Sidebar
Like TURF
Follow TURFDurbin introduces bill to block road privatization
US Senate Leader Introduces Bill to Block Road Privatization
Bill would force states to pay back federal contribution before leasing highways to private companies.
The Newspaper.com
Senator Dick DurbinA member of the US Senate leadership is looking to stop states and cities from selling America's freeways and airports to private companies. Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), the assistant majority leader, introduced the Protecting Taxpayers in Transportation Asset Transfers Act on June 17 to rein in governments officials who would sell off roads to meet short-term budget needs, leaving motorists to pay far more in the long run in tolls and other fees.
"The federal government provides states and local governments billions of dollars to build, maintain and improve transportation projects around the country," Durbin said in a statement. "The last transportation bill alone provided states with an average of $48 billion per year for upgrades to roads, bridges and mass transit systems. Any deal to sell or lease these assets should be closely examined and include a return on the federal taxpayer investment." Durbin was particularly upset by Chicago's deal to lease its parking meters to Morgan Stanley for $1.2 billion. Nearly all of this money was spent by former Mayor Richard M. Daley, leaving drivers to pay massive increases in the cost of parking that will add up to an estimated $11.6 billion over 75 years.
"This legislation protects against fire sales of our existing public assets while making certain the public's interest is fully protected in future public/private partnership agreements," the House sponsor of the legislation, Representative Peter DeFazio (D-Oregon), said in a statement.
The legislation directs the US Department of Transportation to place a lien on public transportation assets so they cannot be sold or transferred without the value of the federal expenditure on construction, maintenance and upgrades being returned to the US Treasury. Transportation assets include freeways, mass transit, airports and railroads worth more than $500 million or where the federal contribution exceeds $25 million.
The legislation also imposes conditions on any lease deal to increase transparency. Companies must disclose conflicts of interest, the estimated tax benefits and financing transactions over the life of the lease, the amount of increased tolls over the life of the deal, changes made to the workforce, and revenue estimates over the life of the deal. State governments must justify the deal in terms of the public interest and disclose the likely impact on nearby roads. In the event the private company goes bankrupt, ownership of the asset must return to the state. The contract with the private company must also be posted online 90 days before the deal can be approved.
Source: S. 1230 (US Senate, 6/16/2011)
Trans Texas Corridor officially repealed, but is it dead?
By Terri Hall
Founder, Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom
The people of Texas scored a big victory with the recent repeal of the Trans Texas Corridor (TTC) from state statute. Governor Rick Perry even signed it. That ought to give us pause. The TTC is Perry’s legacy building project, one he still defends despite the massive grassroots uprising against it. So why would he sign it?
Because it’s not truly dead. Like the famous line in the film Princess Bride, it’s mostly dead. During the 82nd Texas Legislative Session that ended May 30, the final repeal of the Trans Texas Corridor made it to the Governor’s desk, but with the passage of several key bills, it essentially revives a Trans Texas Corridor-style sale of Texas infrastructure through controversial public private partnerships (PPPs). Several segments of TTC-69 (most are connections to the Port of Houston) are authorized in SB 1420 and will move forward piece by piece as PPPs.
Texas politicians have been frustrated since the Trans Texas Corridor first became one of the most radioactive political hot potatoes across the state (and nation) as to how to convince constituents that the TTC is DEAD. Once Texans were educated about it and became sophisticated in their knowledge of how to identify it and kill it, they were just too smart to believe the TTC was really dead simply because a politician told them so. The flame started to burn in 2005 when Governor Rick Perry awarded the development rights for the Trans Texas Corridor TTC-35 to a Spanish company, Cintra, and would not release the contract to the public. Then the anti-TTC sentiment spread like wildfire after two rounds of public hearings, 54 hearings in a matter of weeks in 2006 for TTC-35 and then another 46 hearings again in 2008 for what was once I-69 that morphed into a Trans Texas Corridor concept of a foreign-owned toll road through mostly rural East Texas, known as TTC-69.
More than 28,000 Texans went on the record opposing that project, even more than the TTC-35 project, and those East Texas lawmakers, including Transportation Commissioner turned Texas Senator Robert Nichols (who was present when the TTC-35 development rights contract was first signed) and Senate Finance Committee Chair Sen. Steve Ogden, who carried the original bill to create the TTC, took notice and abject panic set in. That was the most public comment against any road project in the history of Texas. Now the backlash wasn’t isolated to just Central Texas (TTC-35), it was in the hotbed of Republican fundraising country, where property rights are sacred (TTC-69).
The Trans Texas Corridor as originally envisioned was a 4,000 mile multi-modal network of toll roads (auto and truck lanes), rail lines (freight rail and commuter rail), power transmission lines, pipelines, telecommunications lines, you name it, it was part of the Trans Texas Corridor, a terrorist’s dream. It was going to be financed, operated, and controlled by a foreign company using public private partnerships in swaths of land 1,200 feet (4 football fields) wide.
Called the biggest land grab in Texas history, it was going to gobble up 580,000 acres of private Texas land (the first corridor alone was to displace 1 million Texans) and hand it over to Cintra or some other global player who would have exclusive rights to determine the route and what hotels, restaurants, and gas stations were along the corridor (a cash cow, and government-sanctioned monopoly for HALF CENTURY). The federal government calls the TTC more nebulous sounding names like “High Priority Corridors,” “Corridors of the Future,” and even the NAFTA superhighway. TTC-69 is referred to in congressional documents as High Priority Corridors 18 & 20 and is supposed to the start at the southern border of Texas and go all the way to Port Huron, Michigan.
The Trans Texas Corridor, re-named the “Innovative Connectivity Plan” in 2009, has always been about exploiting landowners and taxpayers to open up new trade corridors to facilitate the free flow of goods (mostly cheap goods from China) among nations to benefit global corporations. With WikiLeak documents confirming our government is indeed pushing for the integration of the United States with Canada and Mexico into a North American Union, these economic and trade connections are vital to their plan, and won’t die simply because the TTC statute is now gone.
Stop the freight train, er...pipeline!
Within days of Perry winning the Texas primary March 2, 2010, TxDOT revealed its intention to extend the SH 130 toll road northward. SH 130 from Georgetown around Austin extending south to San Antonio is the first leg of the Trans Texas Corridor TTC-35. So as predicted, Perry, bolstered by his re-election, continued his plans to push the TTC piece by piece all the way up to the Red River.
With Winnipeg moving a multi-modal trade corridor southward along I-35, and the expansion of US 281 south of San Antonio underway (which feeds into the I-35 corridor) moving the corridor northward, it proves the TTC's demise was mere illusion designed to put Texans back to sleep while politicians get re-elected and quietly build it, segment by segment under the radar.
When the Texas Department of Transportation announced that TTC-35 was "dead," it also clearly stated TTC-69, also given the name I-69 to make it appear more harmless, is still moving forward. In fact, expansion of US 77 is already underway in the valley as part of the initial leg of what will be known as TTC-69/I-69.
In addition, Ports to Plains (to run from Mexico all the way to Alberta, Canada) and La Entrada de Pacifico, two other active TTC corridors, show that nothing has changed there either, except dropping the official connection by name to the Trans Texas Corridor. La Entrada, to traverse through the Big Bend area, has a disturbing new twist with the resurrection of the idea to cede Big Bend to international interests by deeming it an "international" park, essentially to join it with Mexico's "Big Bend" on the other side of the U.S. border.
The idea is to eventually develop future sea-port connections with Far-East ocean shipping lanes, and to steer federal transportation dollars into several otherwise useful local projects over time, and then connect the segments into a singular, identifiable system.
Part of the TTC concept for Ports to Plains includes the transport of wind power around the state (per a TxDOT feasibility study in 2007) and a tarsands oil pipeline. So it’s not a leap to suspect the Keystone XL tarsands oil pipeline (owned by a Canadian company called TransCanada) heading down from Alberta, Canada to Houston via East Texas right now may well tie into the TTC, or at least the larger picture of trade with China. Either way, several trans-national pipelines are still in the works through Texas that have been fraught with threats of eminent domain and downright bullying - all for oil that won’t likely benefit the U.S.
“TransCanada’s own funded report shows that the Keystone XL pipeline will cause an increase in the price of gas, is not currently needed, and that it will not decrease imports from ‘unfriendly sources.’ The State Department acknowledges the fact that there is no guarantee that any of this product would stay in the U.S. This pipeline would open up the world market for landlocked tarsands and provide China’s tarsands investors with a port, while putting our lives and water supplies at risk,” notes East Texas resident David Daniel, Founder of Stop the Tarsands Oil Pipeline.
‘Come and Take it’
Anyone familiar with Texas history knows about the story behind the Gonzales flag emblazoned with a cannon and the words ‘Come and Take It.’ It was the challenge the Texians gave the commander of the Mexican army in 1835 when he sent for the cannon stationed there (in a move to disarm the Texians). They simply replied, ‘Come and take it.’ When the Mexican army came to retrieve the cannon, the Texians put up a fight and the army retreated. It was considered the beginning of the Texas revolution. The rest is history.
As part of their proud history, Texans can add another ‘Come and Take It’ moment to their epic: the rise of the Trans Texas Corridor and its subsequent defeat. Texans educated the nation on this coming land-grabbing superhighway tidal wave and generated a Texas-sized revolt against the Trans Texas Corridor, striking fear in the eyes of any politician associated with it.
Yet while Texans have a lot to celebrate for driving a stake through the heart of the Trans Texas Corridor as it was originally envisioned -- it will no longer include the vast pie-in-the-sky “multi-modal” network of rail, telecommunications, power transmission, and pipelines of all sorts in a 1,200 foot wide foreign-controlled right of way -- a toned-down version of that plan still creeps its way into existence. So all Americans must stay vigilant to kill this beast wherever it lurks. Texans stand ready.
Politicians penchant for selling off public assets
Our Politicians Are Selling Off Pieces Of America To Foreign Investors – And Goldman Sachs Is Helping Them Do It
End of the American Dream.com
All over the United States, politicians are selling off key pieces of infrastructure to foreign investors and big Wall Street banks like Goldman Sachs are helping them do it. State and local governments across the country that are drowning in debt and that are desperate for cash are increasingly turning to the "privatization" of public assets as the solution to their problems. Pieces of infrastructure that taxpayers have already paid for such as highways, water treatment plants, libraries, parking meters, airports and power plants are being auctioned off to the highest bidder. Most of the time what happens is that the state or local government receives a huge lump sum of cash up front for a long-term lease (usually 75 years or longer) and the foreign investors come in and soak as much revenue out of the piece of infrastructure that they possibly can. The losers in these deals are almost always the taxpayers. Pieces of America are literally being auctioned off just to help state and local governments minimize their debt problems for a year or two, but the consequences of these deals will be felt for decades.
Sadly, this trend continues to accelerate. Just this week, a bill that will allow the state government of Ohio to proceed with plans to lease the Ohio Turnpike to investors was approved. The state government of Ohio will soon receive a one-time injection of cash and everyone in the area that uses the Ohio Turnpike will end up paying much higher tolls for decades to come.
Highways have also been auctioned off (most of the time to foreign investors) in Indiana, the city of Chicago, Florida, Virginia and Texas.
Amazingly, many politicians continue to insist that selling off pieces of infrastructure that have already been fully paid for by taxpayers is a wonderful thing. In fact, there are actually some politicians that have the gall to call it a "conservative" thing to do.
For example, Rick Perry has been at the forefront of the effort to "privatize" the highways of Texas.
You would think that the people of Texas would have gotten rid of him by now, but considering the fact that he may be running for the Republican nomination in 2012, he just might be our next president.
What makes the selling off of our infrastructure even worse is that big Wall Street banks such as Goldman Sachs are helping our corrupt politicians do it.
In fact, Wall Street sees a tremendous opportunity in the "distressed assets" of our broke state and local governments.
The fact that Goldman Sachs is making millions auctioning off our public infrastructure should make the blood of all red-blooded Americans boil. The following is a brief excerpt from a recent article posted on dylanratigan.com....
On Wall Street, setting up and running “Infrastructure Funds” is big business, with over $140 billion run by such banks as Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Australian infrastructure specialist Macquarie. Goldman’s 2010 SEC filing should give you some sense of the scope of the campaign. Goldman says it will be involved with “ownership and operation of public services, such as airports, toll roads and shipping ports, as well as power generation facilities, physical commodities and other commodities infrastructure components, both within and outside the United States.” While the bank sees increased opportunity in “distressed assets” (ie. Cities and states gone broke because of the financial crisis), the bank also recognizes “reputational concerns with the manner in which these assets are being operated or held.”
Why does Goldman Sachs always seem to be at the heart of so many things that are wrong with our financial system?
Unfortunately, Goldman Sachs is not the only one seeking to make a quick buck these days.
Foreign investors in particular seem to have an affinity for pieces of U.S. infrastructure, and Wall Street banks such as Goldman Sachs love to help them gobble it up.
The sovereign wealth funds of nations such as Saudi Arabia, China, Kuwait, Libya, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates are eagerly investing in highways, ports, toll roads and even parking meters all across America.
So precisely what is a sovereign wealth fund?
In a previous article I defined it as "a huge mountain of state-owned money that roams about the countryside looking for assets to gobble up."
The combination of sovereign wealth funds with huge piles of money to burn and state and local governments that are desperate to raise cash has created something of a "perfect storm".
In an article for Rolling Stone, Matt Taibbi documented some of the key pieces of infrastructure that these sovereign wealth funds have been gobbling up....
A toll highway in Indiana. The Chicago Skyway. A stretch of highway in Florida. Parking meters in Nashville, Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, and other cities. A port in Virginia. And a whole bevy of Californian public infrastructure projects, all either already leased or set to be leased for fifty or seventy-five years or more in exchange for one-off lump sum payments of a few billion bucks at best, usually just to help patch a hole or two in a single budget year.
As Taibbi noted, the money that is raised from these long-term leases usually only helps fix budget problems for a year or two, but the pieces of infrastructure that are being auctioned off will be in the hands of foreigners for decades to come.
Sadly, much of our own infrastructure is not even built in this country anymore.
For example, a 2,050 foot bridge that is going to connect San Francisco and Oakland is actually being built in China and is being shipped over to the U.S. piece by piece.
This bridge is being constructed by the China State Construction Engineering Group, and according to an article in The Telegraph, they have been building a whole lot of major projects all over the United States....
CSCEC has already built seven schools in the US, apartment blocks in Washington DC and New York and is in the middle of building a 4,000-room casino in Atlantic City. In New York, it has won contracts to renovate the subway system, build a new metro platform near Yankee stadium, and refurbish the Alexander Hamilton Bridge over the Harlem river.
Massive corporations that are either fully or partially owned by the Chinese government are deeply integrating themselves into the U.S. economy.
For much more on this phenomenon, please see a previous article I authored entitled "The Chinese Government Is Buying Up Economic Assets And Huge Tracts Of Land All Over The United States".
Sadly, as our state and local governments get even deeper into debt, the amount of infrastructure that is being auctioned off to foreigners will continue to grow.
Most Americans don't realize how desperate many state and local governments have become. For example, things have gotten so tight that New York City is now actually rationing toilet paper at Coney Island.
The United States is drowning in debt from coast to coast and pieces of the country are literally being auctioned off. The looting and the "privatization" are only going to intensify as our state and local government debt problems get even worse.
Perhaps on all future maps of the world we should just put a big "for sale" sign on the United States.
What in the world has happened to this country?
The War on Cars: Who’s putting us on a ‘road diet’?
By now you may be asking how does providing safe access to roads translate into reducing single occupancy vehicles? Because the “complete streets” initiatives aren’t about adding curbs and sidewalks (which indeed are needed to accommodate pedestrians and the disabled) as much as about declaring an all-out war on cars. Like “complete streets,” “walkable communities” is code for the United Nations’ Agenda 21 initiatives that seek to abolish private property, reduce the carbon footprint of humans, restrict mobility, and basically control what we eat, how many children we can have, how we travel, and where we can live, work, and play -- initiatives which are already being implemented through ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability in over 600 cities nationwide and in 178 countries worldwide.
The MPO has adopted into its bylaws this “complete streets” policy that requires ALL future transportation improvement projects to include bicycle and pedestrian facilities. That means take already scarce highway funds and mandate part of them be spent on bike and pedestrian trails or sidewalks, etc. Few if any state highways are the appropriate place for sidewalks or pedestrians so it likely means the practical application of this is to use highway funds to build hike and bike trails elsewhere as part of every highway project. Any exceptions must be “adequately documented” and “bicycle and pedestrian components included in a project cannot be deleted from the project at a future date in accordance with this policy.”
Organizations like the National Conference of State Legislatures are promoting key Agenda 21 policies, including drafting sample legislation for your state representative to take home and enact into law. 'Complete streets' policies and public private partnerships were both on the agenda of last year's conference and Texas State Representative Linda Harper-Brown came back and introduced legislation for both initiatives this year, but her attempts to pass a state 'complete streets" policy failed largely due to the efforts of Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom exposing it as an anti-car, anti-property rights Agenda 21 scheme. However, some Texas cities have already adopted a 'complete streets' policy at the local level through their MPOs, including Austin, Houston, and San Antonio.
The policy not only heists already scarce gas taxes to pay for other modes, but also grows government bureaucracy. The MPO has a full time “Bicycle/Pedestrian Planner.” The City of San Antonio has also added a full-time “Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator.” In 2009, the city hired a new Sustainable Transportation Coordinator, Julia Diana, as part of the City of San Antonio’s Office of Environmental Policy. Diana’s background has little to do with transportation and more to do with preserving open space. She’s served on the Linear Creekway Parks Advisory Board and is a founding board member of the Voelcker Park Conservancy.
“What we need to do is make biking and walking easier. I live in the suburbs and have access to very little infrastructure which promotes biking. I would gladly ride to my local H.E.B., but the route is dangerous, not to mention unpleasant. Therefore, I think we should focus on accessibility, directness, and continuity of bike routes while analyzing and implementing land use policies that support paths, lanes, sidewalks, crosswalks, etc, ” Diana said.
Road diet = war on cars
It sounds nice enough, but the part she leaves out is that part of the plan is to reduce auto lanes to make way for bikes and pedestrians. It’s not truly about offering more choices, but government deciding for you that cars are bad and cycling and walking are better alternatives to driving in your car. So under the guise of “sustainable transportation,” the real motive is to force people out of their cars and onto their feet or bikes to get around.
The MPO plans “to identify and analyze roadways that would benefit from a ‘road diet.’” It explains “a ‘road diet’ as a technique...to narrow the width of a road or lane or completely eliminate the through lane(s) to achieve...a more efficient, multi-modal street or roadway” under subtask 2.3 of the MPO’s Unified Planning Work Program. An MPO resolution supports achieving bike facilities through “restriping or through a road diet.” Only a government bureaucrat would call shrinking the number of auto lanes and replacing them with bike lanes an “efficient” roadway.
Here are some examples of how these policies have played out in Bexar County and around the state. First, since the “complete streets” policy was adopted by the MPO, on North New Braunfels Avenue between Ft. Sam Houston and Austin Highway the city came in and restriped it so that what used to function as two lanes in each direction is now one lane each way for autos with a dedicated bike lane in the space once used by autos. There has been no marked increase in cyclists, but the auto congestion has doubled.
Then, in recent weeks NW Military Highway between 1604 and 410 was expanded between Shavano Park to Castle Hills not for autos, but for a dedicated bike lane in each direction. So after all that time and money on a road expansion, they did not add ANY new auto lanes, only bike lanes including a 6-8 foot buffer lane of space between the auto and bike lanes without adding any new auto lanes as well. The road remains congested. Next, Bexar County Flood Control Division condemned 30 homes, in 2009, using eminent domain along El Verde Road in order to expand Huebner Creek and to add hike and bike trails and to expand a park.
Also, the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority, another duplicative government agency, is currently conducting the required environmental study for both the US 281 and Loop 1604 toll projects, and both will be including bike and pedestrian facilities. There’s already discussion of completing a bike path that traverses under 1604 as part of the project. Yet all of these agencies repeatedly tell us there’s no money to fix/expand our roads without tolls, but we apparently have plenty of money for extensive frontage roads, sidewalks, bike trails, and lighting for those sidewalks and trails.
Finally, San Angelo just announced its award of $3.2 million in highway funds to build a bike trail. It turns out the cost works out to be over a million dollars PER MILE!
'Way to coerce people out of their cars'
Getting the picture yet? There’s a war on cars and politicians and bureaucrats are putting us on a “road diet” to force you out of your car and onto a hike & bike trail to help “solve” congestion. Naturally this also plays into the agenda of toll road advocates and bureaucrats that want free routes to remain congested to force you into paying tolls to get mobility. But is biking and walking really a practical solution for your daily commute and do you want your road taxes being used to expand roads for bikes only with no similar expansion for auto lanes? A larger agenda is at play and Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood wants gas taxes to fund non-motorized transportation: “It is a way to coerce people out of their cars. About everything we do around here is government intrusion in people's lives...So have at it.”
TX Legislature fails to pass anti-groping bill
Here's a link to Sen. Dan Patrick's account of the events. Conservatives wanted the Senate version to pass because Straus watered down and perpetually delayed the House version. But perhaps the real news of this TSA saga in the last few days has been Rick Perry's interview on Glenn Beck's Fox TV Show taking credit for the TSA anti-groping bill when he was dragged kicking and screaming to get him to add the bill to his call for the special session which Perry alone controls.
Lawmakers Call it Quits, Leave Unfinished Business
By Thanh Tan, Texas Tribune, June 29, 2011
The Senate's version of a bill to criminalize intrusive pat-downs by federal agents with the Transportation Security Administration has died in the House, after the chamber couldn't get the four-fifths vote needed to suspend the rules.
The 96-26 vote meant the measure couldn't pass before the end of the special session, so House lawmakers adjourned sine die.
That leaves two of Gov. Rick Perry's special session priorities — TSA and sanctuary cities — incomplete, but the governor doesn't seem compelled to call lawmakers back again.
“Although I am disappointed lawmakers did not finalize legislation that would have banned sanctuary cities, I commend the Legislature’s work to pass measures that further strengthen our legal system through loser pays lawsuit reform, uphold the integrity of the ballot box by requiring voters to present photo ID at polling places, protect unborn life by requiring an ultrasound before an abortion, strengthen private property rights, and increase penalties for individuals who participate in human trafficking," Perry said in a statement. "And although the airport pat-down bill did not pass, it did initiate a public discussion and some changes in airport security procedures."
While Democrats argued the TSA bill was political in nature and unfairly targeted at federal agents doing their job, Republicans in the House were more angry at the Senate's decision to adjourn early yesterday without passing HB 41, the House's version of the bill they said had been vetted by the attorney general's office. The Senate version was more strict, and House lawmakers had lingering concerns over whether it could withstand a challenge from the Department of Justice, which warned the state last month about the possibility of shutting down airports in Texas if TSA officers could not conduct screenings.
In response to the take it or leave it option before them, state Rep. Jim Keffer, R-Eastland, said, "It's insulting!" After the session adjourned, he went even further with his criticism of the Senate: "In my humble estimation, they have nothing to be proud of."
After it became apparent the bill was dead, Simpson spoke before the House and openly criticized leadership in both chambers. With House Speaker Joe Straus, who just last week referred to the TSA bill as a publicity stunt, standing behind him, the outspoken Republican said he believed House leadership had thwarted his effort to stop the "routine" touching of private parts by federal agents. Though his comments were received with a collective groaning sound from lawmakers, Simpson was undeterred.
During his 15-minute speech, Simpson said he is "fed up with phonies" and politicians who take credit for bills they try to kill. He quoted Churchill by saying, "Never yield to force... never yield to the overwhelming might of the enemy." On the TSA legislation, he declared, "I'm not giving up." The Longview Republican didn't limit his views to the TSA issue. He launched an all-out critique of the state budget, which he accused of being filled with accounting tricks and nowhere near conservative enough.
Immediately after Simpson finished, some members of the public sitting in the House gallery applauded his remarks before storming out of the room. "If you cowards don't protect us, we'll protect ourselves," screamed one man.
While Simpson stole the show, the real anger in the body continued to be directed at the Senate. Lawmakers passed HB 79, a comprehensive judicial reorganization bill, but not without some direct hazing of the measure's Senate sponsor, Sen. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock. Lawmakers had to remind members of the House that the bill had been in the works for six years and originated in the House. Just last night, the governor and the House blamed Duncan for stripping the sanctuary cities ban from SB 1. (The Senate promptly came to his defense). Today, Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, chastised Duncan for refusing to consider his amendment to HB 79 that would have banned Sharia law in Texas. Tensions reached a peak as State Rep. Lois Kolkhorst stood at the back microphone, launching into her own tirade against the Senate leaving the House hanging. A loud banging noise could be heard in the gallery, prompting Kolkhorst to say, "Am I about to be shot in the head?"
With no major bills left on the agenda, Straus pounded the gavel around noon and declared the special session over. After praising the House for holding the line on a tax increase and setting an austere budget, Straus told reporters he did not take Simpson's comments too personally. He said every member of the House is entitled to an opportunity to speak and the version of the Senate bill Simpson championed simply came "too late" to pass.
"I think he's disappointed," Straus said. "I've spent a lot of time over the past couple weeks trying to help him. I think that it's unanimous here in the House, the goal of making sure that our TSA employees are reasonable in their searches. It was the methodology and the specifics of his bill that a lot of House members thought needed work."
Indeed, Simpson said he is already re-working HB 41 and drafting additional legislation that would require more training for TSA agents, whom he said lack the same skills as peace officers. He stood by his statements against the leadership, too. "It could have been done earlier," he said of the bill, which he claims had the votes to pass during the regular session before the Department of Justice intervened. To do all this, Simpson will have to be re-elected by his district. Today, he confirmed he will run for a second term.
Straus was also asked about his future plans, and he responded that he filed the appropriate paperwork to run for a third term as speaker last month. He said he had not planned to start campaigning until the session adjourned.
"Now that we're out of the called special session, it's time to get back to politics, but I think reading the mood of the members, which is a big part of my job, that it's time for everyone to take a couple weeks off, to reconnect with our families, to take vacations... and the time to realize that we've been here for 170 days and we all need a break," Straus said.
Though conservative groups have encouraged lawmakers to withhold their so-called "pledge cards," Straus said he has never collected those cards himself, and does not plan to start doing it anytime soon.
House Democratic leader Jessica Farrar, D-Houston, acknowledged members of her caucus were largely on the sidelines the past two days, watching the supermajority nearly fall apart.
"It looks like a conflict from within. Their rhetoric is not sustainable," she told the Tribune. "However, Simpson actually made our argument when he said the budget is smoke and mirrors."
Now that both chambers have adjourned, Farrar predicts Texans will begin to see the effects of the public policy decisions made this session.
"What we'll see in the interim is what cuts will do to the schools. You won't see a lot of people defending their decisions," Farrar said.
Another toll hike for DFW commuters
Link to article here.
The arrogance of this out of control un-elected toll authority is downright despicable. To say the authority "must keep charging more" and "it's either pay me now or pay me later" when there's high unemployment, high gas prices, and many people losing their homes and cars due to the downturn, now is certainly not the time for a tax increase. This is what happens when UN-elected bureaucrats make tax decisions. The NTTA doesn't have to answer to the taxpaying public who cannot pressure these people to lower tolls or keep toll taxes at reasonable rates. Their board doesn't even have to vote publicly for these tax increases as is required of other agencies, AND they can automatically increase tolls every two years from here on out without accountability or transparency of where this money is going.
Then to have some elected officials in Arlington advocating charging "market" rate tolls that would jack up the toll rates as high as people are willing to pay before they stop taking the road...These people are greedy, irresponsible, unaccountable scoundrels! Notice the reporter doesn't publish their names. Okay Arlington, find out who they are and make them pay political retribution!
The NTTA's statements affirm they're not interested in more customers (because that means a higher operation and maintenance cost), they actually want to shed customers so they can make more money on the schmucks stuck taking their toll roads.
"Without the toll rate hikes, which Davis said should pull in an extra $18 million to $20 million next year, NTTA would have to rely on increased traffic on its highways to keep its finances in line."
The article also states that the reason for the toll hikes are due to NTTA taking on new projects. Why should current customers pay to cover the costs of other new toll roads? According to testimony in the House Transportation Committee, there are no longer toll viable roads in Texas. They've all been built. Now they're raiding from every source of taxpayer money they can get their hands on to SUBSIDIZE LOSER toll projects they have no business building as a toll road.
“This allows us to take these rate increases in little pieces and avoid the massive 30 to 40 percent increases that we would have to impose otherwise whenever we decided to take on a new road,” Davis said.
The ol' stealing from Peter to pay Paul trick...he "independent" audit of the NTTA can't come fast enough!
__________________________________________________________
NTTA raising Dallas-area tolls 6 percent Friday
BY MICHAEL A. LINDENBERGER
Dallas Morning News
28 June 2011
Drivers will spend more to use area toll roads beginning Friday.
Rates will creep up about 6 percent to 15.3 cents a mile, an amount that will mean nearly $40 more a year for toll-paying commuters who drive 10 miles each way to work and back.
The increase is unusual because it will take effect without any action by the North Texas Tollway Authority board, which voted 8-1 in 2009 to schedule automatic increases that will take place every two years forever, or until the board votes to end them.
Unlike Dallas Area Rapid Transit, which is required by federal law to hold hearings and to vote at least twice on a fare increase, NTTA can set rates as it chooses. In an interview last week, board member Bob Day, the lone dissenter in 2009, said he remains opposed to the increase — both on principle and because he thinks now is a bad time to ask drivers to pay more.
“I didn’t think we needed that large of an increase, and secondly the timing is wrong,” said Day, former mayor of Garland. “And third, I am basically against automatic increases.”
Despite Day’s opposition, there has been no discussion by his colleagues since to revisit the issue.
Tuesday, NTTA chief financial officer Janice Davis defended the increase as not just good for NTTA, but good for drivers’ pocketbooks, too.
“Looking at this strictly from the viewpoint of the drivers, this is really a ‘pay me now or pay me later’ situation,” Davis said.
NTTA owes about $8 billion to bondholders, almost of all which it has taken on since 2008, when it borrowed $5 billion to cover construction costs for the Sam Rayburn Tollway and the $3.2 billion it paid local governments in return for winning the right to collect tolls on that road.
Strong credit
Despite owing so much, NTTA has maintained strong credit ratings, partly because it has pledged to ensure its revenue remains at least 1.5 times as high as the payments it makes each year on its senior debt.
Davis said by deciding to schedule automatic increases, rather than ask the board or the public each time, the authority gains an additional advantage. It can guarantee creditors that the revenue will keep going up — even if traffic is flat — unless the board takes the unlikely step of acting to end the increases.
In turn, creditors reward NTTA with lower interest rates, Davis said.
She said that even without the scheduled increases, NTTA would still have to vote to raise its rates every few years, and probably by much larger amounts each time to enable it to finance the roads that local officials want it to build.
“This allows us to take these rate increases in little pieces and avoid the massive 30 to 40 percent increases that we would have to impose otherwise whenever we decided to take on a new road,” Davis said.
Day said he understands the business case for the automatic increases but said the benefits do not justify dealing the public out of the board’s rate-setting decisions.
“As a former mayor, I believe we’ve got to decide publicly every time we want to charge our customers more,” he said, noting that with a vote comes the opportunity for public input.
But Chairman Victor Vandergriff, in a statement explaining the increase earlier this month, said it’s a necessary step by NTTA “to maintain a viable financial system and to deliver the many mobility projects that bring growth to the North Texas region.”
What market will bear
Elected officials on the Regional Transportation Council in Arlington have urged NTTA for years to adopt a more aggressive rate policy.
The council wants NTTA to charge drivers like a private company would by setting rates closer to the maximum drivers would pay before they stopped using the toll roads.
That “market-rate” approach will soon be tested in its purest form on the managed lanes being built with regional council approval by private firms throughout North Texas, the first of which will open about 2015.
Those roads — including LBJ Freeway when improvements are complete in 2016 — will offer special lanes that will cost drivers several times what NTTA charges.
In return, those lanes will have a guaranteed minimum speed of 50 mph no matter how crowded the corridor becomes.
The increases will mean big money over time for NTTA, which already collects more money in tolls than DART does in sales taxes and fares combined from its 13 member cities.
This year, NTTA expects to collect $396 million in tolls. By 2024, toll receipts are expected to be $1 billion a year — 10 times the amount of sales taxes collected by DART this year across its member cities.
A surer route
Because NTTA’s annual debt payments are also expected to balloon in coming years — they will total $371.5 million by 2015 — the authority must keep collecting more revenue.
Without the toll rate hikes, which Davis said should pull in an extra $18 million to $20 million next year, NTTA would have to rely on increased traffic on its highways to keep its finances in line.
That would be an uncertain bet, because even though business has been good at NTTA, the combined effects of lingering unemployment, high gas prices and higher rates mean that traffic is likely to be lower in coming years than NTTA advisers had expected.
Privatized Indiana Toll Road headed for bankruptcy
The poster child for road privatization gurus is headed for bankruptcy which may not seem like much in these economic times, but its a MASSIVE indictment against privatization advocates that have strapped taxpayers with oppressive tax increases on driving (doubling the toll rates in just 5 years) and crushing debt for generations.
Here's what a supporter penned at the news:
The big Indiana toll deal is living on borrowed time. Its reserve
account will run dry in Q1 2012. It is losing money so they have to come
up with more capital or quit. They'll default. This is bigger than all
of the previous failures combined.
Cintra and Macquarie split this concession 50-50. They took over the
existing IH 80(?) passing through Indiana. They put a lot of cash into
fixing up the road and installing toll equipment. They also paid the
state of Indiana $3.8 billion for the right to collect tolls for 75 years.
The toll is about 5 cents per mile. I think they are allowed to increase
the toll but that doesn't help. Every penny increase drives away enough
users to cause a bigger loss. They are caught in a cruel vice.
These geniuses borrowed the money for a 75 year deal on a 10 year note.
Due in 2015. Maybe they thought they could do a re-fi at CountryWide
Mortgage Company
The State of Indiana is a huge winner. They got $3.8 billion for nothing.
There is a lot more to this story that is not presented in the article. ...
Vince
London news wire says Indiana TR concession in financial trouble
Posted on Sun, 2011-06-26 22:57
Toll Road News
Debtwire, a London Financial Times wire service claims the Indiana Toll Road Concession Company (ITRCC) is in danger of defaulting on its debt as early as the first months of next year (2012). The wire says ITRCC has been rapidly "burning through" an interest reserve account which threatens to put it out of compliance with reserve provisions of its $4.1b in bonds.
The principal lender to ITRCC is the Royal Bank of Scotland which Debtwire says has assigned the loan to its "workout" department. The wire report says the interest reserve account could be depleted by the end of 2011.
ITRCC is a joint 50/50 percent venture of Cintra and Macquarie. A Cintra spokesman said merely that the reserve account was intended for drawing upon during a recession and low traffic like that presently experienced by the US. A Macquarie spokesman said simply that no default is expected.
Traffic and revenue have been well below expectation since the 75 year concession was signed with the state of Indiana at the height of the boom in June 2006. Toll revenues in 2010 were $164.2m versus interest expense on debt of $268m.
There were $9m of non-toll revenues mostly from the leasing of rest stops for total revenue of $173.3m.
Expenses included toll collection $9.6m, routine repairs and maintenance $8.7m, other operating costs $16.3m for total operating expense before depreciation of $34.5m. That generates EBITDA (earnings before of interest taxes depreciation and amortization) of $138.8m. Depreciation and amortization was $79.7m making a profit before interest expenses of $59.1m.
It's $268m in interest expense that is killing the ITRCC.
In 2010 that interest plus a derivative loss (from hedging interest rate swaps) of $51.9m converted a modest operating profit into the net loss of $260.8m.
In mid-2006 ITRCC paid the state of Indiana $3.8b in one-time rent for the 75 year concession on the road. Cintra and Macquarie each put in $374m to produce an equity at start of $748m. They borrowed $4.1b.
They appear to be paying 6.5% interest to the Royal Bank of Scotland and associated lenders (268/4100). The bulk of the debt on the concession ($3,685m) is less-than-10 year debt due in 2015.
The concessionaires made major capital improvements including third laning in the west, and other bridge and pavement repair as well as an improved toll system.
Transactions 35% low
Traffic is reported by Macquarie as 74.6k/average day or 27.2m/yr in 2010.
We don't know what traffic and revenue forecasts Cintra and Macquarie used, but forecasting for the state (INDOT) was Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) "Rate Review and Revenue Projections Study" August 2005. Indiana Finance Authority commissioned Crowe Chizek & Company's "Indiana East-West Toll Road Financial Analysis" dated March 2006.
WSA had a forecast of transactions and revenues in six different columns, each for a different combination of toll rates (see nearby). At the time of the forecast the ITR had toll rates of 4c/mile for cars and 14.6c/mile for tractor trailers, while by WSA estimate maximum revenue would be gained with tolls of around 13c/mile for cars and 44c/mile for the big rigs.
Toll rates under state control were about a third of the market or revenue maximizing rates!
They've been pushed up a bit according to the maxima allowed by the concession - to 5.6c/mile for cars and 22.4c/mile for tractor trailers at present and another small increase goes into effect July 1. That puts them between two WSA transactions forecast columns 47.2m and 37.8m. If the middle point is used you get 42m as the forecast for current toll rates so actual 27.2m traffic is a huge shortfall - about 35%.
$s down 17% on forecast
Toll revenue using the same 'middling' should be $196m for 2010 compared to actual $164m, making it a 17% shortfall on forecast.
(Traffic so-called is actually toll transactions and the ITR is a barrier system of toll points over the mainline in its western commuter heavy/car heavy portion, versus a ticket system in its long stretch east which is almost a truckway. Transaction counts overweight the importance of the barrier portion and commuter car traffic because a relatively short trip there may be 2 or 3 transactions whereas all trips on the ticket portion are the single transaction even for driving its length. Traffic has obviously dropped most on the barrier system portion out west.)
Crowe Chizek & Co assumed much smaller debt by the concessionaire and higher equity - about one tenth the debt ITRCC actually assumed. Debt service was put at a mere $24.8m in 2010 versus the actual $268m in interest.
COMMENT: That's where the problem lies - assuming far too much debt for too variable and uncertain a revenue stream. Easy to say in retrospect though many said at the time that at 40x they paid too high a multiple of cash flow. Even if their traffic were at WSA forecast levels, and even with market toll rates as opposed to concession regulated toll rates, they'd still only have toll revenues of $245m. And with interest payments to be made to borrowers of $268m they'd still be losing money. They must have thought that somehow, someway they could muddle through. Maybe they still can? We'll see. But this time they can't blame forecasters for their troubles - editor.
Demerging and stapling
The Macquarie interest in ITR held originally by Macquarie Infrastructure Group along with other weak tollroads was divested (they used the goddawful word 'demerged') Feb 2010 to two entities with the name Macquarie Atlas Roads, one with the ending International Limited (MARIL), the other just Limited (MARL) managed jointly by Macquarie Atlas Roads (MQA).
At Macquarie they love to "staple" equities - a peculiarly Australian arrangement - meaning that one stock cannot be bought or sold without buying or selling the other. They call the stapled security of one MARL and one MARIL share Macquarie Atlas Roads (MQA) which security trades on the Australian Stock Exchanges.
This complicated duplication of companies followed by their forced marriage looks like a makework racket by corporate lawyers Downunner.
https://www.getizoom.com/index.jsp
http://www.macquarie.com/mgl/com/mqa
http://www.macquarie.com/mgl/com/mqa/asset-portfolio/indiana-toll-road
annual report
http://www.macquarie.com/dafiles/Internet/mgl/com/mqa/asset-portfolio/do...
TOLLROADSnews 2011-06-26 ADDITIONS, EDITS 2011-06-27 11:30
U.S. to cut highway funding by nearly $10 billion
Perhaps the most shocking stat in the article is the fact that 75 of our U.S. Interstate highways are already tolled. This is why Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Pennsylvania lawmakers, John Peterson and Phil English, worked so hard to keep tolls off our interstates. These people will stop at NOTHING to tap the revenue stream of taxpayers. They exploit congestion weary commuters by refusing to spend our gas taxes to fix our roads (currently both federal and state lawmakers habitually raid our gas taxes for non-road uses) so they can extort money from us saying we have to pay tolls to get our roads fixed.
Declining US money for highways - where tolling fits in
Posted on Fri, 2011-06-24 00:37
Toll Road News
Kenneth Orski who follows transport funding issues in Washington DC says US Government grants to the states for highways will drop from the current level of $41b/year to about $32b next year based on the end of deficit financing under a newly budget conscious House of Representatives. That $32b will be the result of relying solely on federal gas/diesel tax revenues - as we used to before the massive deficit spending of 'stimulus' funds the past three years. (see Orski at www.innobriefs.com)
It's a return to highway users "paying their way" and "living within our means" Orski says citing the popular mantras that now set the tone for US Government budgeting for surface transportation. Handouts for highspeed rail will - hopefully - be zeroed out, and other rail folliescontained. Unsustainable 'sustainability' and 'livability' nonsense won't survive the result of last November's election, and the changed composition of the US Congress.
Too much attention is sometimes to Washington DC's role. States and local governments raise fully three times as much for highways as federal funding, Orski points out. They of course face their own budgetary constraints, and lack state 'Reserve' banks with the power to print US$s. And there is almost no stomach in any legislature to raise gas/diesel tax rates - politically directed highway programs are so distrusted.
Some states have been 'borrowing up' heavily themselves for highways loading up on TIFIA and GARVE (grant anticipation) bonds, so an increasing proportion of their gas tax funds and US money goes not to new roads but to paying for past loan-based spending.
IBTTA had a useful panel this week on the major opportunity for tolling in the US - funding the rebuild of the Interstate highway system. Ed Regan of Wilbur Smith Associates gave another of his masterful analyses of the issue and a collection of others gave variations on the theme.
Key point Regan makes is that the cost of essential rebuilding of the Interstate Highways is way bigger than the costs incurred in original construction. What we have now cost around $130b but the cost of rebuilding is in the range $1,300b to $2,500b in current prices - ten to twenty times higher. If spread over 50 years that's an annual expenditure in the range $26b to $50b.
Some of the increase is general inflation, but some is real extra cost - construction under traffic is inherently more expensive than greenfields construction, and we build better than we used to in many respects.
Tolling could take on the job of rebuilding the interstates. Current toll revenues are around $10b, and they would need to be increased at least three-fold to take on the Interstate Rebuild job, which Regan calls "probably the most important transport investment in American history."
The opportunity arises out of:
- states desperate for new and sustainable revenue sources
- the greater acceptability and lower cost of all-electronic tolling as compared to earlier methods
- direct user charges and paying-your-way being a theme of the times since it allocates cost directly to those who benefit
- the power of variable and differentiated toll rates to manage traffic and offer free flow
- the potential to tap investor money and management with PPPs
- the states own the interstates so they ultimately carry the responsibility for rebuilds
7% of the interstate system (2,921 miles of 48,000) are already tolled plus most of the large bridge and tunnel crossings. 3,175 miles in 17 systems were built as tollroads. Some 254 miles and four systems (CT Tpk 129, DFW Tpk 30, KY Tpk 45, Richmond-Petersberg VA 50) were unfortunately detolled.
Most of the tollroads built in the past 10 years have been non-Interstate in classification, but around half of the new expressway mileage built in that time has been tollroads.
Regan makes the point that tolls represent something of a return to President Franklin Delanor Roosevelt's concept of a system that would be "self liquidating" with tolls and corridor property rights. And to the fact that it started out with 17 toll systems as its basis. The oldest Interstate in the country is I-76 in central Pennsylvania: the Pennsylvania Turnpike.
Trouble is so far the US Congress and the Obama administration cling to their legislative bar on tolling the interstates. Indeed both Secretary Ray LaHood and House committee chair John Mica have said they support tolls for new capacity but oppose its use on existing capacity.
There's little demand for new capacity, but a huge demand for rebuild funds and the management power of tolling. And for its ability to allocate money where it will be most productively used - which the political process does a dismal job of.
see http://www.ibtta.org/contentnoleftnav.cfm?ItemNumber=5202&token=47104&us...
Emanuel: Corporate tax holiday to get Infrastructure Bank buy-in
What's really amazing about this article is Rahm Emanuel's influence post-White House Chief-of-Staff turned Mayor of Chicago. But the fact his proposal is a form of bribery (they call an 'incentive') of public officials and a special interest giveaway is not surprising...there's a reason Michele Malkin calls the Federal Infrastructure Bank "corporate welfare."
Corporate Tax Holiday Could Create Infrastructure Bank -- But Devil Is In The Details
By Matt Sledge, Huffington Post
First Posted: 06/22/11 06:32 PM ET Updated: 06/22/11 11:25 PM ET
Rahm Emanuel has a proposition. A grand one, for big business, big unions, and Congress: let a corporate income tax holiday pay for a national infrastructure bank.
Let multinationals bring their money home -- the money that's parked overseas, dodging Uncle Sam's corporate income taxes -- and the federal government can use some of it to pay for the infrastructure bank, the newly minted mayor of Chicago says.
Unions, big corporations, and potentially members of both parties: a virtual rainbow coalition may be assembling in favor of the infrastructure bank. But corporate watchdogs charge there's no difference between a tax holiday with a bank and a tax holiday without one.
Under Emanuel's plan, which he is developing with Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the bank would build the bridges, roads and mass transit that America has been neglecting for decades. As these structures rust and fall apart, oftentimes nothing new is being built in their place. Yet money to improve infrastructure money will not be easy to come by in the midst of a protracted deficit debate; by including the tax holiday, Emanuel's proposition aims to win over Republicans leery of adding to the deficit.
The idea for the bank is not new -- former Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern mooted it in an op-ed piece months ago -- but it seems to be gaining renewed attention. Reed Hundt and Thomas Mann wrote about it in the Washington Post last week, Emanuel treated it as his own in a speech to the U.S. Conference of Mayors on Saturday, and now Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is feeling out the Senate.
For proponents, the hope is that the proposition could unite Democrats in the Senate and Republicans in the House. Emanuel said he thinks his grand compromise "brings the parties together."
The specific terms of the tax holiday, however, would be critical. Some Democrats don't want to give multinationals a free pass, and Republicans don't want to be too hard on corporate America.
Without some sort of deal, it's possible that money could continue to linger offshore -- parked in anticipation of a better deal from a different Congress. That has been the situation since 2005, when another tax holiday was declared, premised on the idea that it would create jobs; it didn't.
Critics of any sort of tax holiday say that the infrastructure bank is just the latest twist on corporate blackmail.
"Every one of these amnesties encourage greater holding offshore and Congress is being irresponsible even to say they are thinking about it," said Calvin Johnson, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law who specializes in tax law.
Former SEIU chief Andy Stern disagreed. "The problem is the money hasn't come back, there's no reason to believe it will ever come back," said Stern, now a senior fellow at Georgetown University Public Policy Institute.
"Details are appropriate and important -- you know, what's the tax rate? -- but we're now in the right framework," he argued.
In his speech to the mayors, Emanuel said he would like to see the tax rate lowered to 10 or 15 percent, down from its current 35 percent, for the tax holiday. The money the government raises from those taxes would then be directed only to the infrastructure bank, ensuring, in his view, that it would actually be used to create jobs.
Such a cut on the corporate income tax rate, however, might not sit well with small businesses, who can't use creative accounting to hide their profits overseas like the multinational corporations. And a cut to 10% might not be steep enough to win over Republicans in the House, who have been talking about taxing repatriated income at a rate in the low single digits. In the Senate, Schumer has reportedly suggested a 5% rate.
Rep. DeLauro told HuffPost that she's working with Emanuel to find a balance, and she is hopeful that Republicans can be convinced to sign on to their plan. DeLauro said she has been working on plans for an infrastructure bank for 14 years, and found the recent discussion of the idea "very encouraging."
"The concept of an infrastructure bank has wide support -- from the U.S. Chamber, from labor unions, from a whole bunch of people in between," she said.
Robert McIntyre, director of Citizens for Tax Justice, isn't one of those people. He said there was "no substantive difference" between a straight tax holiday and one that was combined with an infrastructure bank. "It's just somebody's wacky idea that the problem the world faces today is a lack of capital. Our problem is there's not enough consumer demand. The government should be out there shoving money out the door and stimulating the economy."
"This bank is going to be just another bank -- they could have given the money to SunTrust, you know?" he said.
DeLauro said capitalizing the bank via a tax holiday was not her first choice, but she thought that it would be a good approach in the GOP-controlled House.
"If we are going to have another repatriation holiday, the federal government should use the incoming revenue to capitalize a national infrastructure bank, and we do know that such an entity creates jobs, long-term economic growth," DeLauro said.
Tying the repatriation to a larger reform of corporate income taxes is also critical in her mind. "Any repatriation effort has got to be a bridge to broader corporate tax reform. We have to close tax loopholes," she said.
Her infrastructure bank plan would leverage money from corporations and the federal government to create projects that include public-private partnerships. Because of the federal backing, loans for the projects could be issued at low rates.
Such arrangements are common overseas; some have pointed to the European Investment Bank as a model for what could be created here.
The United States has relatively fewer infrastructure projects that are operated as public-private partnerships, and any ventures that smacked of privatization might prove controversial. A privately owned toll road created with lending from the infrastructure bank, for instance, might charge a high rate to pay off its government loan. Criticism might also arise if the arrangement's big winners are the same multinationals benefiting from the tax holiday, as opposed to small businesses.
Spain's rush to privatize falls flat, toll roads empty
The finger-pointing over road privatization has commenced, but perhaps the best assessment below is this: "bad planing and excessive spending." The drumbeat for taxpayer-funded bailouts for this infrastructure mess that'll be deemed too big to fail begins...
June 24, 2011
Spain’s Building Spree Leaves Some Airports and Roads Begging to Be Used
By RAPHAEL MINDER
New York Times
MADRID — In March, local officials inaugurated a new airport in Castellón, a small city on Spain’s Mediterranean coast. They are still waiting for the first scheduled flight.
To justify the grand opening, Carlos Fabra, the head of Castellón’s provincial government, argued that it was a unique opportunity to turn an airport into a tourist attraction, giving visitors full access to the runway and other areas normally off-limits. This Sunday, it will be used as the starting point for part of Spain’s national cycling championships, featuring the three-time Tour de France champion Alberto Contador.
Castellón Airport, built at a cost of 150 million euros ($213 million), is not the only white elephant that now dots Spain’s infrastructure landscape. Spain’s first privately held airport — in Ciudad Real in central Spain — was forced to enter bankruptcy proceedings a year ago because of a similar lack of traffic.
Across the country, nearly empty toll roads are struggling to turn a profit. Other projects are surviving only with continued public financing, which has been cast into doubt by Europe’s sovereign debt crisis.
Over the last 18 months, Spain has been in investors’ line of fire after permitting its budget deficit to balloon during a long property bubble, which finally burst alongside the worldwide financial crisis. To clean up the mess, the Socialist government of José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero introduced austerity measures last year that, among other things, shrank spending on infrastructure. That has left some projects in limbo, despite political pledges to keep them alive.
Over the last two decades, Spain built transportation networks at a rate that few other European countries approached.
Having opened its first high-speed train connection between Madrid and Seville in 1992, Spain overtook France last December as the country operating Europe’s biggest high-speed rail network, covering just over 2,000 kilometers, or 1,200 miles.
Growth in road and air transport has been just as spectacular. Between 1999 and 2009, Spain added over 5,000 kilometers of highways — the biggest road construction endeavor in Europe. And its 43 international airports handle more cross-border passengers than any other country in Europe.
Such expansion has been a source of intense national pride. It has also brought major economic benefits to some previously isolated and impoverished regions.
Yet like Castellón Airport, not all the projects were necessarily well thought out. Some experts suggest that Spain’s approach to development during the boom years placed speed ahead of risk assessment.
Joseph Santo, logistics and transportation director in the Iberian subsidiary of the consulting firm Booz & Company, said there were differences between Spain and Britain, for example, when it came to forming so-called public-private partnerships in transportation.
“In the U.K, they try to get everything into the agreement ahead of time and think of every contingency, so that it can take years to negotiate the deal,” Mr. Santo said. “In Spain, they do the reverse. They make the deal in six months and then if something comes up, they see how they can fix it.”
In separate interviews, the heads of some of Spain’s largest construction and infrastructure management companies conceded that spending had gotten out of control before the crisis. But they also predicted that most building projects, particularly in transport, would eventually yield profits.
“The problem is that such projects are generally conceived at a time when everything seems bound to succeed — even sometimes badly conceived projects — and there were no doubt some planning problems,” said Salvador Alemany, the chairman of Abertis, an infrastructure management company that is based in Barcelona. “At the same time, such projects have to live with the realities of an economic cycle that brings lows as well as highs, and there are plenty of examples of highways around the world that had difficult takeoffs.”
Baldomero Falcones, chairman and chief executive of FCC, a builder, recalled the painful opening of toll roads in the region of Catalonia in the 1970s — roads that have recently required expansion to cope with soaring traffic.
“I have never seen any transport infrastructure that at the end of the day has not proved profitable,” he said.
To help raise money, the government has recently intensified efforts to privatize some state-owned infrastructure, including the country’s two biggest airports, Barajas in Madrid and El Prat in Barcelona.
In May, the Spanish secretary of state for transportation, Isaías Táboas, said the government would sell operating concessions for the two airports by the end of the year. Iñigo Meirás, chief executive of Ferrovial, said his company was “seriously considering taking part in the tender process,” with Abertis also expected to be among the bidders.
With a general election coming in March, the issue of public spending has also fed political tensions.
José Blanco, the industry minister, has accused the previous center-right government of José María Aznar of “bad planning and excessive spending,” telling Parliament that Mr. Aznar’s government paid four times as much as it should have to expropriate land on which additional roads were then built.
Things have become so bad that the private operators of one of the roads, which links the Spanish capital and Toledo, started litigation last year against the government, seeking changes to the terms of its concession that would permit it to collect tolls for a longer time.
Mr. Alemany from Abertis noted that the Madrid-Toledo case was not the only one of its kind. “There are certainly a few other projects where a solution needs to be found to avoid a crisis outcome,” he said.
But he expressed optimism that most disputes would be settled out of court.
“I do think that something can be negotiated that would avoid legal conflicts that could certainly prove costly and lengthy,” he said.
Mr. Blanco suggested in November that the government would overhaul the toll road system to help operators of unprofitable roads, notably by extending their concessions.
Mr. Blanco also has pledged to keep on schedule certain projects that have turned into significant electoral pledges for the governing Socialists in some regions of Spain, like extending the high-speed rail network to the southeastern cities of Alicante, Murcia and Cartagena by 2014, as well as adding a link to the northwestern region of Galicia.
Mr. Falcones of FCC suggested that the biggest problems were likely to come from other types of underused infrastructure that do not stand the test of time as well as roads. The debt crisis and the slump in construction have also left Spain with several half-built or deserted museums, stadiums, public libraries, administrative offices and shopping malls.
Still, when it comes to transportation infrastructure, even Castellón’s deserted airport could have a future, Mr. Falcones predicted, as a gateway to some of Spain’s most popular beaches.
“It’s not worked out so far, but a flight from Castellón to Manchester or Frankfurt is quite imaginable,” he said.
Indiana Toll Road: Tolls more than doubled five yrs after privatization
Indiana Toll Road lease: Five years later
By David Tanner, Land Line associate editor
June 27, 2011
Before Gov. Mitch Daniels leased the Indiana Toll Road to private investors in 2006, professional trucker Randy Nace would occasionally use the tollway even though it carried a $14 toll. Several toll increases later, with truckers set to pay $35.20 starting Friday, July 1, residents like Nace are reminded of why they fought so hard against the privatization deal.
“I still think it was the wrong thing to do,” Nace said from his truck on Monday. He says he’s managed to survive cost increases and the economic downturn in part by avoiding the Indiana Toll Road.
Five years ago this week, on June 29, 2006, Gov. Mitch Daniels leased the tollway to Cintra of Spain and Macquarie of Australia in exchange for $3.85 billion in cash. To date, it’s still the largest privatization deal involving a U.S. roadway and certainly one of the most controversial.
“I don’t think the people really wanted it, but they went ahead and did it,” said Nace, an OOIDA member who makes his home in Monticello, IN.
Nace and a group of plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in 2006 in an attempt to block the lease deal while it was still in the Indiana Legislature. OOIDA supported the plaintiffs in their fight against the toll road lease.
Even though they didn’t win, the plaintiffs showed resolve and helped educate the public about long-term roadway leases built on profit margins.
The 151 percent toll increase realized during the first five years of the Indiana Toll Road lease was part of a guarantee to the investors. After this year, investors will continue to increase tolls at or above the rate of inflation, likely around 3 percent.
When highways become profit centers, the end user is left holding the bag.
“Indiana’s got some of the roughest interstate highways in the nation,” says Nace.
In the U.S. House and Senate, lawmakers are currently drafting long-term legislation that could set rules for tolling in the future. Indications are that the House version could emphasize more public-private partnerships for roadway infrastructure.
Nace says instead of selling off the nation’s highways, lawmakers should heed the philosophy of President Eisenhower.
“We ought to start an ‘Ike Was Right’ campaign – because that’s how we’d like to see highways funded,” he said. “There’s no need to have any toll roads at all. It could all be taken care of at the fuel pump.”
Financial woes?
According to reports, the consortium that leased the Indiana Toll Road in 2006 isn’t on great footing right now. The Financial Times says the Cintra-Macquarie consortium, doing business as ITR Concession Co., has been burning through an account that is supposed to act as a buffer against $4 billion in loans, according to the article, which adds that the company could end up in default.
Land Line has not been able to independently verify the claim, but the recent economic downturn and decline in traffic on the roadway certainly cannot be good news for the operators.
“I don’t think they reaped as much from the investment as they thought they would,” said owner-operator Mark Elrod, an OOIDA life member from Peru, IN.
He says he hasn’t used the Indiana Toll Road at all since it was “sold” in 2006, although he admits he’s not in the region very often.
Elrod points out that the legislation that created the Indiana Toll Road in the 1950s stated that the tolls would come off once the roadway was paid off. That obviously hasn’t happened, and it’s not about to happen anytime soon because the Cintra-Macquarie lease is scheduled to last through 2081.
“It shouldn’t be a lifelong cash cow,” Elrod said.
The issue of privatization brings out all sides, but one thing most truckers agree on is that existing taxpayer highways should not be converted into toll roads.
“I’m not against a public-private partnership if it’s done right,” Elrod said. “One thing I’m definitely against is tolling existing roads.”
Tolling wouldn’t bother truckers so much, Elrod says, if the projects involved new highways or lane capacity, also known as “greenfield” projects. He says greenfield projects paid for with tolls would be OK as long as highway users benefit and the tolls are removed once construction is paid for.
Copyright © OOIDA
Grimm: Privatization reaps 'corruption'
"The speakers just avoided discussing the scary aspect of privatization — how to keep public assets from getting gobbled up, for below fair-market prices, by Florida’s political bag men. They’re pretending not to see the unseemly potential of putting public institutions up for sale. They didn’t mention the influence peddlers who’ve co-opted so much of state and city and county government."
Posted on Sat, Jun. 25, 2011
Privatization’s unspoken risk: Corruption
By Fred Grimm
Miami Herald
The future of government runs for 10.5 miles through the heart of Broward County, amid rocks and dust and earth-moving equipment and trucks and workers along Interstate 595, where motorists can look out their car windows and contemplate another three years of traffic hell.
Don’t think of them as commuters, stewing in their gridlocked resentment, cursing the knucklehead government planners who created this transportation mess. Think of them as potential customers for Actividades de Construcción y Servicios S.A., the Spanish highway and tunnel builder. You see brutal traffic jams. ACS sees a business opportunity — 180,000 potential customers a day of whom no small percentage will happily pay for the opportunity to zoom along on a fast private highway running parallel to the unwashed (and unmoving) masses.
It’s a brilliant business plan, nearly diabolical. After four years of construction exacerbating the already torturous traffic jams on I-595, even cheapskate commuters will be exhausted and ready to pay whatever ACS demands. Call it a toll, or call it extortion.
So the company is spending $1.8 billion up front, building two reversible toll lanes down the once grassy medium, which in the old days might have been considered public right of way. The notion of public is so passé, so 2010. ACS, with the state’s blessing, will be taking the free out of freeway. It’s the new ideal in Florida, squeezing profit and (maybe, hopefully, fingers crossed) efficiency out of government functions.
On Friday, outside a Marriott Hotel on Fort Lauderdale Beach, demonstrators near the entrance indicated that not everyone’s thrilled by the private business takeovers of public institutions. They held signs demanding, “Stop the War on Workers.”
If public workers felt left out of Florida’s first privatization conference, they weren’t out of the discussion. Cities and counties and state agencies were said to be leasing out government operations like hamburger franchises to cope with escalating worker pensions and health care costs, intransigent unions and rigid civil service structures. A city official from a community that had privatized water and sewer utilities said it was worth it, now that the private contractor’s human resources director, rather than him, had to deal with the worker “who had come in drunk for the fourth time.”
Much of the talk was about raising capital for major infrastructure projects. Private corporations, it was said, can cut years off the time it would take the government to finance and build big projects. The five-year I-595 project would have taken the state 20 years to build. And there was talk of how private companies were less risk adverse than public officials, cowed by their need to mollify the baying crowd.
But not much was said about the potential corruption that dogs public-private deals, which was like describing war without mentioning that there might be casualties.
Along with the I-595 project, the conference focused on two privatization success stories — water and sewage utilities owned by the city of Live Oak and in Clay County, both now enjoying improved service and lower costs. But those nice folks from Live Oak and Green Cove Springs come from another universe. South Florida probably has more lobbyists than Live Oak, population 7,000, has public workers. South Florida has elected officials in prison or facing trial on charges that they concocted their very own special public-private partnerships. Hey Toto, this ain’t Kansas, we’re trying to privatize.
Aside from the felons mucking up the works, the mad rush to privatize prisons, utilities, freeways, computer systems and chunks of public education has become so entangled with lobbyists and campaign contributions and donors to political slush funds that it’s tough to discern the sensible deals from low-down giveaways of public assets.
Broward Commissioner Kristin Jacobs told me last week that she was worried that the privatization push was behind a state law, just signed by the governor, “that passed under the radar. Nobody in the Florida Association of Counties knew it was coming.” She said the new law weakens open-records requirements tied to the bidding process and extends “the veil of secrecy” over so-called confidential information in the winning bids. Amid this privatization frenzy, as cash-strapped governments dole out public assets to private companies, she worried that the law was concocted to obscure sweetheart deals until they become... well... done deals.
Most of what this first-ever privatization conference broached sounded like sensible solutions to the brutal economics crippling state and local government. The speakers just avoided discussing the scary aspect of privatization — how to keep public assets from getting gobbled up, for below fair-market prices, by Florida’s political bag men. They’re pretending not to see the unseemly potential of putting public institutions up for sale. They didn’t mention the influence peddlers who’ve co-opted so much of state and city and county government.
Come the second privatization conference, maybe we’ll see signs demanding, “Stop the War on Taxpayers.”
Out of control: TSA asks 95 yr old to remove adult diaper for patdown
Texas lawmakers need to pass the ban on TSA's groping patdowns as a condition of travel NOW!
Elderly woman asked to remove adult diaper during TSA search
LAUREN SAGE REINLIE / Florida Freedom Newspapers
2011-06-25 12:41:37
A woman has filed a complaint with federal authorities over how her elderly mother was treated
at Northwest Florida Regional Airport last weekend.
Jean Weber of Destin filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security after her 95-year-old mother was detained and extensively searched last Saturday while trying to board a plane to fly to Michigan to be with family members during the final stages of her battle with leukemia.
Her mother, who was in a wheelchair, was asked to remove an adult diaper in order to complete a pat-down search.
“It’s something I couldn’t imagine happening on American soil,” Weber said Friday. “Here is my mother, 95 years old, 105 pounds, barely able to stand, and then this.”
Sari Koshetz, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration in Miami, said she could not comment on specific cases to protect the privacy of those involved.
“The TSA works with passengers to resolve any security alarms in a respectful and sensitive manner,” she said.
Weber’s mother entered the airport’s security checkpoint in a wheelchair because she was not stable enough to walk through, Weber said.
Wheelchairs trigger certain protocols, including pat-downs and possible swabbing for explosives, Koshetz said.
“During any part of the process, if there is an alarm, then we have to resolve that alarm,” she said.
Weber said she did not know whether her mother had triggered an alarm during the 45 minutes they were detained.
She said her mother was first pulled aside into a glass-partitioned area and patted down. Then she was taken to another room to protect her privacy during a more extensive search, Weber said.
Weber said she sat outside the room during the search.
She said security personnel then came out and told her they would need for her mother to remove her Depends diaper because it was soiled and was impeding their search.
Weber wheeled her mother into a bathroom, removed her diaper and returned. Her mother did not have another clean diaper with her, Weber said.
Weber said she wished there were less invasive search methods for an elderly person who is unable to walk through security gates.
“I don’t understand why they have to put them through that kind of procedure,” she said.
Koshetz said the procedures are the same for everyone to ensure national security.
“TSA cannot exempt any group from screening because we know from intelligence that there are terrorists out there that would then exploit that vulnerability,” she said.
Weber filed a complaint through Northwest Florida Regional’s website. She said she received a response from a Homeland Security representative at the airport on Tuesday and spoke to that person on the phone Wednesday.
The representative told her that personnel had followed procedures during the search, Weber said.
“Then I thought, if you’re just following rules and regulations, then the rules and regulations need to be changed,” she said.
Weber said she plans to file additional complaints next week.
“I’m not one to make waves, but dadgummit, this is wrong. People need to know. Next time it could be you."
GA toll road paid for, but 'new toll' commences
As we've warned for years, the tolls will NEVER come off the roads once you start to go down this path. Politicians and bureaucrats, especially the toll authorities whose jobs depend on emptying your wallet to fill theirs, will ALWAYS find an excuse to continue tolls once a road is paid for....maintenance, rehabilitation, capital improvements, even other projects altogether.
Out with the old toll, in with the new toll
By David Tanner, Land Line associate editor
Landline Magazine, June 24, 2011
More than 20 years ago, Georgia leaders promised that tolls would come off the GA 400 in Atlanta once the roadway was paid off. Well, the roadway is paid off, but drivers will still pay a toll there for at least another 10 years. So what happened?
It’s an age-old trick.
Last year, with the end of tolls approaching, officials with the State Road & Tollway Authority launched a campaign saying they didn’t have enough money to make future improvements to the roadway. If only they could collect tolls for another decade, they could complete a laundry list of capital improvements.
That campaign led to then Gov. Sonny Perdue performing a little sleight of hand. Perdue stood on a soapbox and declared that the toll would come off as promised and that the government had fulfilled its commitment to the taxpayers. But then, just as quickly, the governor declared that a “new toll” would begin almost immediately, and last 10 years. It would not be the same toll, it would be new, he said.
The big switcheroo is happening this week. The “old toll” technically ends at 8 p.m., Friday, June 24, and highway users will get a solitary toll-free week of reprieve before the “new toll” begins.
Highway users including truckers demand that tolls be taken off once a roadway is paid for. It’s something governments promise for many projects but can rarely deliver, it seems.
There’s more to the Georgia story, and again it’s something that sticks in the craw of highway users.
Prior to Perdue’s term, former Gov. Roy Barnes signed a law to OK the diversion of some GA 400 revenue to other projects. Upon taking office, Perdue was presented with legislation aimed at ending the diversion, but he stamped a veto on it.
Georgia’s current governor, Nathan Deal, who took the reins in January, campaigned on a promise that if elected, he would “swing the sledgehammer” and put an end to the GA 400 toll before the end of his first year in office.
A spokeswoman for the governor had not returned a comment as of this posting.
Indiana toll operator going bankrupt
This is what privatizing our public roads reaps:
"Tolls for cars driving the length of the road are now $8.80 as compared to $4.65 when the lease was signed. Tolls for large semitrailer trucks are now $35.20, as compared to $18 when the lease was signed."
Then here's a Letter to the Editor that appeared in the Las Vegas Review Journal, June 25, 2011:
Road worries
To the editor:
State Sen. Joe Hardy's legislation allowing a toll road around Boulder City may lead to a perilous path.
Indiana sold its portion of a federal highway to bankers. The contract the governor signed is for 75 years. That contract prevents Indiana from improving any roads near the toll road or having high-speed rail service. Indiana must reimburse the investors for loss of tolls due to floods, etc., and the state must maintain the toll road.
Today, the tolls have increased obscenely and will continue to increase. Is this the future of Boulder City?
The Nevada Department of Transportation will not be allowed to maintain U.S. Highway 93/95, or Nevada Way, which is the main thoroughfare through Boulder City, if the contract with investors is similar to Indiana's.
I feel that any contract with investors should be approved by the voters of Clark County to safeguard our rights.
MAUREEN FAHLBERG
BOULDER CITY
_______________________________________________________________________
Report: Indiana Toll Road operator may default
By Keith Benman
Motorists drive under i-Zoom signs near the Indiana Toll Road Portage exit. Toll Road operator ITR Concession Co. could be in danger of defaulting on its huge debt by early next year, according to a report. Also, tolls are scheduled for another increase Friday.
The private operator of the Indiana Toll Road could be in danger of defaulting on its huge debt by early next year, according to a report on the news wire service Debtwire.
The May report in Debtwire, a Financial Times Group publication, stated Toll Road operator ITR Concession Co. is rapidly burning through an interest reserve account, which much be maintained to keep $4.1 billion in loans in good standing.
Indiana Finance Authority Chairman Christopher Ruhl, in an email to The Times, stated that even in case of default and foreclosure, no taxpayer money is at stake, as the state has received the full $3.8 billion lease payment in June 2006.
He noted the lender would need the state's approval to transfer control of the Toll Road to any new private consortium or operator that may step in.
Tolls headed up
Tolls on the Indiana Toll Road make their annual increase Friday. Cars and motorcycles with i-Zoom or other electronic transponders will continue to receive a state-sponsored discount and see no increase. Tolls on the barrier system in Northwest Indiana also will not increase. Listed are some of the new tolls for driving the length of the road followed by the current tolls:
Cars and motorcycles: $9/$8.80
Car with trailer or small box truck: $11.50/$11.10
Semitrailer truck: $36.20/$35.20
"We've known since 2006 that the $3.8 billion lease payment was financed primarily through debt, that the debt came due in 2015 and that the amount of debt could place a significant burden on the capital structure of the concessionaire," Ruhl wrote.
The apparent financial difficulties have come about despite dramatic hikes in tolls since the 157-mile road was leased to a private consortium backed by Spain-based conglomerate Cintra and Australia-based Macquarie in June 2006.
Tolls for cars driving the length of the road are now $8.80 as compared to $4.65 when the lease was signed. Tolls for large semitrailer trucks are now $35.20, as compared to $18 when the lease was signed. Tolls are scheduled for another increase July 1.
According to the Debtwire article, the lending group for the Toll Road privatization is led by Royal Bank of Scotland, which has now assigned the troubled investment to its workout group to see if a financing solution can be found.
An interest reserve account of $150 million was established at the time the Toll Road lease deal was financed, but that has now dwindled to between $40 million and $50 million and could be depleted by year end, sources told Debtwire.
Royal Bank of Scotland did not respond to a Times' request for comment.
Cintra responded directly to questions on the status of the interest reserve account with an e-mailed statement that read in part: "The reserve account was initially created exactly for the intended financial gaps that occur over long time periods of operations. That is expected during economic cycles. Naturally it's going to be accessed and utilized on occasion, which is a continued sign of fulfilling its intended use."
A Macquarie representative said there has been no default on ITR Concession's debt, and no default is expected.
Ruhl stated the Indiana Finance Authority has been aware that interest expense has exceeded gross Toll Road revenue for years. He said that was "not a surprise" given the amount the private consortium borrowed to pay for the lease.
The lease agreement provides that the road returns to state control if any successive owner does not adhere to its operating standards. That owner could be a bank, hedge fund or consortium much like the current one.
As early as December 2009, ITR Concession Co. CEO Fernando Redondo told The Times traffic revenue for the Toll Road were not what the company had hoped it would be. He attributed the shortfall to lower than expected traffic levels during the recession and he expressed confidence revenue would recover.
Cintra parent company Ferrovial's annual report for 2010 shows traffic on the Toll Road in Northwest Indiana, its most heavily traveled section, was down 6.5 percent for the year. On the rest of the Toll Road traffic was up 2.7 percent.
However, a 10 percent toll boost in June 2010 helped pump up Toll Road revenues, with earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITA) increasing to $155.9 million, a 15.9 percent increase as compared to the year before.
The Indiana Toll Road Oversight Committee is aware of the possible financial difficulties at ITR Concession, said former Indiana Toll Road Executive Director Leigh Morris, who is now vice chairman of the oversight committee.
Morris said the lease between the Indiana Finance Authority and ITR Concession signed in 2006 contains more than adequate safeguards.
"It ensures continuity of the operation of the Toll Road and for the protection of the asset," Morris said.
Straus torpedoes TSA anti-groping bill
It's not a "stunt" to protect Texans, especially our children, from the groping of our sexual organs as a requirement for air travel. What next? Full body cavity searches when the next terrorist brings in a weapon in his body cavity? Texans have drawn a line in the sand, and no "resolution" requesting better treatment nor legislators going AWOL is acceptable. It's abundantly clear the 110 co-signers of this bill in the House didn't mean it when they failed to show-up to pass it Friday.
Call Speaker Straus and your Texas lawmakers at (512) 463-4630 to tell them this isn't political theater or a mere request, DO NOT BACK DOWN or wimp out, we expect our lawmakers to ensure our 4th amendment rights are protected. Pass the anti-groping bill NOW!
Straus Calls TSA Bill "Publicity Stunt"
By Becca Aaronson
June 24, 2011
Texas Tribune
Updated 3:40 p.m.: Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst issued a statement this afternoon saying the Senate will try to pass its version of the bill out of committee on Monday. Dewhurst also said he is working with the Attorney General "to address several issues that were raised when the bill first came up for a vote in the Texas Senate."
Although the full text is not yet available online, 20 House members (not including Straus) authored a resolution "urging Congress to take appropriate action to ensure acceptable treatment of the public by personnel of the Transportation Security Administration." It was filed and referred to the State Affairs Committee post-adjournment today.
Original story: The TSA anti-groping bill hit another roadblock when the House adjourned today without considering the legislation as scheduled. “Our plane was not full to capacity,” House Speaker Joe Straus said, hinting that the House did not have a quorum present to pass the legislation. But that wasn't the only reason the bill wasn't heard.
“The bill, without some serious revisions, appears to me to be nothing more than an ill-advised publicity stunt, unenforceable…[and] misdirected at uniform security personnel,” Straus said. He argued the bill should be aimed “at Washington, at the bosses of these people."
The bill would criminalize "intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly touching" the "sexual organs" of someone during a security screening at a public facility, including airports. Although it passed unanimously out of the House during the regular session, the bill died in the Senate after the Department of Justice threatened to shut down Texas airports if the legislation passed. In a letter to Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and House Speaker Joe Straus, U.S. Attorney John E. Murphy said the federal government would be forced to cancel flights in Texas if TSA could not effectively screen passengers to ensure the safety of all flights.
The Longview Republican who authored the bill, David Simpson, said he’s not surprised the bill was not considered today. Straus approached Simpson earlier this week and asked him to change the language of the bill. “The first thing I was asked to do was remove the section that refers to private parts,” said Simpson. He was also asked to reduce the standard for searching people in the bill from “probable cause” to “reasonable suspicion.” Simpson did not agree to change the language, but said he would have accepted an amendment, if it was supported by the House, to change the language in the bill.
Today, Straus — showing a degree of public adamance not seen much this session — said the bill will never be considered on the House floor "as written." The House is drafting a resolution to send a message to the appropriate people and address the issue of inappropriate searches “without making the Texas Legislature a laughing stock," he said.
The TSA groping bill is the latest item to be added to the special session call. Gov. Rick Perry originally stated the bill did not have enough support to warrant a second chance. His thoughts were captured and published on YouTube while he was at a book signing in New Orleans. Perry added the bill to the call last week, on the same day Simpson sent him a letter stating that the bill had enough support to pass out of both chambers.
“The only thing I’ve seen from the governor was on YouTube,” said Straus, who said he hasn’t received any guidance from the governor on whether or not to pass the legislation.
The special session ends Wednesday, and with the recent setback, it is unlikely the bill will be approved by both chambers in time to pass. A committee hearing to consider an identical version of the bill filed by Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, was cancelled on Thursday, June 23.
The Insanity of Sustainable Development
NOTE: Sustainable development and Agenda 21 are being implemented in transportation policy as well through public private partnerships (PPPs). In the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature, not only did PPPs get re-authorized, HB 1105/SB 513 (which failed to pass) attempted to force TxDOT to adopt a "complete streets" policy that would have mandated 20% of the cost of a highway project go to curbs, sidewalks, "context solutions" (expensive, artsy, site specific ornamentation or landscaping), and/or accommodating bicycles, often at the expense of auto capacity (which has resulted in the removal of auto lanes and dedicating them to bicycles only in San Antonio already).
The Insanity of Sustainable Development
By Cathie Adams
International Issues Chair
Eagle Forum
June 20, 2011
Physicist Albert Einstein said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. That is exactly what the United Nations is doing with "sustainable development," which insists that economic, environmental and social equity or "justice" will produce health, peace and prosperity. The UN incorporates it in policies and treaties that target every nation, prodding them to conform to the same Marxist ideals that failed miserably in the 70-year experiment in the former U.S.S.R.
The UN has given special emphasis to the implementation of sustainable development in Africa, passing a resolution each year since 1998 entitled the "Causes of Conflict and the Promotion of Durable Peace and Sustainable Development in Africa." With devastating results today 67% of the world's HIV/AIDS cases are in Africa, as are 90% of the cases of malaria, while 33% of its population suffers from malnutrition, and 15 wars rage on the continent.
Pushing for more foreign aid is key to the UN's sustainable development agenda, but two prominent Africans believe the funding has hurt, rather than helped the African people. Andrew Mwenda, editor of Uganda's Independent newspaper, and Kofi Bentil, lecturer at University of Ghana, have concluded that foreign aid has "stunted growth and subsidized bad governance in Africa. . . . adding that the weight of regulations, bad laws and stifling bureaucracy, subsidized by five decades of development aid, prevents Africans from lifting themselves out of poverty".
Media mogul Ted Turner's billion dollar gift to the UN gives him a billion reasons to advocate for the UN and its sustainable development. Playing on American generosity, while hiding UN failures, Turner's UN Foundation president Timothy Wirth cited the UN's "frontline work" in Sudan and Libya as the reason why 85% of Americans support the UN in their recent poll. But the truth is that the UN has failed in both countries.
Since 1955, ten years after the UN's founding, civil wars have ravaged Sudan. In 2005, the UN Security Council referred the desperate situation in the Sudanese city of Darfur to the International Criminal Court. The ICC issued arrest warrants against its president, yet he remains in office, while about 100,000 persons have suffered the losses of their homes and jobs. Admitting its utter failure, the UN complains that the Sudanese president "continues denying the crimes, attributing them to other factors (such as inter-tribal clashes), diverting attention by publicizing ceasefire agreements that are violated as soon as they are announced, and finally proposing the creation of special courts to conduct investigations that will never start."
Admitting failure also in Libya, the UN states that "the international community" has let Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi "literally get away with murder" for the past 42 years. Since February, an estimated 10-15,000 people have been killed in battle, another 1,200 drowned attempting to flee by sea, and millions suffer from severe food shortages. Meanwhile, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) has extended its air war for another 90 days, as Gadhafi wages a ground war giving Viagra-like medications to his troops targeting his political opponents for rape.
The UN's international tribunals cost about $300 million annually, but have few results to show taxpayers. The UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda held its first trial in 1997 for the 1994 Rwandan genocide of 800,000 Tutsis. Since then 50 trials have been held that convicted 29. Eleven more trials are in progress, with 14 individuals awaiting trials, while 13 accused are still at large. Rather than the UN Security Council shutting down the grossly inept tribunal, in 2014 it will transfer its work to a new International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals.
Since its inception, the UN has failed its first mission to resolve conflicts and avert wars, and its courts and tribunals cannot even bring the bad guys to justice. Its emphasis on sustainable development in Africa has failed to bring peace or health or prosperity; yet, it continues to prod every nation to adopt its Marxist ideals. "We the people" are looking for a presidential candidate in the 2012 with the courage to stop this insanity.
Durbin: Tread carefully before selling public assets
Link to article here.
Durbin gets it. However, his bill needs to go farther. His bill still allows governments to enter into public private partnerships -- the only "protection" is disclosure of the terms and an insurance policy that the feds get their money back. That, however, isn't much protection for the actual taxpayers being asked to pay the daily toll taxes plus the profits of a foreign company in these government-sanctioned monopolies over our PUBLIC infrastructure.
Tread carefully before selling public assets
Federal taxpayers must be protected
By Dick Durbin
Special contributor to the Chicago Tribune
7:06 PM CDT, June 23, 2011
We all know the story of Chicago's parking meters — for a one-time payment of $1.15 billion, we turned over control of a public asset to a private investor. But now, only two years into a 75-year lease, that money is almost gone and the costs just keep going up for Chicagoans and visitors.
From parking meters to airports, public assets around the country are now seen as "cash cows" that can be sold or leased by cash-strapped state and local governments for a one-time payment.
Having billions of dollars immediately available to plug budget holes without raising taxes is very appealing. And to the delight of Wall Street investors, state and local governments often fail to ask the important questions or consider the long-term impact.
In 2006, Indiana struck a deal with foreign investors to lease the 157-mile Indiana Toll Road for 75 years in exchange for a one-time payment of $3.8 billion. Under the deal, the investors own the right to collect tolls, which they plan to increase in the coming weeks. For truckers that fee will rise to $36.20 from $35.20.
Is it surprising when foreign investors — with no stake in the road other than their interest in turning a profit — continue to raise tolls?
Whether you agree or disagree with privatization, two things are obvious. First, taxpayers need to be asking more and better questions before handing over control of critical public assets like a highway, an airport or a parking meter concession. And second, Uncle Sam is being played for a sucker.
In Washington we're broke, so for every dollar we spend, we borrow 40 cents from China, Saudi Arabia and others. We then give these borrowed funds to state and local governments because they can't afford to build highways and airports on their own. Now many of these same governments are selling and leasing these assets without any payback to the federal government.
It is time for the federal taxpayers to have a seat at the table and a return on their investment in these projects. Taxpayers across the U.S. have invested hundreds of billions of dollars building our nation's infrastructure and that investment should be protected.
Last week, I introduced legislation that would require state and local governments to take a hard look at the impact these deals are having on the federal taxpayer and the people that use these transportation assets. The Protecting Taxpayers in Transportation Asset Transfers Act would require full disclosure of the terms and conditions of any privatization of an asset that was built with federal tax dollars.
The bill would attach a lien to existing federally funded major transportation projects that have received more than $25 million in federal funding or have a value over $500 million. The lien would only be removed after state and local governments repay the depreciated value of federal funds used to build and maintain the asset.
Instead of incentivizing quick, short-term decisions, the federal government should be asking the tough questions when governments turn over publicly funded transportation assets to for-profit operators. This legislation will make sure those questions are answered before we sell our public assets.
U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., is the assistant Senate majority l
Glenn Beck tackles Agenda 21 that seeks to privatize public roads
Check out Beck's expose' on YouTube here. Here's an example of the sort of propaganda sustainable development proponents produce in order to make it "cool" and "green" to give up your property rights and freedom to travel. Watch it on YouTube here.