Former official sees little threat from superhighway

Lawrence Journal-World ^ | August 19, 2006 | Ken Miller

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

As the former executive director of North America’s Super Corridor Coalition (NASCO), I want to provide a much more accurate description of Interstate 35 and North America’s Super Corridor Coalition (NASCO) compared to statements made during a recent congressional campaign news conference. (“Proposed NAFTA superhighway a threat to Kansans …,” Journal-World, Aug. 12)

First, there is no NASCO plan to build a “10-lane superhighway” through Kansas or the rest of the Midwest. There is no “conspiracy” to grab Kansans’ property to provide the right of way for such a project. NASCO is a small, non-profit 501(c) (6) organization with members in Mexico, Canada and the United States.

The state of Texas is working on plans for a Trans-Texas Corridor that would parallel I-35, but anyone who has tried to drive in Austin, Dallas and Fort Worth knows why Texans are considering this mega-project: It’s called total traffic congestion. There are simply too many vehicles on outdated highway facilities.

It slows not only commercial traffic and hurts “just in time” delivery, which is critical in our economy, but it’s also unsafe for the traveling public and our environment. Just think of all those vehicles idling and spewing pollutants when a 20-minute trip becomes a two-hour odyssey. And while we are seeing this happen now in Texas, you better believe that eventually it will also happen in Kansas City and Wichita.

Second, NASCO or any other public/private organization has no power to decide what transportation improvements are funded. Those decisions are made by the respective state departments of transportation, and are funded in large part by the federal government. If you ask department of transportation leaders in Kansas or other states along the I-35 corridor, you will find that states are having a hard enough time paying for maintenance of their highway systems. Kansas is not a member of NASCO; I know this because I tried to get the state to join in 2002, and was politely told no.

Third, consider the sources on the Internet that started this rumor of a “North American Union” and the gradual disintegration of U.S. national independence. “WorldNet Daily” and “Amerikan Expose” aren’t exactly the Wall Street Journal and Newsweek. Conspiracy theorists need to have their so-called proof examined thoroughly before their assertions are accepted as truth.

Groups like NASCO are looking for innovative ways to enhance economic development through transportation improvements, technological advancements and perhaps most importantly, international understanding and cooperation.

[ARealMothersSonForever]

"During the early 1980s the rapid changes in the United States economy and mergers among other western railroad companies made it increasingly difficult for the Southern Pacific Transportation Company and the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company to compete as independent railroads. On December 23, 1983, the parent companies merged to form the Santa Fe Southern Pacific Corporation (now Santa Fe Pacific Corporation), and an application was filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission to merge the two railroads. However, in July 1986 the ICC refused to allow the merger and ordered the holding company to sell one of the carriers. This resulted in the sale of the SPTC to Rio Grande Industries, parent company of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad Company, on October 13, 1988. A new system consisting of the SPTC, Rio Grande, and Cotton Belt was thus formed. Initially each company continued to operate under its own name, but in 1992 operations of the Rio Grande and Cotton Belt were consolidated with those of the SPTC, and the system became known as the Southern Pacific Lines. On April 30, 1993, the name of Rio Grande Industries was changed to Southern Pacific Rail Corporation. From the days of the Buffalo Bayou, Brazos and Colorado and the Galveston and Red River, the Southern Pacific system in Texas has been centered in the Houston area. The new system continues to operate major terminals, shops, and a regional office in Houston, only a few miles from where the first rail was laid, not only in Texas but also on what is now the Southern Pacific."

http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/SS/eqs35.html

[deport]

Why not use trains from Mexico to various US cities?

---

Where have you been?.....

Kansas City Southern de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. Overview

On April 1, 2005, Kansas City Southern (KCS) completed the purchase of the controlling interest in TFM, S.A. de C.V. (TFM) from Grupo TMM, S.A. (TMM). As a result, KCS owns all of the common stock of Grupo Transportacion Ferroviaria Mexicana, S.A. de C.V. and controls all of the shares of TFM entitled to full voting rights. In December 2005, the name TFM, S.A. de C.V. was changed to Kansas City Southern de Mexico (KCSM).

The 2,661-mile KCSM operates the primary rail route in northern and central Mexico, linking Mexico City and Monterrey with Laredo, Texas, where more than 50 percent of the U.S.-Mexico trade crosses the border. The line also connects the major population centers of Mexico City and Monterrey with the heartland of the U.S. and serves the ports of Veracruz, Tampico and Lazaro Cardenas, a primary alternative to West Coast ports for shippers in the route between Asia and North America.

[conservativecorner]

Notice that all the roads are in the United States of America? Read the CFR document on the US Embassy Website for a wonderful North American Community.

[Tai_Chung]

...declare imminent domain

The concept of "imminent domain" is evil in my view because it allows the government the right to take your property against your will. It reminds me of China in which you can own a building, but all land belongs to the government.

[Dane]

Notice that all the roads are in the United States of America? Read the CFR document on the US Embassy Website for a wonderful North American Community.

Oooh, what about I-5, 19, and 35 that go straight to the Mexican border.

Damn globalsit Eisenhower(cue spooky music).

[conservativecorner]

From Polipundit just for you Dane. LOL!

Enforcement Works, If You Give It A Chance


How is that Hazleton, Pa Ordinance on illegals working?

Mayor Lou Barletta of Hazleton, Pa., estimates that as “many as half” of the estimated 10,000 Hispanics who were living in Hazleton when it passed an ordinance in July to punish those who hire or house illegal aliens have since left the city.

“We’ve been notified by some 30 other cities in the United States that are waiting to process such ordinances,” he said yesterday in an interview.

In Valley Park, Mo., 20 immigrant families disappeared virtually overnight from a high-crime apartment complex, and at least dozens quickly left Riverside, N.J., this summer when those two small towns passed laws cracking down on employers who hire illegal aliens and landlords who rent to them.

I wonder how things would be if they had simply adopted a “tolerance ordinance?”

-- Oak Leaf

[horse_doc]

in the long run Texas needs roads and will have them whether it is the TTC or some other funded option such as state debt and taxes. It's mostly a matter of time in the approval process.

I agree. But there just isn't a concensus on the TTC.

Knee-jerk conspiracy theories don't help. And Knee-jerk labeling of anyone opposed to the TTC as a NIMBY-enviro-whacko-Luddite doesn't help either.

It is a huge project, and shoving it through isn't doing the state any good at all. I know a lot of very good, conservative people who think that the TTC is not a good idea. If you guys really want to get this thing done, you'd better start listening to them, and you'd better start thinking about compromising with them, and on the scale of the project.

The "my-way-or-else-we-are-all-doomed-plus-you-are-stupidly-standing-in-the-way-of-progress" attitude is polarizing a lot of very good people against the TTC, and they are, in turn, going to ensure that rural legislators will knife this project to death in a thousand creative ways.

You need to build a political consensus. It isn't there, yet.

[deport]

You need to build a political consensus. It isn't there, yet.

---

Don't disagree one bit. But the knife cuts both ways imo.

I think you'll find consensus being brought along. Look at the olive branch to the DFW Metroplex on the loop arrangement. As these come together along the route then it will go ahead.

But by the same token the antis keep posting crap that isn't in the plan today, next week or maybe in the next 20 yrs, someday maybe in the distant future. I doubt that there will be 4,000 miles of 1200 ft wide roadway built under the plan that has been touted on every anti web site and articles. It was a conceptual idea to get things up and running when no one was even trying to address the needed transportation problems in this state. They don't do themselves any good with the slander of that concept which to some degree has been changed and will be changed as the projects become needed.

[Freeper]

Actually Eisenhower did not propose the I-System as your picture depicts. He only planned on having three I-Hiways going E to W and 4 I-Hiways going North to South. Most of the remainder you see in the Interstate System you see today was a long after thought of Eisenhowers plan.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

But I still can not figure out how Hawaii got Interstates and Alaska did not.

I've read that certain roads in Alaska and Puerto Rico have interstate designations.

[ARealMothersSonForever]

Your spirit of concensus and respect is admirable and honorable. The hyperbole that has been thrown out to date is significantly on the "anti" side. I firmly agree that any transfer of private property must be subject to agreement, scrutiny, and review. Mineral rights absolutely must be taken into account. The "pro" position has not done an adequate job of researching, addressing, and validating the concerns of citizens that may be impacted. The two hearings that I attended were too "mechanical" in my opinion. Agriculture and cattle are essential for Texas, as is natural gas and oil. Great people have staked their livelyhoods and reputations on productive land for several generations here. Yet for those that are dead set against private business, even foreign business, look around at the railroads. They are all the private property of the railroad.

That said, I still support citizens being offered fair value for property. Whether for private or public works. The county commissioners court and the Texas Railroad Commissioners weild much more power than a governor. "RAILROAD COMMISSION. Although it is only a state agency, the Texas Railroad Commission has been historically one of the most important regulatory bodies in the nation. This is because for much of the twentieth century it has strongly influenced the supply and price of oil and natural gas throughout the United States. As its name implies, the commission was originally established to oversee railroads. Riding a wave of Populist-style resentment of the railroads, James S. Hoggqv won the governorship in 1890 largely on his promise to have them regulated. The state constitution had been simultaneously amended to allow such a body, and in 1891 the legislature established the commission, giving it jurisdiction over rates and operations of railroads, terminals, wharves, and express companies." http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/RR/mdr1.html Unless one believes that the Federal Interstate Commerce Commission will do what is best for Texas and Texans.

[deport]

I firmly agree that any transfer of private property must be subject to agreement, scrutiny, and review. Mineral rights absolutely must be taken into account.

---

And I suspect that is what will happen. I can't see the good 'ol boys in the Texas legislature not providing the protection to their constituents when they agreed to imminent domain. I had some 52 acres taken for a roadway expansion project and got current market value based upon sales of like property in the area and retained the mineral rights. Granted this property was in Louisiana and thus I don't know the specifics of Texas law. It is possible that many of the Texas landowners don't have all the mineral rights anyway as Texas allowed original owners to retain the rights without ever letting them go but if they do they should be able to retain them and not let the state take that. The State only needs surface rights for a roadway.

[ckilmer]

What..... you mean they can't use the existing interstate highways but have to wait several years for the new road system to be built....
//////////////
In fact the beginning of the current flood of illegals 20 years ago coincides with the completion of the current interstate highway system.

They get over the border and two days later they're in small town pennsylvania.

[unixfox]

As much money that is robbed from the taxpayers these roads should be paved with gold.

[ARealMothersSonForever]

"In fact the beginning of the current flood of illegals 20 years ago coincides with the completion of the current interstate highway system."

"In 1986 Reagan obtained an overhaul of the income tax code, which eliminated many deductions and exempted millions of people with low incomes. At the end of his administration, the Nation was enjoying its longest recorded period of peacetime prosperity without recession or depression."

Uhh, Ronald Reagan was POTUS 20 years ago. Do you claim that Reagan is responsible for the immigrant flood?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/rr40.html

[ARealMothersSonForever]

It is possible that many of the Texas landowners don't have all the mineral rights anyway as Texas allowed original owners to retain the rights without ever letting them go but if they do they should be able to retain them and not let the state take that. The State only needs surface rights for a roadway.

The city dwellers likely have no idea about mineral rights in Texas. And those are the ones being targeted by the "landgrab" crowd. We rural property owners are very sensitive to right-of-way and mineral rights. The Texas Cattleman's Association, County Commissioners, and Railroad Commissioners are an invaluable source of information and help. They can even refer a lawyer that came from a Texas school, and is not a damn Yankee.

[Ben Ficklin]

"shoving it thru"

Discussions on what to do about the roads began in the 80s.
The Center of Transportation Research released their final report in 96, in which they recommended the MultiModal Corridor.
In Jan 02 TxDot began an implementation plan.
In 03, the legislation was completed
There has been uncountable meetings and comment.

How is all that "shoving it thru"?

As for all these very good conservative people you know, they need to come up with an alternative. Or, more to the point, how much are you going to have to raise the gas tax?

[Ben Ficklin]

Because of better gas mileage, drivers now pay only beteen a third and a half of the gas tax that they used to pay.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

In fact the beginning of the current flood of illegals 20 years ago coincides with the completion of the current interstate highway system.

The beginning of the flood appears to coincide with the signing of that dumb 1986 amnesty. The Interstate Highway system was considered completed in 1996.

[ARealMothersSonForever]

"The Interstate Highway system was considered completed in 1996."
The devil is in the details.