Flood Trumps Drought -- Why Not?

I'll start this post by stating the soon to be obvious: I am not an expert in environmental science, water (hydrology - at least I know the word), or anything water or weather related. I'm just a person reading the news and wondering.

I've read about the drought in Georgia and poor water conditions in California. I saw an article about the Army Corps of Engineers moving water from Lake Lanier (in GA) to help out endangered mussels in Florida. Then there's flooding along the Mississippi River.

So here's my question: Why can't we send a fleet of tanker trucks to Iowa and other areas affected by flooding, drop some hoses in the flood, suck it up and dump it in Lake Lanier and other lakes in states with water shortfalls (like California)? If there's concern about vacuuming up the local fishes, I would think that bucket brigades could form up as easily as sandbag brigades. I don't imagine that the cost of chartering the fleet and paying for the gas would exceed the cost of paying for all the flood damage, the lost crops, and everything else....

If this water transport already happening, I haven't read or seen it yet. Please point me in the right direction. If it's not, can someone please tell my why it wouldn't work? I'm serious here. If there are any experts out there who can explain it in English, or even folks who have a better handle on it than I do who want to put in their pennies, please -- explain it to me.