The strategy document confused people into thinking Heartland was just planning on attacks on education. That wasn’t new, see Fakeducation For Years From Heartland..
It also distracted everybody from the real info in the Budget and Funding documents.

The results are mixed. There has been much confusion … but then I’ve gotten more calls from mainstream media and Congressional staff in last week or so than in quite a while. One Congressman has already called for an investigation of one Heartland-related government employee, letters have gone to 6 universities regarding staff who might have conflicts of interest, many people are pushing on corporate donors, we’ve learned Heartland is getting even more money from tobacco companies, and a large number of people besides me have suddenly gotten interested in 501(c)(3) and following money trails. Some of that would have happened without the leak, some not. Of course, the Anonymous Donor is almost certain to be Barre Seid, something useful to know.

d. Morally impure ineffective outcome.

Not to get all scold-y, but it’s hard to see how Gleick’s recent actions are going to help the cause of climate change, or help to discredit the Heartland Institute. If anything, it is going to give them the high ground, cause them to gain sympathy from the general public, spur donations to them, and generally not help the cause of those advocating for action to slow/stop climate change. Also, it generally just muddies the water in the climate debate. Not a very effective outcome in my mind. Seems pretty straightforwadly counter-productive.

IF THE FEDS DEVELOP MORE RESOURCES FOR WATER IN THEIR SYSTEM AND THIS GOES TO THE FARMERS TO KEEP THE U.S. COMPETITIVE IN GLOBAL AGRIBUSINESS THEN MIGHT THIS FREE UP SOME STATE WATER PROJECT WATER FOR OTHERS? IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION.

THERE IS A COMPELLING NATIONAL INTEREST IN NUNES’ H.R. 1837 BILL FOR AGRIBUSINESS. WHY WOULD WE WANT TO MAKE FARMERS PAY CITY WATER PRICES AND MAKE THEM LESS COMPETITIVE GLOBALLY? DO WE WANT OUR LETTUCE, MELONS, BOK CHOI, AND EVERYTHING ELSE FROM CHILE AND MEXICO? NOT ONLY IS THE PRICE OF CHEAP WATER GONE THE NOTION THAT CALIFORNIA WATER HAS GLOBAL AMERICAN INTEREST IS ALSO GONE. THINK GLOBALLY, DRINK LOCALLY.

I think the statement that it will nullify the need for a canal (not sure MWD would agree with that) may have more to do with broadening support and framing it as fiscally conservative. There is another provision about incentivizing early payoff of CVP debt as a measure to reduce the national debt (a deceptive claim). This bill is undoubtedly dead this year, but I wonder if he thinks there is a chance if Republicans get control of the Senate next year, and it could be somehow rolled into a deficit reduction package or a measure to “pay for” a popular tax cut. Wild speculation, but I wonder if there is more to the strategy than moving the window, playing chicken, or being a loose cannon.