Texas outlets fluff Charles Perry's Proposition 4 instead of saying "vote no"

Proposition 4 is the constitutional amendment to create a permanent state water fund, with an automatic $1 billion per year diverted from state sales taxes into that fund.

Wingnuts, at least some, hate it because, at least for a decade, it establishes permanent funding without legislative approval, and other issues. 

The Trib, Lone Star Left, and presumably other librulz are lining up to kiss it.

Lone Star "Left," per Cactus Ed Abbey, seems to believe in growth for growth's sake without admitting that's the theology of the cancer cell.

Also wrong is is the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, clearly proving itself to still be Gang Green neoliberals in the environmental organization world, in an official support with no real analysis.  

I mean, that piece even admits voters are being offered a pig in a poke:

At least 50% of the annual allocations must go toward the New Water Supply for Texas Fund and the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas (SWIFT). The New Water Supply for Texas Fund supports various projects - some of which are highly controversial - that add to the total volume of water available to Texans, such as reservoir construction, seawater desalination, reuse of oil and gas wastewater (“produced water”), a statewide water conveyance system, acquisition of water from out of state, water and wastewater reuse, and aquifer storage and recovery. 

The focus of the SWIFT is solely on water infrastructure projects identified in the State Water Plan. This is an important accountability measure because it means there must be some level of support for the project locally for it to appear in the State Water Plan. However, there is no requirement for how this part of the funding must be split between the New Water Supply for Texas Fund and SWIFT.

But still says vote yes. 

The Texas branch of League of Women Voters is also wrong. 

Leftists for sure, and more clear-eyed liberals, should not. But for different reasons than wingnuts.

First, as I noted several weeks ago, even before state Sen. Charles Perry expanded his ideas to constitutional amendment level, it's a boondoggle. That was based on reporting by the Monthly, where Forrest Wilder said Perry was trying to revive "a failed 1960s solution."

Second, because the whole idea is the brainchild of a Texas wingnut, it takes climate change into zero account. Nor does it support conservation. But it DOES back environmentally destructive desalinization. And the "reuse" of old "produced" water from fracking.

On all of this, the media in general know it. Lone Star "Left" sure as hell knows, or should know, all of this. Hence "left" in scare quotes.

It also doesn't regulate groundwater pumping. And, Perry lives above the Ogallala Aquifer and knows it's running dry. (Maybe he's hoping to make a buck selling some of its water to East Texas.)

Let the state increase TCEQ grants and low-interest loans for local water infrastructure and get rid of the rest.

I didn't like Perry speaking question-free and interview-free at the Texas Press Association state convention, either.