The Open Road

2006-10-25T22:12:00.000-05:00

Strayhorn for Governor
The state comptroller recognizes that education is the key to solving Texas' problems.

Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/recommendations
/4269796.html

As Election Day approaches, Texas finds itself locked in a government and tax structure better suited to the 19th century than to the 21st. Its depleted natural resources can no longer finance quality education with money to spare. Its low taxes and limited government regulation are no longer enough to lure businesses looking for a skilled work force and a high quality of life for their executives and employees.

The future of Texas lies with its children, yet the state is failing many of those children on almost every level. One out of every four Texas children lives in poverty. About 70 percent of these impoverished children have parents who work but receive low pay and no benefits. Too many children growing up in Texas are poorly educated — a drag on the economy that reduces tax revenue as it drives up demand for social services.

One in four children is without health insurance — the highest rate in the United States. Uninsured children tend to be unhealthy and receive care in expensive hospital emergency rooms, burdening taxpayers and employers who pick up the tab.

Texas officials have not acted vigorously to reduce toxic air pollution, particularly in the Houston area. Perhaps the politicians in Austin are too concerned with maintaining the profits of existing businesses or don't want to offend campaign contributors — or worse, are simply indifferent to public health. Businesses have been deterred from moving here, and many residents are at increased risk for cancer and — especially with children and the elderly — respiratory disease.

Texas badly needs to change its philosophy of governing. In hopes of fostering this change, the Houston Chronicle endorses Carole Keeton Strayhorn for governor. Of the four candidates, she is best equipped to shake up the status quo in a way that balances the needs of both business and residents.

Strayhorn is running as an independent, portraying herself as an outsider who wants to give Austin a jolt. In one sense that is true. She would bring a fresh style of leadership to the executive branch. But it should be remembered that Strayhorn is no novice when it comes to working the levers of government.

She has a lifetime of experience in government and public service. Once mayor of Austin, then a member of the powerful Texas Railroad Commission, Strayhorn serves as state comptroller. She knows how state government operates and how to make it more efficient and effective. Government, she says, can be leaner without being meaner.

More than any other candidate in this race, Strayhorn recognizes that the key to solving Texas' problems and securing the state's future is education. Half of all state tax dollars go to the public schools, yet half of Texas' children drop out before graduating from high school. In the information age, good jobs require higher education, yet too few of those who graduate go on to college.

The population of Texas is rapidly becoming more Hispanic, an ethnic group in which children are disproportionately at risk of dropping out. Unless Texas does a better job of keeping all children in school and preparing them for higher education, the state will not have enough middle-class taxpayers to pay for the education and government services a civilized society requires.

Strayhorn promises to make Texas public schools a model for the nation. She has a blueprint to raise teacher pay, recruit quality teachers, provide adequate and reliable school funding, increase student performance and cut the disastrous dropout rate. She has won the backing of the state's teachers.

Unhealthy children tend to be poor students. To increase the number of Texas children with health insurance, Strayhorn vows to make maximum use of the Children's Health Insurance Program, better known as CHIP and largely financed by the federal government. She decries decisions in recent years to cut the program's services and send hundreds of millions of dollars contributed by Texans to other states. She would end the contract that left registration and eligibility for social services in the hands of an inept and uncaring private company.

Gov. Rick Perry has missed his chance to make the kind of changes Texas needs. The other two candidates have not shown the kind of vision and leadership to do any better. The Chronicle believes only Carole Keeton Strayhorn has the experience and savvy to win election to the governorship and then use the office to improve public education and change the course of Texas for the better.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/recommendations
/4269796.html

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-10-19T14:48:00.000-05:00

Toll Road Plays Starring Role in Coming Attraction
by Ben Wear

From http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/
local/10/09/9wear.html

Monday, October 09, 2006

We don't normally do movie reviews in Getting There.

But there's a new, $50,000 independent film that I wanted to tell you about, literally a road movie. Now, the title — "183A Toll" — is a tad bland, but the film itself is pretty good. And if you live in Cedar Park, Leander or points north, pretty useful.

Just so I don't bewilder folks beyond repair, be aware that the starring role in this 11-minute, mostly computer-generated travelogue is played by a toll road — U.S. 183-A — that won't open until spring.

The three toll roads that are about to open up Nov. 1, all of them built and operated by the Texas Department of Transportation, are not in this movie. The department didn't make a version for its roads, which is too bad.

U.S. 183-A, on the other hand, is being built and operated by the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority.

That agency's communications director, Steve Pustelnyk, came from the Orlando toll road agency, which created these computer-generated tours of their new roads. Pustelnyk, who narrates the 183-A film, brought the idea with him.

Basically, the film looks like what you might see driving the road, and from above in a virtual helicopter swooping back and forth. You find out where the toll plazas and exits are, how the frontage roads and interchanges work and what the road will actually look like.

The mobility authority is going to distribute the film every way it can, including through the Statesman Web site (go to www.statesman .com/wear to see it).

It should cut down on consumer confusion when the 11.6-mile-long road opens this spring.

vv

Speaking of confusion, I sowed a bit of it last week.

I said in a Monday article that people would get Dash bobblehead dolls if they signed up for toll tags. Well, some will, eventually.

As John Kelso reported in his Tuesday column, the dolls of the wise-cracking toll road mascot won't be available for four or five months.

And tollway officials tell me they'll likely hand them out at promotional events rather than sending one along to each new toll tag subscriber.

Guess we'll all live.

vv

On a related matter, after the Dash article appeared, I was besieged the next day with calls and e-mails from people wanting to know how they could get a TxTag. And pointing out that the reporter should have had that information in the article. One of the pointer-outers was, well, the editor of this newspaper, Rich Oppel. Ouch.

With that in mind: You can get a tag by calling (888) 468-9824, going to www.txtag .org, or visiting the state's tollway customer service center at 12719 Burnet Road. This is on the east side of MoPac Boulevard, just north of Parmer Lane.

The implanting of the toll tag chip in your forehead, by the way, is a relatively painless, in-patient procedure lasting about 30 minutes.

(Note to readers: The above was "humor" and untrue. The toll tag will be implanted by you on your car's forehead, that is, the windshield's interior. It may or may not be painless.)

Getting There appears Mondays. For questions, tips or story ideas, contact Getting There at 445-3698 or bwear@statesman.com.

by Ben Wear

From http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/
local/10/09/9wear.html

2006-10-18T14:56:00.000-05:00

How to Stop Spread of Special Interests in Government
By Peter Stern

From http://www.jaspernewsboy.com/news/2006/0927/viewpoint/014.html

ONCE AGAIN, elected officials are letting the "stew simmer." So many legislative and "special" sessions [at a cost of $2 million each] have gone up in smoke without fixing anything.

The real question is: How are elected officials getting away with doing so little to resolve crisis issues?

Seems like everyone but hardworking Texans got something for themselves. Even now there is lobbying for the gambling industry, but little is being accomplished to improve the quality of our children's education or to find a more suitable source of financing public schools. Meanwhile, homeowners still are in dire need of property tax relief; consequently, home foreclosures continue to rise. Gov. Perry is pointing the blame at legislators for not arriving at resolutions. In part, he's correct. But Perry needs to assume the responsibility for most of our problems - after all, as governor he's our state manager! Furthermore, Perry has called for and wasted more tax dollars on special sessions than any previous governor.

Currently the governor is running for reelection so he's planting "smoke & mirrors" again with his placebo cures, e.g., the implementation of the 15member committee to "study" the home tax/appraisal system. If the state would receive $100 for every "study" Perry implemented, Texas would not be in its current financial mess. Much as with the Texas Tax Reform Commission (which was supposed to find cures to financing public schools), don't expect any brilliant results.

However, during the past five years of Perry's reign special interests have reaped large profits at a huge cost to Texas taxpayers.

So who are the real culprits within our political system?

It starts at the top with an inept and/or special interest-motivated governor, lieutenant governor and House speaker. It dominoes down to most of our legislative members. Elected officials are being "bought" by special interests.

Special interests are relentless and insatiable. They are the vermin and parasites destroying the very lives of Texans and their children.

So what can Texans do to stop the vicious cycle?

First, we need to demand a more open form of state government. While Attorney General Greg Abbott has moved towards open government by hiring one attorney to oversee it and has made it mandatory for officials to attend classes on open government. However, the AG Offices does little to enforce the laws of open government; consequently, there is no accountability and officials continue to run hog wild at the capitol.

We need to hold elected officials more accountable for how each votes on every issue. How a legislator votes must become public knowledge and documented into the public record.

The next step is for taxpayers to take away the power wielded by special interest lobbyists and groups. Voters need to make campaign contributions less powerful. Lawmakers need to put a more rational limitation on campaign contributions and voters need to make the issues the criteria for electing our officials.

Special interests must not be permitted to lobby inside the capital during regular and special sessions - that includes private individuals. After all, we don't permit campaigning within the borders of voting halls and ballot boxes, do we?

Until Texas voters demand accountability and until the laws of open government are fully enforced, the plight of special interest vermin will continue.

By Peter Stern

From http://www.jaspernewsboy.com/news/2006/0927/viewpoint/014.html

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-10-16T17:41:00.000-05:00

Halliburton’s Lobbying Efforts Paid Off: Watchdog Group
From http://www.lonestaricon.com/absolutenm/anmviewer.asp?
a=627&z=69
Sunday, October 08, 2006

WASHINGTON — A watchdog group says that the lobbying efforts of Vice President Dick Cheney’s former company paid off big-time.

Over the last six years, Halliburton has bought influence in Washington to the tune of $4.6 million.

At the same time, its government contracts mushroomed by over 600 percent and jumped from being the 20th largest federal contractor to sixth by 2005, according to HalliburtonWatch.

As a result, the company gained $18.5 billion in revenue from contracts related to the war in Iraq from March 2003 to June 30, 2006. In 2005 alone, Halliburton received $6 billion in federal contracts.

The analysis found that Halliburton’s lobbying efforts came from three main sources: the board of directors and their spouses, Halliburton’s political action committee, and the company itself.

Halliburton’s board of directors have seen the entire value of their stock jump to over $100 million — a quadrupling between March 2003 to March 2006 due to high oil prices, contracts, and Mideast violence.

The value of shares held by Halliburton’s largest corporate shareholder — CEO David Lesar — jumped from $17.3 million in 2003 to $66.8 million in 2006, said the HalliburtonWatch report.

For more information, visit HalliburtonWatch’s website.

INFO
www.halliburtonwatch.org

From http://www.lonestaricon.com/absolutenm/anmviewer.asp?
a=627&z=69

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-10-04T17:14:00.000-05:00

NAFTA Super Highway Map

http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/publish/article_4218.shtml

This map is a conceptualization of the Super Highways now underway to connect the United States, Canada, and Mexico to help bring about the creation of a North American Union similar to the European Union.

Map information source: fina-nafi.org (North American Forum on Integration)

The map's travel corridors show the desired routes of the new Super Highways as proposed by the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI) — a group of wealthy industrialists, academics, and politicians whose aim it is to break down barriers to the North American Union. The main actors in NAFI are members of the Council on Foreign Relations or related organizations based in Mexico and Canada.

NAFI, whose first objective is to make "the public and decision-makers aware of the challenges of economic and political integration between the three NAFTA countries," is following the country-integration plan of the European Union. (Emphasis added.) That plan used the idea of "free trade" to make steps toward integration sound appealing to the public. Though the North American Union would devastate the American middle class, the Super Highways are being touted as facilitating free trade and bringing about prosperity in the three countries.

NAFI's vision is being enacted right now. Eighty separate, but interconnected, "high priority corridors" are being initiated in the United States. To find a complete list of the 80 intended Super Highway projects, go to http://www.aaroads.com/high-priority/table.html.

From The New American

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-10-04T16:19:00.000-05:00

Blog from the Trail
Post by Brad McClellan

http://www.carolestrayhorn.com/Blog/BlogPost.aspx?ID=4

We would like to know if you received any of the promised property tax cuts this year? We need a leader like Carole Keeton Strayhorn who shoot straight with Texans.

Texans expect their elected leaders to tell them the truth. When our leaders don’t shoot straight, then people lose trust in our government. Here is what some Texas newspapers and Tax Assessor-Collectors are saying about Rick Perry on property taxes:

What Texas Newspapers and Tax Assessor-Collectors Are Saying About Rick Perry on Property Taxes

“Bexar and Harris County tax officials said there won't be a big property tax cut. In fact, many homeowners could find higher taxes on the way.

“The average homeowner living in the Houston Independent School District with a house assessed at $160,000 will pay $140 more, or a 4.2 percent increase over last year, Harris County Tax Collector-Assessor Paul Bettencourt said. ‘Anyone who is running on a big tax cut is making a mistake because the numbers don't support it. Call it what it is, it's property tax relief. It's not a tax cut,’ Bettencourt said. (The Houston Chronicle, September 30, 2006)

“Bexar County Tax Assessor-Collector Sylvia Romo expects her office to come under siege from angry taxpayers when the first batch of about 600,000 tax notices get mailed next week.

“Romo said Perry's promise of a $2,000 tax cut for the average homeowner inflated hopes. “They're going to say, 'Hey, they promised me I'm going to get a tax cut. Why am I paying more?'”

“Romo said she figured Perry's TV and radio spots would cause trouble because she knew that average San Antonio homeowners wouldn't see the promised savings.

“Most Texans will get their tax notices just days or weeks before the Nov. 7 election. These people are going to vote emotionally," she said. "They are going to say, 'You lied to us.' That's the bottom line." (The San Antonio Express-News, September 30, 2006)

Posted by Brad McClellan on Tuesday, October 03, 2006 at 10:54:13 PM

You can find a link to this blog on the front page of www.TexansAgainstTolls.com

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-10-02T17:04:00.000-05:00

Bill Ware and Carol Caul are featured in Chronicle reporter Rad Sallee's story about opening of the redesigned West Loop. Too bad there is no mention that their lawsuit against TxDOT includes allegations that TxDOT misled the federal government as to its intentions when TxDOT applied for federal funds to pay for the redesign.

Bill is an engineer and Carol is a lawyer. They have done important work ferreting out deceptions in the noise analysis work prepared by TxDOT.
Anyone in a fight with a transportation agency that involves questions about noise impacts needs to keep this lawsuit in mind.

- Barry Klein

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4228693.html

Carol Caul, left, and her husband, Bill Ware, who live about 750 feet from the Loop near its Katy Freeway interchange, have sued TxDOT, contending the agency should have performed an environmental impact study and taken steps to mitigate noise produced by the new exit.
Nick de la Torre: CHRONICLE

Mixed Reviews for West Loop
Ramps praised for traffic flow, criticized for noise

By RAD SALLEE
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

At 5 a.m. last Wednesday, the Texas Department of Transportation reopened all lanes of the spectacularly reconstructed West Loop for the first time in four years. At 6:30 p.m. Friday, southbound traffic on the Loop between the Katy Freeway and Westheimer was crawling at 20 mph.

Rush hour is still rush hour.

It was the second remarkable freeway project to be completed in Houston this year. Like the first, the rebuilding of Spur 527 and extension of the below-ground Southwest Freeway, it's getting mixed reviews.

Both engineering feats had their high points — in the case of the West Loop, long elevated ramps designed to reduce traffic weaving by letting motorists exit far in advance of their destination without fighting traffic entering the freeway.

"This is a conceptually different freeway than what has historically been constructed," said John Breeding, president of the Uptown Houston District.

"In the past, you would come up from an intersection, get on the frontage road, come up an on-ramp and blend in with traffic," he said. Now you can exit to Woodway and Memorial, or to Bellaire, by taking the long ramps, he said.

Sometimes referred to as "flyovers" or "Godzillas," the ramps were key parts of an ingenious response to a complex task — improving traffic flow in a tight space without adding lanes.

The design, which also involved relocating several other entrance and exit ramps, was a last resort. Public outcry had quashed earlier designs for a 24-lane freeway cutting into Memorial Park and a double-deck version like I-35 in Austin.

Ed Browne of the grass-roots Citizens Transportation Coalition, which advocates against urban sprawl and for public transit and compact development, acknowledged that "as a user, the road is nice."

But he added, "If I lived in adjacent neighborhoods, I would worry about pollution, soot, noise, and property values.

"Of course, the argument is that before, it was a parking lot so there was more pollution, etc. To which I say that in a few years (or sooner) it will just be a bigger parking lot."

Bill Ware and Carol Caul, who live about 750 feet from the Loop near its Katy Freeway interchange, have sued TxDOT, contending the agency should have performed an environmental impact study and taken steps to mitigate the additional noise from increased, faster traffic.

Not only does traffic noise arrive in the neighborhood directly, it also is reflected downward off the bottom of the long Woodway-Memorial ramp," Ware said.

"It is definitely far louder now," said Caul.

She also said that noise levels across the Loop in Memorial Park and the Houston Arboretum and Nature Center are unlawfully high for such protected spaces.

Christof Spieler, a Citizens Transportation Coalition board member whose blog, Intermodality, comments on local transportation issues, drove the reopened Loop from U.S. 290 to Woodway during the Friday evening rush.

Although the new ramps have helped ease some problems, he said, that particular segment was "a sea of slow-moving cars."

"It's ironic that the Loop was initially a way to bypass around the city, and now it's the most congested road in the city."

"There's just so much that clever engineering can accomplish," Spieler said.

Spieler said that where the West Loop meets the Southwest Freeway, "they have made traffic better through smarter design. But up around U.S. 290 and Interstate 10 that's not the problem.

"The problem is simply too many cars and no place to put them."

And there's more to come, he said, when future toll lanes feed in from U.S. 290, the Katy Freeway and the Fort Bend Tollway.

rad.sallee@chron.com

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4228693.html

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-09-30T15:42:00.000-05:00

What's Up With that Absent Exit and Idle Bridge?
Monday, September 25, 2006

by Ben Wear http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/
09/25/25wear.html

What's Up With That returns today after a lengthy vacation and fact-finding tour to the Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska, the Trans-Rhode Island Corridor toll road project and the Marfa light rail system.

If you don't recall, What's Up With That is a (very, very) occasional feature in Getting There where I attempt to satisfy your curiosity (or mine) about oddities or outrages on Central Texas roads. So, without further ado . . .

Q: I was headed southbound recently on that new highway section of U.S. 183 in Northeast Austin and I wanted to exit and then go east on U.S. 290 toward Elgin. To my shock, there was no exit, and I ended up having to making a U-ie at the next exit beyond 290. What's up with that?

A: Well, there is an exit, actually. But it's a full mile and a half back to the northwest, just past Interstate 35 and before you get to Cameron Road. Which means that to go from one major, newly refurbished highway to a major route to Houston, you have go through two or three stoplights.

If you know when to exit.

Bob Daigh, the Austin district engineer for the Texas Department of Transportation, points out that there are three signs back to the northwest on U.S. 183 telling you that there is a Cameron Road/U.S. 290 exit coming up. That's true, but when you're that far away from U.S. 290, you might not realize that's the only exit.

Daigh said there was room near U.S. 290 only for the entrance onto U.S. 183, not for an exit. He said a flyover bridge is planned for that left turn to U.S. 290 when the segment east of there is upgraded as a tollway. Pending resolution of the great toll road debate, that project could begin within a year. Or not.

Q: That upgrade of Texas 71 east of I-35 to Riverside Drive seems to be taking forever. And why hasn't that last flyover bridge from westbound 71 to northbound I-35 opened? It was finished more than a year ago.

A: The $53 million, 2.1-mile Texas 71 project now is predicted to finish around Christmas, after almost four years of construction. In that same time frame, the state will have built 40 miles of toll roads from scratch in North Austin and Williamson County. For something close to $2 billion.

As for that last flyover bridge, which has basically been a very tall piece of public art since the summer of 2005, it has been waiting on work to finish near Burleson Road. It will open when the Texas 71 project opens.

Q: Will motorcycles be allowed on the toll roads opening soon, and will they pay more or less than cars? And what about bicycles?

A: First on the bicycles: No, cyclists won't be allowed to ride on the toll roads.

As for motorcycles, because they typically have no windshield they will get special TxTags that can be affixed to nonmetallic surfaces like the front fender.

Unlike car/truck tags, which for now are being handed out free, motorcycle TxTags will cost a $20 tag deposit. That deposit will be refunded when the user closes the TxTag account. The toll charges for a motorcycle will be the same as for cars.

Getting There appears Mondays. For questions, tips or story ideas, contact Getting There at 445-3698 or bwear@statesman.com.

By Ben Wear

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-09-28T10:22:00.000-05:00

The Statesman finally ran Carol and Nina's guest editorial yesterday. Here's the link: http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/
09/25/25Cespedes_edit.html

COMMENTARY

Cespedes and Butts: Save Oak Hill from TxDot Superhighway

Carol Cespedes and Nina Butts, LOCAL CONTRIBUTORS

Monday, September 25, 2006

Springs, clear creeks, majestic live oaks. These are the pride of Austin. Those of us lucky and plucky enough to live here are nourished by Austin's natural setting.

Southwest of downtown Austin, Oak Hill is blessed with live oaks hundreds of years old. Oak Hill was named for these titans. Williamson Creek is a clear, spring-fed creek running through the heart of the community.

But the Texas Department of Transportation is revving up the chainsaws and bulldozers to destroy these invaluable natural features of Oak Hill. TxDOT plans to cut down the majestic live oaks, and put Williamson Creek into a ditch. If TxDOT gets its way, the Oak Hill Y at U.S. 290 and Texas 71 will look just like the superhighway mixmaster at U.S. 183 and Interstate 35.

Fix 290, a coalition of Oak Hill property owners, neighborhood associations, and environmentalists, has proposed an alternative to TxDOT's superhighway. Our concept is simple: a six-lane, mostly grade-level parkway that will move traffic safely and keep the majestic live oaks and Williamson Creek intact.

An independent transportation-engineering firm, Smart Mobility, analyzed the Fix 290 alternative and concluded that the "plan will provide the needed vehicular capacity to meet the CAMPO (Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization) 2030 daily traffic projections for this location. Further, this plan will result in many longer term benefits to the region."

A parkway can meet traffic needs without ruining Oak Hill. We believe that TxDOT's superhighway will be bad for business, bad for property values, bad for water and air quality, and just plain bad for Oak Hill.

Elevating U.S. 290 for two miles, as TxDOT plans, will damage the sense of community and spell doom for many small businesses. The elevated lanes will bring a permanent increase in noise and light pollution. The flyover intersection will overwhelm the commercial hub at the Oak Hill Y.

The road will take at least three years to build, snarling traffic and testing tempers. TxDOT's price tag, almost $200 million, will mean a sweet prize for the winning contractor. Highway contractors contribute lavishly to political campaigns in Texas, and only two Texas contractors, Cintra-Zachry and Williams Brothers, are big enough to take on the Oak Hill project.

Our parkway alternative is far less expensive than TxDOT's design and will take far less time to build. It also provides better access for local businesses and reduces the barrier imposed by the highway to a scale that can be easily spanned by pedestrian and bicycle bridges. With reduced asphalt and disturbance to Williamson Creek, the Fix 290 plan would provide improved water quality for the Edwards Aquifer and Barton Springs.

More than 1,700 citizens have signed our Fix 290 online petition. The Oak Hill Association of Neighborhoods endorsed our parkway plan in May. With the help of Sen. Gonzalo Barrientos, we presented our conceptual design to CAMPO in June, where it was well-received. We are now working for a directive from CAMPO to redesign the highway according to the parkway concept.

With the help of CAMPO, the creek and live oaks enjoyed by our ancestors will thrive for centuries to come.

Cespedes is president of South Windmill Run Neighborhood Association in Oak Hill. Butts teaches English at Austin Community College. Read the Smart Mobility report at Fix290.org.

http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/
09/25/25Cespedes_edit.html

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-09-26T14:21:00.000-05:00

Lawmakers: ‘Just say no’
By LAUREN HOUGH / Journal Staff Writer http://www.journal-news.net/News/articles.asp?articleID=3863

LEESBURG — After the frenzy of rush hour had ended, local lawmakers gathered Friday morning to send out impassioned cries on behalf of their commuting constituents.

The park and ride lot at the Dulles North Transit Center was transformed into a stage for a press conference, called by representatives of AAA Mid-Atlantic, to protest a proposed increase of nearly 100 percent in the tolls on the Dulles Greenway.

The 14-mile highway, also known as VA 267, runs from Leesburg to the Dulles Airport and is privately owned by the Toll Road Investors Partnership II, L.P. (TRIP II).

On July 19, TRIP II Chief Executive Officer Tom Sines filed a new toll schedule application with the State Corporation Commission (SCC), detailing plans to raise the $2.70 toll for 2-axle vehicles to a total charge of $4.80 in the next five years.

The now-contentious proposal is for an increase AAA Mid-Atlantic Public and Government Affairs director Mahlon “Lon” Anderson calls a “significant wrong.”

“(Motorists) will be charged nearly $10 a day to commute,” Anderson said. “It’s just too much.”

For Anderson and the four lawmakers, including U.S. Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., who gathered on behalf of their constituents, the message was simple: Just don’t do it.

“It’s a bad deal for motorists,” Anderson said. “It’s not fair.”

If the proposed increases are accepted, the cost of using the highway will skyrocket to 34 cents per mile, making it the most expensive toll road not only in Virginia, but also in the entire United States.

Many in attendance at the press conference were directed to take the Greenway to the commuter lot, and, to their own chagrin, were charged the full $2.70 toll for riding just one short mile.

“From the beginning, this road was to be a public/private partnership. Today, there is no public in this partnership. This is a company bent on turning this road into a cash cow,” said U.S. Rep. Frank R. Wolf, R-Va.

Wolf said that the Macquerie Bank of Australia, which owns the road, made more than a billion dollars in revenue last year, according to their Web site.

“Many commuters who live in this area have no choice when it comes to how they get to work. They must rely on the Greenway.”

Wolf pointed to other toll roads throughout the country, such as the Pennsylvania and New Jersey Turnpikes, which charge anywhere from three cents to six cents per mile.

He calculated that the average commuter, who now pays $1,350 in tolls to travel to work 50 weeks a year, will spend $2,400 in 2012 just to travel on the Greenway.

Of the estimated 64,000 daily travelers on the highway, thousands are West Virginians on their way to work, Capito estimated.

“This is going to have a huge influence on their ability to get to work everyday,” the Congresswoman said.

Many of her constituents choose to live in West Virginia for the quality of life the state offers but keep their jobs in Washington, D.C., she said.

That choice, however, comes at a price, in the form of an increased length and time of their commute.

Raising the toll on such a frequently traveled road would create more of a burden on those residents, who use the highway not only for work, but also to get to the mall or the airport, Capito said.

It was e-mails sent from Eastern Panhandle commuters that first alerted the Congresswoman to the toll increase proposal, which she also opposed in a letter sent last week to the SCC.

“This is really a good example of why constituents want to make sure they make their voices heard,” Capito said.

It is also a cautionary tale for the state, which, in the midst of highway funding deficits, could look to charge residents tolls on certain roads.

“It’s looked to be a quick fix to get what you want,” Capito said. “Then you pay the consequences.”

Anderson said that toll roads, often public/private partnerships, are the straw that drowning governments reach for when they can’t find the funds to do what they need to do.

He urged concerned citizens to voice their opposition to the proposed toll increases to the SCC during the public comment period, which closes on Thursday.

The auto club has set up an online Legislative Action Center at http://capwiz.com/aaamidatlantic, where commuters can e-mail or mail their comments directly to the SCC.

“You’ve heard how much the corporation stands to make, and how much motorists stand to lose,” he said. “The message is simple: Say ‘no way’ to $10 a day.”

— Staff writer Lauren Hough can be reached at 263-8931, ext. 163, or at lhough@journal-news.net
Section: News Posted: 9/23/2006

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-09-18T15:26:00.001-05:00

The Toll Road "Hustle" Continues...
Believe it or not, toll roads are here already!

By Peter Stern http://pstern.statesmanblogs.com/

Even though most Texans don't want toll roads officials will open them in November. The temporary "free" [no tolls] promo is another con game so that once drivers use the new roads, they won't go back to using the old roads when the tolls become enforced.

"Free" toll roads bodes a good game plan for the November elections.

Supposedly voters won't get angry until the tolls are charged sometime after the elections.

While many Texans don't know the history of the extremist politics behind toll roads, they have "bought into" the misleading information provided by the governor's office and the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) --- that toll roads are the only and/or best way to build, operate and maintain Texas roadways and that the state hasn't the tax funds to finance new and/or to improve old roadways.

BTW, there is no proof whatsoever that the proposed toll roads will ease-up traffic, in fact, most toll roads cause additional problems.

In truth, toll roads are one of the LEAST cost-effective methods of collected taxes for building and maintaining roadways, whereby up to 50-percent of all tolls collected immediately go to the private company that manages the toll roads.

To get its contract with the state CINTRA, the Spanish world-wide toll maven, agreed to pay TxDOT (the state) $7.2 BILLION upfront for its 70-year toll road supremacy in Texas.

DOES ANYONE KNOW WHERE THAT UPFRONT MONEY IS GOING?

It's doubtful because TxDOT and CINTRA have filed a lawsuit against the Office of the Attorney General, who stated that CINTRA's contract should be open to the public under the laws of the Public Information Act. The lawsuit states that TxDOT wants to protect its client CINTRA under the Privacy Act, citing that other toll companies may gain an edge if the information becomes public.

If you believe that one, I have some ocean-front property in Central Texas I'll sell you at a fantastic price!

Believe whatever you want about the pending toll roads, but apparently toll roads have taken a life of their own when 90-percent of the public doesn't want them but officials are pushing them upon us anyway!

The only ones who truly benefit from toll roads are the governor's special interest campaign contributors and also legislators like Rep. Mike Krusee and his cohorts who already are getting something in return for their efforts!

We desperately need to vote-out Perry and special interest legislators in the next several elections!

By Peter Stern

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-09-18T11:17:00.000-05:00

Toll roads to open Nov. 1
Perry aide denies that earlier debut before election is politically motivated

By Ben Wear
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Saturday, September 16, 2006

Central Texas will join Dallas and Houston in the Texas toll road fraternity on Nov. 1, when all or parts of the area's first three turnpikes will open to traffic, state officials confirmed this week. With no tolls, temporarily.

To meet that earlier date — officials in June had predicted a December opening of about 40 miles of tollways — the Texas Department of Transportation will initially bring down the barricades on just 26.3 miles of Texas 130, Texas 45 North and an extension of MoPac Boulevard (Loop 1). The other 13.8 miles of Texas 130 previously announced as part of this tollway premiere, from near Hutto to Interstate 35 north of Georgetown (and perhaps more of Texas 45 North, west of Loop 1), likely will open in early December.

Starting Nov. 1, cars will pass through the toll booths on 26.3 miles of MoPac Boulevard (Loop 1), above, along with Texas 130 and Texas 45 North. For two months, the toll roads will be free.

Even in its incomplete form, what the state calls the Central Texas Turnpike Project will offer an alternative expressway to I-35 via Texas 45 North and Loop 1 for people going to and from Round Rock, as well as a partial eastern bypass of Northeast Austin on Texas 130. The speed limit on all three roads will be 70 mph.

All the roads will be free for the first two months. This is a common promotional practice for toll roads, allowing drivers to sample the road at no cost and, toll agencies hope, engendering some good will for the paying days to come.

In early January, cash customers will begin paying tolls of about 15 cents a mile. But people with an electronic toll tag (called a TxTag by the agency) on their windshields and an account on file with the Transportation Department will get yet another month of free service. And in February, TxTag users will pay only half price. In March, the promotions end.

Those extra financial breaks for people with TxTags are an effort to get more people to sign up and use them, turnpike director Phillip Russell said this week. Toll transactions with tags (an overhead reader detects the passing tag and triggers a debit to the tag owner's transportation account) cost the agency much less than dealing with cash and having to hire people to staff toll booths, officials say. Having fewer people swerving and jerking to a stop for toll booths causes less congestion and fewer accidents, they say.

And toll tags, like credit cards, have the additional advantage — from the seller's point of view — of making toll payments an invisible and seemingly painless purchase.

Officials expect to cut the ribbon after rush hour on that Wednesday morning of Nov. 1 where the new Texas 45 North tollway meets the new Texas 130 turnpike in a tangle of flyover bridges. The early opening — and free service — will come just six days before toll road advocate Gov. Rick Perry stands for re-election, timing that at least one of Perry's opposing campaigns found more than suspect.

"Clearly this is being directed by the governor's campaign," said Mark Sanders, spokesman for Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, running as an independent for governor. "What the governor is doing is pushing the collection of tolls just past the November election because he knows it's going to cost him votes and probably the election."

Perry spokeswoman Kathy Walt, asked about the opening switch, said she hadn't even heard it was occurring in November rather than December. Perry, at least as of Thursday, didn't have the ribbon-cutting on his schedule, she said.

"He did not ask them to open it early," Walt said. "Obviously the governor's been interested in making sure that TxDOT moves projects along as quickly as possible to address traffic congestion. But TxDOT makes the decisions when segments of roads are opened all the time."

Transportation Department officials, meanwhile, said the change in plans has nothing to do with politics. Instead, they said, money — specifically the $2.3 billion the agency acquired through a 2002 bond sale and is using (along with $1.2 billion of local and state tax dollars) to build the three roads — offers plenty of incentive to open the road and begin bringing in revenue as soon as possible. Since 2003, the agency, using some of the money it borrowed, has been paying between $74 million and $86 million a year in debt payments.

Revenue isn't predicted to top the $86 million figure until 2011, when operating and maintenance expenses will have kicked in as well Unless traffic and revenue exceed projections, the system won't operate in the black for many years.

Debt payments will increase over the next 36 years to almost $500 million a year, according to documents from the 2002 bond sale.

"You've borrowed money, and that interest clock is ticking," Russell said. "You want a toll road to open as soon as possible. It may not be perfect, but it will be safe."

Safe, perhaps, but far from complete.

Russell said landscaping and other finishing touches will continue for months on the sections opening in November and December. But more important, Texas 130 will open without completion of a flyover bridge that will allow unobstructed left turns for people traveling from U.S. 290 eastbound to Texas 130 northbound. Drivers, until that bridge is complete early next year, will make those turns using a more traditional ground-bound interchange of frontage roads and stop lights.

And the incomplete sections of Texas 130 south of U.S. 290 (it will extend another 20 miles to Mustang Ridge by the end of 2007) and, at least briefly, north of U.S. 79 mean continuing construction and obstruction in those areas. Aside from the ongoing work on Texas 130 by contractor Lone Star Infrastructure, the state has other companies at work on Texas 45 North from west of Loop 1 to U.S. 183 at Lakeline Mall.

And the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority has yet another contractor building a fourth toll road, U.S. 183-A, that will run north for more than four miles from Texas 45 North to Cedar Park. The mobility authority is also building seven more miles of free frontage roads, extending north from the end of the U.S. 183-A toll road and running beyond Leander. Years from now, when traffic merits it, toll express lanes will be built in the middle of those frontage roads to extend the turnpike.

In all, there should be about 70 miles of operating toll roads in Central Texas by the end of next year.

All of them will have both electronic toll gantries and cash toll booths. Customers with toll tags will be able to drive at full highway speed under those gantries and go through toll stations on entrance and exit ramps without pausing. Cash customers will give money to toll collectors or, in some cases, toss correct change into a basket.

Drivers using cash will pay 75 cents at the single mainlane plaza on Loop 1 and another 75 cents on Texas 45 North, and on many ramps will pay another 50 cents to enter or exit the tollway. On Texas 130, the single main lane toll plaza in the section opening Nov. 1 will carry a cash charge of $1.50, and the charge on certain ramps will likewise be 50 cents.

In all cases, customers with toll tags will pay 10 percent less.

By Ben Wear
bwear@statesman.com; 445-3698

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-09-13T14:24:00.000-05:00

THE NEW WORLD DISORDER

Kansas City customs port considered Mexican soil?

WND investigation finds new evidence U.S. facility to be on foreign territory

Posted: July 5, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

A Mexican customs facility planned for Kansas City's inland port may have to be considered the sovereign soil of Mexico as part of an effort to lure officials in that country into cooperating with the Missouri development project.

Despite adamant denials by Kansas City Area Development Council officials, WND has obtained e-mails and other documents from top executives with the KCSmartPort project that suggest such a facility would by necessity be considered Mexican territory – despite its presence in the heartland of the U.S.

The documents were obtained with the assistance of Joyce Mucci, the founder of the Mid-America Immigration Reform Coalition, under the provisions of the Missouri Sunshine Law from the City of Kansas City, Mo., and from the Missouri Department of Economic Development.

The documents reveal a two-year campaign initiated in 2004 and managed by top SmartPort officials to win Mexico's agreement to establish the Mexican customs facility within the Kansas City "inland port." Kansas City SmartPort launched a concerted effort to advance the idea, holding numerous meetings with Mexican government officials in Mexico and in Washington to push the Mexican port idea in concert. The effort involved Missouri elected officials, including members of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate.

The documents make clear that Mexico demanded Kansas City pay all costs.
To date, the Kansas City Council has voted a $2.5 million loan to KC SmartPort to build the Mexican customs facility in the West Bottoms near Kemper Arena on city-owned land east of Liberty Street and mostly south of Interstate 670.

"Kansas City, Mo., is leasing the site to Kansas City SmartPort," Tasha Hammes of the development council wrote to WND last month. "It will NOT be leased to any Mexican government agency or to be sovereign territory of Mexico."

Yet, an e-mail written June 21, 2004, by Chris Gutierrez, the president of the KC SmartPort, stated that the Mexican customs office space "would need to be designated as Mexican sovereign territory and meet certain requirements."

Even more recently, an e-mail dated March 10 of this year was sent by Gutierrez to a long list of recipients that left no doubt that KC SmartPort has not yet received federal government approval to move forward with the Mexican customs facility. Gutierrez informed the e-mail recipients that the processing a critical form, designated "C-175," needs approval by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection before the form is passed to the State Department for final approval. The processing and approval of the C-175 application is holding up the final approval of the Mexican customs facility.

In the same memo, Gutierrez reported on a recent meeting in Washington: "Both sides (U.S. and Mexican officials) met several weeks ago and the 'document' or as the U.S. refers to it the 'C-175' is near completion. This document is the basis for the procedural, regulatory, jurisdictional, etc. for the project. It defines what will happen and how and what laws, etc. allow this to happen. Both sides have put a lot of effort into this document."

Gutierrez appeared concerned that the intensive lobbying done by KC SmartPort could be a wasted effort if the final U.S. government approvals were not completed before Mexico elected a new president this week.

"The process for the document is for U.S. Customs to present the document to the acting Commissioner and officials with the Dept of Homeland Security," he wrote. "This will happen in March. The document will then be reviewed by the U.S. State Dept who has been consulted on the document all along so they are aware of it. State will make the recommendation on the diplomatic status of the Mexican officials and the documents fit with existing agreements, accords or treaties. Mexico will wait for this recommendation and then get the sign off of their Foreign Ministry (Secretary [Luis Ernesto] Derbez and Under Secretary [Geronimo] Gutierrez are well versed on the project and support it). The hope of both sides is that this will be completed before the Mexican presidential elections in July."

Gutierrez's March 10 e-mail ended by expressing a hope that discussion of the Mexican customs facility issue could be kept from the public, obviously concerned that press scrutiny might end up producing an adverse public reaction that could destroy the project. Gutierrez specifically proposes a low-profile strategy designed to keep the KC SmartPort and the Mexican customs facility out of public view.

"The one negative that was conveyed to us was the problems and pressure the media attention has created for both sides," he wrote. "They want us to stop promoting the facility to the press. We let them know that we have never issued a proactive press release on this and that the media attention started when Commissioner (Robert) Bonner was in KC and met with Rick Alm. The official direction moving forward is that we can respond to the media with a standard response that I will send out on Monday and refer all other inquiries to U.S. Customs. I will get the name from them to refer media calls."

Robert C. Bonner is the commissioner of CBP within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Rick Alm is a reporter for the Kansas City Star.

On May 16, Bonner addressed the Chamber of Commerce in Kansas City, saying the Mexican customs facility idea "could be enormously important to Kansas City and the surrounding area, and would – or should – facilitate trade for U.S. exporters by expediting the border clearance process for U.S. goods and products exported to Mexico." Bonner added that "If the Kansas City SmartPort is implemented, Kansas City could become a major new trade link between the U.S. and Mexico."

Among those copied on Gutierrez's e-mail of March 10, 2006, was George D. Blackwood, the president of NASCO (North America's Super Corridor Coalition, Inc.). Blackwood is an attorney with Blackwood, Langworthy & Tyson in Kansas City. He also served as the former chairman of the North American International Trade Corridor Partnership, which he helped found in 1998 when he was serving as mayor pro tem of Kansas City. NASCO supports the Kansas City SmartPort's initiative to establish a Mexican customs facility as part of the NASCO SuperCorridor project.

By Jerome R. Corsi

http://pstern.statesmanblogs.com/

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-09-13T14:02:00.000-05:00

Here is a confirming piece of information that was sent to me by one of my contacts. Some of the information was originally published in a Spanish-language newspaper, Rumbo, and again on the web sites below by Mike Blair, the American Free Press. Before you dismiss this as just another conspiracy theory out there, here is a link where ol' George first heard about these plans:

http://www.dot.state.tx.us/ttf

Chinese Regime Eyes Texas Port Facilities

by Mike Blair / American Free Press | August 7 2006

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/August2006/070806Facilities.htm

The Chinese are eyeing facilities in Texas to further their economic invasion of the United States.

Negotiations are under way for communist Beijing to utilize as a “logistics hub” the former Kelly Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas, which was closed in 1995 during the Clinton administration’s base reduction program.

If the deal is consummated the Chinese will also gain access to two major Texas ports at Corpus Christi and Houston on the Texas coast of the Gulf of Mexico, an 11,000-foot-long airstrip, which is part of the Kelly base facilities, rail links with railcar switching facilities and links with five interstate highways. The Chinese are keenly interested in the deal because the San Antonio base will help facilitate its trade with Mexico.

San Antonio will give China access to a highway corridor along I-35, linking San Antonio to Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, which is just across the border from Laredo in west Texas.

Nuevo Laredo is a major staging ground for Mexican drug cartels, which have fostered an atmosphere of lawlessness in the city. Almost daily people, including police, are shot in the streets. In addition, frequent clashes occur between drug smugglers and U.S. Border Patrol and state and local police on the U.S. side of the border in Laredo.

There have also been reports that Chinese military units have been operating with Mexican army troops, who assist the drug smugglers and have made incursions into the United States.

“San Antonio is a strategic site for commerce between China and the United States and for the exportation of Chinese products to Mexico and Latin America,” Zhou Ming, general director of the Chinese State Agency of Promotions and Chinese Investments, said after a Chinese delegation visited San Antonio last year, according to a report in the Spanish-language newspaper Rumbo, which reports on activities in Mexico and U.S. border states.

Like most Chinese industrial, investment and commerce kingpins, Ming has ties to the People’s Liberation Army, which controls most industry in China with much of the profits going to build up the Chinese military.

Considerable slave labor is used, making it impossible for U.S. workers to compete.
A year ago, San Antonio Mayor Phil Hardberger and other municipal officials traveled to China to promote the former air base facilities, now renamed the San Antonio Port Authority.

The mayor’s office is working with the Port Authority, the Free Trade Alliance San Antonio and the San Antonio based Omega Group International, which maintains offices in Austin, Texas, San Francisco, Mexico City and Beijing and Qingdao, China.

According to Rumbo, Omega International sponsored visits by Chinese officials last year to San Antonio. J.J. Saulino, press secretary to Hardberger, told AFP that the mayor is interested in the project and traveled to Guangdong province in China to promote it.

Jorge Canavati, vice president of the San Antonio Port Authority, claimed the Rumbo article was “not accurate” and abrasively brushed off questions about the effort to get the Chinese into the former U.S. air base facilities.

The former air base, often referred to as a “dry port” or an “inland port,” because it is not a coastal facility or located on a navigable waterway, “has no limits for the products, from toys to heavy equipment [from China],” Vivian Lee, president of the Omega Group, was quoted by Rumbo as saying.

AFP was told by Rogello Garcia, a spokesman for the Free Trade Alliance San Antonio, that a Chinese delegation was in San Antonio last spring to further work out details of the project.

Kelly Air Force Base was opened in 1916 as a training facility. Nearby Lackland Air Force Base was a spin-off from Kelly. The Texas Air National Guard 149th Fighter Wing still utilizes the facility, along with the Air Force Reserve 433rd Airlift Wing.

A spokesperson with the Port Authority told AFP that the base has been used to repair and maintain C-5A Galaxy transport planes, which are the largest aircraft in the Air Force. The base has an 11,000-foot runway to accommodate the C-5A, which the military shares with the Port Authority.

In addition to the airstrip, the Port Authority has a 1,200-acre yard operated by the Union Pacific Railroad. The Burlington Northern-Santa Fe Railroad is also linked to the inland port.

A retired Air Force intelligence officer told AFP that taking over the San Antonio base would likely streamline Chinese exports to the United States and would give them access to ports in Houston and Corpus Christi on the Gulf coast.

The Chinese already control the Panama Canal, through the Hutchison-Whampoa Company, and maintain a major airfield and port facility at Freeport, Bahamas, where Hutchison-Whampoa has a contract through the Bush administration to provide security for container ships bound for U.S. ports on the East Coast.

Chinese state-owned shipping company Cosco has taken over port facilities and warehousing space at the California ports of Los Angeles, San Francisco and Long Beach. This is one of the reasons cited for China’s interest in the San Antonio inland port, as it has extensive space available for constructing warehouse buildings. According to Port Authority sources, a 108,800-square-foot warehouse facility has already been built at the former base at a cost of $5 million and a slightly smaller 102,400-squarefoot building has also been built.

by Mike Blair 8-07-2006

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-09-09T16:15:00.000-05:00

Subj:Transportation Secretary Nominee is a Toll Proponent
Date:9/6/06 1:08:55 PM Central Daylight Time

The following column appears today on the Citizens for a Better Waller County website www.wallercountycitizens.org. It is written by Alice Sorsby McGuffie

Permission to duplicate granted
#########################################################
*****************************************************************
ALICE'S VIEW
September 6, 2006

On Tuesday, September 5, 2006 President Bush indicated he would nominate Mary Peters to be the next transportation secretary. Ms. Peters has been a vocal advocate for toll roads, for privatizing our highway system, and for the Trans Texas Corridor.

Ms. Peters is currently the Sr. Vice President of HDR, Inc., an engineering firm that is currently doing work on the Trans Texas Corridor-35 project. She is a member of an advisory board for the Reason Foundation, a think tank that has actively supported the Trans Texas Corridor concept.

Ms. Peters was also very recently the Federal Highway Administrator and in that role helped push through federal legislation (SAFETEA-LU) that allows public highways to be turned over to private companies.

On March 11, 2005 Mary Peters joined Gov. Rick Perry and Ric Williamson, chairman of the Texas Transportation Commission for the contract signing between TxDOT and the private consortium, Cintra-Zachry, to develop the first leg of the Trans Texas Corridor, TTC-35.

"We are experiencing increasing congestion on our nation's highways, railways, airports and seaports," Mary Peters has said. "... we're robbing our nation of productivity and our citizens of quality time with their families." "Public-private partnerships in transportation hold great promise in cutting the congestion that's choking our economy and keeping families apart from one another."

Interesting words Ms. Peters uses "robbing our nation of productivity and our citizens of quality... choking our economy and keeping families apart from one another." It is the very cure she proposes for traffic congestion, Public Private Parnerships, that will be doing the robbing, choking, and keeping families apart.

Mary Peters faces Senate confirmation before she can step into the role of Transportation Secretary.

Texas Senator, Kay Bailey Hutchison, serves on the Senate COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION. Senator Hutchison can and should oppose the confirmation of Mary Peters. Senator Hutchison can be contacted at

http://www.senate.gov/~hutchison/e-mail.htm
WASHINGTON OFFICE
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-4304
202-224-5922
202-224-0776 (FAX)
202-224-5903 (TDD)

TEXAS OFFICES
Austin http://www.senate.gov/cgi-bin/exitmsg?url=http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/
961 Federal Building
300 East 8th Street
Austin, Texas 78701
512-916-5834
512-916-5839 (FAX)

By Alice Sorsby McGuffie

You have permission to duplicate this article.

Follow-up to the last article.

Bush's new Transportation Secretary and the Trans Texas Corridor
By Wayne Madsen
Friday, September 8, 2006
From http://www.WayneMadsenReports.com/

In Mexico they call it Plan Puebla Panama.

Sept. 8/9/10, 2006 -- George W. Bush's pick for Transportation Secretary represents a major conflict-of-interest designed to spur the construction of the Trans-Texas Corridor -- a project in which Bush and his cronies are heavily invested. Last week, Bush nominated Mary Peters to replace Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Unlike Mineta, a former congressman who then became a Vice President fo the aerospace defense giant Lockheed Martin, Peters comes out of the surface transportation industry. She is a vice president for the engineering firm HDR and co-vice chairman of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission. From 2001 to 2005, Peters was the head of the Federal Highway Administration. Peters is also a former head of the Arizona Department of Transportation. Peters worked in the administration of disgraced GOP Governor Fife Symington, who was convicted of bank fraud and resigned from office. (Symington was later pardoned by his college friend, President Bill Clinton). Peters' commitment to major "infrastructure development" of the nation's highways centers on the development of the North American SuperCorridor (NASCO) highway, of which the Tran-Texas Corridor will be a major component. Already, Bush crime syndicate cronies, including interests tied to Texas Governor Rick Perry, are purchasing property along the proposed Texas highway route at cut-rate prices, using "eminent domain" statutes to pay less than what private and commercial property is worth. The money for the massive land grab is coming from Saudi and Chinese sources, according to knowledgeable sources in Texas. The NASCO highway will cross 11 states: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri, Iowa, South Dakota, North Dakota, Minnesota, Michigan, Indiana and Illinois. It will also connect proposed Mexican super ports in Manzanillo, Mazatlan, and Lazaro Cardenas to various United States trucking and distribution super-hubs in San Antonio, Dallas, Kansas City, as well as one in Winnipeg in Canada. The Mexican ports will be receiving points for manufactured products from China. The theft of the Mexican presidency by conservative Felipe Calderon at the expense of populist leader Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador was engineered to protect the sizeable investments the Bush crime cartel, including The Carlyle Group, and their Saudi and Chinese financiers have already sunk into the project.

New Transportation Secretary Mary Peters to ensure Bush crime family super-highway projects proceed unimpeded.

Eventually, NASCO will be expanded as far south as Argentina by linking North America to Central America (Mexico-Central American Corridor and an improved Pan American Highway). The expensive tolls charged throughout the 10-lane super-highway system will be used to line the pockets of the Bush family well into the middle of the 21st century. Peters, as a highway and trucking industry shill, has been entrusted by the Bush crime cartel to ensure that the plans for NASCO and the Pan American Super Corridor proceed unimpeded. It is estimated that as many as 1 million Texans alone, many in rural and poor urban areas, could be displaced by the Trans-Texas Corridor.

Mary Peters at Transportation: Major responsibility is to ensure roadblocks to North American SuperCorridor are eliminated.

By Wayne Madsen

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-09-05T15:56:00.000-05:00

The Toll Roads Boondoggle
By Lillian Simmons

Boondoggle Presentation (3.42 MB) By Lillian Simmons
Warning: This is a fairly sizeable Powerpoint Presentation file, so those with slower connections or those without Powerpoint may want to skip this one.

Those who don't have Powerpoint, and who don't mind another large download (93 MB) can get OpenOffice.org from http://download.openoffice.org/2.0.3/index.html.
Its a nice little productivity suite (in the vein of Microsoft Office) that can read most office document formats, including Powerpoint presentations. Best of all, its free!

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-09-02T13:48:00.000-05:00

Protest of the Gov. Perry- DoubleTax Toll -- Hwy. 121, Dallas, Ft. Worth
Pictures & Video clips!
By Linda Curtis

Tuesday, August 29, 2006----Today's Protest in Coppell, Texas at Perry's Celebration of the Tolling of Hwy. 121 -- the first freeway toll conversion in the state under HB 3588, the same legislation that created the Trans-Texas Corridor.

Check out these short news video clips in DFW, Channel 5: http://www.nbc5i.com/news/9754839/detail.html
Here's a video clip from Channel 11. Watch TxDOT boss, Rick Williamson, squirm: http://cbs11tv.com/consumer/local_story_241165325.html

Dear All:

We had some fun this morning in Coppell, Texas, protesting Rick Perry's "celebration" of the first freeway-toll conversion, Hwy. 121. Except -- wait a second -- late yesterday, TxDOT announced that the 121 tolling would be delayed to sometime in November (after the election)! But then...wait another second, Ric Williamson (TxDOT Boss) today at the "celebration" said, 'we might not toll until January', citing the need to "test their equipment". Does he mean their toll equipment, or their voting machines??? Hah!

IF YOU LIVE IN THE DFW area join us and Carole Keeton Strayhorn this Thursday in Lewisville for a press conference with Stop121Tolls.com founder (and Indy Texans), Randy Jennings. They will be telling you the truth - we know you CAN handle it -- about Perry's new genre of "double-tax" toll roads -- he and his highway robbin' contributors want to put tolls on roads we've already paid for through the gas tax! Go to Stop121Tolls.com for details.

We are identifying precinct, city and state organizers for the Strayhorn campaign between now and election day.

If everyone does something -- and we're counting on thousands of people across the state-- we will dump this Governor, his Corridor and his double-taxing, double-dealing ways. Then, together with Carole, Texans will have a fighting
chance to take back Texas!
Reply to this email and let us know we can count on you! Then, we'll give you a call, or feel free to call us.

Independently yours,

Linda Curtis, founder
Independent Texans
http://indytexans.org
PO Box 14294
Austin, TX 78761
512-535-0989 Austin
817-921-2417 DFW

Save These Dates:

Sept. 30, Saturday, (times to be announced soon) Hands Across the Corridor, coming to your community.

Friday, Oct. 6, at 7 pm, first televised gubernatorial debate, Channels to be
announced. Plan to watch with friends & family.
_______________________________________________
indy-discussion mailing list
indy-discussion@lists.independenttexans.com
by L. J. Curtis

TEXAS INSIDER
Perry: SH 121 Bypass Is Landmark in Texas Transportation
http://www.texasinsider.org/scoop/Scoop_GovPerry-08-30-06-SH121IsLandmarkInTXTrans.htm

COPPELL – Gov. Rick Perry today dedicated the opening of State Highway 121 Bypass, calling it a landmark in the history of Texas transportation.

“It is the first road to be completed as a project stemming from legislation passed in 2003 that has allowed Texas to develop new and better ways to pay for highway construction,” Perry said. “And State Highway 121 will be the Texas Department of Transportation’s first all-electronic toll road, with no toll booths to slow traffic down or contribute to accidents and no hassle of digging around for spare change.”

Although the bypass, also known as the Golden Corridor, was built as a toll road, motorists will continue to be allowed to drive on the road at no charge throughout the fall as TxDOT tests the new electronic toll-tag readers.

“This announcement means that drivers will not only have a few extra months to enjoy a toll-quality road without the cost, they will also have more time to get an electronic TxTag sticker, which gives drivers a 10 percent discount on the Golden Corridor and every other toll road in Texas,” Perry said.

Motorists who use the North Texas Tollway Authority’s TollTag or the Harris
County Toll Road Authority’s EZ TAG won’t need a new sticker. And those who would rather pay per trip will still be able to drive on State Highway 121, thanks to new technology that will allow them to get a bill by mail, although the cost will be a little more.

“By leveraging the latest technology and the resources of the private sector, SH 121 will provide North Texans a route that is faster, safer and more efficient – as well as funding for additional road improvements in this part of the state,” Perry said.

Toll revenue from the 121 Bypass will help provide the $200 million it will cost to widen I-35 East through Denton County, the $80 million reconstruction project of FM 423, and many other projects that will help get traffic moving in North Texas.

By the Texas Insider
http://www.texasinsider.org/scoop/Scoop_GovPerry-08-30-06-SH121IsLandmarkInTXTrans.htm

Carole Keeton Strayhorn & friends working to stop Rick Perry's double-tax tolling of Highway 121 in the DFW area.

Randy Jennings, Stop121Tolls.com

Thanks so much for coming, y'all. Hope to see you at meetings happening in your area (check the indytexans.org events calendar) and be sure to SAVE THIS DATE -- Saturday, September 30th for Hands Across the Corridor, coming to your local county courthouse. Stay tuned for details!

Wanna help? Reply to this email or give us a call at 512-535-0989.

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-29T14:32:00.000-05:00

Pictures are Worth a Thousand Words!
by Bobby Dean Phillips
of Stop TxDOTNow.org in Houston

Just a few pictures of the billboard we had put up on I-10 actually in the area where we fought off the elevated lanes...Hope this gives you some inspiration....

http://www.stoptxdotnow.org/maps/comparison.htm

Here is our vision for Cottage Grove Park, as opposed to that of TxDOT.

Bobby Dean Phillips of StopTxDOTNow.Org will be speaking in Austin on Thursday, Sept. 7th at 7pm at the ACC Pinnacle Campus, Student Commons Room, at 290 West in Oak Hill. For more information, you can also visit www.Fix290.org.

By Bobby Dean Phillips
Houston, Texas

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-28T14:20:00.000-05:00

PODER Working to Defeat Toll Roads
By Fancy Fairchild

http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/story?oid=oid%3A397690

Dear Editor,
Re: "More Toll Road Tremors" [News, Aug. 18]: Mike Heiligenstein, director of CTRMA, used our tax dollars to make dopey commercials (Hey kids! Tolls are great!) to coax and lull people into accepting tolls. Drawbacks, such as rising costs of goods and services caused by tolls, traffic snarls caused by drivers avoiding tolls, or that it's a misdemeanor (with all the costs and penalties that implies) to drive on toll roads without paying are "conveniently ignored" by Heiligenstein.

In 2004 Heiligenstein said it would take a gas-tax increase of $2 to $3 per gallon to avoid toll roads. CAMPO's estimate was that it would take 2 cents per gallon to avoid them. The power and money CTRMA will have in the future hinges on how many toll roads Heiligenstein can sell. Contrast his motives with those of PODER – working to save East Austin's poor and working class from financial hardship.

PODER didn't "conveniently ignore" anything. There is a disproportionate number of freeways being converted to toll roads in east Travis County. TXDOT, CTRMA, and CAMPO are components of a toll-road machine started by Rick Perry. They never even tried to think of other ways to meet our road needs. There are viable alternatives, but this machine is powerful and money-driven. Grassroots toll-opposition groups are not Luddites – we are trying to keep our tax-paid transportation infrastructure from being a revenue source for private interests.

During the meeting, CAMPO's chairman Gonzalo Barrientos bullied PODER's speakers until one man was roundly applauded for saying he wasn't going to take Barrientos' disrespect anymore. Let's see a report on that in the Chronicle.

Fancy Fairchild

Elgin

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-22T14:07:00.000-05:00

Strayhorn Outlines Transportation Plan To TxDOT On Last Day of Comments
Expand Existing IH 35, Implement Ports to Plains, Telecommuting Expansion, Appoint Inspector General over TxDOT

(Austin) – On the final day the Texas Department of Transportation accepted comment on the Trans Texas Corridor, Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, Independent Candidate for Governor, today told the agency her administration will expand IH-35 using existing rights of way, implement the ports to plains initiative, expand her successful use of telecommuting and appoint an inspector general to oversee the agency and a transportation ombudsman to talk to Texans.

“This agency is not listening to the people,” Strayhorn said. “At 56 hearings over 21 days, TxDOT ignored the overwhelming majority of people who testified against the Trans Texas Catastrophe. They even went so far as to tell Texans that they could not stop this boondoggle – even if they elected a new governor.

“Well, they are dead wrong. I will blast this corridor off the bureaucratic books and replace it with a common-sense plan to address our transportation needs.

“My plan is a better approach than the Governor’s secret agreement with a company based in Madrid, Spain, to seize more than half a million acres of private Texas property and build toll roads across the state,” she said. “The Governor said if someone has a better idea then lay out that plan. Today, I am outlining a better plan – one that puts Texans first, not special interests.”

Strayhorn’s plan includes protecting Texas farm and ranch land, improving coastal evacuations, increasing capacity of existing freeways and railways, encouraging family-friendly telecommuting, and appointing an independent inspector general over TxDOT as well as an ombudsman to listen to the people.

“Texas property belongs to Texans, not foreign companies,” Strayhorn said. “To meet our transportation needs we need freeways not toll ways, and we must use existing rights of way and increase efficiency of existing roadways and ports. We must not destroy our precious farm and ranch land.”

Strayhorn testified against the Trans Texas Corridor at 14 public hearings held by the TxDOT, at which she detailed revenue sources available to the state instead of tolls. The Governor refuses to back off his Trans Texas Corridor plan, despite widespread opposition from Texans at the hearings.

“I stood with Texans from the Rio Grande Valley to the Red River who oppose the Governor’s attempt to seize land and build toll roads across Texas,” Strayhorn said. “I listened to the people of Texas and the people of Texas are overwhelmingly opposed to this $184 billion boondoggle.

“Texans deserve to hear the truth,” she said. “And the truth is much of the work to help Texans get from here to there has already been done.”

Strayhorn submitted three reports to TxDOT – their own 1999 state analysis calling for the expansion of IH 35 using existing rights of way, the Ports to Plains study that will relieve existing congestion by improving transportation from South Texas through West Texas using existing roads, and her recommendation to expand telecommuting.

“Family friendly telecommuting is up to 15 percent in my agency,” Strayhorn said. “The employees love it, it keeps folks off the road, and it works,” she said.

Strayhorn will:

Increase capacity on IH-35 using existing rights of way without tolls and prioritize the West Texas Ports-to-Plains highway system;
Appoint an independent inspector general and an ombudsman at TxDOT;
Increase the use of Texas ports from Orange to Brownsville and improve rail and road systems from the coast to the interior of Texas;
Improve and increase efficiency of the state’s rail system along existing rights of way; and
Use telecommuting and staggered work schedules to ease traffic congestion and decrease pollution.

“Texas once had and can again have a freeway system that is the envy of the nation,” Strayhorn said. “I am adamantly opposed to any toll roads in Texas.”

Strayhorn’s transportation plan is part of her Texas First Agenda, a series of initiatives and solutions that she will be releasing in the coming weeks.

Statement of Carole Keeton Strayhorn August 21, 2006

This is the last day the Texas Department of Transportation is accepting comments on the Trans Texas Corridor and I am outlining my transportation plan and submitting three documents I hope they will consider as they review this ill-conceived project.
The documents show how we can expand IH-35 using existing right of ways, implement the ports to plains initiative and expand my successful use of telecommuting.
As part of my plan, I am also announcing today that I will appoint an inspector general to oversee the agency and a transportation ombudsman to talk to Texans.
This agency and the Austin establishment are not listening to the people. At 56 hearings over 21 days, TxDOT ignored the overwhelming majority of people who testified against the Trans Texas Catastrophe. They even went so far as to tell Texans that they could not stop this boondoggle – even if they elected a new governor.
Well, they are dead wrong. I will blast this corridor off the bureaucratic books and replace it with a common-sense plan to address our transportation needs.
My plan is a better approach than the Governor’s secret agreement with a company based in Madrid, Spain, to seize more than half a million acres of private Texas property and build toll roads across Texas. The Governor said if someone has a better idea then lay out that plan.
I went to the hearings and I listened to the people and today I am outlining a better plan – one that puts Texans first, not special interests.
My plan includes protecting Texas farm and ranch land, improving coastal evacuations, increasing capacity of existing freeways and railways, encouraging family-friendly telecommuting, and appointing an independent inspector general over TxDOT as well as an ombudsman to listen to the people.
Texas property belongs to Texans, not foreign companies. To meet our transportation needs we need freeways not toll ways, and we must use existing rights of way and increase efficiency of existing roadways and ports. We must not destroy our precious farm and ranch land.
I testified against the Trans Texas Corridor at 14 public hearings held by TxDOT, where I detailed revenue sources available to the state instead of tolls.

Four points -- 4 billion dollars in Texas Mobility Bonds
An additional 3 billion dollars in revenue bonds
Increased federal dollars
And increased tax collection at the state level

The Governor refuses to back off his Trans Texas Corridor plan, despite widespread opposition from Texans at the hearings.
I stood with Texans from the Rio Grande Valley to the Red River who oppose the Governor’s attempt to seize land and build toll roads across Texas. I listened to the people of Texas and the people of Texas are overwhelmingly opposed to this $184 billion boondoggle..
Texans deserve to hear the truth. And the truth is much of the work to help Texans get from here to there has already been done..
Two of the reports I am sharing with the people of Texas and that I am sending to TxDOT are their own -- a 1999 state analysis calling for the expansion of IH 35 using existing right of ways, let me make very clear, using existing right of ways without tolls, and the Ports to Plains study that will relieve existing congestion by improving transportation from South Texas through West Texas using existing roads, and without tolls, and my own recommendation to expand telecommuting..
Family friendly telecommuting is up to 15 percent in my agency. The employees love it, it keeps folks off the road, and it works..
My plan -- I will:

1. Increase capacity on IH-35 using existing right of ways without tolls and prioritize the West Texas Ports-to-Plains highway system;
2. Appoint an independent inspector general and an ombudsman at TxDOT;
3. Increase the use of Texas ports from Orange to Brownsville and improve rail and road systems from the coast to the interior of Texas;
4. Improve and increase efficiency of the state’s rail system along existing right of ways; and
5. Use telecommuting and staggered work schedules to ease traffic congestion and decrease pollution.
Texas once had and can again have a freeway system that is the envy of the nation. I will make that happen.
6. I am adamantly opposed to any toll roads in Texas.

END

by Carole Strayhorn

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-21T15:26:00.000-05:00

TxDOT Seeking Submissions for Transportation Publication

TxDOT has a new quarterly magazine and its first publication is now available online. The quarterly called Horizon is seeking manuscripts, preferably original, (i.e.,articles, commentary, and book reviews) which are timely in scope and relevant to transportation.

If you know of someone with credentials/background in transportation or finance who is in a position to offer an authoritative perspective that challenges TxDOT's PR blitz please forward this information to them.

Alice M., Citizens for a Better Waller County

Horizon, a quarterly policy publication, examines topics across all modes of transportation, reflecting the concerns of policymakers and leaders in government, industry and the general public. It provides analysis and commentary from transportation experts.

Summer 2006: The Future of Transportation Finance (ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/gbe/horizon/horizon_summer2006.pdf) [pdf, 42 pages, 2.25 mb]

A Quiet Crisis in Transportation Finance: Options for Texas by Martin Wachs, Ph.D., RAND Corporation. Discusses transportation financing choices facing state and local governments.

The Return of Private Toll Roads by Robert Poole and Peter Samuel, Reason Foundation. Outlines the history and significance of tolling.

Mobility: All Roads Lead to Texas by Joseph Giglio, Ph.D., Hudson Institute. Emphasizes the need for innovative funding strategies for mobility projects.

Thinking about the Future of the Highway Program by Kenneth Orski, Editor, Innovation Briefs. A commentary challenging us to engage in the important transportation funding conversation.

Coming Fall 2006: Innovations in Project Delivery

To subscribe to Horizon
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/services/government_and_business_enterprises/horizon/sub_form.htm

Fall 2006 Issue Theme: Innovations in Project Delivery
Deadline for Submissions: August 31, 2006 to John Sabala at TxDOTHorizonEditor@dot.state.tx.us • (512) 416-2386.

Submission Guidelines for authors Horizon is a journal of the Texas Department of Transportation, Government and Business Enterprises Division. It provides innovative and trend-setting articles about transportation policies in Texas and throughout the world. Research findings and policy issues are presented in accessible language to allow for discussion among policy-makers, professionals, and citizens.

The journal seeks manuscripts, preferably original, (i.e., articles, commentary, and book reviews) which are timely in scope and relevant to transportation.

1. Submit manuscripts by email in MS Word format to the Editor at: TxDOTHorizonEditor@dot.state.tx.us

2. Acceptance of manuscripts for publication is subject to approval by the editorial staff.

3. The author must inform the editor if the article has appeared in, or was submitted to, any other publications. The author must provide written approval from the publication in which his article appears. If the article was presented as a paper at a seminar or other event, please state the location, time, and event.

4. Sales presentations for organizations, promoting a particular product or service, are not suitable for publication.

5. The text of manuscripts is to be double-spaced and 12-point type. Articles are limited to a maximum length of 2000 words (approximately 5-6 pages); commentary and book reviews are limited to a maximum of 1000 words.

6. The manuscript should have a title page which includes the names, affiliations, addresses (mailing and email) and phone numbers of all authors. Brief biographical sketches for all authors should be included with the manuscript.

7. Include an abstract that briefly describes the contents, procedures, and results of the manuscript and does not exceed 100 words.

8. Endnotes are to be used rather than footnotes and placed at the end of the manuscript. Footnotes may be occasionally used within the document for clarification purposes, but not for citing references.

9. The Modern Language Association Style (MLA) is to be used for endnotes and references. At the end of the manuscript, complete references are listed alphabetically (not by number) by author surname, government agency, or association name.

10. Photo/Art Guidelines.
• If you provide photos, please include caption, photographer’s credit, and written permission from the photographer for each image.
• If sending compressed files, please send as a self-extracting file (SEA).
• All photos must be scanned or saved at 300 dpi or greater and sent separately from the document. Please send photos in high resolution: JPG, TIFF or GIF file formats.

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-18T15:19:00.000-05:00

25 Rules of Disinformation: How to Fight Back
and
8 Traits of The Disinformationalist: What to Look For

by H. Michael Sweeney
copyright (c) 1997, 2000, 2001 All rights reserved (Edited June 2001)

Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation
(Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist)

Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate in the world of dealing with veiled and half-truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation. Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even "good guys" can be suspect in many cases.

A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluation... to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not... or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.

It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence for a given solution, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the solution is invalid an a new one must be found... but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed solution, chain, or link, if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach. While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek by means of intimidation to prevent discussion in general.

It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull their strings (those who stand to suffer should the crime be solved) MUST seek to prevent rational and complete examination of any chain of evidence which would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in this process. However, the public at large is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily led astray by these time-proven tactics. Remarkably, not even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

This why concepts from the film, Wag-The-Dog, actually work. If you saw that movie, know that there is at least one real-world counterpart to Al Pacino's character. For CIA, it is Mark Richards, who was called in to orchestrate the media response to Waco on behalf of Janet Reno. Mark Richards is the acknowledged High Priest of Disinformation. His appointment was extremely appropriate, since the CIA was VERY present at Waco from the very beginning of the cult to the very end of their days - just as it was at the People's Temple in Jonestown. Richards purpose in life is damage control.

For such disinformationalists, the overall aim is to avoid discussing links in the chain of evidence which cannot be broken by truth, but at all times, to use clever deceptions or lies to make select links seem weaker than they are, create the illusion of a break, or better still, cause any who are considering the chain to be distracted in any number of ways, including the method of questioning the credentials of the presenter. Please understand that fact is fact, regardless of the source. Likewise, truth is truth, regardless of the source. This is why criminals are allowed to testify against other criminals. Where a motive to lie may truly exist, only actual evidence that the testimony itself IS a lie renders it completely invalid. Were a known 'liar's' testimony to stand on its own without supporting fact, it might certainly be of questionable value, but if the testimony (argument) is based on verifiable or otherwise demonstrable facts, it matters not who does the presenting or what their motives are, or if they have lied in the past or even if motivated to lie in this instance -- the facts or links would and should stand or fall on their own merit and their part in the matter will merely be supportive.
Moreover, particularly with respects to public forums such as newspaper letters to the editor, and Internet chat and news groups, the disinfo type has a very important role. In these forums, the principle topics of discussion are generally attempts by individuals to cause other persons to become interested in their own particular position, idea, or solution -- very much in development at the time. People often use such mediums as a sounding board and in hopes of pollination to better form their ideas. Where such ideas are critical of government or powerful, vested groups (especially if their criminality is the topic), the disinfo artist has yet another role -- the role of nipping it in the bud. They also seek to stage the concept, the presenter, and any supporters as less than credible should any possible future confrontation in more public forums result due to their early successes. You can often spot the disinfo types at work here by the unique application of "higher standards" of discussion than necessarily warranted. They will demand that those presenting arguments or concepts back everything up with the same level of expertise as a professor, researcher, or investigative writer. Anything less renders any discussion meaningless and unworthy in their opinion, and anyone who disagrees is obviously stupid -- and they generally put it in exactly those terms.

So, as you read any such discussions, particularly so in Internet news groups (NG), decide for yourself when a rational argument is being applied and when disinformation, psyops (psychological warfare operations) or trickery is the tool. Accuse those guilty of the later freely. They (both those deliberately seeking to lead you astray, and those who are simply foolish or misguided thinkers) generally run for cover when thus illuminated, or -- put in other terms, they put up or shut up (a perfectly acceptable outcome either way, since truth is the goal.) Here are the twenty-five methods and seven traits, some of which don't apply directly to NG application. Each contains a simple example in the form of actual (some paraphrased for simplicity) from NG comments on commonly known historical events, and a proper response. Accusations should not be overused -- reserve for repeat offenders and those who use multiple tactics. Responses should avoid falling into emotional traps or informational sidetracks, unless it is feared that some observers will be easily dissuaded by the trickery. Consider quoting the complete rule rather than simply citing it, as others will not have reference. Offer to provide a complete copy of the rule set upon request (see permissions statement at end):

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues. Example: Media was present in the courtroom (Hunt vs. Liberty Lobby) when CIA agent Marita Lorenz 'confession' testimony regarding CIA direct participation in the planning and assassination of John Kennedy was revealed. All media reported was that E. Howard Hunt lost his libel case against Liberty Lobby (Liberty Lobby's newspaper, The Spotlight, had reported Hunt was in Dallas that day and were sued for the story). See Mark Lane's remarkable book, Plausible Denial, for the full confessional transcript. Proper response: There is no possible response unless you are aware of the material and can make it public yourself.. In any such attempt, be certain to target any known silent party as likely complicit in a cover up. In this case, it would be the entire Time-Warner Media Group, among others. This author is relatively certain that reporters were hand-picked to cover this case from among those having intelligence community ties.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit. Example: 'How dare you suggest that the Branch Davidians were murdered! the FBI and BATF are made up of America's finest and best trained law enforcement, operate under the strictest of legal requirements, and are under the finest leadership the President could want to appoint.' Proper response: You are avoiding the Waco issue with disinformation tactics. Your high opinion of FBI is not founded in fact. All you need do is examine Ruby Ridge and any number of other examples, and you will see a pattern of abuse of power that demands attention to charges against FBI/BATF at Waco. Why do you refuse to address the issues with disinformation tactics (rule 2 - become incredulous and indignant)?

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
'You can't prove his material was legitimately from French Intelligence. Pierre Salinger had a chance to show his 'proof' that flight 800 was brought down by friendly fire, and he didn't. All he really had was the same old baseless rumor that's been floating around the Internet for months.' Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. The Internet charge reported widely is based on a single FBI interview statement to media and a similar statement by a Congressman, neither of which had actually seen Pierre's document. As the FBI is being accused in participating in a cover up of this matter and Pierre claims his material is not Internet sourced, it is natural that FBI would have reason to paint his material in a negative light. For you to assume the FBI to have no bias in the face of Salinger's credentials and unchanged stance suggests you are biased. At the best you can say the matter is in question. Further, to imply that material found on Internet is worthless is not founded. At best you may say it must be considered carefully before accepting it, which will require addressing the actual issues. Why do you refuse to address these issues with disinformation tactics (rule 3 - create rumor mongers)?

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues. Example: When trying to defeat reports by the Times of London that spy-sat images reveal an object racing towards and striking flight 800, a straw man is used. The disinformationalist, later identified as having worked for Naval Intelligence, simply stated: 'If these images exist, the public has not seen them. Why? They don't exist, and never did. You have no evidence and thus, your entire case falls flat.' Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You imply deceit and deliberately establish an impossible and unwarranted test. It is perfectly natural that the public has not seen them, nor will they for some considerable time, if ever. To produce them would violate national security with respect to intelligence gathering capabilities and limitations, and you should know this. Why do you refuse to address the issues with such disinformation tactics (rule 4 - use a straw man)?'

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues. Example: 'You believe what you read in the Spotlight? The Publisher, Willis DeCarto, is a well-known right-wing racist. I guess we know your politics -- does your Bible have a swastika on it? That certainly explains why you support this wild-eyed, right-wing conspiracy theory.' Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply guilt by association and attack truth on the basis of the messenger. The Spotlight is well known Populist media source responsible for releasing facts and stories well before mainstream media will discuss the issues through their veil of silence. Willis DeCarto has successfully handled lawsuits regarding slanderous statements such as yours. Your undemonstrated charges against the messenger have nothing to do with the facts or the issues, and fly in the face of reason. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 5 - sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule)?'

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint. Example: ''This stuff is garbage. Where do you conspiracy lunatics come up with this crap? I hope you all get run over by black helicopters.' Notice it even has a farewell sound to it, so it won't seem curious if the author is never heard from again. Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your comments or opinions fail to offer any meaningful dialog or information, and are worthless except to pander to emotionalism, and in fact, reveal you to be emotionally insecure with these matters. If you do not like reading 'this crap', why do you frequent this NG which is clearly for the purpose of such discussion? Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 6 - hit and run)?'

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive. Example: 'With the talk-show circuit and the book deal, it looks like you can make a pretty good living spreading lies.' Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply guilt as a means of attacking the messenger or his credentials, but cowardly fail to offer any concrete evidence that this is so. If you think what has been presented are 'lies', why not simply so illustrate? Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 6 - question motives)?'

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources. 'You obviously know nothing about either the politics or strategic considerations, much less the technicals of the SR-71. Incidentally, for those who might care, that sleek plane is started with a pair of souped up big-block V-8's (originally, Buick 454 C.I.D. with dual 450 CFM Holly Carbs and a full-race Isky cams -- for 850 combined BHP @ 6,500 RPM) using a dragster-style clutch with direct-drive shaft. Anyway, I can tell you with confidence that no Blackbird has ever been flown by Korean nationals nor have they ever been trained to fly it, and have certainly never overflown the Republic of China in a SR or even launched a drone from it that flew over China. I'm not authorized to discuss if there have been overflights by American pilots.' Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply your own authority and expertise but fail to provide credentials, and you also fail to address issues and cite sources. You simply cite 'Jane's-like' information to make us think you know what you are talking about. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 8 - invoke authority)?'

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect. Example: 'Nothing you say makes any sense. Your logic is idiotic. Your facts nonexistent. Better go back to the drawing board and try again.' Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You evade the issues with your own form of nonsense while others, perhaps more intelligent than you pretend to be, have no trouble with the material. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 9 - play dumb)?'

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source. Example: 'Flight 553's crash was pilot error, according to the NTSB findings. Digging up new witnesses who say the CIA brought it down at a selected spot and were waiting for it with 50 agents won't revive that old dead horse buried by NTSB more than twenty years ago.' Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your ignore the issues and imply they are old charges as if new information is irrelevant to truth. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 10 - associate charges with old news)?'

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues. Example: 'Reno admitted in hindsight she should have taken more time to question the data provided by subordinates on the deadliness of CS-4 and the likely Davidian response to its use, but she was so concerned about the children that she elected, in what she now believes was a sad and terrible mistake, to order the tear gas be used.' Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your evade the true issue by focusing on a side issue in an attempt to evoke sympathy. Perhaps you did not know that CIA Public Relations expert Mark Richards was called in to help Janet Reno with the Waco aftermath response? How warm and fuzzy it makes us feel, so much so that we are to ignore more important matters being discussed. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 11 - establish and rely upon fall-back positions)?'

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues. Example: 'I don't see how you can claim Vince Foster was murdered since you can't prove a motive. Before you could do that, you would have to completely solve the whole controversy over everything that went on in the White House and in Arkansas, and even then, you would have to know a heck of a lot more about what went on within the NSA, the Travel Office, and the secret Grand Jury, and on, and on, and on. It's hopeless. Give it up.' Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your completely evade issues and attempt others from daring to attempt it by making it a much bigger mountain than necessary. You eat an elephant one bite at a time. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 12 - enigmas have no solution)?'

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact. Example: 'The news media operates in a fiercely competitive market where stories are gold. This means they dig, dig, dig for the story -- often doing a better job than law enforcement. If there was any evidence that BATF had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing, they would surely have uncovered it and reported it. They haven't reported it, so there can't have been any prior knowledge. Put up or shut up.' Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your backwards logic does not work here. Has media reported CIA killed Kennedy when they knew it? No, despite their presence at a courtroom testimony 'confession' by CIA operative Marita Lornez in a liable trial between E. Howard Hunt and Liberty Lobby, they only told us the trial verdict. THAT, would have been the biggest story of the Century, but they didn't print it, did they? Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 13 - Alice in Wonderland logic)?'

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10. Example: 'Since you know so much, if James Earl Ray is as innocent as you claim, who really killed Martin Luther King, how was it planned and executed, how did they frame Ray and fool the FBI, and why?' Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. It is not necessary to completely resolve any full matter in order to examine any relative attached issue. Discussion of any evidence of Ray's innocence can stand alone to serve truth, and any alternative solution to the crime, while it may bolster that truth, can also stand alone. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 14 - demand complete solutions)?

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place. Example: 'The cargo door failed on Flight 800 and caused a catastrophic breakup which ruptured the fuel tank and caused it to explode.' Proper response: The best definitive example of avoiding issues by this technique is, perhaps, Arlan Specter's Magic Bullet from the Warren Report. This was eloquently defeated in court but media blindly accepted it without challenge. Thus rewarded, disinformationalists do not shrink from its application, even though today, thanks in part to the movie, JFK, most Americans do now understand it was fabricated nonsense. Thus the defense which works best may actually be to cite the Magic Bullet. 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imaginative twisting of facts rivals that of Arlan Specter's Magic Bullet in the Warren Report. We all know why the impossible magic bullet was invented. You invent a cargo door problem when there has been not one shred of evidence from the crash investigation to support it, and in fact, actual photos of the cargo door hinges and locks disprove you. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 15 - fit facts to an alternate conclusion)?'

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
Example: 'You can't say Paisley is still alive... that his death was faked and the list of CIA agents found on his boat deliberately placed there to support a purge at CIA. You have no proof. Why can't you accept the Police reports?' This is a good ploy, since the dental records and autopsy report showing his body was two inches too long and the teeth weren't his were lost right after his wife demanded inquiry, and since his body was cremated before she could view it -- all that remains are the Police Reports. Handy. Proper response: There is no suitable response to actual vanished materials or persons, unless you can shed light on the matter, particularly if you can tie the event to a cover up other criminality. However, with respect to dialog where it is used against the discussion, you can respond... 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. The best you can say is that the matter is in contention ONLY because of highly suspicious matters such as the simultaneous and mysterious vanishing of three sets of evidence. The suspicious nature itself tends to support the primary allegation. Why do you refuse to address the remaining issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 16 - vanish evidence and witnesses)?'

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues. Example: 'There were no CIA drugs and was no drug money laundering through Mena, Arkansas, and certainly, there was no Bill Clinton knowledge of it because it simply didn't happen. This is merely an attempt by his opponents to put Clinton off balance and at a disadvantage in the election: Dole is such a weak candidate with nothing to offer that they are desperate to come up with something to swing the polls. Dole simply has no real platform.' Assistant's response. 'You idiot! Dole has the clearest vision of what's wrong with Government since McGovern. Clinton is only interested in raping the economy, the environment, and every woman he can get his hands on...' One naturally feels compelled, regardless of party of choice, to jump in defensively on that one... Proper response: 'You are both avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your evade discussion of the issues by attempting to sidetrack us with an emotional response to a new topic -- a trap which we will not fall into willingly. If you truly believe such political rhetoric, please drop out of this discussion, as it is not germane, and take it to one of the more appropriate politics NGs. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 17- change the subject)?'

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.' Example: 'You are such an idiot to think that possible -- or are you such a paranoid conspiracy buff that you think the 'gubment' is cooking your pea-brained skull with microwaves, which is the only justification you might have for dreaming up this drivel.' After a drawing an emotional response: 'Ohhh... I do seem to have touched a sensitive nerve. Tsk, tsk. What's the matter? The truth too hot for you to handle? Perhaps you should stop relying on the Psychic Friends Network and see a psychiatrist for some real professional help...'
Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You attempt to draw me into emotional response without discussion of the issues. If you have something useful to contribute which defeats my argument, let's here it -- preferably without snide and unwarranted personal attacks, if you can manage to avoid sinking so low. Your useless rhetoric serves no purpose here if that is all you can manage. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 18 - emotionalize, antagonize, and goad opponents)?'

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance. Example: 'All he's done is to quote the liberal media and a bunch of witnesses who aren't qualified. Where's his proof? Show me wreckage from flight 800 that shows a missile hit it!' Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You presume for us not to accept Don Phillips, reporter for the Washington Post, Al Baker, Craig Gordon or Liam Pleven, reporters for Newsday, Matthew Purdy or Matthew L. Wald, Don Van Natta Jr., reporters for the New York Times, or Pat Milton, wire reporter for the Associated Press -- as being able to tell us anything useful about the facts in this matter. Neither would you allow us to accept Robert E. Francis, Vice Chairman of the NTSB, Joseph Cantamessa Jr., Special Agent In Charge of the New York Office of the F.B.I., Dr. Charles Wetli, Suffolk County Medical Examiner, the Pathologist examining the bodies, nor unnamed Navy divers, crash investigators, or other cited officials, including Boeing Aircraft representatives a part of the crash investigative team -- as a qualified party in this matter, and thus, dismisses this material out of hand. Good logic, -- about as good as saying 150 eye witnesses aren't qualified. Then you demand us to produce evidence which you know is not accessible to us, evidence held by FBI, whom we accuse of cover up. Thus, only YOU are qualified to tell us what to believe? Witnesses be damned? Radar tracks be damned? Satellite tracks be damned? Reporters be damned? Photographs be damned? Government statements be damned? Is there a pattern here?. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 19 - ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs)?'

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications. Example: Jack Ruby warned the Warren Commission that the white Russian separatists, the Solidarists, were involved in the assassination. This was a handy 'confession', since Jack and Earl were both on the same team in terms of the cover up, and since it is now known that Jack worked directly with CIA in the assassination (see below.) Proper response: This one can be difficult to respond to unless you see it clearly, such as in the following example, where more is known today than earlier in time... 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your information is known to have been designed to side track this issue. As revealed by CIA operative Marita Lorenz under oath offered in court in E. Howard Hunt vs. Liberty Lobby, CIA operatives E. Howard Hunt, James McCord, and others, met with Jack Ruby in Dallas the night before the assassination of JFK to distribute guns and money. Clearly, Ruby was a coconspirator whose 'Solidarist confession' was meant to sidetrack any serious investigation of the murder AWAY from CIA. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 20 - false evidence)?'

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
Example: According to one OK bombing Federal Grand Juror who violated the law to speak the truth, jurors were, contrary to law, denied the power of subpoena of witness of their choosing, denied the power of asking witnesses questions of their choosing, and relegated to hearing only evidence prosecution wished them to hear, evidence which clearly seemed fraudulent and intended to paint conclusions other than facts actually suggested. Proper response: There is usually no adequate response to this tactic except to complain loudly at any sign of its application, particularly with respect to any possible cover up. This happened locally in Oklahoma, and as a result, a new Grand Jury has been called to rehear evidence that government officials knew in advance that the bombing was going to take place, and a number of new facts which indicate it was impossible for Timothy McVeigh to have done the deed without access to extremely advanced explosive devices such as available ONLY to the military or intelligence community, such as CIA's METC technology. Media has refused to cover the new Oklahoma Grand Jury process, by they way.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively. Example: The False Memory Syndrome Foundation and American Family Foundation and American and Canadian Psychiatric Associations fall into this category, as their founding members and/or leadership include key persons associated with CIA Mind Control research. Read The Professional Paranoid or Phsychic Dictatorship in the U.S.A. by Alex Constantine for more information. Not so curious, then, that (in a perhaps oversimplified explanation here) these organizations focus on, by means of their own "research findings", that there is no such thing as Mind Control. Proper response: Unless you are in a position to be well versed in the topic and know of the background and relationships involved in the opponent organization, you are not well equipped to fight this tactic.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes. Example: To distract the public over the progress of a WTC bombing trial that seems to be uncovering nasty ties to the intelligence community, have an endless discussion of skaters whacking other skaters on the knee. To distract the public over the progress of the Waco trials that have the potential to reveal government sponsored murder, have an O.J. summer. To distract the public over an ever disintegrating McVeigh trial situation and the danger of exposing government involvements, come up with something else (Flight 800?) to talk about -- or, keeping in the sports theme, how about sports fans shooting referees and players during a game and the focusing on the whole gun control thing? Proper response: The best you can do is attempt to keep public debate and interest in the true issues alive and point out that the 'news flap' or other evasive tactic serves the interests of your opponents.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes. Example: To distract the public over the progress of a WTC bombing trial that seems to be uncovering nasty ties to the intelligence community, have an endless discussion of skaters whacking other skaters on the knee. To distract the public over the progress of the Waco trials that have the potential to reveal government sponsored murder, have an O.J. summer. To distract the public over an ever disintegrating McVeigh trial situation and the danger of exposing government involvements, come up with something else (Flight 800?) to talk about -- or, keeping in the sports theme, how about sports fans shooting referees and players during a game and the focusing on the whole gun control thing? Proper response: The best you can do is attempt to keep public debate and interest in the true issues alive and point out that the 'news flap' or other evasive tactic serves the interests of your opponents.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health. Example: As experienced by certain proponents of friendly fire theories with respect to flight 800 -- send in FBI agents to intimidate and threaten that if they persisted further they would be subject to charges of aiding and abetting Iranian terrorists, of failing to register as a foreign agents, or any other trumped up charges. If this doesn't work, you can always plant drugs and bust them. Proper response: You have three defensive alternatives if you think yourself potential victim of this ploy. One is to stand and fight regardless. Another is to create for yourself an insurance policy which will point to your opponents in the event of any unpleasantness, a matter which requires superior intelligence information on your opponents and great care in execution to avoid dangerous pitfalls (see The Professional Paranoid by this author for suggestions on how this might be done). The last alternative is to cave in or run (same thing.)

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen. Example: Do a Robert Vesco and retire to the Caribbean. If you don't, somebody in your organization may choose to vanish you the way of Vince Foster or Ron Brown. Proper response: You will likely not have a means to attack this method, except to focus on the vanishing in hopes of uncovering it was by foul play or deceit as part of a deliberate cover up.

Note: There are other ways to attack truth, but these listed are the most common, and others are likely derivatives of these. In the end, you can usually spot the professional disinfo players by one or more of seven (now 8) distinct traits:

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within. I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

8) BONUS TRAIT: Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation: 1) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth. 2) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command. 3) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

I close with the first paragraph of the introduction to my unpublished book, Fatal Rebirth:
Truth cannot live on a diet of secrets, withering within entangled lies. Freedom cannot live on a diet of lies, surrendering to the veil of oppression. The human spirit cannot live on a diet of oppression, becoming subservient in the end to the will of evil. God, as truth incarnate, will not long let stand a world devoted to such evil. Therefore, let us have the truth and freedom our spirits require... or let us die seeking these things, for without them, we shall surely and justly perish in an evil world.

By H. Michael Sweeney

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-14T13:25:00.000-05:00

Consultants look at how to add MoPac lanes

One solution might be toll lanes added in middle near tracks.

By Ben Wear

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

http://www.statesman.com/search/content/news/stories/local/08/12mopac.html

Saturday, August 12, 2006

Consultants hired to figure out how to squeeze two more lanes onto MoPac Boulevard (Loop 1) say they'll likely unveil a tentative solution by December.

These fourth lanes on each side of what is currently a six-lane expressway probably would be open only to buses and cars equipped to pay tolls with electronic windshield tags, according to John Kelly, a consulting engineer hired by the Texas Department of Transportation to devise short-term and long-term improvements to MoPac.

Given the space constraints, Kelly said, the toll lanes probably would be segregated from the existing, free-to-drive lanes with painted stripes or perhaps with permanent, flexible pylons that bend back when hit by a car. The other lanes will remain free.

Kelly said the agency will hold two open houses in September to gather comments and ideas from the public before releasing the recommended design two or three months later.

If all goes as planned, Kelly said, the expansion, which would run from Town Lake to about Parmer Lane, could have federal approval by the end of 2007. At that point, construction would depend on the Texas Transportation Commission's setting aside money to do the project. To date, the commission has tended to look favorably on toll road projects.

Kelly, a former district engineer with the state Transportation Department who now works for DMJM Harris, said the design likely would involve moving the inner edge of the freeway toward the Union Pacific railroad track that sits in the highway median as far north as RM 2222 before crossing over east of the highway.

Engineers have little choice, given widespread and vocal community opposition about five years ago to plans at the time to widen the highway or build elevated sections.

"If you can't go out and you can't go up, you have to go in," Kelly said.

Kelly said the consulting team has met with Union Pacific to discuss how the highway might get some space while simultaneously leaving enough room for a second track to be added eventually for either freight service or passenger rail.

He said the design also will take into account the possibility of having a passenger rail station at 35th Street.

The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization board, which governs transportation planning in Central Texas, voted in 2005 to allow MoPac from Town Lane to Parmer to add a "managed lane" on each side, stipulating that the road could not be widened.

Managed lanes, in some projects, allow cars with multiple occupants to drive free along with those paying tolls.

But Kelly said that in this case, with no physical barrier separating the lanes and no toll booths, it may make sense to allow only transit vehicles and cars with toll tags.

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-11T15:13:00.000-05:00

Across the country, Americans fight to protect their property.

Will the Government Take Your Home?

From Parade Magazine http://www.parade.com/articles/editions/2006/edition_08-06-2006/AEminent_Domain
www.Statesman.com

By Sean Flynn
Published: August 6, 2006

Joy and Carl Gamble bought an English stucco house in Norwood, Ohio, in 1969. They raised two children there and worked seven days a week in their small grocery store to pay off the mortgage. “ We had the house fixed up just the way we liked it,” Carl says. “When we retired, we planned to sit down and enjoy it.”

But now the Gambles live in their daughter’s basement. Their house stands vacant in the weedy field that was their neighborhood—seized by the city and transferred to a developer who wants to build shops, offices and condominiums.

In Long Branch, N.J., Denise Hoagland, 39, has an endless view of the Atlantic Ocean from the cottage she and her husband, Lee, bought 13 years ago. Their garden blooms with so many flowers that their three daughters call home “the place where the butterflies fly.” But Long Branch wants to take their home and about 35 other properties so a developer can build luxury condos. “It’s theft,” Denise says. “It’s legalized theft.”

Technically, it is a forced sale, because the government has to pay for the property. And it is legal: In June 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that state and local governments can seize homes to make way for private development. The decision in Kelo v. City of New London triggered a sort of government land-grab.

In the one year since Kelo, more than 5,700 homes, businesses and even churches were threatened with seizure for private development, according to the nonprofit Institute for Justice (IJ), and at least 350 were condemned or authorized for condemnation. By comparison, about 10,000 were similarly threatened or taken over from 1998 through 2002.

Government always has had the power to force the sale of private property for public use—a process known as eminent domain. But what is “public use”?

Historically, it meant highways, railroads, schools and sweeping urban-renewal projects, such as the redevelopment of the Baltimore waterfront. But Kelo made clear that middle-class homes could be replaced with malls, offices, luxury homes—anything that might increase tax revenue.

“It’s a blatant example of reverse Robin Hood—taking homes from the poor and the middle-income and giving them to the rich,” says Scott Bullock, the IJ attorney who argued (and lost) Kelo.

“The fact is, a shopping mall does usually produce more taxes than a house,” says IJ attorney Dana Berliner. “An office building does produce more taxes than a church. But if that’s the rule—that anyone’s home can be taken away from them because something else will produce more taxes—then no one’s home is safe.”

But Kelo also has sparked a backlash. In the past year, more than two dozen states introduced or passed legislation and constitutional amendments to stop what critics call “eminent domain abuse.” Even the U.S. House of Representatives approved a bill aimed to restrict eminent domain. Residents also are fighting back through courts of law and public opinion.

In Norwood, the Gambles and two other property owners represented by IJ brought their case to the Ohio Supreme Court. (At press time, the court had yet to rule.) [See editor’s note below.] In Long Branch, two dozen residents, also working with IJ, are suing to stop their neighborhood from being replaced with 185 condominiums. And in Lakewood, Ohio, my hometown, the people of Scenic Park waged such a successful public campaign three years ago that voters spared their homes from being taken.

In each city, the process unfolded almost identically: A private developer, with the government’s backing, wanted a big piece of property—cliff-side homes with valley views in Lakewood, ocean-front cottages in Long Branch—and tried to negotiate deals with each owner. When some refused to sell, the cities threatened to invoke eminent domain to clear the holdouts.

In order to do that, however, city officials first needed to declare the neighborhoods “blighted.” But the legal designation of “blight” bears little resemblance to a commonsense definition. In Lakewood, for example, Scenic Park is a charming neighborhood of older, well-kept homes. But because they lack such modern touches as attached two-car garages and central air-conditioning, the city deemed them blighted—a standard by which more than 80 percent of Lakewood, even the former mayor’s home, would likewise be blighted.

“We always bit on the word ‘blight,’” says Julie Wiltse, 63, who helped neighbors distribute 20,000 fliers and sponsor a series of blight events: a Blighted Block Party, a Blighted Chili Cook-off, even a Blighted Groundhog Day (which predicted four more months of blight). TV cameras and newspaper reporters loved that stuff.

“We were very successful in explaining to the community, ‘If we’re blighted, you’re blighted,’” Wiltse says.

Likewise, the Hoaglands’ neighborhood in Long Branch isn’t “blighted” in any meaningful way. With one or two exceptions, it’s a few blocks of low-key bungalows where families have lived side-by-side for decades, even generations. The shabbiest touches, ironically, are the posters in nearly every home’s windows with the words “eminent domain abuse” inside a red-slashed circle and the several homes that have been bought by the developer and boarded up. What the area doesn’t have, however, are the $500,000 condos or the restaurants with $12 hamburgers that were built immediately south of the neighborhood.

“When they want to revitalize,” says William Giordano, 41, whose great-grandfather built his house, “suddenly we’re not good enough to live here.”

The city has put prices on the houses it wants to take: $400,000 for the Hoaglands’ house, $374,000 for Lori Ann Vendetti’s, $410,000 for the home her parents built across the street and $325,000 for Anna DeFaria’s tiny gray cottage. Those might sound like hefty sums, but not on the Jersey shore. “ I can’t get anything in Long Branch for three and a quarter,” DeFaria says, “let alone an ocean view.”

But what’s money? “The memories are here,” says Lori Ann Vendetti. “They can come in with a million dollars, two million—we won’t take it. A lot of people think we’re bluffing, that everyone has a price. The Vendettis don’t have a price.”

Neither do the Gambles. Most of the properties that the Gambles and their Norwood neighbors owned—6 9 out of 75—were sold to the developer, who was required by the city to pay at least 25 percent above market value. Three others later settled with the developer. Then the city used eminent domain to claim the last three, concluding that the neighborhood was deteriorating, based on a study that was paid for by the developer.

Tim Burke, a lawyer for the city, argues that the government had to clear the holdouts, especially because there were so many other property owners who had agreed to sell. “Would Norwood have used eminent domain if it had to acquire 69 of the properties? Clearly not,” he says.

As Burke explains it, Norwood is an old industrial town that lost its industry and a third of its population. The city needs to redevelop to generate new revenues, and clearly most of the Gambles’ neighbors weren’t opposed. “When you’re a community like Norwood, you’ve got to be concerned with the entire citizenry,” Burke says. “And, yeah, there are going to be instances where, in order to better the lives of the many, the property of the few will have to be taken.”

But what if you’re one of those few? “That this is happening here,” says Joy Gamble, “in the land ‘ of the people, for the people, by the people…’” The thought trails off, and she just shakes her head.

What You Can Do

Stay informed: Eminent domain projects usually are years in the making—but quietly and without public reference to “eminent domain.” Watch for words like “redevelopment,” says Scott Bullock, a lawyer with the Institute for Justice.

Make noise: March, rally, call local newspapers and TV stations. Try to turn community opinion to your side.

Ask for help: Several organizations may take your case for free. But even if you have to hire your own lawyer, you can fight City Hall.

Pester your state legislators now: Some states already have passed new rules that restrict eminent domain.

Fight for the best deal: If you simply cannot save your home, make it as expensive as possible. An analysis by The Cincinnati Enquirer revealed that owners in Norwood, Ohio, were paid on average twice the appraised value of their homes. However, the ones who fought got even more.

Editor’s Note

On July 26, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the city of Norwood can't use eminent domain to take Carl and Joy Gamble’s home solely for economic development. The United States Supreme Court had ruled previously that there is nothing unconstitutional about a government taking private property, with just compensation, solely for economic development but left it to state courts to decide whether such takings violated their own state constitutions. The Ohio Supreme Court further rejected Norwood’s claim that it also could use eminent domain to eliminate the Gambles’ neighborhood because it was a “deteriorating area.” The court ruled that the phrase “deteriorating area” was too vague—that it was, in effect, a standardless standard. The court ruling means the development group has to return the house to the Gambles. “Our state supreme court did what the the U.S. Supreme Court did not do: It protected our home,” Joy Gamble told reporters.

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-09T20:42:00.000-05:00

Port of Corpus Christi signs pact with Spanish firm to develop terminal

San Antonio Business Journal - 2:18 PM CDT Wednesday
http://sanantonio.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/stories/2006
/08/07/daily24.html

The Port of Corpus Christi plans to commit $83 million to develop a new container terminal along the Gulf Coast. The Port of Corpus Christi is in negotiations with Dragados-S.P.L. in Madrid, Spain, toward a definitive construction and long-term concession agreement for the La Quinta Trade Gateway Container Terminal.

The Port of Corpus Christi plans to secure the $83 million in funds from a range of sources, including project revenue bonds, state and federal grants, available cash, proceeds from the sale of general obligation bonds, private investors and federal loan programs.

Under this plan, the Port of Corpus Christi would own the terminal while Dragados-S.P.L. would manage it under a long-term partnership.
Dragados-S.P.L. has developed international port operations throughout Spain, South America, France, Portugal, Italy, Morocco, Chile, the Dominican Republic and China.

The company has operations in port operation, shipping, transit, combined transport and specialized logistics.

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-09T14:21:00.000-05:00

08.08.06 CorridorWatch.org

PRESS RELEASE - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Linda Stall 512.784.6539 (San Antonio)

HUNDREDS OF TEXANS ARE LOCKED OUT OF THE PUBLIC HEARING IN SAN ANTONIO

SAN ANTONIO - Apparently TxDOT didn't realize that San Antonio is the 2nd most populated city in Texas. In fact the Alamo city is. And TxDOT might take note that it is also the 7th most populated city in the entire United States. Really something we would have expected them to have already known.

Hundreds of Texans were unable to attend and participate in the TTC-35 DEIS Public Hearing held in a San Antonio high school on August 8, 2006. When the East Central High School Cafeteria reached it's 600 person capacity the doors were closed. Many of those left standing outside had driven great distances, some from as far away as Houston.

How did this happen? Was TxDOT unaware that metropolitan Bexar County's population had grown to near 2 million? Did they really expect that a meeting room with a 600 person capacity would be adequate, especially given the vigorous debate over the TTC and toll projects in Bexar County?

This stands in stark contrast to Temple, population less than 55,000. When a stunning 1,600 people showed up for the TTC-35 DEIS Public Hearing in Temple, TxDOT needed only add an additional 100 chairs to accommodate the crowd. And that wasn't the only big turn out by Texans who want to let TxDOT know what they think about the TTC. Waco attracted more than 1,000 and 700 in Floresville, a stones throw from San Antonio.

What were they thinking? Were they thinking? Some suspicious types might even suspect an evil plot designed to repel the thongs of unhappy citizens who or taking advantage of their right to express their unhappiness. Certainly people will give a second thought before drive to San Antonio if there's a chance they'll end up standing outside instead of listening and speaking inside.

CorridorWatch.org however is more inclined to suspect it was just horribly poor planning. The kind of planning we fear will be commonplace with the massive Trans Texas Corridor project that's currently being designed in secret without coordination with regional transportation planners or meaningful citizen review and comment.

Of course TxDOT will hold an additional Public Hearing in San Antonio in an attempt to reach those who were turned away. Will they move to a larger facility where everyone, even if there's more than 600, can be assured that they can get inside the building? No they won't.

The next San Antonio DEIS Tier One Public Hearing will be held on Thursday, August 10, 2006, again at the East Central High School cafeteria, 7173 FM 1628, San Antonio, Texas. The meeting room will open at 5:00 p.m. for open house style displays and discussion with a formal presentation beginning at 6:30 p.m., followed by oral comments from the public.

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-08T17:05:00.000-05:00

Is the Trans-Texas Corridor I-69 really on it's way?

Here's a picture our friend Nate* took today. They had these about every five miles up and down Hwy 183 and Hwy 77 down around the valley. The last one came from his photo shop. And here's a link that you can go to for a look at their bigger plans.
http://www.texansagainsttolls.net/nasco.html

Pictures by Nate*

What concerns us is that the required TX-DOT public hearings are not over.

TX-DOT has made very little, to almost none, of this information about the roads they plan to build and the hearings available to the public when requested via the open records act.

They plan to remove farmers and ranchers from their land using eminate domain laws in HB 3588, and HB 2702.

As far as we know there has never been an election anywhere to decide that we want to build these routes, or that we want to have Trans-Texas Corridors for Texas.

And, Governor Rick Perry has signed an agreement with a Spanish corporation CINTRA, which to this day remains unavailable to the public for review.

Pictures by *Atten: Nate at GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

George Eliot GeorgeEliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-07T21:03:00.000-05:00

Editorial on Tolls in Austin is Timeless

Here's a letter to the editor that I found from two years ago when CAMPO voted to implement a toll road system on Austin roadways. It is timeless in it's message, so I'm reprinting it here.

http://www.bizjournals.com/bizwomen/
austin/content/story.html?id=986530

Feeling the heat from tolls

Editor:

If there's an ounce of dignity and integrity, and the need to do the right thing, we must speak out against the Central Texas toll road plan. Contrary to the propaganda slung by the governor, the Capital Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Texas Department of Transportation and other special-interest entities, the toll plan is not in the best interest of Texans.

The majority of Texas residents do not want toll roads. However, officials (elected and otherwise) continue to push aside the will of the people they serve. Any reasonable person must be able to see that toll roads merely are another form of regressive taxation. While we're told that there are options in place for those who do not want to pay the tolls, the reality is quite different.

All Texas consumers will pay tolls, whether they use the toll roads or not. We will all pay tolls many times over in purchasing goods and services from businesses that will use the toll roads. Inevitably, businesses pass along such costs to their consumers. In addition, many of the roads slated for tolls already have been paid for with tax dollars. How many times should we pay for the same road?

Toll roads are nothing more than special-interest profiteering.

The toll plan should be eliminated, because the people of Texas don't want it. Special-interest officials must not determine the direction of our transportation needs. Texans must decide what is in their own best interests -- or at least the plan should be part of a public referendum.

Peter Stern, Driftwood

George Eliot georgeeliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-08-05T19:04:00.000-05:00

SUBMIT COMMENTS AGAINST CORRIDOR NOW!
A Report on the Central Texas Trans-TX Corridor Hearings
by Susan Garry

TAKE ACTION NOW!

Even if you have objected to the Corridor in the past, send comments in
again now. You can repeat your past objections and/or add new ones. It is
important to get these objections on the official record, which will be
reviewed by the Federal Highway Administration. This may not have an impact right now, but it is important to have these objections on the record, for future efforts.

You do not have to go into detail. You do not have to know everything that
is in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. You can simply say that you are opposed to the Corridor, and then add any specific objections that you
want.

Please mail your comments before August 21 to:

Mr. Ed Pensock, Jr., PE
Director of Turnpike Corridor Systems
Texas Dept. of Transportation
P.O. Box 14707
Austin, TX 78761-4707

You can comment online at www.keeptexasmoving.org. Click on the blue “public comments on TTC-35.” Then fill out the fields and click the “no action
alternative.”

REPORT ON CORRIDOR HEARINGS

To: Coupland Anti-Corridor/Rail Expansion (ACRE) email group
August 3, 2006

The hearings in Central Texas are finished; the schedule now moves to South Texas. Linda Curtis of Independent Texans and Linda and David Stall of
Corridor Watch continue to present the anti-Corridor position throughout the
state at as many hearings as possible, supplemented by local volunteers.

A HUGE THANK YOU TO OUR ACRE PEOPLE WHO CAME OUT TO THESE HEARINGS!

It is hard to get out to an evening hearing, but so many of our group did.
Most of our area people attended the Taylor hearing, but some were at
Georgetown, and several were at Manor. It was uplifting to see so many
friends and neighbors.

The Waco hearing saw 1,000 attendees. The Blackland Coalition folks were
determined to beat that record at the Temple hearing, and they did, with
1,600 attendees.

The Manor hearing had about 200 attendees; about 11 people there supported the Corridor. Everyone who spoke was against it. All the candidates who spoke at the Manor hearing opposed the Corridor, including Fred Head, Democrat for State Comptroller; Rock Howard, Democrat for State Senate; Ted Ankrum, Democrat for U.S. Congressional District 10; and Michael Bednarik, Libertarian for Congressional District 10.

Also speaking were Fancy Fairchild and James Shive, who heads up the fight against tolls on U.S. 290 East (Keep290Free.com), and Mary Anderson, co-director of Texans Against Tolls.

Barbara Samuelson, who opposed Krusee in the Republican primary, and who is a filmmaker, was outside the hearing filming people’s comments against the Corridor for her Trans-Texas-Corridor documentary.

AGAIN, PLEASE SEND IN YOUR OBJECTIONS AND ASK FOR THE NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
BEFORE AUGUST 21.

Atten: Susan Garry at TexansAgainstTolls@yahoo.com

George Eliot georgeliot2009@yahoo.com
www.TexansAgainstTolls.com

2006-08-04T15:14:00.000-05:00

HANK GILBERT, Candidate for Ag. Commissioner Has Better Solution

While out on the road this past few weeks, I've been going to the TX-DOT hearings for NEPA--National Environmental Protection Act, to find out what the local people, the farmers, and ranchers are saying about how the Trans-Texas Corridor will impact their lives, their businesses, and their environment. I've been there to learn, to listen, and to meet folks who see lots of problems with this proposed (1200+ ft.) over sized pork trough, and to find out who's running for office that might offer some solutions.

As I consider myself to be an independent voter, trying not to endorse one party over another, I just look for the best qualified candidate who will work for the best interests of the people of Texas. At some of the hearings I met, and heard speak, a fellow named Hank Gilbert, Democratic Candidate for Agriculture Commissioner, who clearly says in his speeches "No Toll Roads, and No Trans-Texas Corridor, and No (NAIS)---National Animal Identification System." Folks are saying there are other good reasons he may make a good Agriculture Commissioner.

Hank Gilbert's Republican opponent, Todd Staples authored the Trans-Texas Corridor legislation (HB 3588) along with some other not-so-honest guys that will make sure YOU drive home on a toll road. From the way the testimony is going at the TX-DOT hearings, no one wants the toll roads, or the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC), or the abuses of eminate domain that the bill packs with it. Imagine paying more than $18/day just to drive to and from work. And, believe me, folks in the rural areas have a lot of expensive driving to do these days.

But, that's the Staples and Perry TTC plan for transportation, to take it out of the hands of Texas families who have owned it for generations, and to long-term-lease this big tract of Texas land to a private corporation, part of it originating in Spain (CINTRA-Zachery).

Here's more of what Hank Gilbert is saying, and Fred Head, Candidate for Comptroller of Public Accounts Agrees!

Toll Roads cost too much, do too little.

Family farms torn apart by the hundreds of thousands of acres changed from agriculture to toll roads.

Increases property taxes for everyone in the State of Texas. Toll roads destroy the existing taxable land, driving up taxes for everyone whose land isn't taken by the State for the TTC.

Roads will be leased by a foreign company (CINTRA) with questionable finances for their exclusive benefit.

If the tolls don't pay enough to CINTRA, then Texas taxpayers will bear the burden.

Land for toll roads will be taken from private property owners, destroying family farms and residences in their path.

Toll roads will hurt small businesses who can't afford to relocate or pay a massive concession to CINTRA.

TTC will destroy agriculture, one of the backbones of the Texas economy, by making it impossible for farmers and ranchers to obtain financing.

Hank Gilbert, Democratic candidate for Agriculture, says his solution is better. He proposes:

Widen existing federal highways with federal dollars.

Keep existing business in our towns and cities alive.

Destroys no farmland since the right of way is already owned by the State

No tolls required.

Safer and better for the environment.

www.HankGilbert.com

'Ol George

Feel free to reeducate me if you disagree at georgeeliot2009@yahoo.com
http://www.texansagainsttolls.net

2006-08-03T15:27:00.000-05:00

Lockhart Post-Register Reports --

http://www.post-register.com/index.php?Name=Home

Strayhorn Speaks out on Trans-TX Corridor

I attended this TX-DOT hearing in Lockhart on Monday, and one in Gonzales on Tuesday, where Carole Strayhorn spoke. Click here and you might be able to download a rough clip of her live speech.

Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwVPkP9eEsQ

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSjWItz_bXA

I scanned the article from the Lockhart Post-Register. Attached. Sounds like the Mayor and Mr. Morris Alexander and Dorothy Schulle and Kathi Bliss have an agenda.

N. Thomas / Aug. 2, 2006

George Eliot
georgeeliot2009@yahoo.com
www.TexansAgainstTolls.com

2006-08-02T13:44:00.000-05:00

NAFTA "Superhighway" Spells the End of NAFTA Countries Manufacturing Alliance
http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=2508
William R. Hawkins
Tuesday, July 18, 2006

“HIGHWAY OF DEATH” FOR NAFTA

There has been a flurry of media reports about what has been dubbed the “NAFTA Highway,” a corridor of both highways and railroads running through Mexico and into the American Midwest. Interstate Highways 35, 29 and 94 are central to this transportation network and the key terminal is an “inland port” in Kansas City, Missouri.

Many of the reports have sought to reopen the debate over the North American Free Trade Agreement, which allowed many U.S. factories to relocate to Mexico, laying off thousands of American workers and replacing them with much cheaper labor south of the border. Some reports have taken an alarmist tack, claiming that further economic integration of the United States and Mexico would lead to a political union that would open America to mass migration and political corruption on a scale that would destroy U.S. institutions, culture and sovereignty.

In actuality, the new energy being put into expanding the transportation network from Mexico into the United States heralds the collapse of NAFTA, and further discredits the trade strategy followed by the administrations of George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

NAFTA was enacted in 1993. The main public arguments put forward by its proponents were that it would open Mexico to more U.S.-made exports and that Mexico, with the addition of new, American-owned factories, would become an export platform permitting American firms to compete in markets throughout the world. (It was also supposed to halt illegal immigration and illegal drug transhipment – but that’s a subject for another column.)

Since the Mexican economy was only five percent the size of the American economy, our export opportunities were limited by the lack of purchasing power to the south. The real interest of the business groups that pushed NAFTA through Congress was to combine cheap Mexican labor with American capital and technology to improve competition with overseas rivals – for shares of the American market. At the time, Japanese firms, which had located factories in other Asian countries with cheap labor, were thought to be the main rivals. Yet China was already looming, unrecognized, over the horizon.

Two of the most vocal proponents of NAFTA testified to this effect before the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade on September 11, 1997. C. Fred Bergsten and Jeffrey Schott, of the Institute for International Economics, stated, “The United States sought to increase its imports from Mexico as a result of NAFTA. In particular, we wanted to shift imports from other countries to Mexico – since our imports from Mexico include more U.S. content and because Mexico spends much more of its export earnings on imports from the United States than do, say, the East Asian countries.” The higher U.S. content in imports from Mexico was the result of sending components from American factories to Mexican factories for assembly into products that are then exported back to the United States.

Such imports from Mexico grew rapidly (while Mexico never emerged as the “export platform to the rest of the world”), and there was congestion in the US-Mexican transportation system as a result. But that is not what is driving the NAFTA superhighway activity now, over a dozen years later. The North America’s SuperCorridor Coalition (NASCO) was formed in 1994 to lobby for government funding for improvements in the multi-modal U.S.-Mexican transportation system. But over half the money it claims to have raised has come since 2003. In 2005, the Kansas City “SmartPort” received $4 million for highway corridor projects, plus another $500,000 earmark from Sen. Jim Talent (R-MO) to further develop the capabilities of the inland port to process a greater volume of international trade. Additionally, the first steps to establish a Mexican customs office at the Kansas Smartport were taken last year. And it wasn’t until last December that the Texas Transportation Commission opened negotiations with a the Spanish-led Cintra consortium to start the first phase of a $7.5 billion, 800-mile corridor from Oklahoma to Mexico that would parallel Interstate 35.

Upon closer examination, something other than the “success” of the NAFTA model, as sold to the American voter, is propelling all this transportation and Smart Port activity – and that is the massive wave of imports from the previously unrecognized export superstar, China. U.S. west coast ports are swamped with container ships filled with Chinese goods, and a scramble is on to find new Pacific ports to bring even more Chinese products into the United States. Container ship traffic from China is growing at a rate of 15 percent a year. Between 2003 and 2005, annual imports from China increased by $92.2 billion, and from other parts of Asia by $41.0 billion. (So much for NAFTA allowing American firms to compete more effectively with the Japanese.)

The Hong Kong-based shipping company Hutchison Whampoa and retail giant Wal-Mart are partners in a new $300 million expansion of Mexico's Pacific port of Lazaro Cardeñas to increase its annual handling capacity from 100,000 containers to 700,000 containers initially, with possible expansion to two million containers by the end of the decade. Hutchison Whampoa is run by billionaire Li Ka-shing, whose business empire is closely aligned with the Beijing regime.

In April, the American Chamber of Commerce in Guangdong, China conducted seminars to promote Lazaro Cardenas as a destination for good shipped from Chinese ports. At the Mexican port, shipping containers are loaded onto the Mexico–U.S. rail line operated by Kansas City Southern Railroad de Mexico. The containers do not clear U.S. Customs until they reach San Antonio. On October 24, 2005, the San Antonio Business Journal reported on a new agreement signed by U.S. and Mexican officials to allow for the movement of air, rail and ground cargo, through Mexico into the United States via KellyUSA – the industrial park created at the former Kelly Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas. The report noted that the cargo would originate “principally from Asia and South America” – not Mexico.

Also in April a group of major shipping and freight companies announced that they are eying Punta Colonet — located about 150 miles south of Tijuana — as a site to develop a 27,000-acre, multibillion-dollar deep-water port. Punta Colonet would initially handle one million containers a year, with capacity to handle as many as five million in five years. Included would be transshipments from Los Angeles and Long Beach, which would take advantage of the new northbound transport routes to avoid the congestion in California. The project includes a 93-mile, two-way railroad to Mexicali, east of Tijuana, over the desert and through the Juarez mountains. The rail line would link to Calexico, better known as Imperial Valley, from where products would be redistributed throughout the United States.

Another deep water port just north of Lazaro Cardenas is Manzanillo. Situated between Acapulco and Puerto Vallarta, it caters primarily to cruise ships and tourists. But NASCO includes it in its future plans to expand trade shipments.

While American-based manufacturers will continue to suffer under the barrage of Chinese goods, Mexican industry and the hope of economic development south of the border will be smashed flat by what should be called a new Chinese Silk Road rather than a NAFTA highway. The goals of NAFTA for North American economic integration and development are being abandoned. The effect of expanded and modernized Mexican ports linked to the U. S. Midwest by new express routes is to allow China to jump over Mexico, kicking it in the face as it passes by.

Over 600 maquiladoras, the assembly plants that sprang up along the U.S. -Mexican border to take advantage of NAFTA, have relocated to China, leaving 250,000 unemployed Mexican workers behind. Chinese interests also own factories in Mexico, which assemble imported components, rather than locally sourced parts, into products than are then exported to the United States. The new trade routes will allow these plants to expand at the expense of their competitors. In 2003, China passed Japan as the second largest exporter of goods, primarily components, to Mexico, behind the United States.

Chinese consumer goods also fill Mexican stores. The traffic in Mexican ports are as one-way as in American ports. In 2004, Mexico imported $9.1 billion worth of good from China, but sold China good worth only $1.9 billion in return. This deficit is similar to the U.S. trade ratio with China, which saw only $41.5 billion in exports against $244.6 billion in imports last year.

A fatalism has crept into Mexico, paving the way for acceptance of the new Chinese-focused investment in infrastructure. “Mexico had been the Number Two supplier to the U.S. [after Canada] within the context of the North American Free Trade Agreement” recalls Raul Rodriguez Barocio, manager of the North American Development Bank (NADB) in Mexico. “However, in 2003, Mexico was displaced by China and seems to have lost that position forever,” he laments. For Mexican industrialists, the Chinese invasion has been devastating, particularly for labor intensive industries such as footwear, toys, and garments. There is little chance for Mexican wages to rise if at $1.50 an hour they can be undercut by Chinese labor at 50 cents an hour, with the products rushed from Asia into the North American market.

Mexico has filed over 90 complaints against China at the World Trade Organization and has imposed anti-dumping duties. Mexico was the last country to approve Beijing’s membership in the WTO, fearing what China would do if given a “level playing field” subject only to its own mercantilist devices. But these efforts have been to no avail. Simon Levy-Dabbah, a foreign trade professor at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, epitomizes the defeatest attitude south of the border when he says that Mexican industrialists must get over their hatred and accept that China is “the factory for the world.” He suggests that Mexican firms form joint ventures with Chinese business, “The Chinese only care about having their goods arrive into the United States. So what is needed now is for products from China and other Asian countries that do not have the required free trade agreements, to be able to use Mexican preferential tariffs to enter these markets.” In other words, if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em and hope for some small share of the spoils.

Charlie Banks, president of R. L. Banks & Associates, a transportation consulting company in Washington, told the L. A. Times (June 20) that Mexico is repositioning itself in a world in which its manufacturing base is eroding and its labor is considered relatively expensive by Asian standards. Part of that repositioning, Banks said, is as a logistics and supply chain corridor for goods heading to the United States. But “lift that bale, tote that barge” labor moving Chinese goods to Kansas will not enrich either Mexico or the United States, as real national wealth comes from production, not mere transport.

NAFTA was sold not just on the basis of trade, but as a means to lift Mexico out of poverty and to help establish democracy by creating a more affluent, optimistic polity. Such a development would improve U.S. security by fending off political radicalism and lessening the exodus of illegal immigrants. The same arguments were made last year during the debate over CAFTA, with the added note that an expanded trade bloc could protect regional industry from Chinese competition. As Rep. Bob Inglis (R-SC) said on the House floor during the CAFTA debate, “I stand here convinced that it is the best strategy available to combine with our neighbors to the south to compete with the Chinese.”

The new transport plans make a mockery of these arguments, as they are being constructed purely to help China improve its competitive advantage over all North and Central American commercial rivals. What is being built is truly a “Highway of Death” for both NAFTA and CAFTA. The resulting turmoil in the region will be felt in the United States, and will be an additional benefit to Beijing as the rising geopolitical challenger to American power.

It is well past time to rethink the sophistry of "free trade" with China. Instead of spending billions of private and public funds aiding Chinese traders, a major effort should be launched to rebuild and expand the production base of North America. A key part of that effort would be to renegotiate NAFTA to create a true trade bloc that would drive Chinese goods off the continent, rather than into its heartland.

William R. Hawkins is Senior Fellow for National Security Studies at the U.S. Business and Industry Council.

George Eliot georgeeliot2009@yahoo.com
www.TexansAgainstTolls.com

2006-07-29T13:05:00.000-05:00

CorridorWatch.org Files Formal Complaint Against Tx-DOT re. TTC-35

PRESS RELEASE - IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CorridorWatch.org FILES FORMAL COMPLAINT AND COMMENTS

Appearing in Dallas last night, CorridorWatch.org (an Trans Texas Corridor watch-dog group) filed formal comments and complaint with TxDOT with regard to TTC-35.

The full text of the formal written comment can be found at:http://www.corridorwatch.org/ttc/pdf/NEPA_DEIS_TTC35_27JUL2006.pdf

[ Text of oral comment follows ]

ORAL COMMENTS & TESTIMONY

TIER ONE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TTC-35 PUBLIC HEARING

DAVID K. STALL, CORRIDORWATCH.ORG

JULY 27, 2006, DALLAS, TEXAS

MY NAME IS DAVID STALL AND I AM COMMENTING ON BEHALF THE MORE THAN 5,000 MEMBERS OF CORRIDORWATCH WHO LIVE AND/OR OWN LAND IN 186 TEXAS COUNTIES INCLUDING ALL 38 COUNTIES WITHIN THE PREFERRED CORRIDOR AND REASONABLE CORRIDOR ALTERNATES.

TxDOT HAS FAILED ITS NEPA MANDATE TO ALERT AND INFORM THE PUBLIC OF THEIR PLANNED ACTIONS.
INSTEAD OF INFORMING THE PUBLIC OF POSSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES, TxDOT IS BOMBARDING THEM WITH A MARKETING EFFORT DESIGNED TO SELL THE CORRIDOR SCHEME. ANY CRITICAL OBSERVATION OF THE CORRIDOR IS MET WITH A SWIFT TxDOT REBUTTAL.

UNDER THE LEADERSHIP AND DIRECTION OF THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TxDOT HAS FAILED THE NEPA MANDATE OF A CAREFUL AND INFORMED DECISIONMAKING PROCESS CONDUCTED FULLY AND IN GOOD FAITH.

THE INTENTIONAL OMISSION OF, AND SECRECY OF, PROJECT DESIGN DETAILS CONTAINED IN THE CINTRA ZACHRY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THWART A REASONABLY COMPLETE DISCUSSION OF THE PROJECT. WITHOUT THAT INFORMATION THE PUBLIC IS UNABLE TO ADEQUATELY EVALUATE THE SEVERITY OF POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS. SUCH OMISSION UNDERMINES THE “ACTION-FORCING” FUNCTION OF ACT.

RATHER THAN SHARING INFORMATION AND COLLABORATING WITH REGIONAL AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS TxDOT HAS BEEN INSTRUCTED TO SHUN THOSE THAT THE CHAIRMAN HAS IDENTIFIED AS WORKING AT CROSS-PURPOSES.

ACTIONS BY TxDOT TO QUELL UNWELCOME INPUT AND COMMENT ON TTC-35 MAKE A MOCKERY OF THE NEPA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY PROCESS.

COMMUNITIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE CHASTISED AND REBUKED FOR ATTEMPTS TO ADVANCE ANY ALTERNATIVE TO THE SINGULAR PLAN ADVANCED BY THE GOVERNOR AND HIS APPOINTED COMMISSON.

IT IS UNACCEPTABLE THAT THIS COMMISSION ACTS TO RETALIATE AGAINST COMMUNITIES, ORGANIZATIONS AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVE BECAUSE THEY OPPOSE TTC-35, A PLAN THAT IS ITSELF A MATTER OF PUBLIC DEBATE.

CORRIDORWATCH IS STUNNED AT THE THREATS AND COERCION CAST UPON PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHO DEVEATE FROM THE PREORDAINED PROGRAM.

THE COMMISSION HAS CREATED A CLIMATE OF INTIMIDATION THAT MAY MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO RECEIVE VALUABLE COMMENTS, INPUT, OR ALTERNATIVES FOR FEAR OF REPRISAL.

CHAIRMAN WILLIAMSON SAYS THAT HE WILL NOT TOLERATE THE KIND OF AD HOC INPUT THAT THIS VERY PROCESS IS DESIGNED TO SOLICIT.

HIS INTENT IS TRANSPARENT AND THE MESSAGE IS LOUD AND CLEAR – SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP.

AS A RESULT THE INTERFERENCE BY THE COMMISSION IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR TxDOT TO COMPLY WITH NEPA AND CEQ REGULATIONS.

THROUGH THEIR ACTIONS THE COMMISION HAS REJECTED THEIR DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY UNDER THE ACT. THEIR ACTIONS HAVE NULLIFIED THE PROTECTIONS THAT THE CITIZENS OF TEXAS ARE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE UNDER STATE AND FEDERAL LAW.

DESPOTISM HAS BECOME THE NEW MANAGEMENT CULTURE AT TxDOT.

BASED ON THIS AND THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE TIER ONE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY THE DECISION SELECTED MUST BE THE NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE.
David Stall can be reached for comment at the above email address, or at # 832-984-4314, or 512-791-4628

George Eliot georgeeliot2009@yahoo.com
www.TexansAgainstTolls.com

2006-07-28T20:33:00.000-05:00

A GOOD Sign: YOUNG PEOPLE Speaking up & Weighing in

From a PERRY stronghold today..

At least this young AGGIE (article below) has attempted to assess the transportation problems in the part of the world that he now occupies (TAMU) and react to his perception of the needs of Texas citizens.. UNLIKE the plans of the "head cheerleader" of the TTC, RICK PERRY to serve gigantic multinational special interests & his own BIG political ambitions. The young man does not have all of the facts about the "self contained" nature of the TTC vehicle/truck corridor designed with service stations, eating facilities, etc. within the corridor. But, it is heartening to see a QUESTIONING of the TTC from the younger generation. The 50 & 99 year terms of some of the contracts others signed with CINTRA make the TTC a threat for ALL generations!

In the interest of "fair and balanced coverage" I am also including a TTC article from a senior writing in the Daily Texan on Wednesday.

There is a public awakening taking place across the State as the Hearings finally allow CITIZENS to focus on the TTC issues. As ABRAHAM LINCOLN said "To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men". The issues and principles involved are so much more important than "building political party power" with a misplaced allegiance to the top of the ticket. PERRY is actually doing harm to his party in Texas and to ALL Texans with the secretive decisions & alliances he is ramming down our throats.

Martha Estes bentfork@pdq.net Citizens for a Better Waller County http://www.wallercountycitizens.org/

Perry's transportation idea has merit but overlooks key issues

Chad Stoermer - The Battalion

By: Andrew Burleson

7/27/06 Section: Opinion

© 2006 The Battalion Online http://media.www.thebatt.com/media/storage/paper657/news/2006/07/27/Opinion/
TransTexas.Alternative-2134674.shtml?sourcedomain=www.thebatt.com&MIIHost=
media.collegepublisher.com

Texas is facing a significant turning point. Gov. Rick Perry has called for the State to build a massive network of freeways with freight rail, commuter rail, utility lines, communication towers and oil and natural gas pipelines all concentrated into a single route. This massive corridor is intended to meet the future transportation needs of the state, which is expected to increase dramatically in the next 50 years.

Texas highways are already packed with cars and trucks, and gridlock strangles our major cities day and night. While the lofty goals of Perry's transportation program are admirable, the program has been met with opposition. In fact, all of Perry's opponents in the November elections are vehemently opposed to the plan.

Critics suggest that the corridor won't even require trucks to stop for customs at the border, but rather will operate as an "EZ-Tag"-style terminal, tracking shipments to central depots in Kansas before subjecting them to any examination. Of course, the trucks will have to exit the freeway numerous times to stop for gas before they could reach Kansas, and who is going to supervise the trucks there?

The route will do little to ease congestion in the cities. By looping 30 to 50 miles around every major metropolitan area, passenger vehicles are unlikely to find the corridor very practical. The suggested speed limit of 80 miles per hour is supposed to lure drivers to the alternative route, but how many Texans are going to want to drive an extra hundred miles and pay tolls the entire way just so they can avoid a bit of traffic?

Another problem with the plan is its rail component. Although a comprehensive high-speed rail system would be an economic boon, and being able to take a high speed train from San Antonio or Austin to Dallas could definitely reduce the number of passengers on I-35, it is doubtful that many people would want to drive 50 miles to the train station and rent a car at their destination, when they could just as easily fly or save money driving the whole way.

These challenges render the entire idea of the multi-modal corridor useless. Instead, the state needs to consider a different approach, routing different uses in different directions.

The most promising component of the plan is the freight rail. The freight rail could work as planned, but it would be even more effective if it was coupled with a system of spurs for freight trucks to transfer cargo on the final leg of its journey from an intermodal depot to the destination city. By picking up cargo in Laredo or McAllen and shipping it to Texarkana or Denton, countless freight trucks could be diverted from the interstate. Not only could this save the state a massive amount of money, but less land could be taken. Better, safer service could be provided using less fuel and generating less pollution and noise.

The passenger rail should also go directly to and from city centers. Texas could build high-speed rail networks through the medians of existing freeways, or over abandoned freight and utility lines. Austin and San Antonio have already been planning a connection using old right of way, which is currently underutilized. Coupling this with an investment in local level light rail and commuter trains could generate huge savings, reduce environmental impact and generate thousands of jobs. Not only could this offer rapid service between city centers (new trains can operate as fast as 300 mph) but would also give passengers safer, more affordable ways to travel. With an average of 43,000 Americans dying every year in automobile accidents, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, now is the time to invest in safer transportation modes.

More congestion relief could be provided in the form of smaller regional bypasses, such as Austin's SH-130. That toll road is being built away from the major commuter destinations and will have limited entry and exit points in a deliberate effort to limit development on the bypass. By connecting to I-35 on either side of Austin, but running only slightly east of the city, travelers not intending to stop have a superior option to pass through the most congested parts of the existing freeway, without needing to add significant mileage to their trip.

Finally, to improve connectivity through areas currently underserved by infrastructure, an improved network of state highways a SH-21 from Bryan to Caldwell could be built with bypasses around the busier towns along the route. Divided roads offer improved safety (which the Texas Department of Transportation claims is their primary concern) without mandating excessive taking of property or cutting off current property owners. Taking the example of SH-6, roads like this can be expanded over time as traffic counts justify increased capacity, rather than sinking billions of dollars into roads, which will be virtually unused for an entire generation.

It's time for the governor to consider a Trans-Texas alternative, investing in multiple modes of transportation but routing them separately to fit the strengths and weaknesses of each transport type.

7/25/06

A Trans-Texas Horror

By Karl-Thomas Musselman The Daily Texan Columnist
http://www.dailytexanonline.com/media/storage/paper410/news/2006/07/25/Opinion/A.TransTexas.Horror-2134019.shtml?
norewrite200607282136&sourcedomain=www.dailytexanonline.com

There is an issue in Texas quietly building steam in what could be a major campaign theme in this fall's elections for governor and the state agricultural commissioner.

It's an issue that has folks in rural Texas feeling the pain of Native Americans centuries prior. It's an issue that has farmers and ranchers readying their pitchforks. And it's an issue that has some of the most conservative counties in the state upset with Republicans they used to consider defenders of free men on the range.

The issue is the Trans-Texas Corridor, a 4,000-mile, $183-billion plan proposed by Republicans and promoted by Gov. Rick Perry as the 50-year solution to Texas' traffic needs. The routes span the state, snaking across central and eastern Texas, connecting Laredo to Oklahoma and Arkansas. Future routes could bring in an East-West line from El Paso or others up through the Panhandle.

Each corridor could contain up to four trucker lanes, six vehicle lanes, six rail lines and a 200-foot utility path. At its maximum size, each TTC could be 1,200 feet wide, consuming up to 9,000 square miles of land, more than exists in all of New Jersey.

These massive property and investment requirements give rise to much of the objection from rural landowners. Cutting through countless farms and ranches and looping around suburbia will be a path wider than the distance between Austin's Congress and First Street bridges. One could set the entire state Capitol inside of the right of way.

An unsettling vision, landowners will be faced with inaccessibility to land split on opposite sides of this monstrosity. The state would ideally pay fair market value for the 5.7 million acres wanted for construction, but as with any mu-nicipality, the "lowest" fair market value will likely be found.

Thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, any acreage desired from particularly cantankerous landowners can also be taken via eminent domain. The Texas Legislature did pass a bill granting protections to Texans from excessive abuses of eminent domain in the wake of that ruling, but it made a convenient exception specifically for the TTC.

For localities, any land consumed by the TTC disappears from the tax rolls, hitting small rural communities the hardest. Proponents claim that new business growth around interchanges and the corridor will offset that.

Unfortunately, primary TTC users will be transporting goods, not buying them. The frequency of off-ramps will likely be less than that for traditional highways, allowing for fewer business opportunities. The few ramps that will exit the TTC will be surrounded by land owned by the management company, Cintra Zachry.

Any commercial value that land will have will belong to Cintra Zachry, not the rural communities torn apart by the TTC. They won't see a string of gas stations and IHOPs as doing much to replace the revenue, character or community lost to this multi-billion-dollar boondoggle.

There are other facets of the project that are unsettling as well. While the Texas Department of Transportation has worked around historic lands or sensitive properties before, there is no law to guarantee that old community cemeteries won't be paved over or that historic buildings won't meet the bulldozer.

Add to that the fact that the presumptive private construction partner Cintra Zachry is an overseas firm based in Spain. Just as security-oriented citizens were unsettled by Dubai running American ports, many are cautious about having a foreign firm build a transportation network connected to Mexico. It only amplifies conservative concerns about border issues and immigration, though in truth, the TTC does not create any new border crossings.

The most unsettling thing about the project is that the terms are sealed, unreadable by the public. Texans have no way of knowing who will ultimately pay for the inevitable cost overruns, nor do they know what will happen when the actual revenues from the TTC are lower than the estimates used to secure the financing. Who will pay for that: the private management company or Texas taxpayers?

Already, 186 of Texas' 254 counties have made their disagreements with the plan public record. Both the Texas Democratic and Republican Party platforms officially state their opposition to the TTC. Every candidate for governor is in opposition to Perry on the issue. The TTC has even shaped up to be the prime topic in the otherwise quiet race for agricultural commissioner between state Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, who co-sponsored the TTC legislation, and Democratic candidate and farmer Hank Gilbert, who opposes it in any form.

Headed to November and through the next decade, the Trans-Texas Corridor will likely become an issue that is, pardon the pun, as big as Texas.

Musselman is a government senior.

George Eliot georgeeliot2009@yahoo.com
www.TexansAgainstTolls.com

2006-07-22T17:53:00.000-05:00

Bosque County Says ‘NO!’ To Corridor

Reproduced from http://www.cliftonrecord.com/news.asp?iArt=3
July 21, 2006

By David Anderson
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
CLIFTON — An estimated 400-plus packed the Clifton High School cafetorium Wednesday evening to issue a resounding “no thanks” to the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 running through Bosque County. An open house and public hearing hosted by the Texas Department of Transportation and the Texas Transportation Commission ran into unanimous opposition locally, and citizens almost as strongly opposed the entire project statewide.

TxDOT Turnpike Division Project Manager Jack Heiss served as the evening’s moderator, and presented an overview of the project. However, the citizens who testified at the hearing seemed to already be well-educated on the subject.

Bosque County Judge Cole Word opened the public testimony by reading a resolution passed last year by Bosque County Commissioners’ Court. Word emphasized the court still opposes the project, whether it comes through the county or not.

Verlie Edwards, chief of staff for District 58 State Rep. Rob Orr, spoke for the legislator, urging TxDOT to “listen closely, and slow down the process so all options are explored.” From there, the elected officials gave way to speakers from the general public, who one by one pled for the project’s elimination.

“No one has been able to give me a list of benefits of the corridor to Bosque County. I don’t believe it exists,” John Faubion said to applause from the crowd.

John Campbell asked anyone in the crowd of over 400 who supports the project to identify themselves, if they weren’t too afraid to.

No one stood, to laughter from the crowd.

As to the alternative route that could slice Bosque County in half, many pointed to the effects it would have on the landscape.

“Our rolling wooded hills, valleys, the abundant wildlife, the fertile soils. The attractions that brought the settlers here in 1854 remain the very essence of the county today,” Walt Lewis said.

“We’re known as the Top of the Hill Country,” Morgan Mayor Pro-Tem Keith Vandiver said. “Bringing the corridor through here would mean blasting the tops of many of our mesas. We don’t want to become known as the Flat-Top of the Hill Country.”

Jamie Finstad wanted to know what the state believes is “just compensation” for taking land and memories that has been in his family for 150 years.

“I wonder where all the wildlife that’s being displaced will go, and I wonder why we’re all in such a hurry,” Finstad continued.

“If we give it up (the land) now, it’s gone forever, and they’ll just want more later on,” Carl Aspen said.

“We haven’t adjusted yet to the second stop light in our county,” Judge Word jokingly remarked. “We’re not for one inch of the Trans-Texas Corridor in Bosque County. If we wanted to live in the Metroplex, we’d move there. We don’t want the Metroplex brought here.” Several spoke to the corruption they believe underlies the Trans-Texas Corridor, and the lack of legislative action to end the project.

“Do you believe in communism or dictatorships? That’s what we appear to be headed for,” Sam Wells told the panel receiving the comments. “I hope TxDOT feels like General Custer, because the public is like Sitting Bull’s tribe, and we’ll do what we need to stop this. We won’t stand for somebody taking our land.”

“I’m appalled the state legislature has not stopped this. Our legislators have yet again turned a blind eye to the needs of this district,” said former Clifton Mayor W. Leon Smith.

“It gives me heartburn to think we’ll build a toll road and send the money to a company in Spain,” said David Pieper, adding that the state is diverting billions of dollars that should be earmarked for transportation improvements to other uses.

“This is not progress,” said Martha West. “It’s prostitution of our great state, and with filthy money.”

Aspen, who said he spoke with a TxDOT official before the public hearing, was not surprised at a comment he received.

“He told me, ‘We don’t want to hear, “Not in my back yard.”’

“Of course, he also told me the corridor won’t affect him where he lives,” Aspen added.

Many testifying suggested that, if the infrastructure is built, the name should be changed. Suggestions ranged from “The Corridor of Regret,” to the “Trans-Texas Horror-Door,” to “Ben Dover.”

Other concerns centered on the facilities being outdated before they are finished, especially considering quantum leaps in technology from year to year.

“It’s like trying to build a better manual typewriter,” Smith told the commission.

While many of those who spoke addressed generations of families that have lived in the county who will lose land should the corridor be brought through, others told of being proud transplants to the county, including Ron Harmon, Les Bowers, and David Anderson.

One by one, most of those testifying put the onus on the state’s legislators. Many said it was past time to send them comments. Most said it was time to send them home by voting them out in the next election.

“House Bill 3588 passed, effectively, unanimously, so they all need to go,” said Linda Curtis, founder of Independent Texans. “We need to get organized, and tell them where to put this corridor.”

Harmon agreed, saying Texas needs to get rid of any politician who supports or does not specifically oppose the TTC.

TxDOT’s officials remained after the public hearing to answer questions, but most of the crowd began filing out of the cafetorium as the public testimonies came to end, apparently having heard enough.

George Eliot georgeeliot2009@yahoo.com
www.TexansAgainstTolls.com

2006-07-21T18:44:00.000-05:00

Australia has some Lessons for us IF we heed their Cautionary Tale

ON LINE opinion - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Open up tunnel deal

By Tristan Peach
Posted Tuesday, 27 June 2006
For a democracy to function effectively, citizens must do more than just vote in elections.

A democracy, just like an economy, works best when citizens are active participants in the decisions that affect their lives.

The increased use of public private partnerships (PPPs) to deliver government infrastructure is presenting significant challenges to our democratic systems. Recent PPP ventures in Sydney and Brisbane have excluded the community from key parts of the decision-making processes.

In Sydney, the Carr State Government developed, negotiated and signed the contract for the controversial Cross-City Tunnel behind closed doors.

Only after the tunnel opened did the public find out how high the tolls were, that surface roads could be closed to "funnel" traffic into the tunnel, and that the private operator could sue the government if public transport improvements led to a loss of revenue.

Without citizen involvement in the PPP process, the interests of shareholders triumphed over the interests of the public.

And to further blur the line between private and public interest, soon after Bob Carr resigned as NSW premier he went to work for Macquarie Bank, a company involved in huge public private partnerships all over the world.

In Brisbane, Lord Mayor Campbell Newman recently signed the contract for the North-South Bypass Tunnel during a private press conference.

The contract locks Brisbane people into a 45-year agreement with the RiverCity Motorway consortium, which is promising shareholders a 6 per cent return on investment before the tunnel is even built.

The public will not see the contract before financial close, which is expected in early July.

To be fair, Brisbane City Council has provided the public with information on the North-South Bypass Tunnel over the past two years.

But it is worrying and unfair that the public are being excluded from the most important part of the decision-making process. The contract is where the rubber hits the road for this tunnel proposal, which has changed drastically since Newman proposed it in his 2004 election platform.

Secrecy was partially justified during the tendering stage because it allowed council to have the upper hand in negotiations between the two competing consortiums.

But once RiverCity Motorway was chosen, there was no longer a need for secrecy. Since then council has selectively released information regarding the contract.

The Lord Mayor has promised that there will be no onerous conditions in the contract and reassured us this won't be a repeat of the Cross-City tunnel disaster. But given the Lord Mayor's track record on promises and honesty, I think we have reason to be worried. In 2004 Newman promised us a $2 toll for the tunnel, which has risen to $4.10. More recently he told us that the tunnel would cost "$2 billion plus", but later revealed that this actually meant $3 billion plus.

And in May The Courier-Mail revealed that there are clauses in the contract that will give the council financial incentives to funnel traffic into the tunnel.

The Cross-City tunnel contract in Sydney includes similar profit-sharing agreements between government and the private sector.

It is certainly in the interests of the Lord Mayor and RiverCity Motorway to keep the dirty details of the contract secret until it is too late.

But ratepayers already have paid more than $83 million for the tunnel, will pay another $54 million this financial year, and will contribute $292 million for construction costs in the future. The community is a huge financial shareholder in this project, and we must ensure that a deal is made that promotes the public interest.

Therefore I call on Brisbane City Council and the RiverCity Motorway consortium to release the tunnel contract for 20 days of public scrutiny prior to financial close.

This is not an unreasonable request in an advanced modern democracy. If it is in the public interest then there should be no problem in releasing it for a brief period of public scrutiny.

First published in The Courier-Mail on June 19, 2006.

Tristan Peach lives and works as a part-time lecturer and tutor in urban and regional planning at the Queensland University of Technology. He is a member of Brisbane Group, Communities Against the Tunnels. He does not own a car and walks, cycles and uses public transport for most trips.

George Eliot georgeeliot2009@yahoo.com
www.TexansAgainstTolls.com

2006-07-21T18:24:00.000-05:00

Here is the latest reality on Texas Condemnation law. As you can see, it changed in 2004 because of a ruling by the Texas Supremes.

March 3, 2006 http://www.txfb.org/ Texas Farm Bureau

(It is in the ARCHIVES part of the website.)

Landowners have few options in condemnations

By Bobby Horecka
Field Editor TEXAS AGRICULTURE [Texas Farm Bureau publication]
Texas landowners don't have many options when it comes to protecting their property when governments begin talking eminent domain.

Not, at least, until state laws regarding those issues are better defined by the state legislature, said Judon Fambrough, private property advocate with the Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University.

Traditionally, Fambrough said, local, county and state governmental entities were required by the interpretation of the law to offer landowners a "fair market value" for any property they intend to claim by means of eminent domain.

But all that changed on July 2, 2004, when the Texas Supreme Court issued its ruling in the Hubenak v. San Jacinto Gas Transmission Co. case.

"That one case threw out all incentives to receive fair market value. Period," Fambrough said. "For one, it removed several key restraints in the condemnation process that were favorable to landowners. But most of all, it changed how the process of the law worked when dealing with such cases."

In all cases dealing with condemnation proceedings, a basic three step process is involved: 1) the entity wanting the land must negotiate for its purchase; 2) if negotiations fail, they may go before a three-person appointed commission for a ruling; and 3) if parties are still unhappy with the result, the matter goes to a trial situation before a judge and jury.

Prior to 2004, most cases that made it to the third level in the process were often sent back to step one, Fambrough said, which forced the governmental body to come up with a better offer to the landowner.

But that changed with the Hubenak case. The courts ruled that "the condemnor's offer generally should not be scrutinized or compared with other indications of value." In essense, any offer made by the condemnor satisfied the letter of the law.

It also forced the burden of proving the land's worth to the landowner, not the condemnor.
"This is the only matter in civil law that I am aware of where the burden of proof lies with the defendant," Fambrough said. "You, as the landowner, must prove that the offer you were given is inadequate."

What that means for the landowner is that they must obtain—at their own expense—an independent appraisal of the land, and in so challenging, also pick up the tabs of legal representation, he said.

"Even if you win, the courts ruled that you cannot collect any additional amount to cover attorney fees and court costs," Fambrough said, adding that it can often cost as much to defend a piece of property as it is worth.

In real terms, that means if a governmental entity opts to condemn a piece of property that is actually worth $2,000 an acre, Fambrough said, there is no incentive for them to offer much more than $1,000 on the property.

"It will cost you at least $1,000 to prove them wrong," Fambrough said, "And they know it."
Several private property advocates, including Texas Farm Bureau, are working on legislation to change the letter of the law, but at least for the next couple of years, Fambrough said, that is what landowners will face until the law is changed.

Fambrough suggests landowners come to the commission hearings well prepared to make their case, as the costs of going to step three are prohibitive. He also suggested working agreements into the land's purchase that allow the landowner access to the property until the project is actually begun, which can prolong farming, ranching and even recreational uses.
These are the articles on the webpage.

Here are all the water articles.

The LINK for ALL Water Rights Issues Publications is
http://recenter.tamu.edu/pubs/pubssearch.asp?TID=47&AID=&TYP=18&STX

Water Rights
"Water Pressure: Below the Surface of GCDs"
(Gilliland) No. 1770, $5. Tierra Grande reprint, 4 pp. (2006).
"Water Power"
(Gilliland, Robertson & Cover) No. 1691, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 3 pp. (2004).
"Groundwater Leases: What Texas Landowners Should Know"
(Fambrough) No. 1628, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 3 pp. (2003).

Secrets for Negotiating Texas Groundwater Leases
(Fambrough) No. 1593, $5. Technical report, 12 pp. (2002).
"Drilling for Minerals"
(Fambrough) No. 1534, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 1 p. (2001).
"Liability for Flooding Neighbor's Property"
(Fambrough) No. 1509, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 1 p. (2001).
"Texas Surface Water: Ownership and Uses"
(Fambrough) No. 1508, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint (2001).
"Rural Water: Plan Before You Plat"
(Gilliland) No. 1499, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 2 pp. (2001).
Texas Water Law: The Next Century
(Johnson) No. 1469, $3. Special report, 29 pp. (2001).
"Water Stored Underground: Who Owns It?"
(Fambrough) No. 1458, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 2 pp. (2001).
"H20 Pollution Solution"
(Gilliland) No. 1442, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 2 pp. (2001).
"Who Owns Groundwater?"
(Fambrough) No. 1377, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 4 pp. (2000).

"Got Water? Tapping a New Texas Market"
(Gilliland) No. 1357, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 3 pp. (2000).
"Dam the Reservoirs, Full Speed Ahead"
(Gilliland) No. 1341, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 5 pp. (1999).
"Before the Well Runs Dry"
(Gilliland) No. 1270, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 4 pp. (1999).
"Texas Water Code: Brief Shower Creates Storm"
(Fambrough) No. 804, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 1 p. (1990).
"Use Not Automatic: Ownership Governs Water Rights"
(Fambrough) No. 715, $2.50. Tierra Grande reprint, 4 pp. (1989).

George Eliot georgeeliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-07-19T15:40:00.000-05:00

Attorney general's map gives Travis County three Republican incumbents in Congress

State's map would strip Doggett of Democratic base in county.

Reproduced from Statesman.com

By Laylan Copelin, Tara Copp
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Friday, July 14, 2006

Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican, offered a new congressional map today that would strip U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, of his Democratic base in Travis County and split the county among three Republican incumbents.

The U.S. Supreme Court last month overturned one border district, saying it discriminated against 100,000 Latinos because heavily Latino Laredo was split between that district and another one. The court required parties to the redistricting lawsuit to submit suggested fixes to a panel of three federal judges.

The state's map is just one of several expected to be filed today, but it likely will get serious consideration by the court because it represents the state's position.

"The state's map is a map that Tom DeLay would be proud of," said Ed Martin, a Democratic redistricting expert, referring to the former U.S. House majority leader who engineered the 2003 re-mapping of Texas that cemented Republican control of the state's congressional delegation.

The map splits Travis County among U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio; Henry Bonilla, R-San Antonio; and Michael McCaul, R-Austin.

Doggett would be left with some difficult choices. He could run against Smith, who would inherit a large chunk of Doggett's Democratic base in Travis County. Or, as Abbott seems to suggest Doggett could run in his redrawn district, which would stretch from Caldwell County to the border.

Abbott, in the brief, defended the map, saying the Caldwell-to-the-border district includes many of the voters Doggett now represents.

Doggett was not immediately available for comment. But Martin said Texas Republicans are trying to silence Travis County Democrats.

"This is trying to split the most Democratic urban county in Texas among three Republicans," Martin said. "It is essentially to deny a voice for the Travis County majority."

The state's map also fuses Laredo back into a single district, which would run west to El Paso. Rep. Henry Cuellar, the Democrat whose district now runs from Laredo north to San Antonio, would be able to run in that new district.

Abbott's press secretary Jerry Strickland objected to calling the state's map Abbott's map.
"It's our client's map," Strickland said.

He said Gov. Rick Perry, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and Speaker Tom Craddick, all Republicans, are Abbott's clients in the lawsuit.

But Strickland refused to say who actually drew the map or approved it before Abbott filed it today.

Although the Republican members of Congress said they were working through the attorney general's office, not all of them might be happy with the final map filed by Abbott.
Bonilla was making "very last minute" considerations on whether to submit his own proposal instead, said spokeswoman Brittany Eck. His office wasn't ready to comment on the state's map.
"It's so up in the air right now," Eck said.

lcopelin@statesman.com

George Eliot georgeeliot2009@yahoo.com

2006-07-18T13:50:00.000-05:00

What I said in Hillsboro at the TxDot Hearing

July 13, 2006 Hillsboro TxDot meeting re: TRANS TEXAS CORRIDOR-35

Amidst all this talk of projected growth rates and traffic congestion on our local roadways, you would think that these fine people from TxDot might better spend their time and talents addressing these issues, not trying to build a NAFTA super highway. We need upgraded roadways and we need better-designed cities with creative solutions to the very real challenges we face from growth. Problem is, solving the day-to-day travel problems of most Texans is NOT what the TTC is all about. It just isn't.

This is not primarily about passenger cars or even viable public transportation. It is not about moving people to and from their jobs or getting your kids to school safely. It just isn't. This whole Corridor principle is about relieving congestion at our seaports resulting from the massive influx of products from Asia. Containers packed in Shanghai will be brought by boat to Mexican ports to be loaded onto trucks that will barely slow down at the Texas border on their race to the new SmartPort in Kansas City....from there to be distributed throughout our country and into Canada.This is the FedEx hub model gone Global. This is about global trade and the ONE MILLION acres of Texas land alone that will be required by this project. That is 146 acres for every mile of roadway. To these road-builders, our towns and rural communities, our lakes and rivers, our ranches, farms, woodlands and prairies are of no importance. We are just in the way of some urban planner's concept of "progress". Some new vision of what Texas ought to look like. We must be mollified first and removed next. This hearing is part of that process.

The Trans-Texas Corridor will not enrich the lives or the economics of ordinary Texans. It will simply move goods faster, not PEOPLE, and certainly not people just trying to get to work or to school. This is a very limited-access roadway and you will only be able to cross it every 50 miles or so. Towns will be carved up. Water sources will become increasingly polluted and scarce. Fertile farm and ranch land will be lost forever to miles of asphalt and security fences. This is not about helping US, the folks who live and work in Texas today, it just isn't.

Even the road itself would be operated by a foreign company. CINTRA, headquartered in Spain, has already paid the State of Texas 7.5 Billion dollars just for the right to run this road project. Use eminent domain to acquire land from Texans to lease to a foreign company to generate revenue. Is this even legal? We must all contact our elected officials and tell them we are not interested in giving up our state to this super-highway. Write letters to your local newspapers. Talk to your neighbors. Call for a statewide VOTE on this project. They cannot do this without Texas land and the cooperation of our state and local officials. We are the Gateway to Mexico and if this Corridor concept does not succeed here, it will not happen. What we stand to lose in community integrity, air and water quality is just not worth cheap goods from China. Texas is better than this.

Stop this project now or watch Texas morph into something you and I will no longer recognize as our home. Stand up, stand together and speak out. Let our "leaders" know what WE want and replace them if they don't listen. There is power in numbers. Let's USE that power.

- Susan Cook

2006-07-17T18:43:00.000-05:00

North American Union Superhighway

July 13, 2006 -- Last week, WMR reported on the close ties between the American Trucking Associations (ATA), extreme right-wing neo-confederate movements, and key members of the Bush administration, including Dick Cheney Chief of Staff David Addington and former Bob Dole chief aide Jim Whittinghill. It is now being reported that George W. Bush's top pick to replace outgoing Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta is none other than former Kanasas GOP Governor Bill Graves. Graves has told the ATA that he does not plan to leave his current job.

Graves will benefit from Bush North American Union initiatives whether he remains at ATA or moves to Transportation Department.

Not surprisingly, Graves, who hails from a wealthy Midwest trucking family, became the President of the American Trucking Associations in 2003 after leaving the Topeka governor's mansion. Graves has been a major fundraiser for Bush and the Republican Party. It is no coincidence that Graves and his trucking interests will greatly benefit from the construction of a major superhighway from the Mexican border, through Texas, Oklahoma, and his native Kansas, to the Canadian border. That superhighway, which is attracting major Saudi and Chinese investments, will serve as a linchpin in the creation of the corporate-controlled "North American Union," a contrivance that will further erode democratic government. WMR has been told about the secretive North American Union plans by individuals associated with the traditional Democratic and Republican parties. The recent theft of the election in Mexico by Felipe Calderon's wealthy supporters and the accession to power of Stephen Harper's Tory government in Canada, both accomplished with the help of GOP and Democratic Leadership Council operatives from the United States, are also intended to spur along the North American Union agenda.

Information from www.WayneMadsenReports.com

www.NASCOCorridor.com

2006-07-10T16:56:00.000-05:00

The standard justification for tolls is that the state of Texas has run out of money for roads and can't raise the gas tax. Therefore, private industry is invited to build new capacity, using private capital. If the roads are successful the capitalists will earn profits. If the roads are losers the capitalists lose money.

But, Texas is dealing with phony capitalists who use public money - yours - to earn their profits. If the roads they build are losers, they are likely to walk away and let you take the hit.

Cintra-Zachry will borrow federal funds to build SH 130 S. They will also borrow some money on the open market but those bonds will be senior to the federal bonds. (The private "investors" are all but guaranteed that they can't lose a penny.)

I assume that all of the interest will be tax-free. That's not the end of it. Congressman Lamar Smith requested and received federal grant money for SH 130 S (which isn't even in his district (!) or the CAMPO area.)

US 183A also received federal loans (and state and local grants) and I suppose every CTRMA project will, if any more are built. The question is, if CTRMA and private companies can get federal loans, why can't TxDOT? A 1 cent local increase in the state gas tax, dedicated to retiring the bonds, would suffice to build everything we need toll-free. Another penny would keep the new roads maintained.

- Vince May

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/
localnews/stories/062305dnmetcintraloan.36c03c5e.html

Texas Corridor Developer Now Seeks Public Funding
Deal had been sealed largely on plan to use private money

09:30 PM CDT on Wednesday, June 22, 2005
By TONY HARTZEL / The Dallas Morning News
Cintra-Zachry, the consortium that won a $7.2 billion development deal from the state for the first part of the Trans-Texas Corridor largely because it said it would use private money on the massive project, is looking for public funds to help subsidize the corridor's first segments.

The partnership has filed a letter with the Federal Highway Administration stating its interest in applying for a $320 million low-interest loan. If approved, it would help pay for the estimated $1 billion, 42-mile State Highway 130 extension from south of Austin to Seguin that the company identified as a potential corridor project in its letter to federal officials.

For months, state officials have touted the Trans-Texas Corridor as a way to get 316 miles of needed toll roads and rail lines built from North Texas to San Antonio without the use of public funds. And when the state and Cintra-Zachry signed the deal March 11, Gov. Rick Perry's office issued a news release saying that the construction would be done "at no cost to taxpayers."

"I believe we always said state dollars" would not be used, said Texas Department of Transportation spokeswoman Gaby Garcia, drawing a distinction between federal and state money. "At the time Cintra-Zachry came on, we looked only at [whether there would be] the inclusion of state dollars. That's how we defined it."

In December, Cintra-Zachry officials outlined some of their financial and development plans for the corridor, which prominently included private funding for the public project.

José López, director of Madrid, Spain-based Cintra's U.S. and Latin American operations, said at the time that federal loans, known as Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act loans, could be used. The loans are used to entice public and private investment in major transportation projects.

"This is part of our normal research in preparing for any eventuality to get needed roads built more quickly," Rossanna Salazar, a spokeswoman for Cintra-Zachry, said Wednesday.

Cintra teamed with San Antonio-based Zachry Construction Corp. and other firms to design and build the corridor project.

If Cintra-Zachry's federal loan request is eventually approved, it would mark only the second such loan given to a private entity for a large road project. An Australian firm received a $140 million loan for a toll road project near San Diego that broke ground in 2003.

Not surprised
Kathy Walt, spokeswoman for Mr. Perry, said he was not surprised that Cintra-Zachry would have to seek innovative forms of financing to help it build billions of dollars of new highways. The request is not a reversal of any of the consortium's previously stated goals about using private funds, she said.

"I disagree that the perception is any different here," Ms. Walt said. "A loan is a loan. It's not a grant, and it will be paid back with interest."

Still, the news that any government money could be used on the project dismayed some state leaders.

"This is the first we've heard of them essentially seeking tax money for the project," said Mike Sizemore, press secretary for Sen. Ken Armbrister, D-Victoria, who has publicly questioned the corridor project. "The whole thing is, it was touted as using private funds."

So does a low-interest federal loan use public money? It can be viewed both ways.

Opponents argue that the funds are coming from the U.S. Treasury, which could use the money for other purposes.

"I didn't think the federal budget has enough money to loan right now," Mr. Sizemore said.

Loan's terms
Federal officials who oversee the program also pointed out that the loan would be repaid with interest. But the terms on such loans usually are favorable to the borrower.

In general, the terms of such loans allow for repayment over 35 years. A recent loan for a Louisiana project featured the government's 4.45 percent interest rate. The loans typically don't require payments to begin until the project is substantially complete, an important point for a proposed toll road that would not generate revenue until it was opened to traffic.

Because it is part of a separate funding program, the loan would not affect the amount of federal highway money Texas regularly receives.

In debating whether public funds are going toward the corridor project, the state Transportation Department also makes a distinction on State Highway 130 itself. Technically, Ms. Garcia said, it is not considered part of the corridor because it received federal approval for construction before the Trans-Texas Corridor development deal was awarded.

In addition, Highway 130 also may not have room for roads, rail lines and utility lines all in one place, one of the key selling points the state has touted.

"If the corridor never moves forward, Highway 130 would be built on its own," Ms. Garcia said. "130 is a stand-alone project from the corridor."

But when the corridor deal was announced in December, the Highway 130 project was the first of six potential road projects listed in a presentation as links in the corridor. In addition, a Federal Highway Administration lists the proposed project name as "Trans Texas Corridor (SH 130 Segments 5 & 6)."

Federal officials could notify Cintra-Zachry within a few weeks whether it can file a formal loan request.

"We know this project is needed," Ms. Garcia said. "We've got to make it happen. The question is how to finance it" with either state funds or a private development deal.

E-mail http://us.f544.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=thartzel@dallasnews.com

2006-07-10T16:27:00.000-05:00

The T-TC is a done deal for east Travis County, except for one aspect. Since SH 130, which is T-TC 35 through Travis County, has no room for T-TC auxiliaries like pipelines and rail, these facilities will probably be built somewhere between Manor and Elgin.

This should be the focus of any T-TC discussion in east Travis County. More farms will be cut up. More noise and air pollution will be created. Communities will become isolated.

The presentation must include environmental justice. People west of I 35 give us their landfills, prisons, tank farms and sewage plants. Now they want to give us their freight trains, too. We don't want them and won't tolerate new assaults on our way of life.

- Vince May

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/03/30rail.html

Spanish Road Builder Weighs In on Rail
Cintra-Zachry wants to spend $5 billion-plus on Dallas-to-Mexico freight line

By Ben Wear
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Thursday, March 30, 2006
Cintra-Zachry, the Spanish and American partnership already working with the state on a cross-state toll road, has offered to build a 600-mile, high-speed freight rail track from the Dallas-Fort Worth area to Mexico.

Numerous details remain to be worked out, including the route, and competitors (including any of the state's three major freight carriers) could in the end build the line instead. But Cintra-Zachry has offered to build a railway that could cost $5 billion or more, officials say, and open the line to any freight rail company interested in paying to use it.

The state's contribution to the project, as currently envisioned, would be to buy the right of way that the rail line — or lines — would pass through. And the state would pay the considerable expense of getting environmental clearance from the federal government. The project, officials said, would be built in the median or alongside the toll road that Cintra-Zachry is in the early stages of designing as part of the Trans-Texas Corridor.

It would also include what amounts to a giant loop around the Dallas-Fort Worth area, allowing cross-country freight to bypass the Metroplex' clogged rail system.

"We estimate that over 10,000 18-wheelers a day would be removed from the I-35 footprint," Texas Transportation Commission Chairman Ric Williamson said. In 2004, the highest Texas count for trucks on Interstate 35 was in Austin: 20,588 a day.

The proposal, as outlined by Texas Transportation Commission members Wednesday, would not require Union Pacific to remove any freight traffic from its track through the heart of the the Austin-San Marcos area. For years, transit advocates have been hoping that all or most of Union Pacific's two dozen or more daily freight trains could be routed around Austin, freeing up space on the line for passenger rail.

However, Williamson said companies such as Union Pacific, BNSF Railway and Kansas City Southern would no doubt be attracted to the line's anticipated top speed of 70 mph, considerably faster than existing routes. And, as proposed by Cintra-Zachry, the line would have no "at-grade" crossings — spots where cars and trucks have to drive over railroad tracks, allowing trains to maintain their speed.

"Common sense dictates that if Cintra-Zachry builds a high-speed rail line from Fort Worth to the Mexican border, all three railroads are going to be negotiating with them to locate their freight on that line," Williamson said.

Union Pacific, for its part, was noncommittal about what the proposed deal might mean to its Texas operations, or whether it would even be interested in paying to run freight on a Cintra-Zachry track.

"This is the first time we've heard about this proposal," said Joe Arbona, a Houston-based Union Pacific spokesman.

Several months ago, Union Pacific and BNSF signed agreements with the state to work to move the bulk of their freight operations out of urban centers.

Arbona cited five points in Union Pacific's agreement with the state, among them that relocation would be voluntary, that the railroads would pay only to the extent that it benefits them and that they would be involved in the planning. An agreement between the state and a third party — Cintra-Zachry — to build what amounts to a competing line throws those agreements into limbo.

"It's just going to take us a little time to work through this," Arbona said.

And there will be time, it appears.

The state is in the first stage of a two-step environmental approval process for the Trans-Texas Corridor segment paralleling I-35. The first step will take at least another 18 months, and the second stage two to five years. That means that work on the road, and the railway, could begin no sooner than late 2009. Who would build it, meanwhile, could be decided in only a year or two.

The Trans-Texas Corridor is the centerpiece of Republican Gov. Rick Perry's transportation policy for the state, and Perry is up for re-election. Given that, it was not surprising that politics entered into Wednesday's events.

Jim Dillon, an independent candidate for governor, repeatedly disrupted the Williamson's news conference, hinting darkly that the state was involved in creating concentration camps and was building the railroad mostly for WalMart and Halliburton.

Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, running for governor as an independent, released a statement saying Perry should not give the Spanish company control of another transportation project.

"Whether it is a foreign company running our roads, our rails, or operating our ports, it's wrong," she said.

In a statement, Perry's campaign fired back: "The Texas population is expected to double in the next 40 years and Gov. Perry has put forward a plan to address the transportation needs of Texas for the next century. Ms. Strayhorn, where is your plan?"

The rail proposal
What: 600-mile freight line from Dallas-Fort Worth to Mexico.
Who: Cintra-Zachry, comprised of Spanish toll road builder Cintra and Zachry Construction Co. of San Antonio.
When: Groundbreaking no sooner than late 2009.
Cost: $5 billion to $6 billion, not including right of way and regulatory costs to be borne by the state.
Worth knowing: Railway would have no at-grade crossings with roads and would allow steady speeds of 70 mph.