B and B

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is seeking donations in order to keep our state parks open

Texas has been hit with a record drought over the past 15 months.  The first few weeks of December saw a little relief, but forecasts call for the drought to likely continue well into next year.

Apparently the Texas parks system has been hit hard in the budget as a result, and they are now asking for people to send donations to help keep our state parks open. 

Please consider donating if you love Texas state parks.  You can do so at the website of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department:

Record drought and heat, devastating wildfires, and a drop in visitation have led to a critical situation for state parks.

We need to raise $4.6 million to keep state parks operating, and we can't do it without you.

There are three simple ways you can help:

1. Make a year-end, tax-deductible donation.
2. Make a donation when it's time for you to renew your vehicle registration.
3. Most importantly, because visitor fees pay for about half of all park operating costs, visit a state park this holiday season.

Please act now, to help keep Texas State Parks open for everyone to enjoy. Our state parks won't be the same without you.

Thank you,
Carter Smith
TPWD Executive Director

In case it helps out, here's a scene I captured at Guadalupe River State Park north of San Antonio a few weeks ago.

The Republican party launches fight against American workers

At TPMCafe, Robert Reich has a good summary of how Republican party is pitting Americans against Americans in oder for their obscenely wealthy patrons to re-assert control over the country and the vast majority of its money and resources.  He begins:

The Republican strategy is to split the vast middle and working class - pitting unionized workers against non-unionized, public-sector workers against non-public, older workers within sight of Medicare and Social Security against younger workers who don't believe these programs will be there for them, and the poor against the working middle class.

By splitting working America along these lines, Republicans want Americans to believe that we can no longer afford to do what we need to do as a nation. They hope to deflect attention from the increasing share of total income and wealth going to the richest 1 percent while the jobs and wages of everyone else languish.

The assault on workers' rights in Wisconsin recently launched by its new governor Scott Walker is only one particularly visible and intense battle.  Those of us who don't want to see the country fall into the control of "robber barons" reminiscent of the late 19th century should stand with Wisconsin workers, and those of other states, in this battle.

 

No more swap. Texas gets a new state park on the Devils River and can keep the old one.

I was surprised and encouraged to hear this news.  Instead of losing access to a large, remote natural area in order to gain another, smaller, but more accessible, one, the people of Texas will be able to use both thanks to private donations. 

From today's Austin American-Statesman:

Using a remarkable pool of private contributions totaling more than $10 million, the commission agreed to buy the Devils River Ranch from Dallas-area home builder Rod Sanders for $13 million.

The ranch fronts the east side of the Devils River for about 10 miles before the river begins merging with the Amistad International Reservoir on the Rio Grande near Del Rio. The ranch, which is largely desert scrub, includes a large lodge, several other residences and an airstrip.

The Devils River State Natural Area also is on the east side of the river about 13 miles upstream, and the two properties will compose a single state nature complex on the river.

The purchase means that the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department now controls about 38,000 acres adjacent to Devils River, which is only 90 miles long but is regarded as the purest natural waterway in Texas and is considered sacred by anglers, paddlers, campers, hikers and wildlife lovers.

The deal was in contrast to a land swap proposal in early November in which the state and Sanders would have exchanged ownership of the two large tracts, and Sanders would have received $8 million in cash.

I'm looking forward to checking this place out.

Obama's new direction?

How is Obama going to handle the Republicans who are virtually unanimously out to destroy him?  As Paul Krugman relates, his recent words and actions are not a good sign.  I hope this changes very soon.

Mr. Obama’s [freezing federal workers'] pay ploy might, just might, have been justified if he had used the announcement of a freeze as an occasion to take a strong stand against Republican demands — to declare that at a time when deficits are an important issue, tax breaks for the wealthiest aren’t acceptable.

But he didn’t. Instead, he apparently intended the pay freeze announcement as a peace gesture to Republicans the day before a bipartisan summit. At that meeting, Mr. Obama, who has faced two years of complete scorched-earth opposition, declared that he had failed to reach out sufficiently to his implacable enemies. He did not, as far as anyone knows, wear a sign on his back saying “Kick me,” although he might as well have.

I do remember that there were times in 1995 after the last Republican takeover during a Democratic administration when I was about completely fed up with Bill Clinton.  His signing of the salvage logging rider, suspending environmental laws to permit accelerated logging in U.S. National Forests, was almost the last straw for me.  Fortunately Clinton realized his mistakes and turned things around in time.

Now is the time for the Paycheck Fairness Act

The Paycheck Fairness Act may come up for a vote in the U.S. Senate today.  This is a critical piece of legislation that addresses several shortfalls in current laws against unequal pay for women.  We know from personal experience that these shoftfalls need to be addressed before we can hope to achieve the decades-old goal of equal pay.

Terrel McSweeny writes at whitehouse.gov:

Wage discrimination is real.

Just ask Lilly Ledbetter.  She is a mother.  She didn’t seek a “less stressful work environment” than her male counter parts.  And she was paid roughly 30% less.   If she had been allowed to share information about her pay with her colleagues she would have realized she was being paid less than men with less experience.

But Lilly couldn’t bring that case.  She could have lost her job if she discussed her pay with her colleagues.  The Paycheck Fairness Act would provide that protection. The author [of a Wall Street Journal op-ed] is right there are a lot of laws aimed at this problem – but because they don’t provide basic tools like pay transparency, discrimination persists.

Also see Carol Rose at boston.com:

Lawmakers meant for The Equal Pay Act of 1963 to ensure equal pay for equal work, but over time, because of weak remedies and loopholes in the law, significant disparities in pay persist.

The Paycheck Fairness Act would give employees the legal tools they need to finally close the wage gap by, for example, requiring employers to demonstrate that wage differences between men and women doing the same work have a business justification; prohibiting retaliation against workers who inquire about their wages; and leveling the playing field by ensuring that women can obtain the same remedies as those subject to employment discrimination based on their race or national origin. The bill would also provide technical assistance to employers and provide important safeguards for small businesses.

The Paycheck Fairness Act already passed the U.S. House of Representatives with bipartisan support and now has 40 co-sponsors in the Senate—more than it has ever had in any previous Congress. Recently, a report from the White House National Economic Council underscored the need for the Paycheck Fairness Act as an important step towards the economic security of women and our nation’s families.

If we want the tools to eliminate pay discrimination against women, it is time to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act.

State Park swap in the works?

Potentially interesting maneuvers at Texas Parks and Wildlife.  They appear to be in a hurry to swap the existing, remote, Devils River State Natural Area for a somewhat smaller, more accessible ranch downstream.  I'm not sure what to think of this, but the hurry is definitely unsettling.

From Shannon Tompkins in the Houston Chronicle:

The swap/purchase would put into Texas Parks and Wildlife Department hands a "spectacular," much more accessible-to-the-public tract that could become "one of the premier parks in our system," said Scott Boruff, TPWD deputy executive director.

But some conservation organizations and paddler/anglers are leery of the deal, questioning the logic of the transaction, TPWD's procedures for informing the public about the proposed exchange and the impact on paddlers of trading away the only public land along the upper reaches of the Devils.

"There are several things that concern us. How are they going to pay for it? Not just the up-front costs — the $8 million - but development, operational and maintenance costs, particularly given the economic issues state agencies are facing," Ken Kramer, director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, said of the Devils River swap/purchase proposal. "And we're certainly concerned with what seems like a rush to get this deal done quickly, without much notice and opportunity for public input. The first I heard about it was last week. It doesn't appear to me they are living up to the spirit of their policy on land transactions."

...

The Devils River swap/purchase has been discussed only in closed-to-the-public executive session of the TPW Commission. The Nov. 4 TPW Commission meeting at which the proposal will be considered for adoption will be the first meeting at which the transaction is publicly discussed.

Hopefully this can be considered with a bit more deliberation and public discussion.

Three months later... Health insurance reform imminent?

In the three months since my last post on this matter, the push for health care reform has gone through many ups and downs.  But now it does really seem to be on the verge of a final vote.  Time to push it over the top, for if it goes down, we won't have another chance for a very long time.

Health insurance reform imminent?

After so many seemingly interminable months of back-and-forth, is health insurance reform finally imminent?  It is looking that way, thankfully.  The bill is not as strong as most of us would like, but it still represents a drastic improvement on the status quo for a huge number of people.  Paul Krugman summed it up in the New York Times a few days ago:

[L]et’s all take a deep breath, and consider just how much good this bill would do, if passed — and how much better it would be than anything that seemed possible just a few years ago. With all its flaws, the Senate health bill would be the biggest expansion of the social safety net since Medicare, greatly improving the lives of millions. Getting this bill would be much, much better than watching health care reform fail.At its core, the bill would do two things. First, it would prohibit discrimination by insurance companies on the basis of medical condition or history: Americans could no longer be denied health insurance because of a pre-existing condition, or have their insurance canceled when they get sick. Second, the bill would provide substantial financial aid to those who don’t get insurance through their employers, as well as tax breaks for small employers that do provide insurance.All of this would be paid for in large part with the first serious effort ever to rein in rising health care costs.

The result would be a huge increase in the availability and affordability of health insurance, with more than 30 million Americans gaining coverage, and premiums for lower-income and lower-middle-income Americans falling dramatically. That’s an immense change from where we were just a few years ago: remember, not long ago the Bush administration and its allies in Congress successfully blocked even a modest expansion of health care for children.

As the title of his piece says, "Pass the bill!".

Regulate and reform the health insurance industry

President Obama talks about the need for regulating and reforming the health insurance industry and addresses the ridiculous "death panel" rumors being spread by reform opponents.

Conservative Supreme Court justices go "activist" against another discrimination law

The five conservative Supreme Court justices have gone all "activist" in undermining the clear intent of another discrimination law.  The previous example was in 2007 with gender discrimination -- a ruling that was remedied by the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.  This time, in a recent decision, it is with age discrimination.

Employment lawyer Ellen Simon describes what these justices have done in this post at Today's Workplace.  Their argument is rather legalistic, but the intent of the decision is clear -- to make it harder to bring those who discriminate to justice.  Hopefully Congress will remedy this bad decision soon.

Lost Maples State Natural Area is growing

From the San Antonio Express-News today:

For centuries, people have been drawn to the twisting limestone canyons that make up Lost Maples State Natural Area.

Lou Waters was one. Now 70, he can hop across white boulders to explore the grottos like a 10-year-old.

On Friday, he plans to sign paperwork to transfer more than 600 acres of his neighboring ranch to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department to be added to Lost Maples. Another 100 acres will be transferred this fall.

Agency staff said the public should have access to trails on the new addition — which is a third of the park's current size — by 2012.

State appraisers valued the land at more than $2 million, but Waters is selling it for $1.5 million because he wants to see the land and its Can Creek watershed protected forever.

Land acquisition funds from the Parks and Wildlife Department and a $400,000 federal conservation grant will pay for it.

“You see it and you just want to take care of it,” Waters said.

In a memo explaining the sale, Waters said walking through the Can Creek canyons in the fall under the native big-tooth maples was like “hiking in a golden-red cathedral.”

His wife, Wanda Waters, said, “It just makes you feel so good that other people are going to be able to enjoy it.”

Lost Maples is about two hour drive west of here and a spectacular park as it is.  Excellent news that it will soon be about 30% larger.

Texas Parks and Wildlife offered land next to two state parks. Will they take it?

From the Hill Country Planning Association:

The Hill Country Planning Association asks that you please consider sending two e-mail letters (samples provided (below) to support Tx Parks & Wildlife Commission purchasing 732 acres adjacent to Lost Maples and accepting 3000 acres adjacent to Government Canyon.  My understanding is that the state needs to hear public support, or the default position would be to decline these opportunities to meet budget cuts.  With sufficient support, they have a good chance of being passed.   Thanks 

****************************************************************************

Land Purchase - Bandera County:  Lost Maples State Park
In a meeting on May 27, 2009, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission (the Commission) will consider the purchase of approximately 732 acres of land adjacent to Lost Maples State Park in Bandera County. At this meeting the public will have an opportunity to comment on the proposed transaction before the Commission takes action. The meeting will start at 9:00 a.m. at the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Headquarters, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, Texas 78744. Prior to the meeting, public comment may be submitted to Ted Hollingsworth, Land Conservation, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, Texas 78744 or by email at:  ted.hollingsworth@tpwd.state.tx.us  or through the TPWD web site at www.tpwd.state.tx.us .

Dear Mr. Hollingsworth: 

I will not be able to attend the May 27, 2009 meeting described below.  I wish to submit my opinion for public comment.  I strongly support purchase of land adjacent to Lost Maples State Park in Bandera County.  Lost Maples is a popular destination and is at risk of having its natural resources decline through overuse.  Purchasing an additional 732 acres of land adjacent to Lost Maples will help protect more of this invaluable and rapidly vanishing habitat.

 

Sincerely,

(name and address)

****************************************************************************
Acceptance of Land Donation - Bexar County:  Government Canyon State Park

In a meeting on Ma7 27, 2009, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission (the Commission) will consider accepting a donation of approximately 3,000 acres adjacent to Government Canyon State Park in Bexar County.  At this meeting the public will have an opportunity to comment on the proposed transaction before the Commission takes action.  The meeting will start at 9:00 a.m. at the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Headquarters, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, Texas 78744.  Prior to the meeting, public comment may be submitted to Ted Hollingsworth, Land Conservation, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, Texas 78744 or by email at:  ted.hollingsworth@tpwd.state.tx.us  or through the TPWD web site at www.tpwd.state.tx.us .

Dear Mr. Hollingsworth:

I will not be able to attend the May 27, 2009 meeting described below.  I wish to submit my opinion for public comment.  I strongly support TP&W Commission accepting donation of 3000 acres adjacent to Government Canyon State Park in Bexar County.  Government Canyon State Park is a wonderful asset that the public is just starting to utilize.   With such close proximity to San Antonio, it is expected the park will be heavily utilized.  The City of San Antonio Parks and Natural Areas are already over-utilized and crowded.  Accepting donation of additional land adjacent to Government Canyon will help protect more of this invaluable and rapidly vanishing habitat.

 

Sincerely,

(name and address)

Misleading headline of the day

New York Times headline today:

By Slim Margin, Senate Advances Stimulus Bill

A more accurate description:

Senate Advances Stimulus Bill 61 to 36

"Slim-margin" is of course referring to the Senate rules that allow any 40 Senators to block legislation.  But anywhere else a 61 to 36 margin would be considered decisive -- even perhaps a "landslide".

After 15 years, Congress returns to the job of protecting our public lands

I wasn't able to pay it much attention at the time due to all the excitement surrounding Obama's inauguration and the major concern over our economic downturn, but about ten days ago, the Senate passed a measure that purports to protect large areas of federal lands in numerous states. 

According to at least one news article (from ENN), it provides "the largest expansion of the National Wilderness Preservation System in 15 years."  The one 15 years ago must be the California Desert Protection Act, passed in October 1994 as one of the last acts of the Democratic-controlled Congress.  The Gingrich/DeLay GOP, and their antipathy to the very concept of land that belongs to everyone in the country, took over Congress a few weeks later.

Virtually ever since then, we've had to play defense in public lands protection, including numerous fights over preventing the Bush administration and the Republican-controlled Congress from selling off our lands to developers and other special interests.  It is nice to be on the offensive again.

Ledbetter Fair Pay Act passes Senate

Excellent news.  From The Hill:

The Senate on Thursday flexed its bolstered Democratic majority and passed an equal pay measure that Republicans blocked last year. The bill could be the first measure signed into law by President Obama.

Senators voted 61-36 for the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, after a day of beating back eight GOP amendments by decisive margins.

“We have now overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan bill to correct an injustice that has been prevailing,” said Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), who led the floor debate on the bill.

All four female GOP senators crossed over to support the Democratic measure: Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas; Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine; and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) also approved the legislation.

Every voting Democrat backed the bill.