The exchange quoted below pretty much sums up what's going on with the proposal now on the State House floor to amend the Constitution to ban diversions -- something that a law has done for 20 years.
"Noah Hall, senior manager of the Great Lakes Water Resource Program of the National Wildlife Federation, said the resolution isn't needed because it duplicates an existing law.
"A constitutional amendment does nothing except give politicians a chance to speak about the issue in an election year," Hall said. "It doesn't provide additional legal protection."
But Rep. Dave Farhat, a Republican from Fruitport who introduced the resolution, said it's important to put the measure in the Michigan Constitution so state lawmakers could not change it in the future. Only a vote of the people can change the constitution.
"What we have now is state law, which can change in the legislative process at any time," Farhat said. "Great Lakes diversion doesn't have to be at the whim of the seated Legislature."
********************************
Suggestion: in addition to the alternative language suggested in a response to the last post, why not amend this proposal simply to say "diversion and/or export"? That would bar any more water bottling facilities like Nestle's Ice Mountain in Mecosta County that export Great Lakes Basin water. Oh, that's right -- we can't do that, because it would actually mean something and protect the environment, and offend a corporation.