Our betters here in California have discovered that we need to spend billions getting water from the Sacramento Valley to various other parts of the state. There are two possible ways to finance this project: Bonds paid for by revenue that the water projects will generate and bonds paid for out of the state's general revenue.

Given the recent financial track record of California, it is pretty clear that the interest rate charged for general revenue bonds will be higher. Also, when a state cannot even fund its basic obligations, it is questionable policy to take on more obligations without securing additional revenues.

On the other hand, if the new water is cheap then farmers and real estate developers will secure greater benefits from the new water projects.

Wonks Anonymous wonders which side these fiscally conservative groups will be on?