Is there a Republican split over Gov. Schwarzenegger's proposed water bond package?

It would seem so, by the looks of the debate raging on some GOP blogs.

It began on July 11, the day after the governor announced his revised proposal to put a $9.3 billion water bond on November's ballot. Conservative blogger Jon Fleischman, on the popular Flash Report, called the proposal "sausage of a political process" that would not do much to fix water problems because it was filled with a "Sierra Club wish list" of environmental initiatives.

But wait. Earlier this week, Senate Republican Leader Dave Cogdill of Modesto defended the proposal on the business-friendly Fox & Hounds blog, calling it "a solid framework for tackling California's water challenges."

Fleischman responded: "I cannot imagine a situation where principled conservatives could vote for a deal."

And today, former GOP legislator Sen. Ray Haynes of Murrieta weighed in: "This bond should be opposed because it (is) the same old Sacramento response to a huge people crisis. It will protect rats and weeds, and not create one ounce of water for people."

The opposition could put Cogdill and Assembly GOP leader Mike Villines of Clovis in an awkward position. Money for dams is a top priority for the farmers who live in their districts. Yet, to strike a deal with Democrats, they will likely have to agree to a "comprehensive fix" that includes money for environmental restoration, water recycling and the like.

That will increase the bond price tag. And, as evidenced by the debate above, will anger fiscal conservatives in other parts of the state.

Oh, and all this must be resolved by Aug. 16 to get it on the ballot.