WATCH: Adam Schiff Gets Called Out for Misleading Claim About Wildfires During Live TV Appearance
OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
In a recent live television interview on ABC, Democratic Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA) found himself in the hot seat after making a misleading statement regarding the role of water reservoirs in the fight against wildfires in Los Angeles. The controversy centered around the non-operational status of a crucial reservoir in the Pacific Palisades, which had the potential to hold up to 117 million gallons of water. Analysts had noted that this reservoir could have played a significant role in fighting the massive wildfires that engulfed the area, yet its failure to remain operational was attributed to a lack of proper maintenance by the California government.
The issue arose when an ABC anchor questioned Schiff about the fire hydrants running dry in Los Angeles during the early stages of the fire. The anchor asked, “Why did so many of those fire hydrants simply run dry?” and connected the issue to the dormant Palisades reservoir. He inquired, “Was there something to do with that 117 million-gallon reservoir in the Palisades that was out of operation? What’s your understanding? What’s your initial read on this?”
In response, Schiff downplayed the significance of the reservoir’s lack of operation. “Well, my initial take, and I certainly want a full review of this, so that I can form a more complete understanding of the matter,” Schiff began. He then claimed, “But my initial understanding is the reservoirs that the Palisades were drawing on, these 3 million-gallon reservoirs, were full at the initiation of these fires.”
Schiff suggested that even if the Palisades reservoir had been operational, its impact may have been limited due to the massive scale of the fires. “But they’re intended, frankly, they have the capacity to put out homes that maybe house multiple houses, not if the whole town is up in flames,” he remarked. “And most particularly, not if the winds are so strong that aircraft can’t fly.”
While the fire department struggled to manage the fires due to the intensity of the flames and high winds, Schiff’s comments quickly faced backlash. Critics on social media called out Schiff’s claims, pointing to contradictions between his statements and news reports about the reservoir’s condition.
One prominent conservative account, I Meme Therefore I Am, shared the clip of Schiff’s remarks, accusing him of misleading the public. They highlighted an NBC News article titled, “Reservoir in Pacific Palisades was out of commission when fires started,” which contradicted Schiff’s assertion that the reservoirs were full at the start of the fires. In addition, the article pointed to the fact that the 117-million-gallon water reservoir had been closed for repairs for nearly a year, further compounding the issue of water shortages during the fire crisis.
The criticism didn’t stop there, as users on social media pointed out that a simple search would reveal the ongoing investigation into why the Pacific Palisades reservoir was offline. The Santa Ynez Reservoir, which had been closed for cover repairs, also contributed to the water shortage, making it clear that the 117-million-gallon capacity of the Palisades reservoir had been unavailable when it was needed most.
The controversy prompted California Governor Gavin Newsom to call for an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the water supply issues, with many residents and analysts questioning why the state failed to ensure critical infrastructure remained functional during a fire emergency.
While Schiff’s remarks seemed to downplay the significance of the Palisades reservoir’s closure, the response from social media users and media outlets exposed the misalignment between his claims and the facts at hand. As investigations continue into the causes of the water supply problems, questions remain about whether proper maintenance and oversight could have made a difference in the fight against the wildfires.
As the controversy unfolds, it’s clear that the public is eager for answers and accountability regarding the maintenance of vital resources in the face of climate-induced disasters.