Justice My Ass!
Blog
Worth Reading
Press Release
Colorado Land Grab
All Time Sports Debate
Comments
Order Justice My Ass! Now!
Who Are We?
Owyhee Initiative
Favorite Links
Training and Classes
Join J.M.A.

justice.jpg

Last updated on

 

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Why the Range War In the West Matters

One environmental group is dedicated to the goal of ending commercial development on the vast public lands of the West -- even if it means no cattle, sheep, solar farms, wind farms, natural gas or oil development or vitally needed new transmission lines to bring electricity to the cities of America. 

Since last September the federal government has been spending money like a drunken greenhorn cowboy on a Saturday night. Bank bailouts, stimulus spending that ain't done much stimulatin', and taking over automobile companies all have added up to a federal deficit soaring to a record $1.42 trillion -- the highest it has been since World War Two.

But wasting hard earned taxpayer dollars is not unique to this president or this Congress nor is it the exclusive purview of either political party. In fact, over the years the only danged bipartisan thing they do in Washington is to spend money recklessly and with no accountability.

You might be surprised to learn that some of those taxpayer dollars are being used to fund a radical environmental agenda that if successful will ultimately result in the destruction of a way of life and a business deeply rooted in our history. It will also prevent us from taking advantage of the West's abundant natural resources to produce the energy we need to fuel our economy.

Last July I wrote a piece for the Fox Forum called "Range War in the West" in which I described how one outlaw environmental group, the Western Watersheds Project (WWP) was trying to run ranchers and sheepherders off the public lands that belong to all of us and that the ranchers have used under permit and strict federal guidelines for 75 years.

And their weapon of choice? The lawsuit.

They are using the federal courts and a law meant to protect small businesses, farmers and ranchers from an overbearing and overreaching federal government to put some of your fellow citizens out of business.

Let me explain.

Almost 30 years ago, with the best of intentions Congress passed the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). Simply stated the EAJA said that if the government had done wrong against small businesses, including farms and ranches, and they challenged the government in federal court, they would not have to go bankrupt awash in legal fees from protecting their rights. Call it a leveling of the playing field. If they were victorious in court, the government would have to pay their legal fees. Sounds fair right?

But as with all good intentions, there are some radical environmentalists who have figured out a way to use EAJA against those same small businesses in order to further their radical environmental goals. And even though they aren't being sued directly the ranchers must hire lawyers to give them a seat at the table. -- That's kind of like paying to watch your own hangin'.

In the last 10 years in one Federal District Court in Boise, Idaho, Western Watersheds Project has received $1,150,528.00 of your tax dollars for their jihad against the ranchers and sheep men. They have a found judge in that particular court who has been particularly accommodating to them and who seems to have his thumb on the scales of justice in their favor.

And that is just one organization. It is estimated that in that same time frame billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent settling these ridiculous legal claims.

Here's how it works. WWP sues the government challenging the rancher's public land use permits on trumped up charges over water use or endangered species that aren't really endangered, in the hope of having the permit rescinded. They tie up the ranchers in court and financially bleed them. They don't have to win the case to be given your taxpayer money. The government which is a font of useless legal mumbo jumbo says they only have to "prevail" in the case. And guess who makes the decision whether they "prevail" or not? The federal government!

And it's not just Idaho. This group has offices in Arizona, California, Nevada, Montana, Utah, Washington and Wyoming dedicated to the same goal of no commercial development on the vast public lands of the West. That means no cattle, sheep, solar farms, wind farms, natural gas or oil development or vitally needed new transmission lines to bring electricity to the cities of America.
This ain't just about cowboys folks.

Recently I went to Idaho to see firsthand what the Western Watersheds Project was all hot and bothered about. I was invited by some rancher friends who had first told me about this issue.
It was gathering time for the cattle and I had the rare privilege of riding and working alongside some real cowboys and ranchers. I wish all of America could see this beautiful land and the hard working people who battle Mother Nature and now mankind, to preserve a way of life and leave a legacy to their children and grandchildren.

I saw a land where herds of elk and pronghorn antelope live side by side and graze on the same range as cattle. I saw the range that the environmentalists say has been ruined with cattle and sheep and could not tell that either had even been there. Ranchers and sheep men are under strict rules about rotating where the livestock grazes so as not to over graze thereby maintaining the ecological balance of the region.

And I saw a land that can live in harmony with the competing demands of strong economic activity and sound environmental stewardship-- just as it has been doing for over 100 years.

But the most beautiful thing I encountered on my journey were the people.

Folks like Dick and Betty Baker and their sons Doug and Wayne, nephew Junior and Doug's daughter Sarah. They live in a pristine valley along the East Fork of the Salmon River and have done so for six generations. The original log homestead still stands.

Dick is 87 and on the day we met there he was helping with the vaccinations and pregnancy testing on his family's cows much as he has done for many years during the fall.

We went back to his house where his wife Betty welcomed us with a warm smile and a hot toddy to take the edge off the chill in the air.

Dick and Betty told me many stories of the struggles and challenges of running cattle but I never heard a complaint.

When I mentioned WWP they just shook their heads. They just can't understand what motivates someone to want to take away all they have worked for and who has told them -- to their face--that they intend to run them off the range and out of business. And they wonder why the government that is meant to protect their rights seems either unable or unwilling to do so.

At dusk, I stepped outside and one of my traveling companions pointed to some rocky bluffs. He handed me the binoculars and there were three bighorn sheep standing proudly at the top of the bluffs.

I then looked around and saw cattle grazing in a green meadow and a river just beyond. As we drove out I saw deer and a large herd of elk. Man and nature living side by side.

I trust ranchers, sheepherders and cowboys who depend on a vibrant environment to make a living more than I do any outlaw environmentalists who only seek to destroy lives and the Western heritage that belongs to all of us.

And remember they are doing it with your money.

Patrick Dorinson

8:46 am pst

Monday, October 26, 2009

Is This Trip Really Necessary?

In the long ago summer of 2008 there was a bill before the wizards in California’s State Legislature that if passed would have allowed insurance companies to charge customers who agreed to install a “technological device” in their car to have their insurance premiums calculated by the miles they drove. It was being pushed by liberal Democrat Assemblyman Jared Huffman.

Simply put, if you installed a device you paid less if you chose not to you would pay more.

What is interesting is that it was also supported by Republican Insurance Commissioner and candidate for Governor in 2010, Steve Poizner. In July 2008, the Contra Costa Times said about this effort, “There is a new concept for automobile insurance being driven through our state legislature with Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner at the wheel”.

The bill eventually died.

So what happens in Sacramento when legislation fails and you have all the regulatory power of the Insurance Commissioner? Go around the legislative process where issues like this should be resolved and create regulations that do the same thing without any vote of the people’s elected representatives. And that is exactly what Commissioner Poizner did.

Over the last year and out of the media spotlight, the Department of Insurance has been drafting regulations and taking public comment on this issue and on August 3, 2009, Poizner announced that the regulations would take effect sometime this fall. In his press release announcing this he said…

“Pay as You Drive is a cutting-edge program that will create financial incentives for California motorists to drive less, leading to lower-cost auto insurance, less air pollution and a reduced dependence on foreign oil”.

Sounds great doesn’t it? Save money on car insurance and save the planet all at the same time. Who wrote this press release, Al Gore?

To be fair, unlike the Huffman bill the Poizner Regulations would be voluntary and you could either have a device placed in your car or have your odometer read by a designated vendor like an auto repair dealer or smog check station.

The release goes on to say…

“The revised regulations also allow insurers to offer discounts to drivers who opt to purchase a mileage verification policy”.

So according to Commissioner Poizner this program is an “option” or “voluntary” whichever word you choose.

Is this going to be like Obama’s “public option” on healthcare? The conservative argument against the “public option” is that it will eventually force out private insurance and lead to a government-run healthcare system.

In the case of car insurance in California could this “voluntary” or “optional” idea lead to a point sometime in the future where the current way folks buy car insurance is eventually supplanted by this new “pay as you drive” scheme?

And if we get to that point who will this most effect and who will pay the higher premiums?

If you live in a city or an area with good public transportation or carpools, you can leave the car at home and save money. But what if you live in a rural area where public transportation is virtually non-existent and carpooling is impractical?

Rural folks including farmers and ranchers must drive a great deal and it’s mighty tough hauling your harvest to market on public transportation.

What about small business owners like a florist or dry cleaner with delivery trucks? And let’s not forget the working poor who must drive longer distances to their jobs.

Besides who will pay in this scheme, what about the data that the Insurance companies will retrieve from the “big brother black box” tucked neatly beneath your dashboard?

The Progressive Insurance Company in other states that have a similar program collects additional data on things like, “how aggressively you drive” as well as mileage.

According to the very liberal group Consumer Watchdog, the original Huffman bill that Poizner supported said nothing about the collection of additional data.

Commissioner Poizner assures us that they will only be allowed to collect data on your miles driven.

But he can only speak for his tenure at the Department of Insurance. What if under a different Commissioner the insurance companies like Progressive, push to have the regulations changed to say that they can collect additional data like, where you drive, how fast you drive, are you driving at times when accidents are more prevalent or the aforementioned how aggressively you drive? After all it is not a law passed by the Legislature; it is a set of regulations handed down from the Commissioner.

And who’s to say they don’t create a new system of car insurance using the data they have collected to charge more because using that additional data they determine you are a greater risk?

Finally, there is the unspoken part of where this all might lead.

Is this the camel’s nose under the tent to eventually tax motorists by the mile? Because if that ever became law we would all have to install a GPS locator in our vehicles so the government would know how much to tax us for the privilege of driving on the roads we already pay for through the gas tax.

And you can bet your bottom dollar that the insurance companies would be right behind this idea so they could share in the data retrieved from your car.

Steve Poizner claims to be a conservative but a real conservative would never endorse such a plan because of the uncertain path it sets California on that will lead to more government in our lives not less.

The message of the town halls of this August was loud and clear and it was about more than healthcare. That was the match that lit the powder keg of voter anger against big government.

What it really was about was the ordinary folks who work hard and play by the rules saying to their government, we don’t trust you.

And this scheme by Commissioner Poizner asks the voters to trust the government.

Here is some cowboy advice for Commissioner Poizner. “Convincing yourself that a bad idea is a good one, is a bad idea”.

10:49 am pst

Monday, October 19, 2009

"Whatever Happened to Sportsmanship?".

 

In light of the punch seen 'round the world by University of Oregon running back LaGarrette Blount against a Boise State player after their game a few weeks ago, we need to ask what has become of sports in this country? And more importantly, what has become of a society where boorish behavior has become commonplace and even tolerated in all walks of life whether sports, media or politics as long as you win.

 

A few weeks ago the University of Oregon Ducks were thumped for the second year in a row by the Boise State Broncos, opening the 2009 college football season. Oregon looked pathetic and the Broncos looked a little better. As a matter of full disclosure, I graduated the U of O some 35 years ago.

At the end of the game, Oregon running back LaGarrette Blount punched BSU defensive end Byron Hout in the face seconds after Hout taunted him. It was a black day not just for my alma mater but in my mind for sports in general.

To be fair, Blount had been shooting his mouth off during the off-season about how Oregon was going to give BSU and “ass-whuppin” after they beat the Ducks last year in Eugene. And he kept up his verbal assault in the weeks leading up to the game.

But this column is not about college football. It is about the sorry state of college, professional and yes even high school sports in general and the “trash talking” taunting, and ridiculous over celebrating that has become all too commonplace today.

It is also about life and the society we have become.

Today, a player makes a tackle and he jumps around like he just won the Super Bowl. If the hit is particularly hard he stands over his opponent like some ancient Roman gladiator looking for the crowd to give their “thumbs down” so he can finish him. They will do anything to make an”ESPN highlight reel” that evening. It becomes all about them and not the team and it is all about the “me first” culture we have developed.

In the days leading up to any game, professional or college, there are players who can’t help themselves and taunt the other team. This leads to the next part of the cycle called “bulletin board” material where a rival coach either literally or figuratively, posts the comments on the bulletin board in the locker room so his players will get all worked up when they see it. This then leads to the inevitable taunting and trash talk when the teams take the field.

In the stands at many venues it is not much better as so-called fans taunt the fans from the other team with foul language and gestures many times in the presence of small children. Usually alcohol is involved and it can get pretty ugly.

My sister Mary who bleeds blue and gold for her alma mater, the University of California was attending a game at Oregon one year with her husband and my nephew. They were subjected to taunts and ugly comments during and after the game from mostly young drunken students. They are very lucky my retired U.S. Army colonel brother-in-law was not a few years younger or they might have received a real lesson in manners.

How did all this hooligan behavior both on and off the field get started and who is responsible for perpetuating it?

Well there is plenty of blame to go around. Let’s start with the on- field behavior of the players.

Whether it is high school or college, the people responsible are the coaches first and foremost. They are dealing with impressionable young minds and in this “win at all costs” world of modern sports they whip them up into frenzy and then have the arrogance to think they can control and direct this energy once unleashed.

What they fail to remember is that these are still kids and once you set this in motion it is uncontrollable.  Or maybe that is their whole purpose. Either way it is a failure on the part of the adults to provide guidance in what kind of behavior will not be tolerated.

In the case of the aforementioned LaGarrette Blount, he now will pay a heavy price of not only being suspended for the season but perhaps jeopardizing a potential professional football career.

If he is going to take all the blame for this unfortunate incident that is a load of cattle crap. I think it reflects poorly on his coaches who knew he had a volatile personality and did nothing to help him control it. As long as he was scoring touchdowns they looked the other way. They should be ashamed and should use this incident to remember that they are teachers just as much as they are coaches.

Maybe Oregon can start a new trend of letting your play on the field speak for itself. And they should paste a sign in the locker room that reads in big letters the old cowboy saying, "Better to shoot off your rifle by mistake than your mouth on purpose".

As for the behavior of the folks in the stands, we as a society are to blame. And this taunting, trash talking, boorish behavior is not limited to the sports world.

Check out some of the mindless fare on television’s “unreality” shows like “Survivor” or “Big Brother”. They are full of whiny narcissistic nincompoops who stab each other in the back and taunt each with false bravado all for the almighty buck and the dream they will become “celebrities”.

In politics and the media it is getting even worse. Political discourse on television has been reduced to shouting matches between left and right with everyone looking for their own “YouTube moment” even when they say something stupid.

We need fewer loudmouth pundits and TV and radio hosts and a few more mature adults. Don’t get me wrong I love to see a good battle of ideas and sharp elbows are required sometimes in politics, but the good debater should be able to tell you to go to hell and make you want to buy a ticket, not punch him in the nose.

Let me close by relating a story from my own youthful experience in team sports.

When I was a freshman in high school I went out for the freshman football team. My three older brothers had all played football and were much better athletes than I was. But I decided that I needed to prove something to myself regardless of how tough it might get.

The team was made up mostly of young boys who had never strapped on a full football uniform before and most of them had playing experience only in touch football. We had all come from different elementary schools that fed into the high school. We hardly knew each other at the time but we all were determined to make the team and gave it our all.

In the early season we were not very good and lost by big margins. But we never gave up not one of us. As the season went on we got better and those of us like me who didn’t get much game time practiced hard against the first team knowing it would make them better. We finished the season with a winning record of 4 wins and 3 losses.

The man who coached us was a man I will never forget. His name was Lyle Fisher. He was a math teacher and he coached freshman football and other sports. He took a bunch of ragtag kids with no experience and molded us into a team. And he made damn sure you knew the concept of a team where each one depends on each other was not just a sports lesson but a life lesson.

I’ll never forget that last game. Our first string players had a great first half and we went into the locker room up 21-0. In the locker room Coach Fisher told us he had coached young men who had more skills than we had and some who eventually became All-Americans. But he told us he was never prouder of a team because of the way we overcame our lack of experience, progressed and came together as a team.

And then before we went out for the final half of what would be my short football career, he said “Everybody up!” and we jumped to our feet. Then he bellowed, “Third team will receive the kick-off! Everybody plays!” Now you might think that the first team players would be upset about this. Maybe in today’s world but back then they yelled and hollered and encouraged their teammates who had not gotten on the field too much until the final gun.

In all my life I have never before or since had an experience like that. All because we had a coach who understood that the playing fields of sports are not just about winning games—it is about taking boys and giving them life lessons that will make them better men.

A few weeks ago I got a Facebook “friend” request from a member of that team. He sent me a note and asked how I was doing. I sent back that, “ #33 from Coach Fisher’s freshman football team was doing great”. He sent me back “So is old #66!”.

43 years later and we are still teammates.

 That’s what sports should be about. And more importantly that is what life is about.

8:50 am pdt

Friday, October 16, 2009

I am sure by now you have all heard of 6-year old Zachary Christie, the Delaware first grader who was suspended for bringing his prized camping tool to school so he could eat his lunch. He was threatened with an additional 45 days of suspension to be served in a school for troubled youth. Or as we used to say a Reform School.

 

Zachary is a good student and a proud Cub Scout and from what I have heard and seen of this remarkable young boy he is just what this country will need in the future. Since all the pundits are talking about the issue I thought someone should write Zachary a letter to explain all this grownup stuff and offer him encouragement.

 

Dear Zachary Christie,

Well you sure have had an exciting time recently. You joined the Cub Scouts. Good for you. I see that you are in the first grade so you must be either a Bobcat or Tiger. Before you know it you will be a Webelo and be on your way to becoming a Boy Scout.

I know you will follow the Cub Scout Promise, The Law of the Pack, and the Cub Scout motto. They will be the foundation upon which you will build your life as you grow from a boy into a man. I know that might sound like a long way off right now but it will come sooner than you think.

I also heard that you received a real neat camping tool that has a bottle opener, knife, a spoon and a fork. It will come in handy when you go on cookouts and camping trips with your Cub Scout Pack. Your Mom says that you like to eat with it at home. She sounds like a real good Mom. (When you get older ask her for a Swiss Army knife. It has a screwdriver, scissors and all kinds of other neat blades and tools!)

Then someone told me that you took your camping tool to school because you wanted to eat your lunch with it. And then you were called to the Principal’s office and suspended. I was very sorry to hear that since you did not do anything wrong.

I am also sorry that you had to learn that just like kids grownups do dumb things sometimes. 

They make rules thinking they are protecting you from bad things happening to you but I think that they have forgotten what it is like to be a 6-year-old first grader.

You should be very proud of yourself that you stood up and defended yourself before the school board. Standing up for yourself when you know you are right is a lesson that you have learned at a very early age. It is a lesson that many adults often forget.

You are developing your character right now and I bet you don’t even know it. Character is one of those big words that adults use but I doubt many of them understand the meaning. I will make it simple for you. Character is how you act when no one is looking. That means if you do something wrong just because no one saw you do it, it is still wrong. And while you might think you got away with something there are two people who will always know what you did—you and God.

You have already showed that you understand that key element of becoming a good citizen and a good man. Never forget it as everything else you do in life is based on that simple principle.
Don’t let all this attention bother you. You know how grownups make a big fuss over things sometimes and then it all goes away. You just get back to being a good student, a good Cub Scout and a good son to your parents.

Someday Zachary you and your friends and other kids in other countries that you don’t even know will be running the world.

As a grownup, I hope I am around to see your generation take charge. Because after reading about you and recently having met some other kids who are like you, I know America will be in good hands.

Now go out and have fun being a 6-year old Cub Scout. Keep us all informed about how you are doing. And I hope someday you earn Eagle Scout rank. Somehow I think you will.

Your friend,

The Cowboy Libertarian

P.S. To all the grownups out there here is what Zachary is learning as a Cub Scout. 6 years old and he is learning a code of conduct that will stand him in good stead all his life. Atta boy Zachary!

Cub Scout Promise
I, (say your name), promise
to DO MY BEST
To do my DUTY to GOD
And my Country
To HELP other people, and
To OBEY the LAW of the Pack

Law of the Pack
The Cub Scout follows Akela.
The Cub Scout helps the pack go.
The pack helps the Cub Scout grow.
The Cub Scout gives goodwill.

Cub Scout Motto
DO YOUR BEST

4:06 pm pdt

Monday, October 12, 2009

 An Atheist Holy Day
       October 6, 2009  by Fred Kelly Grant
 
    Our friends, Sherry and Gary Penny sent an email that sends around a decision purportedly issued by a Florida judge that sets April 1, april fool's day as a day that atheists can honor as a holy day since only a fool denies the existence of God according to scripture.
 
    Snopes says that the event didn't really happen, but that the humorous anecdote is a combination of thoughts that express our feelings about the absurdity of the decisions that block religion of every sort from schools, including Christmas decorations and events.  Snopes is right, the email does set forth the idiocy which most of us feel about atheist insistence on denying the free religious expression of the vast majority of the American public.
 
    The meaning behind the humorous anecdote, and the reality of the Snopes essay on the ludicrous history of case decisions bear our reproduction on the  blog.  All this is in keeping with the series which we started in January, 2009, recently updated with the trials in Florida of school officials charged with contempt for praying before a meal (saying Grace).  There will be more as we follow the litigation which no doubt will come in southern California as a result of prayer in school which we will detail this week.  In the meantime, enjoy the email forwarded on by Sherrry and Gary, and the essay by Snopes which follows.  Too bad the time has not come when an atheist would file such a lawsuit and give a determined judge (and there are a few of them) the chance to make the decision, but we can hope:




        
>
>          Subject: Atheist Holy Day
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > FLORIDA COURT SETS ATHEIST HOLY DAY.!!!
>         >
>         > You must read this...a proper decision by the courts...for a change.
>         >
>         > Gotta love this judge!!!!
>         >
>         > FLORIDA COURT SETS ATHEIST Holyday
>         >
>         >
>         > In Florida, an atheist created a case against the upcoming Easter and
>         > Passover Holy days. He hired an attorney to bring a discrimination case
>         > against Christians and Jews and observances of their holy days. The
>         > argument was that it was unfair that atheists had no such recognized
>         > days.
>         >
>         >
>         > The case was brought before a judge. After listening to the passionate
>         > presentation by the lawyer, the judge banged his gavel declaring,"Case
>         > dismissed!"
>         >
>         >
>         > The lawyer immediately stood objecting to the ruling saying, "Your
>         > honor, How can you possibly dismiss this case? The Christians have
>         > Christmas, Easter and others. The Jews have Passover, Yom Kippur and
>         > Hanukkah, yet my client and all other atheists have no such holidays."
>         >
>         > The judge leaned forward in his chair saying, "But you do. Your client,
>         > counsel, is woefully ignorant."
>         >
>         > The lawyer said, "Your Honor, we are unaware of any special observance
>         > or holiday for atheists."
>         >
>         > The judge said, "The calendar says April 1st is April Fools Day. Psalm
>         > 14:1 states, 'The fool says in his heart, there is no God.' Thus, it is
>         > the opinion of this court, that if your client says there is no God,
>         > then he is a fool. Therefore, April 1st is his day. Court is adjourned."
>         >
>         >
>         > You gotta love a Judge that knows his scripture!
 
6:12 am pdt

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Victory for the People!

VICTORY FOR THE PEOPLE---TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION THROWS IN TOWEL ON CORRIDOR—I-35

COORDINATION WORKS TO PROTECT PRIVATE PROPERTY

   October 7, 2009-----by Fred Kelly Grant

Today, the Texas Department of Transportation announces that it is giving up!  It will submit to the Federal Highway Administration a “NO ACTION” alternative for the I-35 section of the Trans Texas Corridor. Yesterday, a member of the Transportation Commission admitted that the people have blocked the project. 

While Governor Perry will take credit for “listening” to the people in order to save his job against the hard charging competitor, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, in fact his path was blocked a determined group of mayors and citizens in Bell County, Texas.  They formed the Eastern Central Texas Sub Regional Planning Commission and forced the Texas bureaucrats to the negotiating table under the “coordination” process which levels the playing field for local government.

Here is how it happened, and why.  In mid 2006, Dan and Margaret Byfield set out to find a way to stop the I-35 project.  They live near Taylor, Texas, and the quarter mile right of way would cut a swath through the country side just a scant mile from their private property.  The data collected even by the State itself showed that the noise from the massive highway-rail corridor would make their property uninhabitable, unless the state spent MILLIONS of dollars in some noise masking process which cannot even be explained in lay terms.  Moreover, the ecosystem which lends the special character to their land and the surrounding land would be destroyed.  Their property rights would be reduced to nothing more than compensation for their land, compensation set by the State without any regard for the intangible losses connected with the property and what it means to the Byfields.

They began to research the statutes of Texas and found in the Local Government Code a requirement that all state agencies coordinate with local regional planning commissions.  Because of their work as Directors and Executive officers of American Stewards of Liberty they were well aware of how successful the “coordination” process has been for local governments in dealing with federal agencies regarding federal lands.   But, yet to be tested was a state requirement of coordination related to private lands only.

Dan spoke with the sponsor of the statutory language and learned that the intent had been to give local government some “say” in its dealings with the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT).  He sponsored the statute because he was tired of seeing TXDOT run over local government and its citizens.

The Byfields also found a Texas appellate court decision that said that the words “coordinate”, “coordination”, “coordinated”, unless otherwise defined by the legislature, meant the common everyday usage of the words.  Turning to a dictionary, the court said the terms meant “equal; not subordinate.”  So, the Texas statute used the same word that Congress has used with regard to federal agencies, and the Texas courts had defined the word in the same way as it had been defined federally.  Plus, they knew now that the sponsor of the legislation had intended that very meaning.

Dan and Margaret called a meeting of their neighbors and met Ralph Snyder, a local businessman from Holland, Texas.  Ralph is a giant of a man in all ways---size, intellect, courage, and his “just do it” attitude which would fit perfectly into the Nike image.  He immediately joined up with the Byfields and began to contact local elected officials.  The “local regional planning commission” referred to in the statute could be formed by any two or more towns.

Strategically, they waited until the Texas legislature went out of session before they moved.  Their fear was that the legislature, which was prone to give the Governor and TXDOT everything they asked for the Trans Texas Corridor, would amend the statute and remove the “coordination” requirement.

After the legislative session ended, Ralph contacted the mayors of four towns in Bell County, Texas and set up a meeting to discuss “coordination” and how it could work.  The mayors of Holland, Bartlett, Little River, and Rogers attended, as did members of the school districts associated with the towns.

These local officials had opposed the corridor plans from the beginning, but they and their citizens were being ignored by TXDOT.  Why did they oppose the corridor?  The plan proposed would place a quarter mile wide right of way directly through prime farm ground which provides the economic backbone for the towns. 

It would physically, geographically divide the towns.  Their law enforcement, medical services, and fire services would be prevented from serving citizens effectively on both sides of the super highway.  The TXDOT plan called for limited access to the highway, with exits to be no closer than seven miles.  That would literally mean that if an accident occurred directly across the superhighway from the site of emergency medical services in Holland, the EMT’s would have to drive seven miles to cross the superhighway, then seven miles back to the accident, and then make the return fourteen mile trip.

Many of the residents of the towns commute to jobs outside the immediate area.  They would move in order to avoid the inconvenience, and increase in fuel costs, that would result from the limited access superhighway. Not only would the economy of the towns be destroyed, so would the social cohesiveness of the towns and their people.

The school districts are among the best in the state.  Their teacher-student ratios are low enough, and quality based enough, that they rank highly in state evaluations.  The superhighway with its limited access points would disrupt school bus lines to the point of rendering the district alignments unworkable.  The danger from that result was that the state would step in and re-assign district lines.  The local control that had built these districts in stature would be lost.

All these concerns had been stated in public meetings, but the bureaucrats were not listening.  Thousands of Texans were appearing and protesting the corridor plans, but Governor Perry’s response was “no is not an option”, the superhighways would be built.

The economy of the towns is agriculturally based.  The TTC I-35 plans would destroy the agricultural use of 145 acres per mile through the entire county.  Thousands of acres of the black lands farming ground would be lost to agriculture. These valuable lands soak up rain water like a sponge, and the spring rain is slowly released throughout the dry summer that follows, making water intense crops possible and profitable. Those lands are considered the most sensitive and productive in the nation even by the same Texas government that planned to destroy them for a concrete superhighway.

After meeting with Snyder and the Byfields, the mayors, with approval from their city councils, formed the Eastern Central Texas SubRegional Planning Commission.  Ralph Snyder became the citizen member of the Commission’s governing board.  The Commission and its activities were joined by members of the school boards who could not vote because of particular provisions related to governing of school districts.

The Commission appointed “associates” who would assist the members with research, analysis and advice.  Dan and Margaret Byfield became associates and worked closely with the Commission the rest of the way.  Other associates were Marcia Snyder, Ralph’s boss, who is a master of internet research, Cindy Ross whose mastery of prior transportation plans inconsistent with what TXDOT was now saying was invaluable, and Mickey Burleson whose analysis of the natural environmental damage to be done by TXDOT was critical.  Another associate who has always remained anonymous contributed with research as to virtually unknown and undiscoverable facts from the past.

Harold Kurtz, president of the Holland independent school district Board, and Kerry Owen, member of the Little River-Academy school board quickly and enthusiastically joined with the mayors.  Joan Kurtz, Harold’s wife, became the recording secretary of the Commission’s governing board.

And the mayors?  Those unpaid mayors who should today be considered Texas heroes were Mae Smith of Holland, Ronnie White of Little River, Arthur White of Bartlett and Billy Crow of Rogers.  Mayor Smith was elected president of the governing board and has been the chief spokesman for the board from that time on.  The population of the four towns taken together just barely exceeds 6,000.

This group had the temerity to serve notice on TXDOT that it was required to coordinate with them, and that coordination meant that it came to the table on an equal footing with the board, and had to use good faith efforts to resolve conflicts between state policy and plans and local policy and plans. The Commission let the Texas bureaucrats know that they expected the coordination to occur just as it did between federal agencies and local government under federal natural resource statutes: the state agency would sit equally with the local government and make all good faith efforts to resolve inconsistencies between state plans, policies and actions and local plans, policies, and actions.

The Commission set a meeting date, and after about a month’s delayed response (no doubt while TXDOT checked with the Attorney General to see what these “wacko” mayors were talking about) the Texas Department of Transportation agreed to send representatives to Holland, Texas for a meeting.

The mightiest of Texas state agencies was coming to Holland to meet with the four unpaid mayors and their school board cohorts.

At the time of that first meeting, nearly two years ago, the environmental impact statement being prepared by TXDOT was due for delivery to the Federal Highway Administration for selection of the route for the superhighway---a route of destruction for these towns and their neighboring land owners.

In that first meeting, the bureaucrats learned that the members of this Commission knew what they were talking about---from all standpoints, economic, social, cultural, political---and were steadfast in their position: if you must build, do so along the already constructed Interstate 35 which would avoid destruction of productive farm land and the towns and districts themselves. 

Of course, such a common sense approach did not fit the plans of the state of Texas.  It had the grand scheme of turning over the new superhighway to a Spanish company which would collect the tolls FOREVER and which would have the exclusive right to establish all new businesses along the superhighway corridor: service stations, motels, restaurants.  The profit motive for the Spanish company would not allow placement of the new roadway as a widening of the already existing interstate.  The cost to the Company of condemning existing business property would be far greater than that of condemning farm land.  The reason for carving the new superhighway through the most productive farm land in the State was greed---more bang for the buck.

Through the past two years, the Commission expanded its coordinate process to include the Environmental Protection Agency which has ultimate oversight over the preparation of the environmental impact statement, the National Resource Conservation Service which has supplied valuable information to the Commission regarding protection of the black-lands, the Texas Department of Environmental Quality, and the Texas Department of Parks and Wildlife.

The Commission filed a letter with TXDOT, and with the Federal Highway Administration requesting that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement be recalled and that the study begin anew in order to take into account the adverse impacts on the economy and social structure of the communities which had been woefully neglected in the Draft.

When that request was not approved, and it became clear that TXDOT had no intent to change its study or report which ignored all the adverse impacts pointed out by the Commission, the letter was followed with a Petition to reject the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.  The Petition detailed the flaws in the environmental study, the manner in which the National Environmental Policy Act was being violated, and the failure of the Department to coordinate in accordance with Texas law.

The actions of the Commission held up submission of the Draft EIS to the federal government for approval for nearly twenty months.  Only the Commission’s actions could have held up submission of the Study, because until the Commission stepped up, nothing was even slowing down the project.

As the Commission plagued the bureaucrats with its “coordination” process, other similar commissions were formed throughout the state along other portions of the I-35 corridor and the I-69 corridor.   All other commissions demanded the same coordination process with the State that had been started by the folks in Holland, Bartlett, Little River-Academy and Rogers.

Finally, yesterday, the State did what no one would have bet good money on two years ago: announced the scrapping of the I-35 Trans Texas corridor.  Today the Governor makes it official, and will take credit for “listening” to the voice of the people.  That is just so much political claptrap. 

The Eastern Central Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission held up the project, and news of its actions spread through the state, resulting in formation of other commissions.  A    s each new commission was formed, more and more publicity showed that the people of Texas had finally found a way to be heard.  The political result was that the past session of the legislature refused to cave in to TXDOT and the Governor.  So, Perry called a special session of the legislature which again refused to cave in.  The people of Texas had been heard at least by their legislative representatives.  Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who is running against Perry in the Texas gubernatorial primary, took up the cause against the Trans Texas Corridors, and is threatening the Governor at the polls.

So Perry has decided to stop the bleeding if he can.  Mayors Mae Smith, Ronnie White, Arthur White and Billy Crow, at the instance of Ralph Snyder and the Byfields, started a process that brought TXDOT to the table and its knees and the Governor to a common sense decision.  Along the way they were joined by Mayor Hal Senkel of Buckholtz as a voting member of the Commission’s governing board.

This group DID what American Stewards of Liberty have been promoting and working for:  as local government they brought a powerful state agency to the negotiating table on an equal footing, and were HEARD.

American Stewards of Liberty point out regularly that local government was the most important level of government when this Republic was formed, and can still be so today.  It is the level of government through which the people can be heard.  It is the level of government which can help the people take back their state and federal governments which have grown to the point at which they can ignore the people.

They took the first major step in making the coordination process work outside the public lands arena; they made it work for private lands, they made it work under a state, not federal, statute; they made it work for local government dealing directly with a powerful state agency determined to have its own way.

Today their victory for the people of Bell County opens the way for people in all states to deal with state agencies that refuse to listen to local concerns.  In Texas history, their names should be remembered for this victory.

Remember their names as you give thanks for the continued vitality of the American spirit, for the continued belief that individual rights are too important to be sacrificed to and for powerful state officials:  Mae Smith, Ronnie White, Arthur White, Billy Crow, Hal Senkel, Ralph Snyder, Harold Kurtz, Kerry Owen---and Marcia Snyder, Joan Kurtz, Cindy Ross, Mickey Burleson, and Dan and Margaret Byfield. 

I hope they put a plaque on the wall of the Holland, Texas community center where the coordination meetings were regularly held:  a plaque which reads “The Trans Texas Corridor Stopped Here.”

10:42 am pdt

2010.03.01 | 2010.02.01 | 2010.01.01 | 2009.12.01 | 2009.11.01 | 2009.10.01 | 2009.09.01 | 2009.08.01 | 2009.07.01 | 2009.06.01 | 2009.05.01 | 2009.04.01 | 2009.03.01 | 2009.02.01 | 2009.01.01 | 2008.12.01 | 2008.11.01 | 2008.10.01

Full name:
Email address:
Comment:
  

Be sure to get in touch so I know you're out there!



As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.
John F. Kennedy