|
|
|
June 17, 2010 Opinions |
|
|
—Editorial—
It Was A Bit Of A Scare
When Oregon Legislature proposed cuts last week because of a $577 million budget shortfall that would result in the release of incarcerated criminals, we were concerned. When it was announced that the three prisons closing included the local Powder River Correctional Facility, we were really concerned. We had to wonder how much more of a hit could our already employment distressed community take?
However, Kulongoski later announced that he would not allow the three prisons to close and no prisoners would be set free before their time is up.
It was kind of like watching a scary movie where the woman hears a noise and goes into the basement to check it out. Only instead of getting assaulted by a knife-wielding maniac, she finds a harmless kitten roaming around. It doesn’t turn out well like this in the movies very often, and likewise when it comes to budget cuts. We had a little scare, but now it’s O.K. Or is it?
Communications spokesperson for Kulongoski, Anna Richter Taylor, said as an alternative to closing the prisons, the Governor supports dedicating the $15 million needed to keep the prisons open be taken out of State emergency funds of which there is currently about $50 million available.
We applaud the Governor for declining to close the three prisons! But exactly where are we going to make up the remaining $562 million shortfall?
We of course, understand the need for budget cuts, but in these economically troubled times, we agree with Kulongoski that closing one of a community’s larger employers is not a prudent move. Nor do we like the idea of criminals going free before they have served their allotted time.
We would rather see, as was suggested to the Governor by Oregon legislators, across the board cuts spread wide, taking smaller cuts over a multitude of services and jobs rather than see the entire cancelation of any one entity. Although the three prisons were initially included in this “across the board” tactic, we don’t think they spread it far enough across the board.
Folks can usually get by with a little less, but they can’t afford to lose their entire income. And when they do lose their jobs it further taxes the already stressed State coffers with unemployment payments and aid. It is estimated that one in five Oregonians is already on food stamps.
Opponents of across the board cuts have called it callous. But what is more callous — taking away the entire income of several hundred families or asking everyone dependent on State wages to take a little less?
—Letters To The Editor—
Don’t Blame The City For Kicking Rally Out Of Downtown Area
To The Record-Courier:
Things aren't always what they seem. Because the rally is poised to expand in the future, it became apparent to us that Main Street was not going to be a viable long term solution for the rally. We love Baker City and its charm and Main Street will always be part of the Rally. It just won't be the only part. We started this trend last year and it worked well.
So don't blame the City, they didn't kick us out of downtown, it was our choice to focus our efforts at the Sunridge. We will continue in our efforts to improve the Rally and strengthen our ties with the great people of Baker City.
Steve Folkestad
Hells Canyon Motorcycle Rally
Forest Service Must Act Consistently With Federal Policy
To The Record-Courier:
The Organic administration Act of 1897 makes clear that the Forest Service must act consistently with the federal policy of promoting mineral development. Section 1 of that act precludes the Secretary of Ag from taking any action that would “prohibit any person from entering such national forests for all proper and lawful purposes, including that of prospecting, locating, and developing the mineral resources there of” 16 U.S. code 478 to “reasonably” protect the environment.
United States Dept. of Ag, forest service minerals program handbook preface (1983). See also forest service manual 2802 (Dec. 1986) (stating that the F.S. policy is to “ensure that exploration, development, and production of mineral and energy resources is done in a sound manner.” See PL187 the “Surface Resource” Act of 1955 for surface use(s) “incidental there to” (30 USCS 601 et seq) provided by Section 612 (b) “that any ‘use’ of the surface of any such mining claim by the United States, (i.e. F.S.-B.L.M.) its permittees or licensees, shall be such as not to endanger or materially interfere with prospecting, mining or processing (Plans of aps?) (or P.O.O.) “uses” reasonable incident there to.” This, public law 167, precludes all State’s land use(s) planning by virtue of Art IV, Section 3, 2nd para – Property closure is to be vested (public trust) by U.S. Congress, not by the State’s administrative fiat, as the United State’s Supreme courts decision was reversing 9th Circuit Court appeals, that quote; “distinction between land-use planning and the environmental regulations (of states) (Oregon)? Was unsupportable, either as an integration of the “governing statutes “or as a matter of logic.” –pg. 8-480 U.S. 572; 1075.CT.1419-94L.Ed2d577-(1987).
In the language used in the Surface Resource Act PL 167- “Permittees” or “licensees,” congress didn’t intend to make a “permittee” of persons acting under 1872 acts.
This language implied that the 1872 acts were a “statutory grant” by U.S. codes 30, sections 22 & 26, and not subjected to P.O.O. (plans of ops), as a permittee, in the land use(s) planning, not subject to federal mineral leasing laws, reserved from 1872 acts.
Under rule of law; Possessions 22-pre-emption by federal law, statutes. State law (pg 8) head note (12A) (12B)- State law can be pre-empted in either two general ways; (1) if congress evidences an intent to occupy a given field (1872 acts?), any state law falling with in that field is pre-empted; or (2) if congress does not entirely displace state regulation over the matter in question, state law is still pre-empted to the extent, it actually conflicts with the operation or objectives of federal law-that is, where the state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment of the full purposes and objectives of congress. (See Surface Resource Act-PL 167-1955 act-intent.)
See also National Materials and Minerals Policy, Research and Development Act of 1980, 2(a)(1), 30 USC and 1601 (a)(7) (congressional finding that the availability of minerals “is essential for national concerns for energy and the environment”; 3,30 US Code – 1602 (It is the continuing policy of the U.S. to promote and adequate and stable supply of materials necessary to maintain national security, economic well being and industrial production will appropriate attention to a long-term balance between resource production, energy use(s), resources conservation, and social needs.
See also mining and minerals policy act of (1970) 2,30 US Code 21a., as the demand for minerals has increased during the last century, congress has emphasized that an economically sound and “stable” domestic mining ---industry is important to the economy and national security. (2, 30 US code 21a.)
It would appear that the state (gov office) and cabinets and the federal agencies, under the Pres. Obama administration-cabinets,- by fiat, are to a conspiracy to the above citing to the development of said conditions, to “boot strapped” the congressional intent? As “partners” or “comrades” to a conspiracy via “agents of law,” Admin Police State???
Liberals are anti mining?
Bruce Parke
Sumpter, Ore.
Bonebrake Good Choice For State Library Board
To The Record-Courier:
Gov. Ted Kulongoski made a very astute decision to appoint Aletha Bonebrake to the State Library Board.
Aletha spear-headed the drive to establish the Baker County Library District and then the levies to remodel the Baker City building and establish branch libraries in Haines, Halfway, Richland, Huntington, Sumpter and Unity.
The Library Journal named the Baker County Library as one of the three best small libraries in America. What an honor and a tribute to Aletha ad all of those who devoted time and energy to improve library services.
Frances Burgess
Baker City, Ore.
|
|
|
