with. Yet, I still kept my water conservation tendencies intact - that's a good thing - to me anyway. 

We're are three days into the new year and California was hit with bad news (I read this news on Twitter - see link below) that residents are now once again required to monitor water consumption in ways us boomers would never see coming. I read residents will be fined if they take a shower and wash a load of clothes at the same time. I thought, "Here we go again but snapped back into reality and thought about the fact that I no longer live in this state!" This thought doesn't mean I don't empathize with the citizens living there; because I surely do! Breaking these new laws which stipulate that residents could only use 55 gallons per capita (per person) would bring fines of up to $1,000/violation.

After reading this Twitter post, I admit that I was appalled and jumped on the outraged bandwagon too. That's until I followed the rabit trail to another article that debunked the water-ban-fine. Source: Correct-information-on-california-water-efficiency-laws/

Do you think this so-called 'correct info' on California water efficiency laws relieved feelings lasted long? It lasted until I decided it would be better to go straight to the actual bill SB 606 - FYI, it is a very long read:  http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB60

The 55 gallon law reads:

(A) For indoor residential water use, 55 gallons per capita daily water use as a provisional standard. Upon completion of the department’s 2016 report to the Legislature pursuant to Section 10608.42, this standard may be adjusted by the Legislature by statute.

Just above this paragraph reads:

(2) It is the intent of the Legislature that the urban water use targets described in paragraph (1) cumulatively result in a 20-percent reduction from the baseline daily per capita water use by December 31, 2020.
(b) An urban retail water supplier shall adopt one of the following methods for determining its urban water use target pursuant to subdivision (a):
(1) Eighty percent of the urban retail water supplier’s baseline per capita daily water use.
(2) The per capita daily water use that is estimated using the sum of the following performance standards:
Source: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bill

So no, there isn't any mention of showers in this article, but one can deduce where news media came up with the idea.

Socialism before our eyes folks.

California passed a TAX stating
you will be fined $1000 for exceeding what the state considers to be a water limit.

California is out of control.
pic.twitter.com/8ajvmj5lRm

— Kambree Kawahine Koa - Text EMPOWER to 88022 (@KamVTV) January 3, 2020

-----
​

​Related Info...

Just like I did, she read the actual California bill 606.

​

​ ​

​

​

​BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) | Twitter

1. The latest Tweets from BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics). The official account for political news from the BBC team based at Westminster. London, UK
2. Politics (@politics) | Twitter
3. Latest Tweets - Twitter - RealClearPolitics Twitter. Sure, if they go around ... 13/ Bill Clinton, and had her law partners offer to represent them when a political opponent threatened to expose the affairs ...
4. Bloomberg Politics (@bpolitics) | Twitter The latest Tweets from Bloomberg Politics (@bpolitics). Bloomberg Politics is the spot for smart, non-partisan political coverage + analysis. #WADR with @jheil and ...
5. NYT Politics (@nytpolitics) | Twitter NYT Politics Verified account @ nytpolitics. A fast-paced feed of news, analysis and dispatches from The New York Times political team. Sign up for the First Draft ...
6. ghost politics (@PoliticsGhost) | Twitter https://twitter.com/PoliticsGhost The latest Tweets from ghost politics (@PoliticsGhost). The OFFICIAL Twitter of Ghost from True Capitalist Radio! Spread it around like wildfire! #CapitalistArmy.
7. NPR Politics (@nprpolitics) | Twitter https://twitter.com/nprpolitics 45.7K tweets • 994 photos/videos • 2.32M followers. Check out the latest Tweets from NPR Politics (@nprpolitics)
8. TwitterPolitics - Politics Powered by Twitter www.twitterpolitics.com Politics Powered By Twitter airs Mon-Fri @ 2pm ET on Sirius XM's POTUS, channel 124. Hosted by @HyperVocal's @LeeBrenner
9. How the GOP used Twitter to stretch election laws - CNN.com Video embedded · Republicans and outside groups used anonymous Twitter accounts to share internal polling data ahead of the midterm elections, CNN
   
   

​^

ARCHIVE