Category: Culture

Posted on

Politically Mandated Punishments

The idea of government in America had a glorious beginning. America’s foundational concept was that men, by right, ought to be free. Self-governance was the goal. Centralized forms of government should be pre-determined and limited. The original 13 colonies developed a compact to serve certain, specified national interests.

The main interest of that federal compact was to secure individual rights. The rights of the individual are foundational, eternal and set the stage for our nation’s premiere document–The Declaration of Independence.

These rights are self-evident endowments from our Creator. They carry enormous weight because all men are created equal. Five unalienable rights are identified:

  • Life,
  • Liberty
  • the Pursuit of Happiness
  • the Right of the People to alter or to abolish a faulty or failed system, and
  • the Right to institute new Government, laying its foundation… in such form, as to …most likely effect their Safety and Happiness.

Our founders weren’t suggesting that governments should be done and undone like disposable diapers. They were aware that mankind is, “more disposed to suffer… than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”

Yet, this is where we find ourselves. We are suffering under the weight of the modern Leviathan, 1)  because we have slowly become accustom to government controls and 2)  because many people profit from the corruption pulsating throughout the system.

Our original American designs have been transmogrified from institutions that were engineered to secure our rights and ensure our freedoms. Now they have become organizations that demand our strictest obedience and compliance with what is acceptable to the so-called “majority.”

This follows the same technique that was used by Lenin in the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. At the time, in Russia, there were many factions seeking government power and control. One group was the Russian Social Democratic Workers’ Party, which was a Marxist organization. It was a small party and it was split amongst two competing subgroups: the Mensheviks (“minority”) and the Bolsheviks (“majority”).

The Bolsheviks actually represented the “minority” because they were the smaller of the two factions. They successfully acquired the name “majority” after an internal party-wide campaign to acquire the name.

The Bolsheviks represented the small faction led by Lenin. Lenin successfully used this “minority” to organize his violent and revolutionary opposition to the czarist government. They propagandized, campaigned and used violence to spawn factions among the populace and they created enormous divisions across regional boundaries.

Across our nation we can witness, daily, these same destructive tendencies that fomented the minority sponsored Bolshevik revolution. In America, we can see the echo of these progressive redefinitions, where ideas shed their traditional meaning to correspond to the latest populist ideology.

Ten years before the Bolshevik revolution, American author, J. Allen Smith wrote his own progressive redefinition as follows, “True liberty consists not in divesting the government of effective power, but in making it an instrument for the…prompt enforcement of public opinion.”

This redefinition is nothing more than an attempt at spit and polish on the arbitrary chains stemming from some arm of bureaucratic control.

Look at recent events in Oregon.  Have these people been heard, treated fairly, set free or shackled?

  • the occupiers of the Malhuer Wildlife Refuge, Harney Co.
  • the $400,000 fine and re-sentencing of Dwight and Steve Hammond, Harney Co.
  • the $135,000 fine against Sweet Cakes by Melissa, Multnomah Co.
  • the firing of Harmony Daws, from Sparkling Palaces, for being elected as president of a pro-life group, Multnomah Co.
  • the harassment of Jessica Morton after false charges were made and her innocence proven, Josephine Co.
  • the killing of LaVoy Finicum, Grant Co.

Shackles are shackles and the bigger the government, the bigger the problem.

President Woodrow Wilson was a big government guy. During his presidency he felt that businesses had gotten the upper-hand and that more government interference was needed as a legitimate check. He knew big industrialists who were, “afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it…” This accurately describes the fear that most Americans have of their own government.

Wilson continues in his progressive double-speak and identifies what he helped to successfully engineer:

“We have been dreading all along the time when the combined power of high finance would be [combined with] the power of the government….We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world–-no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men.” – — President Wilson, 1913  [edit added]

Political power means leveraging the government machinery for purposes of control. Political control allows for politically mandated punishments but this has nothing to do with justice. This is why we have not seen any mainstream media outrage at the $135,000 fine levied against Sweet Cakes by Melissa. After all, it was “legally” assessed by an official bureaucrat. This means bureaucrats throughout the system “possess far more power over people than could be justified by any social contract–unless people are presumed to have implicitly contracted for their own destruction.”*

* Bovard, James, Freedom In Chains: The Rise of the State and the Demise of the Citizen, (St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1999) p. 211

 

Recommended Books…

 
Posted on

Absolute Power is not Easily Tamed

Absolute power is not easily tamed.  This is apparent when contemplating the life of LaVoy Finicum. 

Finicum was father to 11 children and a veritable host of grandchildren. He was a faithful defender of individual liberty and our constitutionally limited federal government.  Finicum was killed during a confrontation with FBI and state police on a lonely stretch of highway between Burns and John Day, last Tuesday.

The current information black-out is troubling because we are purposefully kept in the dark and find ourselves trapped in the web of manufactured information.  The best way to quell the clamor about the unjustified taking of an innocent human life is to show the public the contrary evidence.  We see daily video of drone strikes in Syria and police stops in Tallahassee, are you telling me the FBI doesn’t own any video-cams?

[Addendum: Here’s an edited version released by the FBI that was taken from a helicopter or drone. There are still no video sources from a chest or body cam that shows the shooter’s perspective.]

The anger buried in the cat-calls for “aggressive action” against the protestors has been fulfilled. This is what I find most distasteful and dreadfully shocking. Last week, popular TV host, Montel Williams felt free to suggest, “a bunch of undereducated terrorist buffoons” should be stopped by “a massive use of deadly force.”

Montel got his wish.

Media outlets foment these reactions by continually headlining that the protestors are  “armed occupiers.” If every American has a right to carry a firearm, then why does this sound so threatening?  If this is a guaranteed ‘right’ than is it any different from exercising your freedom of the press or the ability to speak your mind?

Patrick Henry asked the same question during the constitutional convention, “Are we at last brought to such an humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense?”

Under the Obama administration the Department of Homeland Security purchased over 2.1 billion rounds of ammunition between mid-2012 and mid-2015. That’s enough ammo to kill around 30% of the world’s population, or shoot every man, women and child in American with 6 bullets each and have a quarter of million rounds left-over.

Enormous government stockpiles like these pose a direct threat to the sovereignty of all fifty states and our individual liberty and freedom.

Another self-perpetuating falsehood comes from the typical “on-the-street” interview. In these well-crafted interviews, we hear from people who are concerned about, 1) the costs of the occupation, or, 2) the safety of families and children in the area.

These concerns should be legitimate, but the real world tells us differently.

If anyone (including our elected Congress-persons) sincerely cared about unnecessary taxpayer  burdens, then why do budget deficits go unchallenged. Our federal government is fast rolling towards $20 trillion in immediate debt with unfunded liabilities estimated to be $200 trillion.

The costs associated with closing the schools resulted from an unnecessary political gesture.  All of the schools in Harney County are nearly 40 miles from the actual protest at the Wildlife Refuge.

News stories rarely relate size and distance of the land resources in Oregon’s Eastern Desert.  Harney County, encompasses more than 10,000 sq. miles, which is more land than the states of Connecticut, Rhode Island and Delaware. In this single county, the feds control more land than Connecticut and Rhode Island combined.

Additionally, the population totals for those three states approaches 5.5 million souls, while across the same square mileage in Harney County there are just over 7,000 people.

The protestors at the refuge are not terrorists but they are desperately trying to make a point.

Protestors in the 1960’s and 70’s didn’t think their voices would be heard if they played by the rules. Their method was to break rules, windows, and set things on fire. Bundy’s group has not turned and burned any police, sheriff, BLM or FBI vehicles, nor have they broken any windows.

The protestors of the 70’s included Former Attorney General Eric Holder who participated in a five-day armed occupation of a Naval ROTC building at Columbia University. Holder was a leader in the Student Afro-American Society (SAAS), which demanded renaming the office to the “Malcolm X Lounge.” The group insisted, the change would, “honor… a man who recognized the importance of territory as a basis for nationhood.”

During the 60’s and 70’s protests like these were fairly common. The Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) were known to provoke fights and the Black Panthers frequently demonstrated with firearms. The American Indian Movement, even joined in with a 71-day armed standoff at Wounded Knee during which they actually exchanged gunfire with the FBI.

These examples all boil down to the same issues which haunted the authors of the Boston Pamphlet (1772). They highlighted the absurdity of supposing that “the Power of one or any Number of Men,” could usurp the “essential natural Rights or the Means of preserving those Rights,” when the entire purpose of civil government was “the Support, Protection and Defense of those very Rights: The principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property.”

These colonial rebels, during the late 1700’s, led the noble cause that created the freest nation on planet earth. They identified the same political rhetoric we see today.

Our public blindness to our nation’s principles for Liberty, allows the potential for unscrupulous men, in high government offices to abuse their proper authority and yet remain immune from the “Rule of Law.” This will be our most formidable obstacle as we work to secure Liberty for our posterity.

“The [Protestors] have been branded with the odious Names of Traitors and Rebels, only for complaining of their Grievances. How long such Treatment will or ought to be borne is [the question] submitted.”   – The Boston Pamphlet (1772)

Posted on

A Warning to the West

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”The Gulag”][vc_column_text]In, The Gulag Archipelago, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn recounts his first-hand experiences  of life under the iron fist of a 20th Century government. His story records the thoroughly modernized tactics of a small, centralized group of  authoritarians whose goal was total control of its own citizens. As Solzhenitsyn describes the lay of the land, we see it isn’t only about calling for tanks, guns and ground troops but it also included the bureaucratic masses. As his story progresses, the bureaucratic regulators turn out to be some of the most unprincipled and perfidious weapons.

Under the leadership of Joseph Stalin, the administrative system of the state was enriched with resources and empowered with the facade of legality. The result was a multi-tentacled Russian monster that grew from its simple task of administrative enforcement to a full-fledged police state complete with surveillance and population management.

American Similarities

The political similarities embedded in our own nation’s growing surveillance state cannot be missed. Common-place  jurisdictional overreach, strangling regulatory regimes and unrelenting administrative takings all bear witness to unbalanced authoritarian rule.

Solzhenitsyn discloses one illustration of the supreme accuser, or Prosecutor General, who,  “had the right to intervene in any judicial proceeding.” He characterizes the nature of this office as having the power to “pardon[s] and punish[es], at its own discretion without any limitation, whatever.”

This invokes a chilling reflection of the recent re-sentencing that Dwight and Steven Hammond received. A jury of the Hammond’s peers in Harney County, suggested reducing the original minimum sentencing requirement. The judge, the defense and prosecution teams were all convinced that a reduced sentence was justified.

Federal Judge Hogan, also in Harney Co., explained that sentencing the Hammonds to the mandatory minimum, “would shock the conscience.” He further thought that it would violate the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, because five years behind bars is “grossly disproportionate to the severity of the offenses here.” In fact, both “the judge and jury found the fire had arguably increased the value of the land for grazing.”

Then, why the re-sentencing? Maybe, there is a “supreme accuser,” or someone who can fix the problem posed by a jury who supported individuals over bureaucrats.

The “Fixer”

Small details like needing a “fixer” can be arranged with a quick phone call because our Congress has so thoroughly debauched the Constitutional standards that were created for our protection.

On Oct. 7, President Obama appointed a new U.S Attorney for the State of Oregon, based in Portland, 300 miles from Harney County, Ms. Amanda Marshall. Although she had no experience with the federal system, she showed the gumption necessary to accomplish the goal. It was her duty to use the color of law as a disguise for politically motivated appellate action, calling Judge Hogan’s punishments “unlawful.”

Notice, the claim wasn’t that the sentence was “unjust,”  “inappropriate” or “inequitable.” The local community understood the true relevancy of any monetary damages and they knew government intrusions when they occurred. The Hammond’s peers proved best at harmonizing the defendant’s acceptance of responsibility, criminality, and/or misconduct. This is why our US Constitution requires, “The Trial of all Crimes … shall be by Jury.” Local community sentencing provides for truly just criminal punishment, criminal deterrence, and rehabilitation.

So, the “unlawful” nature of the penalties simply means that the Hammonds were not yet crushed. Solzhenitsyn reminds us, the “meat grinder of political interrogation” was designed too crush – body and soul. Over and over, the law is used to demonstrate that the defendant is wrong – in his views, his conduct, his life, and his relationships.

Solzhenitsyn forges a perspective where, “the engine room of the law,” spews out a “scrunched- up wad”  that was once a man. The goal was, “To crush him once and for all and to cut him off from all others, once and for all.”

Now you have some insight into why the Bundys and so many good hearted Americans are in Harney Co. They are fighting the unconstitutional use of administrative law. Law, which by nature, ensures the illegitimate power of the federal bureaucracy.

U.S Attorney, Amanda Marshall has shown us her allegiance. Her allegiance isn’t to securing our liberty, our rights, or our communities protection and justice. Her allegiance is to power and power alone.

Unfortunately, there are thousands in the regulatory state who serve the naked interests of an all-powerful bureaucracy. These warped statist ideas slowly alienate every American, regardless of one’s race, gender, religion, country-of-origin or walk-of-life. This includes people across the political spectrum, both the left and the right, because absurd regulations negatively impact everyone.

Unless “we the, still free, people” step forward and challenge the illegal power that pretends legitimacy, it will continue to metastasize and thereby destroy our freedoms. Thomas Jefferson fought against this authoritarian tendency throughout his life. He wrote, “To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power…”
This boundless enrichment by the ruling class was why our founders established the strict separation of power, the Bill of Rights, and our Representative from of consensual government.

Rev. Samuel Williams, summarized it well, in 1774:

“In a despotic government, the only principle by which the tyrant is to move the whole machine … is fear, by the servile dread of his power.”

The men and women in Harney County are standing together with those who oppose administrative tyranny. They are standing for our founder’s vision where men have inalienable rights and governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Recommended Books…

 

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Posted on

Making the Case in Harney County

Making the Case

We have all heard the phrase “Don’t make a Federal case out of it!” Have you ever thought about what this means?

It means, you can’t win against the feds – so don’t even think about it. It means you can’t fight the raw power, money and monopoly interests that the federal government has ruthlessly acquired. It means that none of us can ever raise enough money to battle the accumulated wealth (originating from our own pockets) that will be ushered against our cause.

Yet, the Hammonds and the Bundys are making headlines in Harney County, Oregon because they are doing just that. These families are the focal point of the media onslaught.

The problem in Harney County is not a new problem. It is a systemic problem that the Founders recognized and feared. At the heart of the issue is the probability that the central government would seek to, “annihilate and absorb the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of the several states, and produce… an iron banded despotism.” **

The blame lies with successive Congressional administrations who have failed to secure the unalienable rights and individual liberties of American citizens. Our so-called representatives have abandoned their Constitutional obligations to a limited federal government and the rights and liberties of the people within their state governments. Instead, they have funded every federal overreach allowing the slow annihilation of state sovereignty and the despotic absorption of state lands.

Why is the West “Federally” Managed?

Federally controlled land is predominately concentrated in the West. Nationally, the United States government has direct control over almost 650 million acres of land — nearly 30% of its total territory.  In Oregon, where I and the Hammond family live, the federal government controls 54% of all of the land. In Nevada, where the Bundy family lives, the federal government controls 84.5% of the land in the state.

Now, imagine if  you owned a business and some bureaucrat decided it was in the public’s best interest for them to manage 54%, or 84% of your resources – this is what is happening throughout the West. The feds under the false color of law have essentially done this to the Western states. The feds also receive the benefit of those resources and they control the disposition of all of those assets.

This is why thousands and thousands of Americans are standing with and applauding these families who are fighting back against the abuses of these federal agencies.

Teddy and the Midnight Reserves (warning: not a bedtime story)

In Oregon, this tragedy started a hundred years ago with grossly unconstitutional actions by a Republican “progressive” living in the White House – Theodore Roosevelt.

Between 1902 and 1906, President Roosevelt, with his fountain pen and telegraph poles, went tearing through the maps of Oregon. He grabbed enormous swaths of Oregon’s pristine landscape and forested wilderness for federal control.

Oregon’s U.S. Senator Charles W. Fulton was outraged by these unprecedented actions. Fulton introduced legislation to eliminate the president’s authority to establish national forest reserves via executive orders in 1907.

The night before signing this law, Roosevelt issued another Executive Order snatching an additional 16 million acres from Oregon’s control. Honest journalists of the day deridingly labeled these new forests as the “Midnight Reserves.”

Then, in 1908, after the legislation prohibiting these blatant land grabs, Roosevelt engineered a new scheme to pluck more land from the states.

Roosevelt designated land surrounding Malhuer, Mud and Harney Lakes in Eastern Oregon as an “Indian reservation.” Roosevelt’s swindle avoided using the phrase “forest reserve,” which was now illegal after Fulton’s legislation. Instead, these new takings were identified, “as a preserve and breeding ground for native birds.”

This was nothing more than an unconstitutional land grab.  Later this “Indian reservation,” which did not include the 13,700 acre Burns Paiute Reservation, became the Malhuer National Wildlife Refuge.

This refuge is the immediate source of the BLM conflict with the Hammond family in Oregon.

The Constitution

Federal fiddling in these areas is flatly unconstitutional. The only relevant authority for federal land ownership comes from the US Constitution. It is known as the Enclave Clause:

“To exercise exclusive Legislation… over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased… for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;”

– Article I, Section 8, Clause 17

While Washington, D.C. remains within the boundary limit of “ten Miles square,” the federal government has blown through all reasonable expectations for forts, ports, arsenals and other military installations. Those installations now exceed 44,500 square miles of land within the states.

The federal government’s rough-shod management of an additional 1 million square miles (650 million acres) of state land is wholly unconstitutional. The Department of the Interior administers 96% of these ill-gotten state lands with one non-elected office holder (Secretary of the Interior), who serves at the pleasure of the President, directing this  unbridled Leviathan.

These are the reasons why large segments of the Western states support the Hammonds,  Bundys and the myriads of other families that come under the gun of these federal marauders.

Last week, Oregon’s U.S. Rep. Greg Walden issued a warm-hearted plea which contained many great talking points. Unfortunately for Americans, it is another toothless gesture. During Walden’s 18 years as a House member he has done little to rein-in this voracious federal machine. Instead, Walden, along with his RINO cohorts and Democrat allies, has needlessly ladled a steady stream of trillion dollar, taxpayer funded budgets into the mouths of D.C.’s lobbyists and bureaucrats.

Congress has long ignored the beauty and strength of 1) limited government, and 2) fiscal accountability. They have promoted government growth at unprecedented levels while their constituents have been successfully bribed by promises for economic riches.

The power of the purse is key

These federal raids on our state sovereignty can only be stopped by using the Constitution rightly. First, this means state nullification of unconstitutional federal actions. Secondly, our Representatives need to exercise their Constitutional obligation to manage federal dollars prudently and begin to do the hard work of defunding these gigantic Federal Bureaucracies.

Thomas Jefferson, wrote, “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

Adherence to our U.S. Constitution is the Federal case that we must make. It is the ONLY Solution Big Enough!

** Bruce Frohnen, The American Republic: Primary Sources, ed. Bruce Frohnen (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2002). 1/10/2016. http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/669#Frohnen_0082_1989

Posted on

Perverting the Plain Meaning

Language is an important tool of political control. In our modern Twitter-pated world where sound bites rule, words or labels do not have to be accurate. They are easily thrown about and can be applied to anything. The Twitter-narrative does not have to be accurate to be seen by millions.

Our modern technology has made it easier to spread spurious ideas around the globe. There is nothing new here. Samuel Adams, noted the same thing in 1776. He said, “How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!”

This is why we see policies emanating from Federal agencies. i.e, BLM, EPA, USFS, Public Schools and Universities that appear confused, misaligned or contradictory. The words are being manipulated based upon their value as sound bites, not their adherence to truth.

The strategies employed by the federal government and its cadre of self-seeking crony-capitalists and bureaucrats is actually quite Machiavellian.

For some background, Machiavelli, was disillusioned with the myriad of struggles amongst smaller cities in Italy during the 1500’s. He viewed the small-townships and communities, with their independence, as detrimental to Italy’s potential for greatness. He defined several effective methods for seizing and maintaining power.

His formula for effective government asserted that good rulers sometimes have to learn “not to be good.” He, noted, they must be willing to set aside ethical concerns of justice, honesty, and kindness in order to maintain the stability of the state.

This is the essence of today’s statism – where the stability and power of the state matters more than your individual Life, Liberty or free pursuits.

Wikipedia notes some attributes of Machiavellian theory:

  •     Engage in both Blame and Forgiveness, as the situation dictates;
  •     Engage in both Lying and Truth-telling, as appropriate means to an end;
  •     Make alliances and break alliances to fit the circumstance;
  •     Make promises and break promises as the need arises;
  •     Make rules and break rules as necessary;
  •     Mislead and misdirect to deceive the citizens.

Notice that Machiavelli’s list simultaneously names both sides of each issue, i.e., lie and tell the truth. His advise was to use whichever one, at whichever moment, as a means for maintaining power and securing the stability of the state.

Our founder’s unanimously rejected the Machiavellian theory.  They would not be swayed by pragmatic circumstances to permit some deception on Monday followed by a small dose of truth on Tuesday. They knew that  powerful men could sway public opinion by deceptively promoting uncertainty and fear.

This is why America was conceived and developed as a constitutionally federated republic. Each of these three terms, together, are essential for conveying the basic ideas describing our form of government.*

First, the Constitution was a written document that pre-defined and limited the extent of government’s responsibilities. These limits are often referred to as the enumerated powers. Madison wrote,

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government, are few and defined.  Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. … The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people.” – Federalist #45.

Our Founder’s words had meaning. In their day, male meant male, terror meant terror, illegal meant illegal. These meanings were known and understood universally.  In this way, the Constitution was a document where there was no room for arbitrary changes in policy or authority.

The Constitution was based upon defined rules, not guidelines. These rules were the  well-understood principals for attaining Life, Liberty and personal fulfillment.

Second, the Constitution was discussed, amended, and ratified by a federation of free, independent and sovereign states. The same thirteen colonies who issued, “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America” in Congress on July 4, 1776.

Notice even in this declaration, “united” is lower-case and “States” was written with an initial capital.  There was no desire for an outside ruler, whether King George III, Parliament, Congress or the Office of the President. The State was recognized as the ultimate source for local governance, not the U.N., NATO, TPP, nor the federal leviathan.

Lastly, Republican government refers to two things: the origin of governmental powers, and the manner in which these powers are exercised. That is, they come from the consent of the governed and they are exercised by elected representatives.

James Madison said that “we may define a republic to be … a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behavior.” – Federalist #39

In No. California and So. Oregon there are people who realize that they have been swindled by self-seeking politicians who are following Machiavelli’s rules.  They are promoting a movement for the State of Jefferson. (General information, Latest video)

They recognize that today’s political class are no longer serving the Constitution –  they no longer serve for limited periods; they have no fiscal integrity; they are waging war against the Bill of Rights; and they are no longer serving the general welfare. Today, the political elites work for Wall Street-financed crony-capitalists, self-interested public-sector unions, government-financed community service and public health agencies. Each of these entities employs scores pf lobbyists to ensure their access to America’s largess, the seed-corn of our future. The Machiavellian progressives are tearing at our Republic’s foundations.

The State of Jefferson movement has a slogan, “The Time Has Come For 51,” meaning they would like to split from their respective state governments and become the 51st state in the Union. It’s been done before (think, Virginia and West Virginia), and with popular momentum it can happen again.

But, I contend, its more than just time for 51. It’s time for all fifty states to secure our individual liberty and unalienable rights. Its time for voters to reject statism and return to local governance and sound Constitutional principles. If their state’s Representatives and Senators won’t serve these constitutional principles then its time to cut those Machiavellian cohorts free from their positions of power.

* Please refer to Carson, Clarence B., The American Tradition, (The Foundation for Economic Education, Inc., New York, 1964) for a thorough exploration of these ideas.
Posted on

Spreading Through America’s Bloodstream

Last week, I drew a word picture about the outrageous growth of the federal government and its cadre of domineering agencies. I likened them to a bad case of acne. At issue was the BLM’s charges against members of the Hammond family who are facing sentencing under Bill Clinton’s Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.

Some people thought the word picture was too disgusting. I actually don’t think it was strong enough. After all, most of us outgrew our teenage acne problems. So my comparison makes it seem as though these agencies aren’t that bad because we all survived our adolescent bouts with acne.

It turns out acne does’t invoke the powerful imagery that is necessary to illustrate the fatal nature of these tyrannical bureaucracies. Acne is not terminal and is nothing like the plague, small pox or Ebola. Today’s federal intrusions are more serious, more akin to a metastasizing cancer.

A metastatic cancer is a cancer that grows and spreads through the body’s own bloodstream. As it spreads it takes root and spawns more growth. This grow/spawn/spread scenario is eventually fatal because the host’s systems slowly get drained of their normal function and utility.

However, cancer too, is a more localized tragedy. It may have affected you, a relative or a friend, but it doesn’t indiscriminately attack a culture or society. The federal government, on-the-other-hand, is an all-consuming force.

We see this force hammering against industries like Obama’s war on coal, or the governments actions against hydro-power, mining, cattle ranching or timber harvesting.

It even strikes at the heart of our nation’s communities, families and individuals. It is happening to good people like the Hammond’s in Oregon, the Bundy’s and Hage’s in Nevada and Andy Johnson in Fort Bridger, Wyoming.

In order to grasp the unrestricted and arbitrary nature of the swollen power housed within these bureaucracies thumb through a few pages of this documentation for the BLM v E. Wayne Hage case.

Here it becomes plain that by using our tax dollars, the federal agencies can continue to pursue outrageous legal actions despite the Court’s contempt rulings against the conduct of the BLM Manager and USFS Rangers. The bureaucrats at these federal agencies are tireless when it comes to using our tax dollars to win their fights against our families.

Throughout human-history vast accumulations of power have created more problems than they’ve solved. The federal government does not have undifferentiated ‘governmental power.’ Instead, the constitution vests three different branches with three unique types of power – power for legislating, executing and adjudicating the fairness of any actions.

During the 1787 Constitutional debate the Anti-Federalists wrote extensively on their skepticism for the long-term success of such a vast central government run by fallen men:

“The powers vested in Congress by this [proposed] constitution, must necessarily annihilate and absorb the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of the several states, and produce from their ruins one consolidated government, which… will be an iron banded despotism.”

This annihilation and absorption of state powers is not like an internal cancer because it is an over-powering external force. It is more like a predator consuming its prey. It exerts crushing power against each independent and sovereign state.

The Founders recognized that pervasive power could be the, “potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People, and to usurp for themselves the reins of Government.”  This in turn would be, “the means of annihilating the constitutions of the several states, and consequently, the liberties of the people.”

In this sense, today’s concentrated federal power is more dangerous than ever. Congress has abdicated their constitutional responsibility to legislate and this abandonment has led to the insidious bureaucratic and regulatory growth that we witness today. Additionally, the House of Representatives consistently refuses to exercise their  “Power of the Purse” to limit the growth of government and protect, preserve and secure the inherent rights and dignity of the American people.

Congress’ continual surrender works like this: First, Congress passes a very generic law to manage “Federal lands to meet the needs of present and future generations.”  This legislative function, however, does not provide many specifics. Even ObamaCare and ObamaTrade (Affordable Care Act, Trans-Pacific Partnership agreements) at nearly 10,000 pages of legalese leave most of the real dirty work to Executive level Cabinet members, not Congress.

This tactic authorizes various unelected commissions, bureaus or departments to create and empower other bureaucracies, such as the BLM, USFS, BOR, FWS, NPS, EPA, etc. to establish benchmarks, science and goals set by special interest groups intent on gaming the system.

Each of these new regulations comes complete with a phalanx of enforcement measures, such as, fines, permits, fees and operating restrictions (i.e., the force of law).  When these new regulations crush a citizen, family or an entire community we often hear the perpetually re-elected incumbent rail against the bureau’s actions.

Yet, Congress created this status-quo and they continually provide vast sums of borrowed money to fund it.bureaucratic-maze

We see it constantly. Agencies routinely make regulations, administer the rules and adjudicate any complaints or appeals. By their very nature these administrative agencies are unconstitutional because they violate the intrinsic principle of consensual governance which stems from the separation of powers.

As the federal government becomes more corrupt and disengaged from its responsibility to, “We the People” the concentrated power becomes evermore treacherous. These agencies glow with absurd arrogance and self-righteousness while demeaning wholesome citizens.

This fatal corruption flows continually from the core. It diligently usurps state and local authority with a steady stream of new rules and regulations published in the Federal Registry. This registry is itself the bloated encyclopedia of administrative abuses costing taxpayers hundreds of billions. Politicians, in turn, make more exotic promises and gather more special interest groups, crony-capitalists or citizens as favored constituents.

Our fight is to reign in out-of-control bureaucracies and return America to it’s roots founded in personal responsibility, individual liberty, free-market ingenuity and a government intent on securing the God-given, unalienable rights of the American people.

“In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man,
but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

–Thomas Jefferson, fair copy of the drafts of the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

Posted on

BLM v Hammond – A Blind Pimple Or Worse?

As eMails fly around the Web supporting the Hammond family, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) shows a striking resemblance to a bad case of acne. My suggestion is that the BLM needs a thorough scrubbing.

A blind pimple is a red, painful, raised area that does not yet show the soft white head of a facial Vesuvius which is about to explode.  Pimples are caused by overactive glands which are producing excess oil. When the skin’s pores become clogged, the debris builds and pimples form.

On one’s face the results are quite common, although extremely frustrating.

Our federal government has what is akin to a bad case of acne. Daily, we witness excessive regulations, exorbitant costs and swelling inefficiencies which stem from the debris left by overactive and over-reaching government policies.

The results oozing from these unmanageable bureaucracies are the outright loss of individual freedom, devastating community conflict, incalculable economic ruin, personal pain and immense suffering. The accumulated layers of this non-consensual regulatory rubble is both harmful and costly to our Republic’s character.

The circumstances engulfing the Hammond family represent all of the above.

Oregon’s Honorable Senators, Wyden and Merkley and House Member, Walden, have all been on the job while the debris has been building. The coming explosion should do more than just ruin their starched white shirts. These men should bear the burden of accountability.

To stop tragedy from occurring Congress needs to rein in rogue federal agencies.  They need to stand for the people they were elected to represent. This means squeezing out the excess puss before federal agencies leave devastating scars on local landscapes.

The Hammond story is a long and twisted tale. The Feds claim the Hammonds, “knowingly and willfully combined, conspired and agreed to commit” crimes against the US.

The Grand Jury Superseding Indictment erupts on the scene in 2012. It highlights purposeful back-burn fires and other extraneous incidents, some of which were up to 15 years prior. It also categorizes the Hammond’s actions as “malicious attempts to damage and destroy” property of the US.

What it doesn’t document is any moral failings or malicious actions by federal employees. Somehow, through decades of interaction, the BLM deserves only glory for their moral rectitude and innocence. While the Hammond’s apparently deserve nothing but our contempt and 60 months in a federal prison.

The real story should be filled with men and women, on both sides of the issue, who made choices.  Sometimes the choices were made under great duress and sometimes they were made with well-thought diligence.

Choices made by individuals and organizations will never be perfect, regardless of which side of the fence they are on. After all, history’s record is swollen with mankind’s fallenness.

The Hammond’s story should also describe men and women who showed genuine care and concern, but who were hamstrung by over-zealous regulators. Washington’s reckless quest for more re-election campaign contributions adds conflicting burdens from crony capitalists, environmentalists and other special interest groups.

My conjecture is that the vast majority of actions at the federal level are aimed at building a federal empire of absolute control.

Our Congressmen have been continually surrendering their legislative authority for decades. They have  consistently squandered their rightful constitutional responsibility of managing national affairs via the historic principles of personal responsibility in free-markets and sound money.

Hudson Institute fellow, Christopher DeMuth, notes, “Since the early 1970s, Congress has delegated broad lawmaking authority to a proliferating array of regulatory agencies, from EPA [, BLM] and OSHA in the early years to numerous executive councils, boards, and bureaus…  In the new dispensation, members of Congress vote bravely for clean air, affordable health care, and sound finance, while leaving the real policy decisions to executive agencies.”

This is the making of a blind pimple of enormous proportions. It has been festering below the surface for decades and with the Hammond family we finally see the sickening whitehead.

The Hammonds are being subjected to a minimum of 5 years imprisonment under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. Does anyone really believe this is an appropriate categorization for Dwight and Steve Hammond?

The Armageddon-like usage of this legislation is not designed to terrorists at bay or keep you and your family safe. Rather, it represents a larger strategic goal focused on ensuring empire through regulatory tyranny and abusive legislation over our food, water, air and land.

The Hammonds’ conviction turned on 139 acres of public land being destroyed during back-burn operations. Does this make them terrorists?

What about the millions of acres destroyed annually by the BLM and USFS? Are there any terrorist charges pending against these organizations or their employees?  No, the cabal of error, vengeance and greed would never allow that.

The federal government has been positioning for absolute control and martial law for years. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012, and its annual renewal efforts, highlights my conjecture.

The NDAA allows for indefinite-detention-without-trial.  This provision is not only for foreign combatants but also applies to US citizens.  The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the National Security Administration’s (NSA) mass surveillance measures are used non-stop to gather millions of phone-calls and eMails without warrant. Additionally, massive resource confiscation provisions exist, via executive order, for the White House to exercise as long as the “emergency” label gets properly affixed.

This is more than a blind pimple festering under the surface.

This is the loss of liberty that the Founders so poignantly identified.

”Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them.”

– Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833

We must not allow our modern congressional profligates their imagined rewards. Instead, support the Hammond family and fight for freedom!

For more information and source documents please visit: http://landrights.org/or/Hammond/index.htm or http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/2015/11/hammond-information-update.html

Posted on

Another Side of Beef?

Special interest lobbyists across America have essentially gutted our Republic. They have become so adept at picking through the bones of our public treasury that they behave more like ravenous wolves than Sons of Liberty.

Yesterday’s House budget deal, delivered by the new Speaker Paul Ryan is nothing but a John Boehner organized Republican blessing on all of Obama’s artful designs. This budget deal, like others over the past 20 years will ensure continual federal debt and deficits while driving the federal leviathan toward complete dysfunction.

Butchers at the Meat Mart

Politicians, in both parties, act more like butchers than representatives as they wield their tools. They specialize in separating the tender morsels of meat stock from the remainder of the carcass. Their self-serving promotional pieces and basic handouts look like the sections of a butchered beef cow.

In beef cutting, a phrase like “choice cut” is quite different from a “select” or “prime cut.”  The USDA came up with several confusingly subjective, supposedly precise, designations to make every consumer feel like he or she was going to be a winner at the butcher’s counter.

Yet, certainly there is a difference. They are priced differently; they cook differently; they have different structural components, and one is more tender, more flavorful and easier to swallow.

This example illustrates how bureaucrats and politicians prefer to confuse the public with well-meaning, feel-good phrases instead of tackling issues with honesty and clarity.

There’s one more rump to carve up now that the nation’s economic carcass is almost in the bag.

Our state’s Democrat Senators, Wyden and Merkley, and Republican Representative Walden are all thoroughly enjoying their time at the bipartisan butcher block as they scheme about methods of slicing up taxpayers via the KBRA/KHSA. [For those not living near Southern Oregon or Northern California these two cash cows are the area’s twin step-sisters: Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) and the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA).]

When Congress sets out to do the Thanksgiving Day carving, our Constitutionally defined Representative Republic and it’s free-market principles are surely on the cutting board.

Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway holding company will be one of the largest winners. Berkshire Hathaway is the parent company for PacifiCorp, the actual owner of the four dams slated for removal. There is no doubt that taxpayers will get turned regularly on the spit of their Representative’s making, while everyone else at the table will get a bone to chew on.

Baskets of Subsidies

The current KBRA/KHSA promises the special interest “stakeholders” a basket of  plentiful goodies:

  • PacifiCorp will receive more than $1 billion in funding for their dam removal efforts.
  • PacifiCorp will inch its way toward meeting the renewable portfolio standard (RPS) as electric utility users grab at rebates structured to reward lobbying interests.
  • PacifiCorp will also receive taxpayer funding for operating their Link River and Keno Dams.
  • The KBRA provides $92,500,000 to the Klamath Water and Power Agency (KWAPA). KWAPA is a Joint Powers/Inter-governmental Agency whose members are water agencies within the Klamath Basin Watershed.
  • Irrigators will receive Electric Power Subsidies to fund unspecified projects to generate renewable energy and increase energy efficiency to reduce power costs.
  • Commercial farming interests in Tule Lake will receive a Pumping Cost Subsidy. This subsidy will transfer costs from a single localized irrigation district to taxpayers across the nation as the USFWS absorbs the cost transfer
  • Owners of thousands of acres of irrigated land will need to”voluntarily” retire their water rights so that the water flows can get transferred to other collective interests.
  • Tribal interests will receive a direct transfer of 100,000 acres from our Winema National Forest.
  • Politicians will receive the benefit of telling us that our government is more concerned about the environment than those of us who actually live and work the land. They will also use this as an opportunity to push their socialist mantra about the benefits of redistributive policies.
  • Lastly, environmental fear-mongers will get their entire agenda subsidized via taxpayer funding.

Too Good To Be True

Even in politi-speak these deals sound too good to be true. The new, progressive American way doesn’t bother to mention any potential downsides, costs, or pay any attention to the stark realities facing the Federal government.

Our nation’s deficit is $19.8 trillion dollars. Therefore, any legislation that adds debt to the deficit cannot be seen as a prudent move by our Congress. The issuance of debt by our government to destroy infrastructure in order to boast about temporary economic activity and job creation is a shell game rigged against the future of our children.

The development of green energy production capacity is another fraudulent subsidy to reward special interests with taxpayer funds. Lastly, debt financed destruction of our nation’s clean, low-cost energy capacity will never produce the prosperity our communities need to sustain themselves.

In the end, the butchers of our great nation will be tussling over the maggot infested bones of our once  vibrant Republic while the local community will be left holding their hand painted signs promising, “KBRA=Jobs.”

You’ll have to admit, its got a nice ring; it makes an easy #hashtag for Twitter users, its under 140 characters and it certainly looks triumphant on taxpayer funded government license plates.

Posted on

I Smell More than One Rat!

My article, KBRA – The Trap is Set, caught (pun intended) some heat and lots of comments, too.

Please know that I chose my words carefully and I never accused anyone of being “a rat” but I did set up an illustration to point out that the federal government treats most of us like rats.

Apparently, the big boys in their white, lab-coats like having us run in our cages. They want to control every aspect of our lives:

  • How much we eat and drink,
  • What we eat and drink,
  • How much energy we consume,
  • What types of energy we consume
  • How much grass our cows consume,
  • How much water we use when we flush our toilets, etc., etc.

The elites in science have made puppets out of our legislators and are fast becoming the new ruling class.

Legendary Oxford scholar, Christian apologist and author C.S. Lewis warned, “The new oligarchy must increasingly rely on the advice of scientists until in the end the politicians become merely the scientists’ puppets.” Lewis’ warning realizes that science (a good thing) could be systematically perverted to attack religious traditions, subvert  law and destroy human freedom. Lewis’ predictions are essential for us today because science is being used to extract money and power from the tax-paying public.

Consider science claims that once occupied the thrones of power and have since been debunked:

  • The American public was told that coffee, eggs and bacon were killers. We were told to drastically reduce our consumption or our health would pay the price. Now, a few years later, the folks in the white lab-coats have new science that says, “Oops…  coffee, eggs and bacon actually contribute to healthy diets.”
  • In another example, paper grocery sacks were once common place, but plastic bag manufacturers developed a winning marketing strategy. They re-defined paper products  as “non-renewable” because they come from our forest lands. Yet, everyone knows forest products are a naturally plentiful, renewable and bio-degradable. This was scare-mongering at its worse because the politically motivated marketing strategy actually prevailed over common-sense.

Legislators were caught, in a trap of their own making. They forgot their duty to the US Constitution – they wanted power, control and money.

The plastics industry consortium had set a perfect trap. They pushed an alternative backed by so-called science. It even looked reasonable, particularly after they sold the claim that worldwide destruction of forests would be imminent without immediate action.

Politicians saw their re-election campaign coffers filling with special interest money and they were trapped – like rats!

The same tactic is being used today against clean, affordable, renewable hydro-electric dam facilities. In Oregon, hydro-electric generation facilities constructed before 1995 have been deemed non-renewable by the legislature. This doesn’t make sense except that Oregon’s legislature has also been snagged by the false promises coming from the federal government.

The State of Oregon would be one of the nation’s top renewable energy producers if their  hydro-electric definition followed common-sense.  Unfortunately, as a top renewable producer, Oregon would no longer have access to fistfuls of money flowing from the federal largess.

In these cases, politics and science can be viewed as evil step-sisters. When left to their independent realms they can serve the public well, but when combined they are often misused.

Today, in the plastic bag arena, it’s happening in reverse.  Estimates suggest over 1 trillion disposable plastic bags are used worldwide every year. Americans use and throw away 100 billion of these bags.

What solutions are being shoveled at the public? Government regulation, of course. Science again will be used to funnel your tax-dollars into the political winner’s circle.

This is not a solution, it is only regulation. It only serves those winners the government chooses, through legislative mandate. Remember, government has no power except coercive power – the power of forcing compliance through regulatory agencies.

Only free markets can accomplish solutions. Free markets do not need political aide to survive. This is why the KBRA/KHSA issue is so divisive. It promotes government regulation of water flows over common-sense solutions for solving water scarcity. Why not add water to our watershed? Why were water storage reservoirs omitted from this comprehensive 50 year agreement? Who’s in charge here? Who’s your master? (How many gallons of water can we use with each flush?)

Seeking political solutions to our societies problems of supply and demand would be like pouring clean, golden brown motor oil on your hot-cakes – it might serve as an appealing photo-op but it is a deadly combination.

Nearly 185 years ago, Alexis de Tocqueville noticed the potential for despotism in America. He observed men, “incessantly endeavoring to procure the petty and paltry pleasures with which they glut their lives.” Over these citizens would reign, “an immense and tutelary power, which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications.”

With dramatic insight, Tocqueville notes, “It would be like the authority of a parent if…  its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks… to keep them in perpetual childhood…”

Tocqueville realized the threat of lost liberty. He notes, it will happen when the government, “chooses to be the sole agent” of our happiness, security and pleasures.

His most poignant insight is the question, “What remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living?”

Tocqueville was a far better word smith than I and he avoided the “rat” analogy by using the more common language of his era which described a horse in harness: “Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large, who hold the end of his chain.”

In closing:

“Be not intimidated … nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice.” – John Adams (1765)

Posted on

Dam Removal is Fishy Business

Last Friday, I was on Bill Meyer’s Radio Show discussing the KBRA/KHSA agreements. Bill asked Klamath County Commissioner Tom Mallams, former Shasta Nation Vice Chairman Gary Lake, and myself to provide insight to the apparent support for dam removal from Oregon’s only Republican House member Greg Walden.

Unfortunately for Rep. Walden, he can’t have it both ways. He can’t pretend to work for rural American values while flushing our property rights and precious fresh-water resources into the Salty Pacific.

Not only does the KBRA and KHSA take water resources from Klamath and Siskiyou counties and the Rogue Valley, but it sets precedence throughout the United States. These measures, if successful, will instruct others on how to successfully use political power to transfer private wealth into collective interests’ pockets. The KBRA/KHSA represents the classic “Divide and Conquer” paradigm: tribes against agriculture, project irrigators against non-project irrigators, wind and solar interests against ratepayers, business cronyism against taxpayers, and finally, the Endangered Species Act against the rest of us.

These agreements are bad for property owners, ratepayers, and taxpayers. They may result in a tidal wave of dam removal efforts across the US, because they ignore facts and propose feel-good measures that can’t possibly achieve their utopian goals.

20 Reasons Why the KBRA/KHSA Does Not Work

 

  1. Ratepayers will pay in excess of $1 billion to remove the private assets of PacifiCorp, a subsidiary of Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway investment empire.
  2. Ratepayers will pay unknown costs for replacing the 155 megawatts of cheap, clean, renewable hydro-power electricity with other more expensive forms of energy.
  3. The Department of the Interior has recently offered to transfer nearly 100,000 acres (156 mi.2) of the Fremont-Winema National Forest back to tribal ownership. The Fremont-Winema National Forest was originally created following the termination of federal recognition of and government services to the Klamath Tribes. The 1954 Klamath Termination Act also paid $41,000 to each of the 1,659 enrolled tribal members (68 Stat. 718). In current dollar terms this would equate to $362,667.10 for each of those tribal members. This would be the equivalent of transferring more than $601 million (current dollars) for the creation of the Fremont-Winema forest.
  4. The dams are at an elevation which is 2,500 feet lower than Klamath’s agricultural basin. The dams are also between 50 and 60 miles downstream from the Klamath agricultural community’s interests. Because of these two facts, anyone can see that Klamath Basin Agriculture has no explicit need for the dams, in or out. The farmers in the Klamath Basin have signed on to this agreement in an effort to preserve their established water-rights which were diminished through the preposterous twisting of administrative water regulation by the State of Oregon.
  5. The agreements do not re-establish agricultural water rights for farmers. The agreements only propose that tribes will not fully exercise their new-found water rights. This is the meaning of the phrase, “water-certainty,” within the agreements. No guarantees of water delivery are explicitly identified.
  6. The water delivery schedule still has a descending priority. First, to fish, second to the  environment, and lastly, to agriculture. Water deliveries are still subject to tribal calls on the water, new endangered species mitigation, new biological opinions regarding current mitigation, and revised regulatory decisions about allocations to existing uses.
  7. The Biological Opinions used for determining water requirements for endangered or threatened species run contrary to scientific evidence. The complex eco-system for maintaining flows and lake levels can be better accomplished with dams left in place. Otherwise, we risk creating a fishy version of the Barred Owl against the Spotted Owl, or the Pacific salmon verses the Harbor Seal in the Northwest. Which of these identified species will win the crown: Lost River Suckers, Shortnose Suckers, Redband Trout, Steelhead, Chinook or Coho salmon? Destroying the dams can’t possibly resolve the conflicting priorities across competing species.
  8. Economic viability of agricultural enterprises will be continually undermined in favor of land idling (using tax-dollars to buy idleness from farmers), out-right bankruptcies, fire sales to environmental or land conservation groups, while leaving the land to its original non-irrigated, pre-historic, high-dessert uses.
  9. Recent year salmon fish counts far exceed (by 100%) any recorded salmon counts from pre-dam construction years.
  10. Cool, voluminous water flows are good for fish and wildlife habitat. Non-seasonal water leveling and flow management can only be provided with dam infrastructure in place.
  11. The dams act as giant settling ponds, removing algae and tons of deadly toxins and other sedimentation which would otherwise foul the river system.
  12. Without the dams in place the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) will be stripped of necessary tools (i.e., river pulsing and flushing) for managing water quality and fish disease outbreaks.
  13. Destroying the dam infrastructures clearly violates the Clean Water Act. Does the problem disappear because there is an “exceptional discharge exemption?” No. It just becomes legal. Using this logic, regulating agencies could argue that a waiver was the only thing needed to appease the people living in the Animus River basin, where the EPA recently dumped 3 million gallons of toxic chemical waste.
  14. The “exceptional discharge exemption” focuses only on calculations for tons of concrete and rebar debris. However, there is no plan for managing the estimated 22.6 million tons of toxic sediment that is currently stored behind the existing dams. This volume is 1000 times more than the toxic Animus river discharge.
  15. Allowing federal contractors to poison downstream aquatic life and salmon spawning beds will create harmful conditions that may take decades to resolve.
  16. Before any studies were completed, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission stated that there was nothing PacifiCorp could do to get the dams re-licensed. This is the type of agenda-driven overreach that mimics the EPA’s predetermined rejection of the Pebble Basin Mine in Alaska.
  17. The “stakeholder” group was created through political, agenda-driven motives by Oregon’s disgraced former Gov. John Kitzhaber. Environmental special interest groups were deemed “stakeholders” with standing, exceeding the rights of private property owners and water right holders.
  18. Private property rights, in the form of water right holdings, become uncompensated “takings” under the agreements.
  19. The destruction of water and river front property value is a clear, unjustified and uncompensated  “taking” of private property.
  20. Public disclosures regarding the total costs to ratepayers and taxpayers is incomplete and disingenuous.

The KBRA and the KHSA agreements would be enormously expensive.  There is no budget for this money, so it must be borrowed from our children’s futures. Will these untapped natural river resources provide our posterity with the means for servicing this debt? Do these expenses solve the real problems? Can these costs be justified?

Oregon’s only Republican House member, Rep. Walden ought to listen to his conservative peers, like  Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) instead of following in the footsteps of our states far-left, progressive liberals, Sen. Wyden (D-OR), Sen. Merkley (D-OR), Rep. DeFazio (D), et al.

In November of 2011, Rep. McClintock, gave his summary of the poorly engineered KBRA/KHSA agreements:

“Amidst spiraling electricity prices and chronic electricity shortages the effort to tear down four perfectly good hydroelectric dams at enormous cost to ratepayers and taxpayers is insane. These dams produce up to 155 megawatts of the cleanest and cheapest electricity on the planet – enough for 155,000 homes.

“Proponents say it is necessary to tear down the dams to help increase the salmon population, and yet we did that a long time ago by building fish hatcheries. The problem is that hatchery fish are not included in the population count. And to add insult to insanity, if the Iron Gate Dam is torn out, the result will be loss of water needed to operate the Iron Gate Fish Hatchery, which produces five million salmon smolts every year.

“Fortunately, congressional approval is necessary to move forward. The full House voted earlier this year against proceeding with the Klamath dam removal. That [2011] precedent, and a $13 trillion national debt {now, $20 trillion] speak volumes on the chances of this legislation passing in the House over the next year.”

What was true then, is true today. That’s the nature of truth, it doesn’t change with the tide.

     “The American farmer is in a situation today that can be solved. The solution is not one of governmental policies that create short-term “fixes” for the farmer. The best method to let the farmer prosper is the same solution that would let the other parts of the economy prosper. Government must remove the burdens placed upon the individual. The individual must be allowed to compete on an equal basis to become competitive with his peers.”

—Edgar Terry, a fourth-generation farmer in Ventura, California