Vicente Fox: North American currency, Amero, is on the way

Ex-Mexican prez: 'Amero' on the way
Vicente Fox confirms long-term deal worked out with President Bush
Posted: October 9, 2007
 
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

 
Ex-Mexican President Vicente Fox last night on CNN Former Mexican President Vicente Fox confirmed the existence of a plan conceived with President Bush to create a new regional currency in the Americas, in an interview last night on CNN's "Larry King Live."
It possibly was the first time a leader of Mexico, Canada or the U.S. openly confirmed a plan for a regional currency. Fox explained the current regional trade agreement that encompasses the Western Hemisphere is intended to evolve into other previously hidden aspects of integration.

According to a transcript published by CNN, King, near the end of the broadcast, asked Fox a question e-mailed from a listener, a Ms. Gonzalez from Elizabeth, N.J.: "Mr. Fox, I would like to know how you feel about the possibility of having a Latin America united with one currency?"


Fox answered in the affirmative, indicating it was a long-term plan. He admitted he and President Bush had agreed to pursue the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas – a free-trade zone extending throughout the Western Hemisphere, suggesting part of the plan was to institute eventually a regional currency.

"Long term, very long term," he said. "What we proposed together, President Bush and myself, it's ALCA, which is a trade union for all the Americas."

ALCA is the acronym for the Area de Libre Comercio de las Américas, the name of the FTAA in Spanish.

King, evidently startled by Fox's revelation of the currency, asked pointedly, "It's going to be like the euro dollar (sic), you mean?"

"Well, that would be long, long term," Fox repeated.

Fox noted the FTAA plan had been thwarted by Hugo Chavez, the radical socialist president of Venezuela.

"Everything was running fluently until Hugo Chavez came," Fox commented. "He decided to combat the idea and destroy the idea."

Fox explained that he and Bush intended to proceed incrementally, establishing FTAA as an economic agreement first and waiting to create an amero-type currency later – a plan he also suggested was in place for NAFTA itself.

"I think the process to go, first step is trading agreement," Fox said. "And then further on, a new vision, like we are trying to do with NAFTA."

Fox's reply to the CNN viewer was captured in a clip posted on YouTube.com. CNN posted video of the interview but did not include the segment with questions from viewers.

Last week, WND reported BankIntroductions.com, a Canadian company that specializes in global banking strategies and currency consulting, is advising clients the amero may be the currency of North America within 10 years.

Coin designer Daniel Carr has issued for sale a series of private-issue fantasy pattern amero coins that have drawn attention on the Internet.

WND also reported the African Union is moving down the path of regional economic integration, with the African Central Bank planning to create the "Gold Mandela" as a single African continental currency by 2010.

The Council on Foreign Relations has supported regional and global currencies designed to replace nationally issued currencies.

In an article in the May/June issue of Foreign Affairs, entitled "The End of National Currency," CFR economist Benn Steil asserts the dollar is a temporary currency.

Steil concluded "countries should abandon monetary nationalism," moving to adopt regional currencies, on the road to a global "one world currency."

WND previously reported Steve Previs, a vice president at Jeffries International Ltd. in London, said the amero "is the proposed new currency for the North American Community which is being developed right now between Canada, the U.S., and Mexico."

A video clip of the CNBC interview in November with Jeffries is now available at YouTube.com.

WND also has reported a continued slide in the value of the dollar on world currency markets could set up conditions in which the adoption of the amero as a North American currency gains momentum.

Austin motorists DOUBLE CHARGED on tollways

Link to AP article here. Interesting how this "glitch" didn't cause under-billing, and the article says the double billing could still happen, just less frequently. How comforting...

DOUBLE BILLING is also occurring in Tyler, TX. See the news story here.

Equipment glitch causes double-billing on Austin toll roads
Associated Press
October 9, 2007

AUSTIN - About 50,000 vehicles have been double-billed on Austin-area tollways because of faulty equipment, Texas Department of Transportation officials said.

The agency said Monday that the problem has occurred about one out of every 600 times a car passed one of the tolling points since charging began in January.

The agency has adjusted its equipment and software in the past few weeks to stop the problem, although it could still occur at a less-frequent rate, like once every 2,000 toll transactions.

Officials said the charges will be reversed for any customers who have been double-billed.

"We will reverse all of them," said David Powell, the department's director of turnpike information technology and toll operations.

Powell said the problem occurred at tolling plazas where the overhead flat-panel antennae were out of adjustment, causing faulty communication with electronic toll tags on car windshields.

If the antenna is not aimed correctly, it can read the tag on one car while believing that it is communicating with a car in a different spot. Then, those cars that have already seen debits to their tag accounts might be photographed by the equipment at a different spot and charged again.

Powell said a number of antennae were out of adjustment, but the one causing the most problems was on the westbound center lane at the Lake Creek toll plaza on Texas 45 North.

He said the antennae could have been installed incorrectly or knocked out of adjustment during construction.

Hundreds turn out to oppose elevated tollway, Grand Parkway

Link to article here. This Grand Parkway project is widely reported to be a connector to the Trans Texas Corridor, TTC-69 project.

Says a local business representative:

''You all that proposed this plan, you have awakened a sleeping giant.''

Hundreds turn out to hear Grand Parkway plans
Oct. 11, 2007
By DUSTIN WENZEL
Houston Chronicle

More than 250 residents spilled into Manford Williams Elementary on Wednesday night to voice their concerns about plans to develop Segment C of the Grand Parkway into a four-lane tollway.

Hosted by the coalition STOP, or Stop Tolls on Parkway, the meeting drew a standing-room only crowd with representatives from eight communities near the proposed highway, which will run from U.S. Hwy. 59 to U.S. Hwy. 288.

''This road is obviously built to accommodate the future residents in Fort Bend County. We are not being accommodated, said Ann Franson,'' a Brazos Lakes representative from STOP. ''We are just like the people that will come later and yet we have not been invited into the dialogue of this road.''

Current plans for Segment C show it to be a four-lane road with grassy medians and access ramps that begins with an overpass over U.S. Hwy. 59 connecting Segment D. It will continue along Crabb River Road until curving to the west at Rabbs Bayou before hugging the north and east edges of Bridlewood before traveling past the George Ranch and eventually connecting with U.S. Hwy. 288.

STOP is asking for a 60-day comment period and the elimination of tolls on Segment C. The group also seeks the removal of the planned overpass on U.S. Hwy. 59 and access ramps near Bridlewood and Brazos Lakes subdivisions.

Grand Parkway Association executive director David Gornet said he does not have the authority to extend the comment period and that the Texas Department of Transportation's Houston-area district engineer, Gary Trietsch, will make the final decision on the segment's route.

Gorent said after a study team completes the final environmental impact statement, which is due before the end of the year, TxDOT will hold another public meeting. Construction on the segment will not start until at least 2010, he said.

Need for road discussed

Community representatives took turns grilling Gornet about how the segment's route was planned and the need for a tollway through a scarcely-populated area with little traffic.

''Prior to reaching Brazos Lake, there is farmland, people — open land,'' said Lynn Franklin, representing Canyon Gate at the Brazos. ''I guess were trying to operate on the 'Build it and they will come' theory.''

Franklin said she is concerned how much impact taxpayers have on a ''road that goes to nowhere'' and that the tollway will produce more traffic around their communities.

Other residents openly complained about the view of a tollway outside their community and the potential increase in air and noise pollution in a rural area.

''If you look at the (proposed) fly-by (connecting U.S. Hwy. 59 to the Grand Parkway), its like a roller coaster - but its a roller coaster ride you dont want to get on,'' said Cheryl Rambaud, a five-year resident of Canyon Gate at the Brazos. ''From my vantage point instead of looking at the trees and the sky and my neighbors' two-story homes, I will be looking at the Jetsons' version of the roller coaster.''

Gornet later [responded on]explained why he believed elected officials favor Segment C and included it in the Houston-Galveston Area Council's 2025 transportation plan.

''The Grand Parkway possibly provides continued growth of our county. (Elected officials) have seen that it has been a benefit as you go south from (Interstate 10),'' he said.

County judge opposes tollway

Franklin wasn't the only audience member who questioned the need for the tollway. Fort Bend County Judge Bob Hebert said the county is against constructing the segment now, but added the county can't stop TxDOT from building a state highway.

Hebert, though, wouldn't rule out the need for Segment C in the future.

''One of the principles of doing tollroads is that tollroads are devices of last resort,'' he said. ''You have to have cars to pay for it. Fort Bend County has no plans to make Segment C a tollroad. Theres no traffic out in Segment C.

''I agree with you folks, now is not the time to even be considering the subject. I'm not opposed to tollways. (But) Segment C is not needed at this time.''

Impact on businesses

Quart Graves, the owner/operator of Chick-Fil-A Greatwood, represented various businesses in the River Park Shopping Center on the northeast corner of the Grand Parkway.

He called the tollway's potential construction horrific and compared the tollways impact on businesses inside the center to Town and Country Mall, which eventually closed after construction to the Sam Houston Tollway limited access to the shopping center.

Tentative plans call for the construction of direct connectors with U.S. Hwy. 59 directly over the edge of the shopping center. If construction proceeds, Graves said Chick-Fil-A, Mattress Firm, Bank of America and Whataburger would be forced to close.

Other businesses on Crabb Road that lie in the segment's proposed right-of-way include Exxon, Burger King, The Z Icehouse and Greatwood Automotive. However, Gornet said, TxDOT will not take any action on businesses that sit in the right-of-way until it issues a record of decision to purchase the right-of-way.

Regardless of the timetable, Graves said he will fight the proposal.

''The cement has barely dried on my business,'' Graves said. ''You all that proposed this plan, you have awakened a sleeping giant.''

For information on Segment C, visit www.grandpky.com.

Pro-toll Richard Perez new San Antonio Chamber President

Perez's stint as toll-road front man
By Pat Driscoll
Express-News
October 10, 2007

Richard Perez, selected as the new president of the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce, is one of the most effective toll-road advocates around.

webPerez.jpg
Richard Perez
Tuesday's story
Chamber statement
As chairman of the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the past two years, Perez was a tenacious fighter for some 70 miles of planned toll roads. Yet, I never saw him try to bully anyone. He was dogged but always a gentleman.

Those are powerful qualities.

Perez skidded into the toll controversy in August 2005, just two months after starting his second term on City Council and taking over as MPO chairman, when he helped beat back demands for an independent study of local toll plans.


Rockin' the toll roads
Split views on toll review
Toll road review idea rejected
Toll critics soon made Perez a top target for his "deplorable behavior AGAINST the PEOPLE."

San Antonio Toll Party
Over the next year, Perez found himself looking for a new MPO director, admonishing a state transportation official in a public meeting, contemplating potential impacts of high gas prices on future toll roads and digging in against cries to revert a U.S. 281 toll plan back to a gas-tax only plan.

Transportation director resigns
Toll debate turns ugly
Gas-price impact on toll roads feared
High gas prices and toll roads
Making a toll stand
Blazing guns
U.S. 281 toll idea gets more detractors
Perez left the MPO last May with as much clamor as ever. An effort led by Mayor Phil Hardberger to keep him on the board, which included a sudden policy change, drew shrieks from critics and the mayor soon dropped the idea.

Perez not going away
Richard Perez passed over
But now Perez is back in the spotlight, and he'll likely be a strong spokesman for toll roads.

State surplus $1.5 billion more than expected…more money for roads

State surplus grows by $1.5 billion
Much of the money already committed
By Jason Embry
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Wednesday, October 10, 2007Texas collected more in taxes last year than expected, Comptroller Susan Combs said Tuesday.

The state ended the 2007 budget year Aug. 31 with an $8.5 billion surplus, which was $1.5 billion more than Combs projected in January.

"State sales and use tax collections, which registered a 10.9 percent increase over fiscal 2006, have proved particularly robust, propelled in large part by vigorous activity in the mining, construction, manufacturing and trade sectors," Combs said in a letter Tuesday to Gov. Rick Perry and legislative leaders.

The additional surplus amounts to about 1 percent of the state's $151.9 billion budget for 2008-09.

Some of the extra money will go to so-called contingency appropriations, which are items in the two-year state budget that lawmakers said they would fund if the state collected extra money.

Fo

r instance, $242 million will go toward a state employee pay raise of 2 percent per year for the next two years, although Combs had assured lawmakers that the money for the raise would be there.

Another $300 million is headed to the Texas Department of Transportation for road-building.

Transportation Department spokesman Randall Dillard said that final decisions about how the money would be used have not been made, but he said it would "help offset skyrocketing inflation."

Highway construction costs have increased 62 percent since 2002, Dillard said.

Combs spokesman R.J. DeSilva said agency officials were still crunching numbers Tuesday to see how much of the new money was already committed and how much will be left over.

Whatever is left will be added to the $2.5 billion that lawmakers left unspent this year so they'd have it for the budget they'll write in 2009.

That extra money could help in a couple of ways. For one, Combs has said that growth in state sales-tax collections is expected to slow in 2008 and 2009 as compared with the robust growth of the past few years.

Also, it could help if the state's new business tax, which companies will pay for the first time next year, brings in less than expected.

"How the money should be spent will depend on the next session of the Legislature," House Speaker Tom Craddick said. "However, I am much more comfortable having $1.5 billion more than expected than $1.5 billion less."

Scholars say Bush makes North American Union unilateral executive decisions

Scholars Explain President's Plan for A North American Union
By Phyllis Schlafly
Monday, October 8, 2007

Those who seek to understand what's behind the chatter about President George W. Bush's Security and Prosperity Partnership as a possible prelude to a North American Union, similar to the European Union, should read the 35-page White Paper published recently by the Hudson Institute called "Negotiating North America: The Security and Prosperity Partnership."

The Washington, D.C., think tank is blunt and detailed in describing where the Security and Prosperity Partnership is heading.

Here's how Hudson defines the Security and Prosperity Partnership's goal: "The SPP process is the vehicle for the discussion of future arrangements for economic integration to create a single market for goods and services in North America."

The key words are "economic integration," a phrase used again and again, into a North American "single market," another phrase used repeatedly.

"Integration" with Mexico and Canada is exactly what North American union means, but there's a big problem with this goal. "We the people" of the United States were never asked if we want to be "integrated" with Mexico and Canada, two countries of enormously different laws, culture, concept of government's role, economic system and standard of living.


Here's how Hudson explains the Security and Prosperity Partnership's process: "The most important feature of the SPP design is that it is neither intended to produce a treaty nor an executive agreement like the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) that would require congressional ratification or the passage of implementing legislation in the United States. The SPP was designed to function within existing administrative authority of the executive branch."

Hudson explains further: "The design of the SPP is innovative, eschewing the more traditional diplomatic and trade negotiation models in favor of talks among civil service professionals and subject matter experts with each government. This design places the negotiation fully within the authority of the executive branch in the United States."

Indeed, the Security and Prosperity Partnership is very "innovative." The arrogance of the Security and Prosperity Partnership's "design" to give the executive branch full "authority" to "enforce and execute" whatever is decided by a three-nation agreement of "civil service professionals," as though it were "law," is exceeded only by its unconstitutionality.

The Hudson White Paper admits the problem that the Security and Prosperity Partnership completely lacks "transparency and accountability." Hudson freely admits "the exclusion of Congress from the process"; constituents who contact their Congressmen discover that members know practically nothing about the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

Hudson states that, under the Security and Prosperity Partnership, one of the U.S. challenges is "managing Congress." Is Congress now to be "managed," either by executive-branch "authority" or by "dozens of regulators, rule makers, and officials working with their counterparts" from Mexico and Canada?

The Hudson White Paper reminds us that the 2005 Council on Foreign Relations document called "Building a North American Community" bragged that its recommendations are "explicitly linked" to SPP. The Council on Foreign Relations document called for establishing a "common perimeter" around North America by 2010.

Hudson praises the Council on Foreign Relations document for "raising public expectations" about what the Security and Prosperity Partnership can accomplish. Hudson explains that, while immigration is not an explicit Security and Prosperity Partnership agenda item, "mobility across the border is central to the idea of an integrated North American economic space."

"Harmonization" with other countries is another frequently used word. One of the Security and Prosperity Partnership's signature initiatives is "Liberalizing Rules of Origin."

The Hudson Paper reveals the Security and Prosperity Partnership's cozy collaboration with "some interest groups and not others." Translated, that means collaboration with multinational corporations, but not with small business or citizen groups.

After the heads of state of the United States, Mexico and Canada met in Waco, Texas, in March 2005 and announced the creation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership by press release, the North American Competitiveness Council emerged as "a private sector forum for business input" to Security and Prosperity Partnership working groups. But, according to Hudson, it wasn't merely "private" because it was "given official sanction."

After the three amigos met in Cancun, Mexico, in 2006, President Bush provided taxpayer funding for a think tank called the Center for Strategic and International Studies to meet secretly and produce a report called "The Future of North America." That document's favorite catchword is "North American labor mobility," which is a euphemism for admitting unlimited cheap labor from Mexico.

The Hudson White Paper states that "SPP combines an agenda with a political commitment." That's exactly why those who want to protect American sovereignty don't like the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

Among the people who take the Security and Prosperity Partnership seriously are Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., who introduced a House resolution opposing a North American Union and a NAFTA Superhighway, similar resolutions introduced into the state legislatures of 14 states, and California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter's amendment to prohibit the use of federal funds for Security and Prosperity Partnership working groups, which passed in the House by a vote of 362-63 on July 24.

The Hudson white paper suggests that it might be "necessary" for the Security and Prosperity Partnership to change its name and acronym. It is unlikely that a change of name will silence the American people who are outraged by the Security and Prosperity Partnership's goals and process.

TxDOT spies on citizens, hides SECRET cameras to collect data

If have to ask ourselves if we just leaped into some Orwellian nightmare when we read this...twice in ONE WEEK we hear of the government (in Maryland and now Texas) monitoring its citizens with cameras on highways. In MD, to catch people with expired registration, in Texas to collect information about people's driving habits, either way, NO ONE ASKED US!

It's one thing to be out and about in public, it's another to be spied upon while going about our daily lives! TxDOT has been hiding cameras in orange barrels along I-35 in Austin and I-10 in San Antonio. They're taking pictures of people's license plates and then mailing them a survey asking questions like:

1) The trip's origin and final destination
2) How often the driver makes the trip
3) How long a driver stayed at my destination before returning

Link to the Austin story here. Link to Houston Chronicle story here. Link to Express-News article with map of camera locations here.

State recorded license plates for transportation study
10/10/2007
By: News 8 Austin Staff

State officials say cameras tucked into orange barrels videotaped the license plates of thousands of drivers on Interstate 35 as part of a transportation study.
Critics of last month's study questioned whether it invaded motorists' privacy.

But a Texas Department of Transportation spokeswoman says the study is vital to transportation planning and was not meant to sneaky.

The state contracted Alliance Transportation Group to conduct the study.

The company mailed about 150,000 surveys to homes explaining that their license plate was randomly recorded. It asks questions such as the trip's destination and purpose, and the number of people living in the home.

Transportation Department spokeswoman Gaby Garcia says about 3,000 people have responded since the survey was mailed out three weeks ago.

She said the information won't be shared or sold and will be securely disposed of.

The department plans similar surveys next year in the Houston, Galveston, Beaumont and Port Arthur areas. Garcia says drivers will be notified ahead of time.

Charge by mile scheme….this time floated in Boston

Link to article here.

Tolling the open road
Massachusetts considers charging by the mile for highway drivers
By Noah Bierman, Globe Staff | October 7, 2007

The monthly invoice could look something like an electricity bill or a cellphone statement. But instead of kilowatt hours or roaming minutes, it would itemize how many miles you drive - with surcharges for traveling during peak hours, premiums for using so-called Lexus lanes that bypass rush-hour snarls, and discounts for sitting through traffic jams.

The free and open road, regarded by many Americans as a birthright, could become a relic under a plan being discussed in Massachusetts and in several other states, transforming highway use from a service available to all into a utility paid for on a per-mile basis.

This philosophical shift is the cornerstone of a landmark report, released last month by the Commonwealth's Transportation Finance Commission, which was tasked with finding the estimated $15 billion to $19 billion needed to fix the state's crumbling roads and bridges over the next two decades.

Under the commission's plan, a 5-cents-per-mile fee on major roads would replace, or minimize, gas taxes and fundamentally change a central aspect of everyday life.


"The idea that this is completely free is a fiction. It isn't," said James Aloisi Jr., a lawyer who served on the commission and a transportation official under former governor Michael Dukakis. "Someone's got to pay for it. We think the user should pay for it."

But early signs show that regular drivers may find the notion of a fully-tolled highway system harder to fathom.

"The taxpayers pay taxes to build the roads, we pay tolls to use the roads, and now they want to hit the taxpayers again," said Phyllis Lachman, 67, of Concord.

State Senator Steven A. Baddour, a Methuen Democrat and cochairman of the Legislature's transportation committee, said turning roads and bridges into a utility and adding more tolls "is too big of a stretch."

"People don't see it that way," he said. "You can't just put it in a report and expect people to buy it."

The technology that allows per-mile pricing is being used around the country, in bits and pieces, though no state has begun tolling all major roads. Oregon has come the closest, with a pilot program that equips volunteer drivers with global positioning devices in their cars. They pay by the mile and are exempt from gas taxes.

British drivers famously pay a flat fee equivalent to about $16 to drive into central London. If they fail to pay in advance, a security camera will shoot a picture of their license plates and automatically send them a ticket. Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York is pushing for a similar approach in his city.

More commonly, several states are using transponders, the same ones Massachusetts drivers use for the Fast Lane program, to create premium lanes on major highway systems that set pricing based on supply and demand. Those willing to pay hefty tolls get home the fastest.

Drivers on an 8-mile stretch of Interstate 15 in San Diego pay $1 to $4 to use the carpool lane (carpoolers and buses still ride free). Digital signs display toll prices that change throughout the day based on traffic volume. An express lane on State Road 91 in Southern California costs as much as $9.50 for a 10-mile drive during peak hours.

The price of using the lanes rises during rush hour so that drivers willing to pay more get a faster commute. At first, critics derided the roads as "Lexus lanes" because it was believed only the rich could afford to use them.

But researchers have found popularity cuts across class lines. Parents desperate to avoid a late fee from a day-care center or workers about to get fired for tardiness do the math and decide that a pricey ride can bail them out in a pinch. San Diego is expanding its program.

"That's the most free-market way of doing things in transportation that we have," said Martin Wachs, director of transportation, space, and technology for the Rand Corporation.

To Wachs, these lanes illustrate the broader choice drivers have. They pay for faster-moving, higher-quality roads through user fees or they pay by sitting in traffic on patchy, slow roads.

"You don't pay the same price for a hamburger as a steak," he said.

The Bush administration has embraced the theory as well. Last month, US Transportation Secretary Mary Peters awarded grants worth $848 million to Miami, Minneapolis, New York City, San Francisco, and Seattle to fight gridlock with strategies that include high-priced rush hour lanes.

The Massachusetts Turnpike Authority has been studying cameras that record license plate numbers, so that motorists who drive through toll booths without a Fast Lane transponder get a bill.

The authority is also looking at Fast Lane equipment that lets motorists drive through toll booths at highway speeds rather than slowing to 15 miles per hour.

The technology, in place elsewhere, would give the Turnpike Authority more options to set aside carpool lanes for fast travel.

Or the authority could charge higher tolls on regular lanes during rush hour. That might reduce congestion by persuading commuters with flexible schedules to avoid rush hour.

In most cases, traffic planners choose to build new lanes or convert carpool lanes into Lexus lanes instead of charging everyone. A more dramatic change, charging for basic roads that are now toll-free, may prove a larger hurdle. The federal government forbids charging on interstate highways, meaning the discussion to change would have to take place on a national level. And any system that requires all drivers to log their travel would raise privacy concerns. Proponents say there are ways to overcome the concerns - including systems that let drivers register for anonymous accounts or keep their digital driving logs stored in their cars.

But unless those concerns are allayed, many politicians say they will not support turning roads into utilities.

Voters "simply don't want Big Brother," said Representative David Paul Linsky, Democrat of Natick. "I want to see a specific proposal."

Nonetheless, the market approach has attracted support from the political left and right. Environmentalists say letting drivers see the true cost of using the roads will discourage congestion and persuade more commuters to use public transportation or to carpool. On the other hand, free market libertarians see an opportunity to reduce taxes and involve private companies in building, maintaining, and controlling roads.

"We use economic markets for electricity, for telephones, for food, for water . . . the question is why roads should be excluded," said Gabriel Roth, a research fellow at the Independent Institute and editor of the book "Street Smart."

The American Automobile Association, a powerful consumer lobby, has traditionally opposed adding tolls. Art Kinsman, director of government affairs for Southern New England, said he will poll his 2 million members. But if drivers are expected to treat roads as a utility, they will need to see better services. Now, many accept it may take a few months to fix a pothole. If drivers pay by the mile, they'll demand to know, "are they going to come out and fix it tomorrow?" Kinsman said.

Beyond that, motorists need confidence that the money will be going to improve the transportation network, Kinsman said.

"There needs to be some trust restored with the public," he said. "I think it's a tremendous shift in how people view roads."

Trans Texas Corridor I-69 SECRET meeting in Fort Bend

In this article, Transportation Commissioner Ted Houghton repeatedly refers to Texans' FREEways as "assets" as if the PUBLIC'S highways are theirs to sell to the highest bidder on Wall Street! To make matters worse, they're holding a SECRET, CLOSED DOOR meeting to discuss the next controversial leg of the Trans Texas Corridor, TTC 69. Also noteworthy, businesses, ie - the Chamber of Commerce, are invited to the table, but NOT the taxpaying public whose community will be paved over by this corridor! How is this getting "community feedback?" Secrecy and involving multi-national corporations has become standard operating procedure for these trade corridors.

TURF's Board member, Hank Gilbert, is mentioned in the article.

Link to article here.

Oct. 8, 2007, 4:26PM
Trans-Texas Corridor talks include Fort Bend officials
Committee formed by state Transportation Commission

By ZEN T. C. ZHENG
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle

A controversial plan to create an interstate highway from the Texas-Mexico border to Texarkana is gaining momentum in Fort Bend County as local leaders are set to begin meeting in two weeks to brainstorm on how the project should be carried out in this area.

Ted Houghton, Texas Transportation commissioner, who was in Rosenberg Wednesday to promote the project, will be in Sugar Land Oct. 26 to discuss the Trans-Texas Corridor-69 proposal with the 24-member group formed by the commission.

'Transportation crossroad'

Houghton said the project, which would turn Fort Bend and its vicinity into a "transportation crossroad," would enable fast cargo deliveries to various ports with rails or truck lanes and increase mobility for passengers with high-speed toll lanes generally along U.S. 59."We need to bring in the money to create economic opportunities," Houghton said at the annual Fort Bend Regional Infrastructure Conference sponsored by the Rosenberg-Richmond Area Chamber of Commerce.

However, the project has drawn opposition from environmentalists, property-rights proponents and those who see the corridor as part of a proposal to create a North America Free Trade Agreement highway to connect Mexico to Canada through the U.S. heartland.

Meeting closed to public

The group to meet on Oct. 26 at Sugar Land City Hall comprises county judges, mayors of cities along the proposed route, leaders of area chambers of commerce and various ports including those of Houston, Freeport and Victoria, and representatives of metropolitan planning organizations. Members are mostly from the Fort Bend, Wharton and Victoria areas.Houghton told the Chronicle Wednesday that the meeting will be closed to the public and media.


He said the group, one of six formed in the project area from Brownsville to Texarkana, will have the opportunity to help tailor the project to "local needs."

"It's a positive thing. We are letting these regions plan it out," Houghton said. "We hope by mid-next year, the group will come up with some recommendations to tell us what they would like to see built."

The Interstate 69 project is part of the proposed Trans-Texas Corridor network at least seven years in planning by the Texas Department of Transportation and supported by Gov. Rick Perry.

1,200-foot wide corridors?

The network is conceived as a cross-state road system of new and existing highways, railroads and utility rights of way. It would have separate lanes for passenger and truck traffic, freight and high-speed commuter rails, as well as infrastructure for utilities including water, oil and gas pipelines, electricity and telecommunications services. One revenue option to support the network would be toll fees.I-69 would generally follow the U.S. 59 footprint with a section along U.S. 77 from Texarkana to three possible terminals along the Texas-Mexico border: Brownsville, McAllen and Laredo.

Another major component of the network, Trans-Texas Corridor-35, would run along Interstate 35 from Denison to the Rio Grande Valley. Two other possible routes would run along Interstate 45 from Dallas to Houston and Interstate 10 from El Paso to Orange.

According to Gaby Garcia, a spokeswoman for the state transportation agency, each of the two proposed major corridors would stretch about 600 miles and cost $12 billion only for the road portion, excluding rails and utility infrastructure.

Houghton said that critics' assertion that the corridors would be 1,200 feet in width is not true. However, he said the exact width couldn't be determined until a definitive plan is shaped with sufficient local input.

County judge's endorsement

Houghton said he and Fort Bend County Judge Bob Hebert "had a great conversation" about the project during a private meeting.While asking Houghton to present a "fine print" of the plan, Hebert said he supports the project.

"I'm excited about it. We need the road," Hebert said Wednesday.

However, some local community leaders deplore what they perceive to be a lack of awareness among Fort Bend residents about the Trans-Texas Corridor concept.

The county's Democratic Party on Sept. 29 brought Hank Gilbert, a Tyler rancher who lost his race for Texas commissioner of agriculture last year, to Sugar Land to rally support for his crusade against the project. Event organizer Jenny Hurley said about 50 people attended the meeting.

Grand Parkway not a part?

Some opponents of a state plan to extend the Grand Parkway as a toll road from U.S. 59 south and then east to link Texas 288 are concerned that the expansion project could be part of the I-69 project. But, Houghton dismissed that notion.However, former Texas Transportation Commissioner John W. "Johnny" Johnson in 2000 told the Chronicle that I-69 was being proposed to pass north and west of Houston, merging with segments of the Grand Parkway, including the stretch between the Katy Freeway and U.S. 59. Johnson also said the proposed Grand Parkway segment south of U.S. 59 could be used as a continued truck route from I-69 to reach the Port of Houston via Texas 288 and Beltway 8.

"A Beautiful asset"

Calling U.S. 59 "a beautiful asset," Houghton said tracing I-69 along U.S. 59 would mean less additional land needed for the project, thus having less impact on the community along the route."We have already the asset. Now we're trying to enhance the asset," he said.

With the project, U.S. 59 at all its intersections would be turned into overpasses, he said.

Houghton said project planners have been examining a variety of ways to fund the project. However, funding remains a difficult task, he said.

"We have looked at everything possible," he said.

The state's goal is to begin construction on the project in two to three years and have it completed within five to 10 years, Houghton said.

Councilman: “It’s a taxation plan, not a congestion plan”

See Councilman Jeff Mills of Sunset Valley on YouTube here, telling the Board these toll roads are about raising revenue, not solving congestion.

Last night in Austin, the Capitol Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) Board voted to convert 4 more FREEways into tollways (and build one new toll road) using $910 million in YOUR gas taxes. The public was against it 4 to 1! We no longer have representative government and Councilman Mills' speech on this above YouTube link proves this is about taxation, not congestion relief.

Article in Austin American Statesman here.

After spending abuses, taxpayers aren’t buying the line that govt lacks money

Link to article here. The most telling finding in this poll on taxes and govt. spending:

"In Mr. Winston's survey, 75% of respondents agreed that, 'Taxes should not be increased as long as Congress continues to waste the tax money it already receives.' Only 23% did not."


ON THE HILL: GOP Tax Dilemma
After years of waste in Congress, voters aren't buying the party's fiscal message.
By Stephen Moore - WSJ
Published: 10-09-07

A few weeks ago Republican leaders gathered on Capitol Hill to hear from their top pollsters and pundits about how they can win back the votes of independent voters. Some of the attendees are still in a state of cardiac arrest over what they learned.

America's swing voters, especially the suburban "security moms," who abandoned the GOP in droves in 2006 still hold Republicans in very low regard. What has party tacticians especially spooked is that these independents are apparently not much attracted to what the Republicans are saying about taxes.

That's a bitter pill for party leaders to swallow, because for 25 years the anti-tax banner has been a political trump card for conservative candidates. A top strategist at the Republican National Committee who attended the meeting told me: "Our tax message has worn thin."
Well, that's not exactly true.


It is true that the GOP message on taxes needs a makeover, perhaps a radical one -- and the party's congressional leaders had better figure this out soon: The big tax fight starts as early as next week when House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangle unveils his multibillion dollar soak-the-rich tax hike plan to pay for middle-class Alternative Minimum Tax relief. So let's review some of the key attitudinal shifts of voters on taxes as revealed in recent polls and focus-group findings.

First, the not-so-good news for the GOP.

Most voters are unpersuaded by the Republican message that the Bush tax cuts were a resounding success that pumped the economy back to life. Worse, the key independent voters are actually repelled by that message.

"It crashes like the Hindenburg," says Richard Thau, who has been monitoring swing voter sentiments across the nation. Why? Because politicians who boast about the rosy economy seem out of touch, even delusional, given the rising costs of gasoline, health insurance and college tuition.

The reality, of course, is that the investment tax cuts did help create seven million jobs and did steer the economy out of recession. That doesn't matter to these "stressed out" voters, as Mr. Thau calls them. The Bush tax cuts are a bridge to the past, not the future, to borrow a Clintonite term. Moreover, because local property and school taxes have been skyrocketing, many independent voters scratch their heads and wonder: What tax cuts?

There is more deflating news.

Unlike in the 1980s and '90s, voters are today less attracted to talk of new tax cuts, which they think are pie-in-the-sky, given the current war costs and budget-deficit. Nor are they averse to raising taxes on "the wealthy," a group they are persuaded is taking advantage of tax loopholes to avoid paying their fair share.

That the richest 10% already pay two-thirds of the income taxes isn't well understood. One strong defense mechanism against the left's class warfare tax policy is that roughly half of voters are convinced that when politicians say they are only going to soak the rich, they fear their own tax bills will go up.

There is another silver lining for the GOP: The Democrat's tax-happy policies are an even less palatable message to voters.

Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, who has sat in the GOP tax strategy sessions tells me that "an overriding concern of economically anxious voters today is that they don't see their own taxes rise."

Pollster David Winston, who's been testing the tax issue for Republicans, agrees with that assessment. When Mr. Winston asked a national sample of registered voters last month, "Do you believe or not believe this statement: Given the cost of living these days, now is not the time to raise taxes," 65% believe now isn't the time to raise taxes, while only 31% believe it is.

There is another GOP imperative: The anti-tax message must be linked to wasteful government spending.

"There's no question that for seven out of 10 American voters, wasteful government spending is one of the largest problems in Washington," says pollster Tony Fabrizio. "For many of these voters it's a bigger issue than taxes."

All of the polling consistently finds that voters believe about 40 cents of every dollar spent by Washington is wasted. So this widespread aversion to the way government mishandles money may be the best shield against tax hikes -- at all levels of government.

In Mr. Winston's survey, 75% of respondents agreed that, "Taxes should not be increased as long as Congress continues to waste the tax money it already receives." Only 23% did not.

Perhaps the most encouraging poll finding is that Americans fully understand the link between a strong economy and deficits. In 2006 federal revenues increased by a world record $250 billion, because of surging employment, corporate profits, and stock values. No Hillary Clinton tax hike could have possibly raised that kind of money.

This is a nation that instinctively gets the supply-side message that putting people to work yields more tax revenues than a strategy of weighing down businesses and workers with tax hikes, which explains this stunning finding: When Mr. Winston's poll asked, "Which approach is more likely to increase federal revenues?" 81% said "increasing economic growth" while only 13% said "increasing taxes."

So the tax issue is still radioactive with most voters, and the GOP would be foolhardy to run and hide from it.

That's especially true because if the economy slows down in the coming months due to the housing credit crunch, aversion to higher taxes is likely to intensify.

"Voters' biggest economic concern is whether they will have enough money to meet their own needs," says Sen. Kyl. He says that if Republicans are going to win in 2008, they have to persuade voters that Democratic tax hikes "will make things worse" for the economy and their own personal finances.

Fortunately, this message has the added attraction that it's not just pollster-driven spin. It's the truth.

Mr. Moore is senior economics writer for the Wall Street Journal editorial page.

City to install surveillance cameras for "crime prevention," but admits it's to "monitor" highways

Link to article here. Note the section that reveals the REAL REASON the city wants these surveillance cameras is to monitor traffic on Hwy 40 to check license plates and registrations. How can this be legal? Government should not have the authority to do random checks on law-abiding citizens. This authority should only be used if the driver is committing a crime. Note the Mayor's cavalier attitude toward BIG DADDY GOVERNMENT and a surveillance society...everyone does it, so why shouldn't the city make a little money off of monitoring its citizens by fishing for minor infractions like lapsed registrations rather than apprehending violent criminals and using our resources to retrofit crumbling bridges and streets (read about how a San Diego street collapsed engulfing 6 homes)?

City passes camera law
Aberdeen agencies may now require surveillance devices in developments
By Madison Park
Sun Reporter
October 7, 2007

Hoping to deter crime by expanding the use of surveillance cameras, Aberdeen passed a measure that empowers the city government and police to require cameras in new developments.

The Police Department, the Department of Planning and Community Development, and the Department of Public Works will decide whether a new residential, commercial or industrial development must install cameras at "strategic locations" before a development permit is issued.

The City Council passed the measure, which becomes effective next week, by a 4-1 vote.

Cameras installed at new developments will be connected to a watch room at the police station, Mayor S. Fred Simmons said.

Simmons said the police chief will work with the other departments to study the feasibility of installation and check whether a camera is "wanted and necessary" at new developments.

But the ordinance does not spell out guidelines for determining whether a new development will be required to have cameras, which concerned the lone dissenter on the council vote, Ruth Elliott.

"We have no internal procedures or policies on this," Elliott said. "It is vague, and you can read in between the lines."



Though crime is decreasing in Aberdeen, the city is seeking to prevent crime by expanding the camera program, Simmons said. The city installed cameras this year at two troubled intersections: one on Edmund and Washington streets and the other on East Bel Air and Aberdeen avenues.

The cameras can zoom in, rotate 360 degrees, and are monitored from the city's police station. Footage from the cameras has been used to prosecute drug cases.

"The cameras are going to see what the police officers are going to see," Simmons said. "It's another set of eyes. That's all."

Surveillance cameras are a familiar sight in larger cities such as New York and Chicago. In Baltimore, a network of about 400 surveillance cameras is in use. And smaller Maryland towns, including Preston and Ridgely in Caroline County, use surveillance cameras. The Harford County Sheriff's Office has been looking into bringing cameras to Edgewood.

Law enforcement officials have credited the cameras with providing information about suspects such as descriptions and license plate numbers.

Simmons said he is interested in expanding the camera program in Aberdeen to monitor traffic on U.S. 40, using cameras that can read license plate numbers and run them through a computer database to check whether a car is stolen or the registration is expired.

"You can't go to a supermarket, the ATM, or a drugstore without being camera'ed," Simmons said. "They're all camera'ed. ... Look up and there's three or four white cameras capturing everything on the state highway. We live in that age."

Elliott voiced discomfort with that notion.

"I don't care to have cameras everywhere in the city," the councilwoman said. "I'm supportive of having cameras in areas where there are problems."

Elliott said the ordinance doesn't protect average residents.

"Whatever that's caught on camera, that may not be of a criminal aspect, just a personal thing could be used depending on who is looking at those tapes," she said. "That info could be released to the wrong people - that's why we need tighter procedures and policies."

Elliott expressed concern that the two-sentence ordinance gives broad authority to the city without laying out parameters about how the city will determine whether a development should have cameras.

But Simmons said, "The reason why it's left open is that the whole landscape changes all the time."

Melissa Ngo, senior counsel of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, also questioned an ordinance that lacked guidelines on determining where cameras would be required.

"How are they going to decide?" said Ngo, whose Washington-based organization studies civil liberty and privacy issues. "If this is going to be low-income development, are they going to watch over the poor people? If this is going to be fancy condos, are they going to decide that they don't need to look over those people?"

TxDOT's "funding shortfall" claim falling on deaf ears

TxDOT funding gripes get cool reception
by Christine DeLoma
Lone Star Report
October 2, 2007

As lawmakers take a deeper look at the implications of leasing state roads to private contractors, state transportation officials are fighting back – warning lawmakers there will soon be a shortage of funds for transportation projects.

It’s a showdown over the private toll road moratorium.

No more money? Transportation Commission chairman Ric Williamson sounded the alarm at the Sept. 27 commission meeting, saying the private toll road moratorium, along with rising highway costs and federal grant cuts, may cause the agency to scale back its plan to build new roads throughout the state.

The warning is nothing new. Williamson has talked in the same vein for several months. Now, deep-seated mistrust between many lawmakers and the agency is causing the alarm to fall on deaf ears.

Rep. Joe Pickett (D-El Paso), for example, who attended the meeting, was quoted in the Austin American-Statesman as saying, “[I]t’s always gloom-and-doom” with the Department of Transportation (TxDOT).

Williamson has repeatedly criticized the Legislature for taking away the agency’s primary tool in raising funds to build new roads, the use of comprehensive development agreements (CDA’s) with private developers.

Lawmakers had a variety of concerns over the length of contract agreements, the setting of toll rates, the inclusion of non-compete clauses, and the buy-back provisions. Accordingly, legislators voted for a two-year moratorium (with several exceptions for urban areas) on CDA’s.

Study committee excludes Krusee. During the private toll road moratorium, lawmakers will study the use of CDA’s in building private toll roads. Speaker Tom Craddick on Sept. 27 named three members to the Legislative Study Committee on Private Participation in Toll Projects.

“This session, the issue of toll roads built with private equity became a matter of much concern among the Legislature and the general public,” Craddick said. “It is my hope that this committee will come up with substantive recommendations so that we can resolve conflicts on this issue.”

Craddick named the following members: Reps. Aaron Peña (D-Edinburg), Larry Phillips (R-Sherman) and Wayne Smith (R-Baytown). Missing from the committee is the primary defender of CDA’s, Transportation chairman Mike Krusee (R-Round Rock). Lt. Gov. David Dewhust and Gov. Rick Perry have yet to make their appointments.

Court says TxDOT advertising OK
Toll road opponents were rebuffed this week in their efforts to stop TxDOT’s campaign extolling the virtues of toll roads in Texas.

State Dist. Judge Orlinda Naranjo denied San Antonio Toll Party Terri Hall’s request for a temporary injunction on TxDOT’s $9 million “Keep Texas Moving” advertising campaign. Naranjo said the Legislature gave TxDOT the legal authority to promote its activities throughout the state.

TxDOT is using taxpayer funds to promote the use of toll roads and the controversial Trans-Texas Corridor through a multi-media campaign using radio, TV, print, and Internet to solve the state’s traffic congestion problems.

At an expected second hearing next week the state Attorney General’s office is predicted to move for dismissal. Hall and her lawyers will allege that TxDOT, contrary to state law, advanced a political rather than an educational campaign.

Paxton asks for interim charge
Meanwhile, Rep. Ken Paxton (R-McKinney) has requested that the Speaker issue an interim charge for the Legislature to study taxpayer lobbying.

“The Texas Department of Transportation has recently been called into question for spending taxpayer money promoting the Trans Texas Corridor and other projects,” Paxton said. “While I appreciate the Department’s efforts to share with the public information regarding its initiatives, I believe the Legislature has a responsibility to ensure that state resources are spent efficiently. For this reason, I have requested an interim charge to research the use of public money for advertising government programs, as I believe the government should not spend the money raised from taxpayers to lobby the public.”

Tolling existing interstates?
When lawmakers learned TxDOT was lobbying Congress for the authority to buy a portion of our federal highways in order to put toll plazas on them, U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison quickly crafted an amendment to ban the idea outright.

However, as with most legislative wrangling, the content of the legislation has changed. Hutchison has teamed up with Pennsylvania Rep. John E. Peterson to help secure the provision to the Fiscal Year 2008 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) Appropriations bill. The most recent iteration of the ban now would allow states to opt-in to a one-year ban on tolling existing interstate highways.

The other major change to her proposal: Individual states would be allowed to toll newly constructed roads or lanes.

Hutchison said she will work for a national prohibition on tolling existing federal highways in 2009.

Currency "cold war" with China

Link to article here. Trade and transporting the influx of Asian goods into the U.S. via Mexico is the primary reason for the Trans Texas Corridor. Considering our massive $230 billion trade deficit with China alone, it's not hard to fathom that these failed trade policies and the rapidly declining U.S. dollar will quickly bring America to its knees economically. Trade has now become a national security issue.

Are Iran, Russia, China behind dollar's free-fall?
Some see 'Currency Cold War' meant to bring U.S. to its knees
October 2, 2007
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
WASHINGTON – The hottest selling book in China right now is called "Currency Wars," which makes the case that the U.S. Federal Reserve is a puppet of the Rothschilds banking dynasty and it has persuaded some top officials Beijing should resist America's demands to appreciate its own undervalued currency, the yuan.

This might not be news of concern to most Americans if the U.S. dollar were not in precipitous free-fall, having reached record lows against the euro yesterday.

What would it mean if China ever threw its economic weight around by dumping dollars in a major way?

Suffice it to say it is referred to in some quarters as China's financial "nuclear option," because it would be the economic equivalent of detonating a thermonuclear weapon in the world's financial markets.


But the American dollar's fate is hardly in the hands of the Chinese alone. Other foreign parties suspected of participating in a new "Currency Cold War" are Iran, Russia and Venezuela.

Diane Francis, a financial reporter for the National Post in Canada, says it plainly and boldly: "There is a Currency Cold War being waged by Russia, Iran and various allies such as Venezuela."

The grand strategy being engineered by Vladimir Putin, she writes, is to force the use of euros as the international monetary standard as a transition to the Russian ruble.

"This is simply a monetary version of the old Cold War, minus the missiles," she writes.

Experts don't see any short-term reprieve for the falling value of the dollar. Kathy Lien, chief currency strategist with DailyFX.com in the US, told Bloomberg she expects the American dollar to slide even further, forcing more lending rates cuts in the U.S. to stave off recession.

"It seems like every single passing day we have a new record low in the dollar, and a new record high in the euro, and it's driven by the fact that U.S. data is continuing to deteriorate," she said.

If other nations do not follow the U.S. in cutting rates, the slide in the value of the dollar would most likely continue.

If the dollar trend continues spiraling downward, the risk is that nations like China – or Japan or Saudi Arabia – which have been buying U.S. Treasury bonds and thereby funding America's deficit, would stop that practice.

That would be the nuclear option.

China, with $1.3 trillion in foreign exchange reserves as a result of the massive and growing $260 billion U.S. trade deficit, has taken huge losses with the falling dollar, given that some 80 percent of China's $1.3 trillion in foreign reserves is held in U.S. dollar assets, largely in U.S. treasury securities.

Meanwhile, Song Hongbing, the author of China's runaway bestseller, "The Currency Wars," says he's pleasantly surprised at the 200,000 copies his book has sold. He is probably not eager to see the dollar punished as he lives in Washington, D.C.

"I never imagined it could be so hot and that top leaders would be reading it," he says during a book tour in Shanghai. "People in China are nervous about what's going on in financial markets, but they don't know how to handle the real dangers. This book gives them some ideas."

Among the research findings that shocked him most was that the Fed is a privately owned and run bank.

"I just never imagined a central bank could be a private body."

Some, meanwhile, are standing on the sidelines cheering the currency wars – seeing them as a way of reducing the power and influence of the "imperialistic" U.S.

Rohini Hensman, who describes himself as "independent scholar, writer and activist based in India and Sri Lanka," says it's about time the U.S. got its comeuppance.

"As the bombs started falling on Iraq in 2003, I wrote and circulated an appeal entitled 'Boycott the Dollar to Stop the War!,' arguing that although the military strength of the U.S. was enormous, its economy was in a mess; with a massive gross national debt, the only reason it could finance its foreign wars and occupations was because of the inflow of over a billion dollars a day from countries accumulating foreign exchange reserves in dollars because it was the world's sole reserve currency. The denomination of the oil trade in dollars made it additionally desirable. With the advent of the euro, however, there was the possibility of an alternative world currency; therefore individuals, institutions and countries opposed to the war on Iraq should refuse to accumulate dollars or use them outside the U.S., because these were activities that helped to finance U.S.-Israeli aggression against Palestinians, Iraqis and Afghanis. After the World Social Forum meeting in 2004, the Boycott Bush Campaign adopted the dollar boycott as part of its strategy."

In early trading today, the dollar advanced slightly, prompting gold prices back from 28-year highs set yesterday. The dollar's value against a basket of six major currencies rose slightly to 77.950 from a lifetime low of 77.657 a day earlier. The dollar traded at $1.4223 per euro, stronger than a record low on Monday of $1.4283.

WND has reported the Federal Reserve is in a dilemma.

The stock market has demanded rate cuts, wanting to return to the free credit policies of the Federal Reserve that fueled the liquidity bubble that has boosted home prices and pumped the Dow Jones Industrial Average since 9/11.

Yet, the Fed giving in to stock market demands and lowering rates threatens an international dollar sell-off that could lead to a dollar collapse.

Former Fed Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan also sparked controversy by suggesting in his recently published book, "The Age of Turbulence," the euro is rivaling the dollar as the international foreign exchange reserve currency of choice.

The Wall Street Journal recently quoted a rule of thumb advanced by Harvard University economist Kenneth Rogoff, a former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund. According to Rogoff’s "back-of-the-envelope" calculation, a 20 percent drop in the dollar's exchange value reduces Americans' income by 3 percent, adjusted by inflation.

Another example of TxDOT-induced congestion…this one designed to push folks to use toll road

Link to article here.


Commuters are fried over new stoplights on Texas 71
Signals installed after tollway opened causing new backups east of the airport
By Ben Wear
AMERICAN STATESMAN STAFF
Monday, September 17, 2007

Sometimes, as the old saw has it, you have to break some eggs to make an omelet.

Of course, this sort of transaction works out best for the one holding the knife and fork. From the egg's point of view, it's pretty much a lose-lose.

The "eggs" in this case are people commuting into Austin on Texas 71 from eastern Travis County and Bastrop County. The omelet is Texas 130, the new tollway that has been opening piece by piece over the past few months as construction moves southward. The Texas Department of Transportation completed the section from U.S. 290 to Texas 71 on Sept. 6.

That's also when new traffic lights on Texas 71 at Texas 130 were turned on. htBefore then, there was no light on Texas 71 between Ross Road east of Onion Creek and FM 973 near the airport, a stretch of about a mile and a half.

The new luminous obstruction, according to some of the e-mails and calls I've been getting, initially added at least 15 minutes to some people's morning commute. One Bastrop resident says her commute ballooned from 30 minutes to 80 minutes or more. One person wrote, perhaps engaging in hyperbole, that the backup extended as far as 10 miles.


The stoplights weren't causing a backup in the evening rush.

Late last week, after some scrambling by the Transportation Department to reroute some quarry trucks and to restripe part of Texas 71, the backup caused by the new lights had moderated. People were losing just a few minutes.

Two questions arise: What's causing the problem? And why the heck do there need to be stoplights there anyway? Wait, there's a third question: What the blankety-blank is the Transportation Department going to do about it in the long run?

The Transportation Department's Austin district blames "starvation," a traffic phenomenon the agency says is happening in this case because of the light farther west at FM 973. The City of Austin controls the timing on that light. Sometimes people get a green going west at Texas 130 and simply have to sit there, because traffic is stacked all the way from FM 973 to Texas 130.

I was out there Thursday morning, and — sure enough, a little after 8 a.m. — that is exactly what happened. At that point, westbound traffic on Texas 71 backed up within minutes to Ross Road, and it took people several minutes to reach Texas 130. Then they had to crawl to FM 973.

But Bastrop commuters tell me that before the Texas 130 light came on, the FM 973 backup at its worst extended nowhere near Ross Road. The new situation has some of them bailing out early and taking back routes to avoid the situation on 71.

The lights at Texas 130 are variable in their timing and switch based on the presence of traffic. Given that traffic is substantially heavier on Texas 71 than on the tollway — Texas 71 had 30,000 cars a day in this stretch two years ago, while the tollway in this interval has yawning gaps between cars — you might think that Texas 71 drivers would be getting the bulk of the green time. Not so.

Thursday morning, the typical interval was about a minute of green for 71, then 40 seconds to 50 seconds of green for Texas 130.

The tollway was getting roughly equal time.

As for why there has to be a light, well, picture yourself on the tollway at 7:30 a.m.

You've just paid about $4 to drive down from Georgetown — right now the road is free south of U.S. 290, but that won't be the case by January — and you want to turn left at Texas 71 and go to Houston. You get to Texas 71, and (in this alternate universe) there's only a stop sign there. To your left is a solid line of commuters headed into Austin. You're stuck, probably for a very long time. Maybe next trip, you take another route and don't pay that $4.

You get the picture.

What is the Transportation Department going to do? Well, in the short run, workers on Wednesday night restriped Texas 71 between FM 973 and the tollway to have three lanes in each direction. That extra capacity seemed to mitigate the "starvation" to some degree. And the agency is working on the signal timing of its lights and the city's light at FM 973.

But in the long run, everyone involved knows, there need to be express lanes for Texas 71 as it passes under the tollway. Right now, there are only the frontage roads with a big space in between. So, is the state about to build those express lanes?

No. There was no money allocated in the $3.6 billion Central Texas Turnpike Project's budget to do that or to build a similar seamless connection where Texas 130 crosses U.S. 290 about 11 miles to the north. Commuters up there from Manor and Elgin have to stop at lights as well.

What is likely to happen, based on what local transportation officials have been saying, is that Texas 71 and U.S. 290 will be turned into freeways all the way from U.S. 183 back in Austin to just beyond Texas 130. Wait, did I say freeways? Actually, the current thinking is that they will become tollways for those stretches, with free frontage roads alongside.

That would be those same frontage roads people are driving on now. The ones with the traffic lights.

So, until last week, you could pass by Texas 130 without stopping. Now there's a light. In a few years, there will probably be a way to breeze through on Texas 71 without having to stop at those lights. If you pay.

Local transportation officials have said repeatedly since the whole toll road rhubarb sprouted here in 2003 that people would always have the same free access they had before any toll road came along. To fulfill that promise, they've already had to make expensive midcourse corrections on the Loop 1 and Texas 45 North tollways.

One of those cases was similar to this Texas 71 situation, the spot where the Texas 45 North tollway crosses under Parmer Lane.

The state scrambled, redid plans and spent more than $20 million building a special free lane on each side under Parmer so that drivers, who didn't have to stop at Parmer when all that was there was plain old RM 620, could bypass the Parmer traffic light. Of course, they had two lanes each way before and one lane now, but one lane is better than nothing.

These tollway extensions on Texas 71 and U.S. 290 won't happen for at least a couple of years, probably more in the case of Texas 71.

The folks on Texas 71 may have to stew a good while longer. Or maybe that should be "fry." As in, fried eggs.

TxDOT claims its out of money for new lanes/roads - how ’bout they stop using their $ for ads!


Link to article in DMN here and Express-News here. Earth to TxDOT...how about you stop spending what money you do have on advertising and lobbying? Of course, Dallas government officials see the new toll tax windfall soon to be collected by the NTTA on the 675 miles of new toll lanes planned in DFW as "easing the financial burden" TxDOT faces. Well, what about relief for the taxpayers' burden of having to pay new exorbitant toll taxes just to drive to work?

One of the best quotes from these articles:

Transportation Commissioner Ted Houghton said the agency needs to slim down, maybe enact a hiring freeze and use fewer outside consultants.
"As we ask the citizens of this state to buck up and be prepared, I think we internally need to look at our own house," he said.

TxDOT running out of cash for new roads
But NTTA payments expected to ease North Texas' financial burden
Thursday, September 27, 2007
By MICHAEL A. LINDENBERGER / The Dallas Morning News

AUSTIN – Texas will soon run out of money to pay for new roads or bridges, state transportation officials said Thursday.

Within three years, nearly all of the state's construction budget will be spent on maintenance and to pay debt incurred in building existing roads, top officials of the Texas Department of Transportation said.

"The people of Texas need to understand that within a very short period of time, there will be no money for mobility projects," said Texas Transportation Commission member Ned Holmes of Houston.

The impact will be less severe in North Texas, where local officials are counting on more than $3 billion in upfront payments from the North Texas Tollway Authority as part of its deal to build the State Highway 121 toll road.

But even some of that money now will probably have to cover projects that had been envisioned as state-financed projects. Throughout Texas, funds for new roads will begin drying up almost immediately, officials said.

Meanwhile, spending on maintenance – especially in Dallas, where the roads are in the state's worst shape – will be increased. State projects already under contract will not be affected.


The inability to build new roads, or to widen existing ones, comes even as experts are warning that Texas' soaring population and booming economy have made traffic in its leading cities among the worst in the U.S. A national study released last week warned that traffic jams in Dallas grew faster over the past 25 years than in any other city in the country.

"People and businesses are moving here because we're a low-tax, low-regulation and low-welfare state – and that is not going to change," commission chairman Ric Williamson said. "They are going to need roads and highways to be able to get around."

Trouble is, Texas just can't afford to build them anymore, he said.

During the next 60 days, local officials will be asked to scale back requests for state funds, said Amadeo Saenz, who was named TxDOT's new executive director late Thursday.

"This will cause delays, and some projects will be canceled," Mr. Saenz said.

Scarce funds, high costs
Mr. Williamson says many factors are to blame for his department's inability to keep up with the demand for new roads.

Federal funds are increasingly scarce, and highway construction costs have soared 62 percent in the past five years, he said. Meanwhile, the state's aging roads are increasingly in need of repair.

"We don't want to see a Minnesota bridge collapse in Texas. In order to avoid that, we are going to have to take care of the assets we have," Mr. Williamson said.

But commissioners saved their harshest criticism for decisions by the Texas Legislature.

They said lawmakers spend the state gas-tax revenues on too many other needs, including more than $1 billion for the state police alone.

But commissioners said the Legislature's moratorium last session on private-investments in toll projects has hurt the most.

The decision cost the state billions of dollars in annual construction funds, said Mr. Williamson, who like the other commissioners was appointed by Gov. Rick Perry.

Mr. Williamson said Mr. Perry asked the commission to find a way to pay for the state's growing transportation needs. Convincing private companies to pay money up front to operate toll concessions was that solution, he said.

Terms too steep
Lawmakers need no lecture on the severity of the state's transportation needs, suggested Steven Polunsky, a top aide to Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, chairman of the Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee.

"We agree absolutely that there is a financial crisis," Mr. Polunksy said. "And Senator Carona will support next session a multi-pronged approach to solve it."

He wants to raise the gas tax and stop the diversion of revenues to pay for other needs, Mr. Polunsky said.

But the private investment deals favored by the commission were too lopsided, he said, noting that some proposed leases would have kept the toll roads in private control for 75 years or longer.

"The price that came with those private financing deals was too steep," Mr. Polunsky said. "Lawmakers found the terms unacceptable, both politically and from a business standpoint."

Mr. Williamson said efforts to raise the gas tax are misplaced. The tax is inefficient because lawmakers divert too much of it to other needs, and he said it is too regressive, since poor people pay the same rate as rich ones.

He did say he would probably support efforts to index the rate to inflation, if only because inflation is making it increasingly difficult for the department to simply maintain the roads it already has.

The legislative moratorium nearly killed Dallas' transportation agenda, said Michael Morris, transportation director for the North Central Texas Council of Governments.

"We took a lot of criticism back in the spring for working to make sure our projects were not going to be affected by the legislature's moratorium," Mr. Morris said. "But if we hadn't succeeded in that, we would be dead in the water, just like the rest of Texas is going to be."

NTTA is not a private company, but it modeled its offer to pay $3.3 billion in return for operating the toll concessions on SH121 on the private companies' proposals. Without the latter, NTTA's deal would never have been so aggressive, Mr. Morris said.

When state funds begin drying up over the next couple of years, it will be the NTTA's money, he said, that keeps construction projects moving forward in the Dallas area.

Even that money, however, will run out over several years – and by then, if the state or federal governments haven't found new ways to pay for projects, North Texas will suffer like the rest of the state, Mr. Morris said.

Relief in sight
Some short-term relief could come as soon as next month, when Texas voters have a chance to approve a constitutional amendment that would authorize TxDOT to borrow up to $5 billion in one-time construction money.

That issue is on the Nov. 6 ballot. But even if it passes, the money would only be a one-time infusion, warned James Bass, the department's chief financial officer. TxDOT has estimated the state has an $86 billion gap between construction needs and available funding. The $5 billion would help – but would also increase the state's annual debt payments for decades to come.

Instead, Mr. Morris said, the state needs real solutions – and that means new revenue. "We're just shuffling the deck chairs around on the Titanic," he said.

"This is NOT over"...fight to stop ad campaign continues

Link to AP article here.

Also, another article below...

Judge denies activist's request to stop toll road campaign
The Associated Press as it appeared in the Star-Telegram
September 25, 2007

AUSTIN -- A judge has refused a toll road opponent's request to block the Texas Department of Transportation from spending money on a campaign that promotes toll roads and the Trans-Texas Corridor.

Terri Hall of the San Antonio Toll Party and Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom argued the "Keep Texas Moving" campaign violates a prohibition on state officials using their authority for political purposes.

On Monday, State District Judge Orlinda Naranjo denied Hall's request for a temporary restraining order. The judge noted another law cited by state lawyers that allows the department to promote the development and use of toll projects.

"It seems that the Legislature has weighed in and given the department the authority to promote toll roads," Naranjo said.

Another hearing is expected soon on the state's motion to dismiss the case. The state contends that it's legal for the transportation department to promote toll roads and that the agency is responding to calls for public education about its projects.

Hall's lawsuit also seeks to block transportation officials from lobbying Congress to allow more tolling.

"This is just round one," Hall said Monday. "This issue is definitely not over."

Her attorney, Charles Riley, said the facts will show that the agency is using highway funds for a political purpose, and not just for providing information about toll roads.

Gov. Rick Perry and the transportation department have championed toll roads and the proposed Trans-Texas Corridor, a tolled network of superhighways, as solutions to dire transportation needs that have outpaced gas tax revenues.

A department spokesman said he had no comment on Monday's ruling and referred to earlier statements defending the department's right to promote toll roads.

______________________________


Link to article here.

Activist loses bid to halt toll-road ads
Peggy Fikac
Express-News, Austin bureau
09/25/2007

AUSTIN — A San Antonio activist lost a court round Monday in her effort to stop state transportation officials from spending public funds to promote toll roads and the Trans-Texas Corridor, but the fight's not over.

State District Judge Orlinda Naranjo refused to grant a temporary restraining order to immediately stop the spending as sought by Terri Hall of the San Antonio Toll Party and Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom.

Another hearing is expected as early as next week on a state motion to dismiss the case, which targets the multimillion-dollar Keep Texas Moving campaign and any attempt by transportation officials to convince Congress to allow more tolling.

"This is just Round One. This issue is definitely not over," said Hall, contending that transportation officials in promoting the initiatives are violating a ban on using their authority for political purposes and on lobbying.

Naranjo noted that another law cited by the state specifically allows the Texas Department of Transportation to promote the use of toll projects.

___________________________________

Goode: Bush wants North American Union to increase profits for corporations

Link to article here.

Rep. Virgil Goode says below: "We are giving away the country so a few very rich people can get richer." Goode stressed that the Bush administration supports both a NAU regional government and a NAFTA Superhighway system.

Congress debate begins on North America Union
Resolution calls for end of NAFTA superhighway, abandonment of integration with Canada, Mexico
By Jerome R. Corsi
WorldNetDaily.com
September 25, 2007


Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va. (Photo: University of Virginia) A House resolution urging President Bush "not to go forward with the North American Union or the NAFTA Superhighway system" is – according to its sponsor Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., in an exclusive WND interview – "also a message to both the executive branch and the legislative branch."
As WND previously reported, on Jan. 22 Goode introduced H.C.R. 40, titled "Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada."

The bill has been referred to the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

WND asked Goode if the president was risking electoral success for the Republican Party in 2008 with his insistence on pushing for North American integration via the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP.

"Yes," Goode answered. "You won't hear the leadership in the Republic Party admit it, but there are many in the House and Senate who know that illegal immigration has to be stopped and legal immigration has to be reduced. We are giving away the country so a few very rich people can get richer."


How did he react when President Bush referred to those who suggest the SPP could turn into the North American Union as "conspiracy theorists"?

"The president is really engaging in a play on words," Goode responded. "The secretary of transportation came before our subcommittee," he explained, "and I had the opportunity to ask her some questions about the NAFTA Superhighway. Of course, she answered, 'There's no NAFTA Superhighway.' But then Mary Peters proceeded to discuss the road system that would come up from Mexico and go through the United States up into Canada."

Goode is a member of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development of the House Committee on Appropriations.

"So, I think that saying we're 'conspiracy theorists' or something like that is really just a play on words with the intent to demonize the opposition," Goode concluded.

Goode stressed that the Bush administration supports both a NAU regional government and a NAFTA Superhighway system: "The Bush administration as well as Mexico and Canada have persons in the government in all three countries who want to a see a North American Union as well as a highway system that would bring goods into the west coast of Mexico and transport them up through Mexico into the United States and then in onto Canada," Goode confirmed.

The Virginia congressman said he believes the motivation behind the movement toward North American integration is the anticipated profits the large multinational corporations in each of the three countries expect to make from global trade, especially moving production to China.

"Some really large businesses that get a lot from China would like a NAFTA Superhighway system because it would reduce costs for them to transport containers from China and, as a result, increase their margins," he argued.

"I am vigorously opposed to the Mexican trucks coming into the country," Goode continued. "The way we have done it and, I think, the way we should do it in the future, is to have the goods come into the United States from Mexico within a 20-mile commercial space and unloaded from Mexican trucks into U.S. trucks. This procedure enhances the safety of the country, the security of the country, and provides much less chance for illegal immigration."

As WND reported, the Department of Transportation has begun a Mexican truck "demonstration project" under which 100 Mexican trucking companies are being allowed to run their long-haul rigs throughout the U.S.

Previously, Mexican trucks have been limited to a 20-mile commercial zone in the United States, with the requirement that goods bound for locations in the U.S. beyond the 20-mile commercial zone be off-loaded to U.S. trucks.

WND reported last month that Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., successfully offered an amendment to the Department of Transportation Fiscal Year 2008 appropriations bill to block DOT from spending any federal funds to implement the truck project.

Dorgan’s amendment passed 75-23, after Sen. Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., changed her vote to support Dorgan.

By a voice vote, the House passed an amendment offered by Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., to the DOT appropriations bill comparable to Dorgan's, designed to block the agency from using federal funds to implement the truck project.

DeFazio chairs the House transportation subcommittee that oversees motor carriers.

"With the Trans-Texas Corridor, which I would say is part of the NAFTA Superhighway system, and with this NAFTA plot with the Mexican trucks just coming in and not loading off to U.S. trucks, they will just drive right over the Rio Grande and come on over into Texas," Goode argued. "A lot of these Mexican trucks will be bring containerized cargo from the west coast of Mexico where they will be unloaded in Mexican ports to avoid the fees and costs of unloading at U.S. ports."

"So, when you look at the total package," he continued, "we do have a NAFTA Superhighway system already in place. There are those in all three countries that believe we should have a North American Union and the Security and Prosperity Partnership, in my opinion takes us down that road. And I am vigorously opposed to the loss of our sovereignty."

Why, WND asked, do so many congressmen and senators insist on writing and telling their constituents that they don't know anything about the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or that SPP working groups are really just to increase our competitiveness?

"In the House, a strong majority voted to provide no money in the transportation funding bill," Goode responded. "I commend Congressman Duncan Hunter for submitting an amendment to the Department of Transportation funding bill [which] got over 360 votes that said no funds in the transportation appropriation measure, prohibiting Department of Transportation funds from being used to participate on working groups that promote the Security and Prosperity Partnership."

As WND reported, Hunter's amendment to the FY 2008 Department of Transportation funding bill prohibiting DOT from using federal funds to participate in SPP working groups creating NAFTA Superhighways passed 362 to 63, with strong bipartisan support. The House approved H.R. 3074 by 268-153, with the Hunter amendment included.

"So, I think a majority the House, if you had an up or down vote on the SPP, would vote down on the SPP," Goode concluded. "But some still say, and it's a play on words, that we don't have a Security and Prosperity Partnership that will lead to a North American Union. I don't think they can say anymore that we don't have a Security and Prosperity Partnership arrangement between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, because that was done in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005, and the recent meeting at Montebello was to talk about it further."

WND asked Goode to comment on the North American Competitiveness Council, or NACC, a group of multinational corporations selected by the Chambers of Commerce in Mexico, Canada and the U.S. as the central adviser of SPP working groups.

At the SPP summit in Montebello, Quebec, the NACC met behind closed doors with the three leaders, cabinet secretaries who were present, and top SPP working group bureaucrats, while various public advocacy groups, environmental groups, labor unions – and the press – were excluded.

Should SPP working group meetings be open to the public?

"I wish they were," Goode responded. "If it is as the Bush administration says, 'We're not planning any North American Union,' then why wouldn’t those meetings be open, why wouldn’t you let the media in?" Goode asked.

"But some of the very big corporations want the goods from China to come in here unchecked," he continued. "It costs money for U.S. trucks to transport Chinese goods from West Coast ports like Los Angeles or Long Beach. But if you can have a Mexican truck and Mexican truck driver, that's going to be cheaper. And it's all about the margins. The margins relate directly to how much money the multi-national corporations are going to make."

Has the Senate debate on the Dorgan amendment brought the issues of the NAU and NAFTA Superhighways more to the attention of the Senate?

"I think so," Goode said. "That debate had a very positive effect. You had grassroots support calling the Senate on the Dorgan amendment.

"The Bush administration engages in the same play of words with all these issues," Goode added. "Take a look at the Kennedy-McCain comprehensive immigration reform, which the Bush administration has now tried to jam through the Senate not once, but twice.

"The Bush administration claims it's not [amnesty] when you let someone stay in the country and give them a path to citizenship," Goode pointed out. "Well, that's their definition, not my definition, and not the definition of the majority of the public. The majority of the public called in and buried the amnesty bill because of public pressure. Public pressure also got de-funded the pilot program on Mexican trucks in this country."

So should the U.S. pull out of the SPP?

"Yes," Goode answered, "but the best way to end SPP would be to have a chief executive that wouldn't do anything with it."

What does Goode think of the state legislatures that are passing anti-NAU, anti-NAFTA Superhighway and anti-SPP resolutions?

"If enough state legislatures pass resolutions like that, it surely should have an impact on the House and the Senate," Goode said.

"President Bush's position is that we need to carry out NAFTA and we need to have this free flow of goods with Mexico and Canada," Goode explained. "Well, Bush's approach involves a derogation of our sovereignty and it also undermines the security and the safety of the country.

"It will be much easier for a truck to get a container on the west coast of Mexico and haul in a biological or radiological or nuclear weapon than it would be if you are going to have to unload the trucks on the Texas-Mexico border and put the goods and material in a U.S. truck," he continued.

"The problem is that the NAU, NAFTA Superhighways and SPP all go back to money," Goode stressed. "The multinational companies want their goods from Mexico and China because they want the cheap labor."

What about the U.S.'s large and growing trade imbalance with China?

"I don't want to have to be an 'I told you so' person," Goode answered, "but I was a vigorous opponent of PNTR ("permanent normal trade relations") and before that of 'most favored nation' trade status with China. We need tariffs and quotas with China. Personally, if I know food is coming in from China, I won't buy it. The American people with the adoption of COOL, country of origin labeling, with the food clearly labeled, I think you will see the American public will shy away from Chinese products."

In 2000, Congress voted to extend to China PNTR. "Most favored nation" or MFN trade status, was given to China first in 1980 by the Carter administration. COOL rules are administered by the Department of Agriculture.

Goode concluded the interview by thanking WND for covering the SPP, NAU and NAFTA Superhighway issues: "I want to thank you for putting these issues out where people can read it," Goode said. "You have enlightened hundreds of thousands if not millions of American citizens who otherwise would have been greatly in the dark on the SPP."

Sparks fly at MPO as McNeil strips agenda item repudiating TxDOT's ad campaign

Link to YouTube video of the knock em out drag em out between David Leibowitz, Carlos Uresti, Tommy Adkisson and pro-toll, pro-TxDOT McNeil. Uresti finishes her off in this YouTube edition.

For those who believed the City Councilmembers when they claimed who was the next Chair of the MPO didn't have anything to do with tolls, today's MPO meeting blows a gaping hole through that notion. MPO Chair and City Councilwoman Sheila McNeil stripped an item from today's agenda AFTER the 72 hour open meetings minimum requirement! Representative David Leibowitz requested a vote to repudiate TxDOT's ad campaign and lobbying of Congress, and she wrote him a letter denying a vote but said she'd place it on the agenda and the Board oculd vote on whether or not to vote on it at the October meeting. Then she pulled a fast one at the last minute and pulled the item altogether!

State Senator Carlos Uresti came to Leibowitz' defense and caught McNeil in her contradictions as to the reason she stripped the item. Commissioner Tommy Adkisson also defended Leibowitz' right to place an item on the agenda. McNeil claimed unilateral authority to set the meeting agenda. She did her usual, "we can get together to talk about it" for anyone who disagrees with her or TxDOT in an attempt to silence all dissension.

Mexican official urges North American Union be formed quickly

Link to article here.

Mexican official urges North American Union
Tells Denver trade conference EU is 'model we need to follow quickly'
By Michael Howe
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
September 21, 2007



Mayor Evaristo Lenin Perez of Ciudad Acuna, Mexico
At a Denver conference on intercontinental trade corridors, a Mexican mayor called for a swift move toward a European Union-style merger of the U.S., Canada and Mexico. Referring to Europe, Evaristo Lenin Perez of Ciudad Acuna – a sister city of Del Rio, Texas – told the Great Plains International Conference, "It's a model we need to follow quickly."

Perez later told WND, "If only people know the benefits of opening the borders and working together, improving the quality of life for all, then no one would be opposed to the idea of a North American Union."

A spokesman for organizers of the conference – which began Wednesday and concludes today – rejected the Mexican mayor's view.

"This is not what the conference is about, it is not about a North American Union," said Joe Kiely, vice president of the Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor Coalition. "It is about developing infrastructure and economic opportunities in the Great Plains. I am equally surprised the other items were brought up here."

Ports-to-Plains describes itself as "a planned, multimodal transportation corridor including a multi-lane divided highway that will facilitate the efficient transportation of goods and services from Mexico, through West Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, and Oklahoma, and ultimately on into Canada and the Pacific Northwest."


 

The conference, held at the Adams Mark Hotel, is promoted as an opportunity to "highlight the efforts of communities and citizens working together to bring the benefits of investment in transportation infrastructure and trade home to the Great Plains region."

Asked why he chose the conference to promote the idea of a North American Union, Perez told WND, "It's as good as any place and the right people are here."

"This is not a new idea," he said. "In fact when there are border meetings between border governors or border legislatures this is a topic that continually comes up."

Perez also affirmed the Ports to Plains Corridor is basically a NAFTA Superhighway and needs to be developed as such.

"We need to begin by building the infrastructure in the three countries, investing in Mexico, and then we can sell the main idea that Mexicans should stay in Mexico. We just need to create an equal level for all," Perez said.

Del Rio, Texas, Mayor Efrain Valdes told conferees he came to build relationships he hopes will last for decades to come.

"We are all North Americans," he said. "Three countries, but we are all North Americans."

Michael Reeves, president of Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor Coalition, kicked off the conference with brief remarks.

Eduardo Arnal, consulate general of Mexico in Denver, later provided numerous statistics documenting the strong economic relationship between Mexico and the U.S.

"Because of NAFTA, we are partners in the fight against terror and need to help ensure each other's safety," Arnal said.

Arnal later discussed with WND the relationship between Mexico and the U.S. and the issue of illegal immigration.

"The best and only way to stop illegal immigration is for the United States to invest in Mexico," he said. "A fence will not work. It's a simple equation of supply and demand – Mexicans go to the U.S. for work because the demand for their labor and wages is there."

Arnal said although Mexico must share responsibility for the immigration issue, it is the U.S. that really needs to step up and begin investing more in Mexico to help bring the country to a level playing field.

The Canadian perspective was delivered by Phillippe Taillon, vice consul and trade commissioner of the Canadian Consulate in Denver. Like his Mexican counterpart, Taillon presented statistics on the relationship between the three countries and told the crowd "NAFTA has been hugely profitable for all three countries."

He also expressed an interest in continuing to integrate rail, truck and air transportation networks as Canada looks to open new markets from Asia.

Subcategories

Eminent Domain

Climate Policy

Page 93 of 102

Latest News

Latest Press Releases