California is trying that, it just takes years to develop these plants. The water from the plants is still more expensive than normal water, but it's a reliable, drought-proof source, which is obviously really desirable right now. See http://www.npr.org/2014/02/26/....
Rights do not disappear because you associate with someone, or because you have more money than them. Rush Limbaugh has just as much right to free speech as I do, despite the fact that he influences a great many more people.
Actually rights can and do disappear because you associate with people. The entire crime of conspiracy is premised on the idea that multiple individuals working together as a group are more dangerous than the individuals working separately. If I say "I am going to rob a bank," I've done nothing illegal. If I say to Person A "Do you want to rob a bank with me?" and Person A responds "Yes," then I've just committed the crime of conspiracy.*
In criminal law it's viewed as suspect when multiple people combine forces, and I don't see why this shouldn't continue to be true in regulation if those people incorporate themselves.
*Yes, this is a very simplified description of conspiracy. The wiki article has much more detail: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_(crime)
As a kid, I was always interested in math and science and got a B.S. in astrophysics planning on going for a Ph.D. After taking a break from school, i discovered a "higher calling" if you will, and am in law school.
I'm still in my first year, and at the beginning I felt like my science background was completely useless. Now that finals are approaching I realize just how critical having an analytical mind is. To provide some hard evidence, the Legal Essay Exam Writing System (LEEWS) talks about how generally people with math or science backgrounds do better than those with english or poly sci backgrounds because they're better able to view the law as a tool (a formula) and know how to apply it to the facts (the variables).