Liberty
Matters News Service
February 14, 2008
U.S. Sides with Mexico in Water Wars
For years, farmers in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas have been trying to get Mexico to live up to the 1944 treaty under which each country agreed to share a portion of its water with the other. The agreement worked reasonably well, but during the ten-years between 1992 and 2002, Mexico refused to send U.S. farmers the entire amount agreed upon. To make matters worse, south Texas was in the throes of a severe drought during much of that time. In 2004, Texas farmers and ranchers sued Mexico for $500 million for violating the 1944 treaty. So far that legal battle has cost them $500,000. Before the case could get off the ground, a tribunal under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) decided it did not have jurisdiction. To settle the matter, George Bush's U.S. State Department intervened on the side of Mexico. "When they did that, it really just hit you in the stomach," said Joe Barrera, general manager of the Brownsville Irrigation District. Texas Comptroller Susan Combs met with the discouraged farmers last week to try to bolster their resolve to continue. "You must call (legislators). You must try everything," Combs exhorted them. "This is really important to the state." The case will now go before a Canadian judge to decide if the NAFTA tribunal decision was wrong. The farmers only have redress through NAFTA because they own property (water) in Mexico that Mexico has appropriated and the 1944 treaty makes no provision for individuals to sue another country. "If Mexico doesn't pay any penalty, it's easier for them to do it again," said Ray Pruitt, president of the Texas Citrus Mutual. Perhaps Presidente Bush could help Mexico pay the Texas farmers out of the $1.4 billion stimulus package he wants to give Mexico.
Texas Farmers Take Water War to
Canada
TNC Ripping Off Taxpayers?
A former land buyer for Brevard County, Florida is suing the County for wrongful firing after he tried to stop a famous "non-profit" conservation easement organization from ripping off taxpayers. David Drake joined the county in April 2006, as a land acquisition manager for the county's Environmentally Endangered Lands program. Drake was fired eleven months later. Maurice Arcadier, attorney for Drake said: "He was terminated for doing his job too good. Basically, the county was getting ripped off left and right. There are a lot of things that could potentially be corrupt." In his lawsuit, Drake said he told his former boss, Mike Knight, he suspected The Nature Conservancy of misappropriating funds and that Knight tried to shut him up. He also suspected Knight was "involved in the illegal acts." Knight explained that Drake was fired because he couldn't establish a working relationship with TNC. "He was very adversarial with them. It developed into a very nonfunctional relationship." Spokeswoman for TNC, Jill Austin, said: "The Nature Conservancy reviewed the claims that he made and found them without merit." Drake is only asking the county for damages of $15,000, back pay and compensation for job-search costs and loss of benefits. He'll be lucky if he can pay his lawyer with that paltry amount.
Land Buyer Sues County Over
Firing
Bush Budget Adds $5 Million to Fund LOST
The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) has never been ratified by the U.S. Senate, yet President Bush has requested $5 million to fund it in his 2009 budget. Steven Groves, in an article in the Heritage Foundation, writes; "U.S. taxpayer dollars should not be used to fund non-existent obligations stemming from flawed treaties. LOST should not be ratified, much less funded prior to ratification." LOST establishes an International Seabed Authority that has jurisdiction over 70% of the earth's surface to manage all the oceans and the minerals therein. Under LOST, U.S. companies would be subject to international taxation. It threatens U.S. sovereignty in that the United States and U.S. companies would be subjected to mandatory dispute resolution by nations that are largely hostile to American interests. It invites international environmental regulation that goes far beyond the shores of the seas, reaching into the interior of this nation. President Reagan, the last American president with any sense, recognized the dangers within LOST and rejected it out of hand. George the First tried to resuscitate it to no avail and Bill Clinton signed it in 1994. Now George the Second is trying to slip it in the back door with this funding maneuver. The Senate should tell Mr. Bush to remove the funding slated for LOST. If not, writes Mr. Groves, "Congress should ignore the requests and provide no funding for any activities relating to the treaty."
Congress Should Ignore Budget Requests
Relating to the Law of the Sea Treaty
Kenedy County Wind Farm Generates Controversy
Jim Blackburn, writing for the Coastal Habitat Alliance (CHA) is concerned that promoters of a wind energy field in Kenedy County, Texas may be trying to make the public believe their project has the full support of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as, the Texas Parks and Wildlife. That may not be the case, according to Blackburn. While representatives from the developers have met numerous times with the agencies, they have not issued any official reviews of the developer's environmental studies. The Kenedy project will consist of more than 500 wind turbines, each as high as the Statue of Liberty. It will stand right in the middle of one of the most active migratory bird pathways in North America, Blackburn says. To back up his concerns, Blackburn cites a report by EDM, an independent consulting group that has a long record of assessing avian interactions with energy production, transmission and distribution. The report "summarized the potential threat to migrating and resident birds as being nearly as high as it would be in a national wildlife refuge. EDM's team concluded that if these wind energy projects went forward at their current locations, they could result in the greatest avian mass mortality event in the history of wind energy." Blackburn says his group just wants the project subjected to a thorough official and public environmental assessment. "We remain confident," he said, "that such a process would reach similar conclusions as EDM." "This wind project may be a good idea somewhere, but it's a bad idea along the coast in Kenedy County"
Firms Misled Public About Kenedy Wind Farms