It About Love

Gov. Perry Signs Eminent Domain Bil

By KERA News & Wire Services (2009-06-15)


DALLAS, TX (KERA) - Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed a bill today that asks voters to amend the state constitution by limiting government's ability to take private property using eminent domain authority. If approved in November, the constitutional amendment would prohibit government officials from taking property and giving it to a private developer to boost the tax base

All Votes Aren’t Equal: Texas Credentials Report Cites Evidence of Procedural Irregularities

This is part of a multi-part series. See Daily Kos and Texas Campaign 2008 for the first part of the series.Crossposted on DAILY KOS
By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - August 12, 2008
I just received a copy of the 2008 Texas Democratic Convention Credentials Committee's report from TDP Staffer Jim Boyton. The summary is below:

STATEMENT ON RULES AND PROCEDURES
The Committee heard heart-felt, dispiriting testimony from witnesses representing hundreds of challengers about improprieties at many county/senatorial district conventions. Even though the Committee could not always ascertain the factual predicate necessary to divine a remedy that would deny the fruits of the wrongdoing to the violators without harming the effort of welcoming participation by tens of thousands of new Democrats and beginning the healing process, the Committee implores the Party to take stringent steps to prevent recurrence of the following types of infractions:
• Abandoning the convention leadership’s responsibility to ensure credentials go only to those properly elected at the precinct conventions below as properly reflected on the precinct convention minutes returned in a timely manner;

• Allowing participation by alternates or visitors in the voting in precinct caucuses or the voting on the floor of the convention;

• Not recognizing delegates on the floor to challenge the approval of the nominating committee’s nominees for4 delegate-at-large without allowing individual challenges;

• Having one person serving in multiple positions, e.g. Chair of the Tabulations Committee, Rules Committee and Credentials Committee simultaneously as well as adopting and enforcing special rules;

• Claiming to suspend the rules or adopting special rules under the rubric of Robert’s Rules of Order in order to operate in direct violation of the Rules of the Texas Democratic Party;

• Holding joint conventions of different senatorial districts within a county, including joint Nominations or other committees;

• Not appointing members of the Credentials or other committees at the time and in the manner prescribed in the rules, including not in open meetings or not properly balanced;

• Ordering precinct conventions to be ignored and to be reheld without proper factual basis found by the appropriate authorities and without opportunity for sufficient notice to all potential precinct voters;

• Not having the precinct convention minutes and all exhibits made available in a timely manner to anyone wanting to use those materials for supporting any Democratic candidates;

• Not addressing the time frame for the credential verification and challenge processes so that those matters can be resolved sufficiently in advance of the opening of the conventions to avoid long delays in the convention before conducting their other business.

The Preamble of the 2008 Credentials Committee Report to the SDEC and Texas Democratic State Convention addresses the expectations of the 2.8 million Texas primary voters:

PREAMBLE
On March 4, 2008, some 2.8 million Texans exuberantly turned out to select the leaders that they wanted to carry forward the Democratic banner in the fall election. These people cast their votes to restore the levers of government in our county and state to those dedicated to implementing policies and democratic values in the best interest of all Americans.

An unprecedented million or so of those voters also participated in their precinct conventions in hopes of helping the presidential candidate of their choice obtain the Democratic nomination to lead that campaign in the fall. Those Democrats rightfully expected the convention process at both the precinct and the county/senatorial district convention levels to be conducted fairly and openly in accordance with the rules and laws applicable to the most important of all rights – the right to vote.

Acknowleding that many of the conventions were conducted fairly, they stated:

For the most part, the conventions were able to conduct their important business with due respect for the rules and the rights for all involved. The conventions did so in spite of the unprecedented numbers of participants, the vast majority of whom had never participated in their conventions beforehand, and cumbersome or arcane rules and procedures. The amazing success of the conventions is due to the dedication, patience and good faith of the scores of thousands involved.

They attributed some of the problems to:

However, constraints of time or facilities, misunderstanding of the rules, miscommunication between the people involved, or occasionally excess zeal in trying to advance the cause of a particular presidential candidate, caused improprieties or mistakes to be made in the process.

The Preamble explains the importance of the Challenge Process:

The Democratic Party devised the rules after decades of experience where those in positions of power often overrode the rights of others, sometimes even of the majority. The rules are designed to give everyone a fair opportunity to participate and any transgression of those rights, regardless of how well intentioned or innocent the cause of the transgression, is a serious matter. For that reason the Party has established the challenge process over which this Committee has been deliberating these past three weeks.

The committee acknowledged that they did not remedy all the challenges they affirmed and they did not enforce the rules to the fullest extent:

This report contains the recommendations of the committee to the SDEC as how to resolve all of the challenges that came before the Committee. The Committee recognizes that these recommendations do not always enforce the letter of the rules to the fullest. This is done consciously and advisedly.

Apportioning presidential delegates at the convention creates disunity:

In the heat of the convention process, where those supporting competing candidates vie for delegates, passions run high and feelings are often injured.

This year the high turn-out of convention attendees further exacerbated the divisions among Texas Democrats:

The unique obstacles created by trying to accommodate such unprecedented participation in inadequate facilities in such a short time for planning often exacerbated the sense of injury.

The Challenge Process is designed to facilitate healing among Democratic Convention participants:

The Committee strongly believes that it is crucial to our common pursuit of success in the fall elections to use the resolution of these challenges to commence the healing of those bruised feelings and the coming-back together of the factions. For that reason, the Committee suggested that the local participants involved always try to reach a mutual accommodation amongst themselves before forcing the Committee to rule on certain challenges. The Committee appreciates and commends those challengers and respondents in many senate districts that did so. The Committee has recommended approval of those agreements.

The Committee stated that they decided in some instances not to require full compliance with the rules, attempting "to balance" opposing sides and hopefully create ways for participants to work together in the future:

In other instances, the Committee has recommended resolution of challenges that balance the competing interests of not discouraging participation by those new to the process and insisting on full compliance with rules. In these instances, the Committee chose not apply the harshest relief available for these violations. These decisions are not made lightly and do not reflect in any regard a derogation of the good faith and hard effort of those bringing those challenges, often in the face of powerful interests or community pressures not to do so. The balanced resolutions are recommended not only because the available data is sometimes insufficient to tie a particular remedy to the appropriate person or the remedy may harm the potential participation in the state convention of those not involved in the violation of the rules; but also because the Committee feels these resolutions are appropriate to encourage those involved to look beyond their arguments for or against the particular challenge to see how they can begin working in harmony again for our common purpose in the fall.

The Committee urges the Party to Reform and Modernize the Infrastructure of the Convention Process:

That said, the Committee .. encourages the Party as a whole to reform and modernize the infrastructure for the convention process at all levels. The specifics of those reforms are beyond the purview of this Committee but we have heard the testimony of so many people that believe the processes to be inadequate that we feel compelled to express that on their behalf.

The report contains summaries of challenges they reviewed. They did not accept for review all the challenges presented to them.

The Committee makes specific comment on certain egregious violations

In the Credentials Committee Report Summary of Challenges they frequently affirm the challenge and state that they have no appropriate remedy.

This report is released long after the deadline for filing National Challenges. Ironically, the report acknowledges the failure of precinct, county and senatorial district officials to provide records and minutes for review and utilization by those wishing to file challenges, yet the Credentials Committee of the 2008 Democratic State Convention missed the deadline themselves. The report was not "written" when presented to the Convention. Mr. Boyton had to compile the report from sources which included video tape and other convention/committee records. I am aware of several people who have been requesting this report repeatedly since the close of the 2008 Convention. I am thankful that it is now available. It is a tool for use in refining the process to ensure that future conventions are not as divisive and detrimental to the purposes most Democrats hold in common.

March 4 primary field is set

By JOHN MORITZ - Star-Telegram Staff Writer - Jan. 3, 2008
AUSTIN -- Texas Republicans will head into the March 4 primaries with a field of battle-tested incumbents in nearly all of the statewide races up for contention while the Democrats will hitch their fortunes to a slate of candidates still struggling to gain broad name recognition.

The deadline was Wednesday evening for entering the primaries for selecting the major-party nominees for several statewide offices, including one U.S. senator, one of the three places on the Texas Railroad Commission, three of the nine seats on the state Supreme Court and three of the nine Texas Court of Criminal Appeals seats.

All of those statewide posts carry six-year terms.

It was also the deadline for the presidential candidates in both parties to have their names included on the Texas primary ballot.

Here's a look at the field:

U.S. senator

Incumbent Republican John Cornyn is seeking a second term. He's a former Texas attorney general, state Supreme Court justice and state district judge from San Antonio. Also running is Larry Kilgore of Mansfield, a longtime activist in the anti-abortion movement who two years ago was defeated in the GOP primary for governor and two years before that lost a bid for a state House seat.

On the Democratic side, state Rep. Rick Noriega of Houston, who served in Afghanistan and along the Texas-Mexico border as an Army National Guard officer, has the support of much of the party establishment. Corpus Christi schoolteacher Ray McMurrey will also be on the ballot. Rounding out the field are retired Army officer and perennial candidate Gene Kelly, and Rhett Smith, who two years ago ran for governor as a Republican.

Railroad commissioner

Michael Williams, a Republican who has served on the panel that oversees the energy industry and sets rates for natural gas service, is seeking his second full term. He will be unopposed in the primary.

The Democrats in the race are former San Antonio City Councilman Art Hall; Dale Henry, a former Mills County commissioner who lost a bid for a Railroad Commission seat as a Democrat in 2006 and as a Republican in 2004; and mobility specialist Mark Thompson of Hamilton.

Texas Supreme Court

Republican Wallace Jefferson, who has served on the state's highest civil court since 2001 and as its chief justice since 2004, will seek re-election to the top post without a primary opponent.

State District Judge Jim Jordan of Dallas is the only Democrat in the race for chief justice.

In Place 7, Republican Dale Wainwright will be unopposed in the primary for a second term. Two Democrats -- Houston lawyer Sam Houston and Dallas lawyer Baltasar Cruz -- will face off.

In Place 8, Republican incumbent Phil Johnson, who was appointed in 2005 to fill an unexpired term, will seek his first full term. No one has filed to oppose him in the primary. Democrats Linda Reyna Yañez, a judge on the 13th Court of Appeals in Hidalgo County, and state district Judge Susan Criss of Galveston are seeking the Democratic nomination.

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

The incumbent Republicans judges on the state's top criminal court -- Tom Price, Cathy Cochran and Paul Womack -- will also seek re-election. State District Judge Robert Francis of Dallas will challenge Womack in Place 4.

Democrat Susan Strawn of Houston is running unopposed for Place 3 and El Paso lawyer J.R. Molina is running unopposed in Place 4.

Presidential primaries

Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Alan Keyes, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, and novice candidates Hoa Tran and Hugh Cort will be on the GOP ballot.

On the Democratic side are Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson.

Dennis Kucinich did not qualify for the Democratic primary because he did not check the box on the filing paperwork pledging to support the party's nominee for president, Texas Democratic spokeswoman Amber Moon said. Mike Gravel did not file for the primary.

Of note

At least eight Republicans will compete for the right to challenge U.S. Rep. Nick Lampson for the suburban Houston congressional seat that was vacated in 2006 by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

Online: www.texasgop.org; www.txdemocrats.org

Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram

PREMEDITATED MERGER - Controversy erupts over leaser of U.S. toll roads

Foreign firm part of public-private partnerships funding highway network
By Jerome R. Corsi - © 2007 WorldNetDaily.com - July 20, 2007
Investment analysts in New York and Australia charge that Macquarie, the Australian conglomerate leasing U.S. toll roads, is a "house of cards" that has made billions by spinning off the highway assets into over-valuated investment trusts controlled by the bank.

Macquarie has been an active participant in the "public-private partnerships" sponsored by Mary Peters when she was head of the Federal Highway Administration.

As documented on the FHWA website, Macquarie recently concluded long-term leasing deals on the Chicago Skyway and the Indiana Toll Road.

In both projects, Macquarie has partnered with Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A., the Spanish investment consortium also involved in financing and leasing the Trans-Texas Corridor.

The criticism of Macquarie can be traced to a paper published last year by John L. Goldberg, an honorary associate at the School of Architecture, Design Science, and Planning at the University of Sydney in Australia.

Titled "The Fatal Flaw in the Financing of Private Road Infrastructure in Australia," the paper argued equity investors in Macquarie investment trusts are likely to suffer heavy losses by excessive valuations Macquarie makes of financed toll roads that are packaged together to be sold to pension funds and other institutional investors.

Goldberg also argued that government guarantees on Macquarie projects are often buried in the confidential part of toll road "comprehensive development agreements," such that the public taxpayer liability only comes to light when a toll road project fails.

Jim Chanos, a founding principal in the New York investment firm Kynikos Associates, has been equally critical of Macquarie.

Kynikos, founded in 1985, specializes in short-selling the stock of companies the firm believes are overvalued by the financial markets and likely to fall in price. Chanos distinguished himself as one of the most active critics of Enron prior to the company's fall.

In a May 30 radio interview with Australian talk-show host Mark Colvin, Chanos charged that the "Macquarie model" was seriously flawed.

"The bank scours the world buying assets," Chanos told the radio audience, "buying assets, everything from toll roads to bowling alleys and selling them into separate trusts that the bank controls. This generates triple fees for Macquarie Bank: one for the up-front purchase; a second for selling the assets into the trust; then ongoing management and performance fees from the funds."

Chanos charged that the loser in the scheme was the investor.

"If you look at the financial accounts of the trusts," Chanos explained to the Australian talk show, "you'll see that in almost all the cases the companies are using Australian re-valuation accounting which is legal under [Generally Accepted Accounting Practices] in your country to write up the value of the asset annually and put that through operating income and into equity."

Chanos argued that the practice only works in a financial environment in which cheap credit is readily available and valuations for infrastructure projects are generally rising.

"You need a credit environment that looks the other way, or you need a credit environment where the people lending are just lending on reputation or not numbers," Chanos said.

Eventually, he contended, the self-dealing between Macquarie and the Macquarie-controlled funds into which the infrastructure assets are sold is likely to crash.

"All I would tell your listeners," Chanos said in the radio interview, "is simply just go to the trusts, the financial statements, and simply extract out the asset re-valuation number, which is basically management's guess as to how much, what the asset's worth and just see what the cash flow looks like. In many cases, the cash flows are diminished or actually go negative. That's the simple litmus test to the Macquarie model."

Still, Chanos argued that despite the problem in the underlying cash flows, Macquarie makes hefty profits.

"Capital gains alone in the fiscal year 2007, just for flipping these types of assets into the trusts, accounted for half of the pre-tax income of Macquarie Bank," Chanos asserted.

Macquarie Bank has hit back strongly against both critics.

According to newspaper reports in Australia, Macquarie Bank executive Warwick Smith complained to University of Sidney Vice Chancellor Gavin Brown, demanding that the university dissociate itself from Goldberg over his critical research.

In response, Brown issued a statement clarifying that Goldberg is not an employee of the University of Sydney, though he has been given the title of honorary associate by the Faculty of Architecture. In his statement, Brown claimed Goldberg "speaks as an individual and the university accepts no responsibility for his comments which it does not endorse."

In the subsequent controversy that erupted in Australia, Goldberg was featured as a case study in "Silencing Dissent," a book critical of the administration of Prime Minister John Howard, published in Australia by Clive Hamilton, the executive director of a prominent Australian think-tank, and his co-editor Sarah Maddison.

In the book, Hamilton and Maddison charged that the Howard government used strong-arm tactics to challenge the tax status of non-government organizations and ruin the reputations of academics who were critical of governmental policies, including the sale of highway infrastructure leasing rights to private investment concerns in Australia.

Macquarie used a similar personal attack to discredit Chanos following the interview on Australian radio.

In a May 31 statement posted on the Macquarie website, the investment group charged that Chanos, "a hedge fund short-seller of equities," had an economic self-interest in advancing "incorrect claims" that could cause the stock price of Macquarie to fall.

When contacted for comment, Macquarie's New York representative referred WND to the company's online statement, in which Macquarie asserts that all assets acquired by funds controlled by Macquarie are valued directly from the market and subject to the approval of independent directors of the funds.

The published Macquarie response to Chanos also cited a May 25 Bloomberg report which quoted Chanos as saying Kynikos maintains a short position on Macquarie.

Short-selling is a Wall Street practice in which an investor borrows and sells stock the investor does not own, anticipating the stock will go down in value. The short-seller profits by buying shares at a lower price to replace the shares that originally were borrowed and sold at the higher price.

Short-sellers lose money if the price of the stock increases and the cost to purchase shares to replace those borrowed is greater than the price for which the borrowed shares were sold.

Macquarie Infrastructure Group is a separate subsidiary from Macquarie Bank.

The website of Macquarie Infrastructure Group bills the company as "one of the largest private developers of toll roads in the world."

Read more in World Net Daily

Flawed Voter ID System purges qualified voters from list

The real problem
While lawmakers push additional ID requirements for casting ballots, a flawed computer database is purging already qualified voters from the rolls.
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle May 5, 2007, 8:33PM
Editorial

Early balloting around the state for the May 12 election has resulted in long delays and frayed tempers in many locales. The difficulties had nothing to do with the unproven election fraud cited by state legislators as a justification for new laws mandating more extensive ID from voters.

Instead, hundreds of people who went to the polls found their names had been removed because of glitches in a $14 million Web-based state computer program intended to centralize voter registration lists.

In a particularly embarrassing episode, the mayor of Prairie View, Frank Jackson, discovered when he attempted to vote early that his name and registration had vanished from the state-compiled list.

The IBM-Hart InterCivic system had been selected at the direction of former Secretary of State Geoffrey Connor, an appointee of Gov. Rick Perry, despite the fact it cost $800,000 more than a proven competitor, VOTEC. After the purchase, the vendor then substituted an untried computer system that is giving fits to election officials around the state.

Read more

See other coverage of the problem

Fence on the border

There are many parallels between Berlin and Texas.
Both were divided through war and political settlements of the border.
Families and bloodlines were divided into two separate nations.
Many of the people who fought or financed the war(s) found their families as citizens of two different nations.
Families faced dire consequences if they violated restrictions on free travel between the two countries without visa, passports, official papers, and special permissions.
I detested the Berlin Wall and all it stands for and I detest a fence at the border of Texas.

There are better solutions.

We have put men and women into space and walked on the moon.
We have helped broker peace in other continents.
We have cured some diseases.
We have managed to survive despite ourselves as a nation much longer than anyone envisioned.

Surely we can find a REASONABLE SOLUTION that doesn't involve barbed wire and prevent grandchildren from easily traveling to grandpa's house across the border.
Surely we can identify decent human beings who have settled in the USA, worked here for years, abided by all our laws except for having come here.

We used to be able to travel easily between the USA and Canada. It wasn't unusual for a US Citizen to go to Canada and work for a summer while in college. Travel was relaxed and free. Border security focused on CRIMINALS and folks who were REAL DANGERS. Then the Viet Nam War dragged on for decades. It was unpopular. Our government requested that Canada tighten their immigration and guest worker laws to make it very difficult for US Citizens to go to Canada and live and work. The border wasn't tightened to keep American safe. It was tightened to keep Americans in.

Fences work two ways. This one on the Southern border says more about predjuice and discrimination than it says about national security. It will not solve the immigration potholes. It will not identify real terrorists. It will not stop the cayotes from smuggling folks across the border. It may change the routes somewhat but it merely makes it more lucrative and rips off the vulnerable more.

To us 164 years seems like a long time; However, that is not all that long when you look at the history of people on this continent. Most politicians look at the peoples of Mexico and of the United States as two peoples -- but we really aren't. To my knowledge, I have no Latino or Hispanic bloodlines in my family. We came to Virigina from England and Ireland between 1630 and 1720 and most of my parents grandparents came to Texas between 1838 and 1870. We have benefited from the sacrifices of Navarro, Juan Seguin and others who helped forge this state and nation. It offends me when I hear folks assume that Texans with hispanic surnames migrated here from south of the Rio Grande. Many of them had families living in Texas long before my family arrived. Most of them also have relatives living in Mexico.

How different is a wall in Berlin from a wall at the border of Texas? Do we condemn communist governments who separate families who resided on different sides of the Berlin wall while urging US immigration and politicans to "tighten" the Texas /Mexico border? Should those who escape the poverty of Mexico and live underground working in the USA, raising their families and contributing to the US economy, risk incarceration and total loss of everything they have worked for during years of peaceful "illegal" residence by simply crossing the border to attend a parent's funeral or attend a family reunion? Is it truly moral to criminalize peaceful economic refugees while ignoring corporations who violate anti-trust rules and politicians who pass rules to legalize schemes that benefit corporations who fund their political campaign?

What difference is there between Germans who were restricted from visiting kin folks residing on different sides of the Berlin wall and families who are separated by the Rio Grande? Should it really be a crime to migrate back and forth across the border, to visit, shop and even work from time to time without extensive red tape and large outlays of money?

Somehow, I see a much stronger parallel than many seem to acknowledge.

Yes, I think we need to know who is crossing.
Yes, I think the cayotes need to be stopped.
Yes, I think we need to inspect cargo coming in and going out.
Yes, I think we need better guest worker programs.
Yes, I think that this nation has a right to vote and decide on citizenship and green card and guest worker immigration policy.

Stringing barbed wire and manning it with Soviet era style guard towers with soldiers armed with machine guns doesn't mesh with my view of America. To me, this is letting the terrorists of 9/11 win.

Surely we have better solutions than this.

A TRANS TEXAS CORRIDOR NAFTA PARABLE

THIS PARABLE IS DEDICATED TO RICK PERRY, DAVID DEWHURST, TODD STAPLES, FRANK CORTE, GREG ABBOTT and all the elected officials in Texas who took Campaign Contributions from H.B. Zachry and worked diligently to get the Texas Transportation Code and Eminent Domain Statues changed to enable construction of the Trans Texas Corridors and similar toll initiatives.

The Trans Texas Corridor initiative seems more like this parable:
Once upon a time let's say that I discovered that it was closer for me to go through your yard than it was for me to go around the block on the public street to conduct my business in the land beyond your homestead. So I begin to habitually take a short-cut through your yard. I make my own path through your shrubbery, detouring around your house and garage and walk through your property to deliver goods to my clients who live far beyond your lot line.

After a while, I complain about how much time I'm losing having to go between your house and garage. For me, I'd get there easier and faster if your house weren't in my way. I mean, after all, why should I be inconvenienced having to detour around your house when I have important business to conduct on the other side of your property!

Under current law, I can't just legally tear your house down. But I know some folks who owe me some favors. I do some things for some other folks so that they'll also owe me. I approach a man who owns a paving company with strong ties with the agency which regulates planning and construction of public paths. Then I find some "business men" and show them how they can profit if your house were gone and we had a direct path WE CONTROLLED through your property and this man's paving company poured the asphalt. Together we start dreaming about this path. Wouldn't it be even better, someone says, if there are concessions along the path. If they can't get off the path to patronize the businesses along existing streets, that will be better for us because we'll make more money. So while the "you scratch my back I'll scratch yours" gang is busy revising the Transportation and Property Codes of the government, we have them add in a clause allowing exercise of eminent domain for construction of a facility which serves users of the toll facility.

By scratching backs and showing folks how they can PROFIT from my scheme, I've moved from just cutting through your bushes and walking between your house and garage as I cut through to the other side of property to conduct my business on the other side of you to actually getting the law changed so that I can have your home torn down and land confiscated by the state. I can also get your neighbor's land condemned by eminent domain because it's contingent to a toll corridor and is NEEDED TO BE USED FOR A CONCESSION WHICH WILL BE USED BY USERS OF THE TOLL PATH.

Now, there are a lot of places in our town where more people actually need a paved path more than this one. There may even be some places where they need a bridge. But this project gets priority because I agree to pay for the clearing, demolition of your house, and the concrete to pave it. I get a 50 year right to set the rates for the toll and operate all the concessions along the path. I get the government to underwrite a lot of the studies and planning for this project because they are in the business of overseeing planning projects.

After we pour all this concrete the neighborhood looks different. Because it looks DIFFERENT, some people call it progress.

You no longer live there. Your next door neighbor no longer lives in the town. The land now belongs to the state. Your neighbors get their tax bills after completion of this project. The school district and county and city have divided their annual budgets among the number of remaining homeowners. Everyone has a tax increase. There is still a shortfall because even with a tax increase, there is less land available and when they need to build a new school, the price is higher for the land. But that's ok. Because it is now easier for the folks I did business with on the other side of your property to go through the path and not have to detour around where your house used to sit. No one actually stops on your land to do anything. They use the concession where your next door neighbor used to live as they travel through. But they don't patronize any of the businesses on the street where you lived. When they carry packages along this toll road to deliver to your former neighbors, they pay tolls. But that's o.k. because the pass the additional cost along to the buyers.

Oh, I forgot one thing. When I sell the VISION for building this toll path corridor, I point out that we need A MUCH WIDER RIGHT OF WAY than is actually called for right now. We need to plan for 50 years in the future. So we advise the "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine gang" to write the law so that instead of the land that the path needs being condemned, they condemn three times that much land. We won't use it for 50 years, but that's o.k. We'll control it. It goes out of the local tax base too and more folks lose their homes. Those that remain have to absorb an even larger percentage of the taxes formerly paid by you and your neighbor. But I'm content.

I'm given an award by the City Father's for being a "Catalyst of Progress." I have more money, so I give a little of it to a charity run by one of the folks who helped me get the laws changed to Legalize all the illegal obstacles to progress that I decided needed to be eliminated so that I'd be enabled to "get a return on my investment" as I instigate getting this toll path built so that I'll not to be inconvenienced by having to detour around your house. I'm now known as a "humanitarian."

Our project has utilized public governmental planning agencies who usually plan public projects. They haven't had time to concentrate on public works projects except for our path. So the street that runs in front of the property where you used to live becomes filled with potholes and is actually dangerous to pedestrians and drivers. The tax base is less. The businesses on that road have closed down because they lost business when people started patronizing the businesses on the toll path. We approach the city and tell them that we can solve their problem. We'll use a bit of the money we made operating this first toll path to repair roads which are currently PUBLIC ROADS if they are turned into toll roads and we are given 50 years to operate them so we can get a return on our investment.

This time there are activists who are prepared for us and manage to demand this project be put to a vote. But it is obvious that the road will remain impassable because now the tax base of the town has dwindled to such a state that there REALLY IS no money in the budget to pave the public road. The toll initiative on the ballot passes by only a few votes, but I have a new project to profit on with my friend the paving contractor. The public street is now a toll road and we are studying where we want to locate the concessions.


--------
There will be goods shipped through Texas from Mexico to other states whether or not the TTC is constructed. Some folks are wondering TEXANS should give up our land and finance the TTC by paying tolls and higher property and school taxes! Don't we have other more important transportation needs that need to be met right now? TDoT, elected officials and transportation planners in COGS tell us that the TTC is necessary because we need to plan for 50 years in the future.

Planning for the future is fine when you have your CURRENT HOUSE IN ORDER. People without food on the table can't throw their entire annual budget into a retirement account. This initiative is one that transfers resources away from meeting VITAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS in communities all over Texas right now! DFW is on the brink of having EPA shut down economic development. We have to address air quality along with transportation. Every urban center in Texas needs SOME transportation solution and this TTC snowgoose doesn't meet ANY OF THEM. But it's true, business interest shipping goods from Asia to Mexican ports will get those goods to market somehow. They want us to cut them a direct, less-costly-for-them route. We must fight for OUR NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED before their comfort! If we build a corridor or highway or rail line for US, and they use it too, that's normal. That's not what they are asking. THE TTC is not a transportation plan to meet the needs of Texans. Instead of concentrating on this state's highest priority transportation needs, we're expected to forgo what we need to build this rail, utility and super toll highway from Laredo to Oklahoma to facilitate shipping through Texas.

Let's end this "good night" story with a quote from a lady who addressed the TDoT officials at the Dallas TTC Hearing: "What part of stupid do you think we are?"