Topic: Government Goof-ups
started by: jimhanson
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 03 2004,1:51 pm
We should have some fun with this thread--everybody knows a story about government goof-ups, snafu's, outrageous overcharges, waste, general inefficiency, or unintended consequences.The thought was prompted by an airline pilot friend of mine. He is running for president of the Air Line Pilots Assn.--the major union for airline pilots in the U.S. He is also a national champion marksman, placing well in the Camp Perry championships every year. He was an early advocate of arming pilots, and one of the first to qualify as an armed pilot, so I asked how the program was going. I received this E-mail:
| Quote |
| "Hi Jim: As long as the TSA is involved I will NOT apply to carry a gun. I assume you know this acronym? Thousands Standing Around! Here is the current rule if I am qualified to carry in the cockpit. If I am armed and ready in the cockpit in flight I am required to unload the gun and lock it in the gov't approved and supplied hard case if the copilot has to leave the cockpit. Yep, you read that right. When I am most vulnerable with the cockpit door open I gotta unload and lock up the gun. You gotta just love these government morons! I am sick of standing in line to have my civil rights violated and I'm not about to be further made a fool of by doing this bullcrap. Later on I'll tell you how I REALLY feel!! Happy new year, Bob |
Following 9/11, thousands of airline pilots volunteered for the armed pilot program. Several of the companies that train armed security guards volunteered to do the training at no cost. The pilots would do the training on their own time. Other than additional background checks (airline pilots have FAA background checks, anyway), there was no cost to the government. The TSA has managed to screw up the program yet again--mandating GOVERNMENT training, mandating AIRLINES pay the pilot during training, and TWO MONTHS backlog to do "background checks". In the 28 months since 9/11, the government hasn't been able to train more than 40 pilots a month, resulting in a backlog of nearly 2 years for pilots seeking training. Instead of the low-cost, volunteer program, the TSA has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the program.
Not content with screwing up security, the TSA has effectively eliminated service to many small communities. I watched an incoming flight at Rochester--there were 14 security agents meeting the flight of a commuter jet--and 14 passengers deplaned. Hibbing and International Falls used to have as many as 8 flights a day--now, they are down to 4, and the airlines are looking to pull out. The TSA mandates 4 screeners ($60,000 per year) plus a head of Airport Security ($105,000 per year starting). Even though these small communities have the demonstrated NEED for air service, it is uneconomical to provide the service when carrying this kind of burden.
Citation to read as follows: For gross inefficiency, government waste, top-heavy regulation, becoming a burden on those it seeks to "protect", economic disaster, and unintended consequences, I nominate the TSA to be the first recipient of the "Government Goof-up" award!
Where's former Sen. William Proxmire's "Golden Fleece" award when you really need it?
Anybody else have a good "Government Goof-up" story?
Posted by minnow on Jan. 03 2004,2:09 pm
Well, what happened is what I've said from the beginning.We overreacted and let the terrorists win by beating ourselves up.
One can never eliminate all risk in anything and often the cure is worse than the disease.
In many ways I feel I've outgrown my country. I used to look up to America, now I just look down and smirk.
Posted by GEOKARJO on Jan. 03 2004,2:18 pm
Freeborn County Goverment
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 03 2004,3:17 pm
Here's another good one--there's an unending supply 
Homeland Security and TSA have established 30 mile--"no fly zones" from wherever the President happens to be. This is up from the former 10 mile radius.
The Secret Service is tasked with protecting the President. They have anti-aircraft missles, and sometimes military jets at their disposal. Incursion into this "no-fly-zone lands an aircrew in hot water--plus the real possibility of being shot down.
The FAA is tasked with safety of air travel--separating aircraft in flight is a GOOD THING!
The problem--the Secret Service won't tell Homeland Security or TSA exactly where the President is at any given time. When Homeland Security DOES get the information, they put it out to the FAA (part of the Department of Transportation)for dissemination to pilots and air traffic controllers--but this information is usually 1 to 2 hours old--the President is usually no longer in the designated place--he's moved on. Pilots and controllers have no idea of the areas they are supposed to avoid--and if they get a briefing BEFORE departure, the information may not be correct. Pilots and controllers organizations have had to resort to starting their own briefing website to find which areas to avoid--the information usually comes from the NEWS MEDIA covering the event. The FAA responded by passing a law exempting FAA controllers or pilot briefers for culpability in ommitting this information when briefing pilots--but not the pilots.
Lest you think this is something that only affects private airplanes, consider the chaos that accompanied the last Presidential visit to Minneapolis--the airport was effectively shut down for all arrivals for 1 1/2 hours, some international flights were allowed to depart--some airlines were held at their point of departure for an indeterminate time, some airline pilots were heard on the frequency asking "when can we land?", some flights were diverted elsewhere. During the election season, the same rules will apply to any of the major candidates, or to other officials at the discretion of the Secret Service.
Pilots are also told to avoid nuclear power plants, chemical factories, and sports stadiums while games are in session. The problem--these areas aren't charted anywhere--that function is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (itself, a part of the Department of Commerce) Part of pre-flight briefing now must include reading the sports section to see if there is a game along your route of flight!
To the TSA, Homeland Security, NOAA, Department of Commerce, Dept. of Transportation, Secret Service, and the FAA--the Sheriff Buford T. Justice award for "what we have here is a failure to communicate!" From the movie "Animal House"--"Your'e on double-secret probation!"
Posted by MADDOG on Jan. 03 2004,3:42 pm
A couple of secrets in government corruption. | Quote |
| Many police departments do NOT run criminal background checks on police applicants. In Tennessee, the legislature passed a law PROHIBITING criminal background checks on big-city police chiefs and sheriffs, perhaps to counter reports that the state led the nation with dozens of sheriffs convicted for drug dealing. If cops can't police themselves, and are impotent to even protect citizens under the strictest of "protection", why does society allow itself to be policed by criminals? Who's going to cop the cops? |
| Quote |
| New York City Detective Frank Serpico testified to the Knapp Commission, "10% of cops are honest, 10% are dishonest, and 80% wish they were honest." America's most-famous detective also noted that 30,000 New York City cops loved to say, "The public, what does the fcking public know?" By Detective Serpico's estimate, that means only 100,000 out of America's 1-million cops are "honest" |
| Quote |
| in its greed to produce an economical car in the 1970s, Ford Motor Company produced 3-MILLION exploding Pintos and Mustangs. The professors explain: "Nobody at Ford, including [president Lee] Iacocca, ordered that a car with a serious design defect be built. Instead, Mr. Iaccoca perceived a problem, devised a solution, established a goal and operating rules, and delegated to others the day-to-day responsibility for design, building and testing. The unintended result of these routine procedures was an unsafe product." Today, traffic safety still suffers an abyssimal standard of engineering, as General Motors discovered when a jury spanked them with a $5-billion verdict in 1999. GM tried to blame its exploding vehicles on drunk drivers, but the jury didn't buy it. (Appellate judges were expected to show their contempt of the jury by nullifying the amount of punishment -- and thus nullifying GM's incentive to make its vehicles safer.) Every year, about 400,000 vehicles burn up, according to the Department of Transportation, killing about 3,000 people every year. Fire-proof rubber-bladder fuel cells, as used in aviation and auto racing, could be added to road vehicles at a cost of $5 each, according to Ford. The Pinto could have been fixed with a strip of plastic for ONE-DOLLAR each, saving thousands of lives and tens-of-thousands of burns, but Lee Iacocca alleged that "safety doesn't sell." So Ford felt a human life was worth less than 1-dollar. As an anonymous Ford engineer explained: "We don't talk about it much. It isn't a popular subject. I've never seen safety on the agenda.... I really don't think the company wants American consumers to start thinking too much about safety -- for fear they might demand it, I suppose." No criminal arrests were made in either of these murderous examples of corporate criminality, even though such laws exist. As Mark Dowie wrote in Mother Jones, "There probably isn't a car on the road without a safety defect known to its manufacturer.... One wonders how long the Ford Motor Company would continue to market lethal cars were Henry Ford II and Lee Iacocca serving 20-year terms in Leavenworth for consumer homicide." When Ford finally got the Pinto certified as "safe" in America, it installed the $1 plastic part, but had to use a Canadian Pinto for the crash test since Canada required "stricter" rear-end crash regulations. No recall was made of the millions of exploding cars already on the road. |
Posted by cwolff on Jan. 04 2004,12:19 pm
Jim, there is something more disturbing than turning the baggage screening business into a federal stand-around and collect twice the pay program. George W. Bush wants to privitize the Air Traffic Control system. Yes, he wants to put the flying public's safety in the hands of a for-profit private business. Bush has already started this process at the lowest level towers. The employees at these privatized towers have stated that staffing levels, which were suppose to stay at a certain level, have dropped below required levels. These under staffed towers have also cut benefits and pay by around 50 percent. I voted for Bush, I used to be a baggage screener supervisor at MSP, and I currently am a Federal Air Traffic Controller, but I think George W. Bush does not have a clue about what the privatization of the Air Traffic Control system will do to our currently safe Air Traffic Control system. Maybe we needed to upgrade our baggage screener positions to help keep the terrorists off of the planes! For what they are paying the baggage screeners, they better keep the terrorists off of the planes. Privization of Air Traffic Control is currently failing misserably in Canada, Germany, and else where.
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 04 2004,1:13 pm
Good points, CWolff--those new baggage screeners are probably making more than the "privatized" controllers!I've seen "privatized" air traffic control first hand--I've flown in or over 76 countries on 6 continents. There's nothing like coming back to the U.S.
Users pay the major portion of the cost of the FAA (the "enforcement section", as well the controllers) through aviation fuel taxes and passenger facility charges. A portion of the cost of the air traffic control system comes from the general fund--on the basis that there is a public good that comes from a well-run, safe, air traffic control system. The idea of making the air traffic control system into a quasi-public/private corporation (think "AMTRAK", with all the problems THEY have!) has been floating around for at least 20 years--it was proposed (and defeated) under the Clinton administration as well.
You are correct in stating that "privatized" air traffic control hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried. These "corporations" are never really private--you can't buy stock in the Canadian ATC system--but they are tasked with making money (another example--the U.S. Postal Service) Everywhere it has been tried, fees go up, service goes down, and administrative costs go out of hand. Example: when we fly to Canada in June, we will get a bill for "airway services"--SOMETIME AROUND THE END OF THE YEAR! We don't know how much to bill to our customer. For smaller airplanes, the Canadian model found it was spending something over $40 to collect a $4 fee--so they exempted small airplanes and increased the fees on the rest. Fees based on size of the airplane have nothing to do with costs incurred--it costs the same to talk to a jumbo jet as it does to talk to a small aircraft--but the airlines are easier to collect fees from. Who ends up paying those fees? The consumer. If the consumer balks at paying those fees and decides to drive instead, the flight is cancelled, and fewer and fewer aircraft end up paying for the system.
Lest anyone think that I'm picking on Canada--on a trip to Europe, it cost $660 to land in Berlin, plus $110 parking fee, $60 Customs inspection, $45 "noise tax" (even though our single-engine turboprop's noise signature is quieter than anything on their charts), $20 for a weather briefing, and $30 something to file a flight plan. Then, we were charged $4.40 per gallon of fuel for jet fuel (a petroleum distillate, equivalent to heating oil). Six months after returning home, we received a bill for over $150 for "airway services" for the 6 hours we were in German airspace. Though this is the most extreme example, all the European Union countries weren't far behind--only non-EU signatories Britain and Denmark had reasonable prices. The result--airports in Europe are uncrowded--Rome is like Rochester for air traffic--I would guess that Minneapolis Center probably handles the same volume (or more) traffic as the entire EU.
Another unintended consequence--government raised fees, cut service, and destroyed an industry. Over 2/3 of the civil flying in the world happen right here in the U.S. Other countries should be emulating US, for a safe air transport system. Don't let the "European model" happen here.
Posted by cwolff on Jan. 04 2004,5:47 pm
Jim, great examples! Some of the controllers that I work with have said that the Canadian Air Traffic Controllers, that they talk with on a daily basis, have constantly complained about their new conditions under privitization. The U.S. controllers have had to increase their distance between aircraft entering Canadian airspace from 5 miles in trail to 60 miles in trail. For example if you have 5 airplanes flying somewhat bunched up heading for Canadian airspace, we have to space them out 60 miles apart, and strung out 240 miles. Our sectors that we work with are only about 100-150 miles long, so aircraft get huge turns and turned repeatedly to get the miles in trail. The Canadian system not only hurts service in Canada, but it greatly affects air traffic outside of their boundries, because Canada puts huge restrictions on U.S. air traffic entering Canadian airspace. The reason for the extra spacing is that our Canadian counterparts are short staffed constantly for the all mighty dollar; in other words profit!!!
Posted by guest on Jan. 05 2004,7:59 am
Here's a more local screw up. Anyone out there know the reason the City is not able to lana apply the sludge from the waste water treatment plant this year like normal and how much extra this is costing us? I hear it is costing about $300,000 more.
Posted by Liberal on Jan. 05 2004,9:08 am
| Quote |
But last year, Albert Lea's industries dumped a high level of molybdenum into the wastewater system. Molybdenum (pronounced mah-lib-dih-num), is a metallic element used by industries to prevent corrosion and to strengthen other metals. Molybdenum is a naturally occurring element and is harmless at low concentrations. However, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has told the city that its level of molybdenum is too high, and the regular method of disposal is not an option Albert Lea Tribune Oct 17, 2003 |
Shouldn't be hard to figure out who disposed of the molybdenum. How many industries in town would even use it?
Posted by MADDOG on Jan. 05 2004,9:26 am
If we're going to have fun with this thread, we need to have something in here that strikes close to home. From Dan Belshan's newsletter, June 2002, read'em and weep: | Quote |
| Freeborn County Info (Back to the Grassroots) From Dan Belshan, Freeborn County 2nd District RR1 Box 192 Glenville, MN 56036 507-448-3332 email dbelshan@clear.lakes.com Volume 4, Issue 1, June, 2002 Facts, Opinions and Info from Dan Belshan, Freeborn County 2nd District Commissioner BUDGET We need to look carefully at ways to downsize our county budget next year. We bonded $1 million to operate this year. Have any ideas? I welcome them. Courts/Jail/Law Enforcement Center OPINION: I believe we need a new judicial center (courts and court services) but that we do not need a new 117 bed jail at this time. As they used to say on Dragnet “Just the facts;. I can back up these facts with taped meeting transcripts, documents and the media. However, there is lots of;spin; going around. SPIN: We've been looking at building a jail for 6-1/2? years;let's just do it. FACT: The county began looking at building a jail only after 3 new members took office in Jan 01. FACT: Architects Boarman Kroos Vogel were hired to design a new courthouse in 1997. In 2000 after public meetings the former board did not vote to build courthouse Plan 10 from BKV at a cost of $12 million, and the jail was not included. Plan 10 did not leave room for jail expansion, which I had pointed out in Mar 99. SPIN: 2001 The air quality in the Law Enforcement Center is poor, and to correct it could cost $1 million, says Sheriff Nolander and an architect. FACT: I suggested that since Alliant Energy had saved us a substantial amount of money on energy saving light bulbs in Human Services, we should look into any other cost saving ideas from Alliant. Alliant did an air quality study and energy audit, and found the air handling system was not energy efficient, but the air was fine. They put in a new energy efficient system (I've been told it's about the same size as the old one) and it is being paid for by energy savings; cost to the county is $0. FACT: The board voted to have the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) do a study on jail needs, a PONI (Planning of New Institution) Phase I technical assistance. This is a usual step before building. It is an extensive study of how the current courts, law enforcement and jail system is operating in a county, steps that may be taken to solve problems without building, and includes a guide to jail design. The study is at no cost to the county. FACT: July 01 The board watched a video provided by NIC. It said not to hire an architect until you've looked at the jail needs and the entire judicial and courts system. FACT: Aug 01 The board voted 3-2 to hire architects BKV to do a jail needs study and upon completion draw up plans for a new judicial/jail facility. Mathiason and I wished to wait for the new administrator Ron Gabrielsen (coming in Sept 01) and the NIC study (supposed to take place in Dec 01). SPIN: BKV will work side by side with the NIC study. FACT: The NIC study was never done. SPIN: It wasn't done because of 9-11 terrorism. FACT: I have letters from the NIC from Jan, Feb, and April 02 showing they attempted to schedule it with our staff without success, and were later not provided with paperwork needed to continue, even though administrator Ron Gabrielsen said at public meetings in April 02 that he hoped it would be done this spring. On May 02 the board voted 3-2 to rescind the motion to have our NIC study, thereby killing it. Mathiason and I wanted the NIC study done before proceeding with jail plans, wanted more than just architect BKV's study. FACT: (Feb to Aug 01) I was able to get statistics from the County Attorney on jail population, and used them in a chart to show that our jail overcrowding is caused in part by the large number of minimum security work release inmates (about 40%) Huber Law released to work, sleep dormitory-style, minimal guard. Nearby counties (Olmsted, Scott, LaCrosse) are building, have built, or used existing empty buildings as low cost Huber facilities, but the majority of the board did not choose to look at that cost study option. Sept 01 to Jun 02 I continue to ask for statistics and info to back up statements from law enforcement staff. SPIN: It would take too much overtime to give one commissioner (guess who) more info. FACT: I asked for statistics and information from administrator Gabrielsen and received criticism from our sheriff and staff for asking for public information and questions within the realm of commissioner concerns. OPINION: I think I'm being stonewalled. SPIN: We need a huge jail. FACT: NIC literature says to use the rule of 10/90, that is, 10% of the cost of a jail is building it. 90% of the cost is the ongoing operation. Using that rule, a new $12 million jail could cost the county $100 million to run over 30 years. Jail staff is 70-80% cost of operation, new jail concept adds $1/2 million in staff wage. OPINION: Our staff insists it is cheaper to build a big jail and run it than to have a separate Huber facility, use appropriate home monitoring, and rent beds in other counties if needed. I maintain we could do those things and postpone building a jail until we really need it, as other counties have done or are doing. I have asked for facts on the actual costs of those options but have not received them. FACT: 1970 County population 38,064. 2000 census 32,584. Young adults 18-34 have twice the incarceration rates as middle aged 35-49 and 13 times the rates for senior citizens 50 and older. Our county population is aging. Our demographics show this key element in the underlying demand for jail space is less with a low proportion of young adults. FACT: March 02 Chairman Mullenbach said we do not plan to rent beds to other counties, but are only looking at the needs in Freeborn County. Scott County, MN is one of the fastest growing counties in the nation. With approx. 98,000 pop. they are looking at building a jail and are taking many YEARS to do it. Freeborn County, with a shrinking population, is looking at building a 117 bed jail and are doing it in 1.5 years on advice from the architects who get more money on a bigger project. SPIN: We've looked at all the options. FACT: After the study done by architect BKV with our staff, BKV says our jail is overcrowded and we should build a new one, designed by them (which coincidentally fits the footprint of the space needed by the courts and court services). They presented only one concept (47 pages). An option I wanted explored was to build a judicial building and use our existing jail with more secure space, adding a large Huber facility below the jail or somewhere offsite, similar to other counties. This concept has never been explored. SPIN: Mower County didn't want to pursue building jointly with Freeborn County. FACT: Nov 01 Talks with Mower County to investigate building a joint jail/ judicial center in Freeborn County were terminated in a 3-2 vote by OUR BOARD not to continue to even LOOK at the option. The Mower Co. board, Commissioner Mathiason and I wanted to investigate further to possibly save millions in construction and operation costs. FACT: March 01 Administrator Gene Smith left to work for Dunn County, WI. FACT: The Dunn County jail, visited by some commissioners, and used as an example by BKV, made money renting out beds but now has surplus beds and may have to lower the rent. Feb 02 A WI newspaper said the gravy train is about to end. They built large, but have about the same number of Dunn Co. prisoners as before they built. Their former sheriff, who helped design the new jail, is serving time in a neighboring county jail for misuse of Dunn County funds. Many WI counties built jails, and now have surplus beds. OPINION: I look at the facts and ponder the following. 1. The whole board agrees we need a new courts and court services building. How did a large jail and a push to demolish the 54 building become the focus? If our courthouse is so crowded, why are we currently renting out prime office space in the 54 and considering renting office space in the new building to the State of MN? 2. The job of the county board is to be fiscally responsible, so why aren't we checking out every option before building a huge new jail? (More than doubling the size of the jail without first trying other options to eliminate overcrowding, as nearby counties have done.) How will we bond? Where is money in reserve for building? 3. Two jail breaks in recent years were blamed on overcrowding, but bars on the windows could have prevented escape. We've added bars (cost about $6,000). Proposed new jail design has windows with no bars. 4. Who came up with the spin build it and they will come? When did an expensive new government building ever bring industry and economic growth to a county? Will high taxes attract high tech? 5. The architect has set the timeline (break ground Fall 02), they've done the only paid study, and developed the only concept. The most expensive project the county has ever undertaken is being driven by the sole paid consultant, and the more $ we spend, the more $ they make. THE CITIZENS OF FREEBORN COUNTY DESERVE BETTER ! |
Posted by guest on Jan. 05 2004,9:31 am
Did the industries really dump more or is it just that with Farmland gone there was less waste to dilute the molybdenum? I heard that that last year they were right at the limit. Should the City be checking for this and do something about it sooner?
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 05 2004,10:40 am
Guest--good point.Similar government goof-up--a small coastal town in Alaska was advised by the EPA that they needed to build an expensive new, cost-prohibitive treatment plant. The EPA advised that there was another way to comply--pump fresh water directly from wells to mix with the effluent, cutting the parts per million. The town now pumps perfectly good fresh water and flushes it through the plant--causing even more effluent--BUT IT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EPA!
"THE SOLUTION TO POLLUTION IS DILUTION!"
Posted by The Rocket on Jan. 05 2004,5:48 pm
Sounds like your damned if do or if you don't. Stop all the sump pumps from pumping and now the parts per million are to high. Maybe they shouldn't have required the fairgrounds to plug all the surface drains that are connected to the sanitary system. If the city infastructure can't handle the flow then how about pulling in some upstream water from the Shell Rock right at the plant to increase the flow at the disposal plant and run it at closer to its capacity. I would think the downstream water quality would increase at a minimal cost and they would be able to land spread the sludge again.
Posted by montyman on Jan. 05 2004,7:23 pm
Good thought Rocket.'Course these guys probably don't know what BOD and TSS are.
I assume the effluent limits are at 5/5, with a pretty stringent NH3 standard thrown in too.
Your idea might work pretty well in the winter...
Posted by cwolff on Jan. 05 2004,7:41 pm
I recently attended an informational meeting put on by the MPCA regarding the proposed 2004 Impaired Waters List, which if your waterbody is included, it precludes the MPCA to perform a TMDL Study and TMDL Implementation to clean up the pollutants. I noticed that the Shell Rock River between Albert Lea Lake to Goose Creek was put onto the Impaired Waters List in 1994 for the pollutants/stressors ammonia and fecal coliform, and again in 2002 for turbidity. My organization in Heron Lake was instrumental in getting Heron Lake onto the 2002 list for excess nutrients, which I was told at the informational meeting was what you want to get onto the list for is excess nutrients, and this will push the main button as far as getting your waterbody cleaned up. Phosphorous is everybodies main problem when it comes to excessive algae and green and slimmy lake conditions, and this is one of the main focuses during a TMDL Study for excess nutrients. A 30 day public comment period will run from January 12 - February 12, 2004 through the MPCA contact person of Dr. Howard Markus (651) 296-7295 if you would like to comment about having this stretch of river/stream between Albert Lea Lake and Goose Creek or any other polluted lake or stream within your watershed included onto the list for excess nutrients. Give Dr. Markus a call if you have any questions about the Impaired Waters List and how it can help your situation with cleanup or restoration. Heron Lake was not even on the proposed 2002 impaired waters list, but I sent a letter stating why I thought it should be on the list, and it was included with the final 2002 list. The list gets updated every two years. Good Luck!
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 05 2004,8:05 pm
Be careful what you ask for, as the old saying goes.Have seen the impaired waters list e-mails.
Anytime I see the "MPCA" acronym, I get nervous at first glance.
Just look what the agency has recently done with the EPA's NPDES Industrial Phase-In, for example.
cwolff has a great idea if the nutrients can be controlled, but the cost to do so would affect farmers as well as city folks with their lawns, etc.
How about adding Wedges' Creek and Fountain Lake to that list too?
Posted by hoosier on Jan. 06 2004,10:38 am
Government goof ups? How about our county board paying almost a half million in interest on a loan this past year alone that they didnt need all at once. They only had to borrow enough for the first year of construction, had they not borrowed the whole amount at once, the county would be a half million richer right now. Mullenbach was the one pushing this, he was the one working with the bonding company. Funny how rumor has it that he was seen getting off a seaplane at a Canadian fly in resort, all expenses paid, by you know who? The same bonding company that benifited from our boards idiotic decision to borrow way more money than we needed at one time. Our county attorney should look into this, Mullenbach is a piece of $hit that needs to get whats coming to him, jail time. Lets not forget that the fairness committee that our board blackmailed into getting out of county politics actually saved us thousands of dollars by dragging the courthouse out a little longer, the interest rates dropped during this time, saving us money.
You want government goofups? You neednt look any further than Freeborn county, plenty right here in our own backyard.
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 06 2004,7:24 pm
Yeah, that 'we gotta use prevailing wages because then we'll get a better contractor' problem AND that 'bonding without a vote of the people' problem AND that 'dysfunctional board' problem AND that 'garvel road turnback' problem AND...Vote 'em out if you don't like it.
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 09 2004,6:54 pm
Here's a link to a follow-up of the initial post on this thread. Almost ANY FEDERAL OFFICIAL--including the Dept. of Education cited in this article--can carry a concealed weapon on board the aircraft--BUT THE PILOT CAN'T!| Quote |
| When asked why an agent from the Department of Education might need to carry a concealed weapon, a spokesman from the agency cited the example of an investigator probing a trade school under suspicion of student-loan fraud. |
Link to entire article < http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36518 >
My friend the 757 captain can't carry a gun in the cockpit to protect himself and the passengers in the event the door is breached--but the Department of Education "crimefighting nerd" in the back can--where it can be taken away from him and used on the passengers or crew.
The CO-PILOT on the same aircraft can't be trusted with a gun in the cockpit, but on his days OFF from the airline, he flies a heavily armed F-16 fighter--WHICH MAY BE TASKED WITH SHOOTING DOWN AN AIRLINER THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN OVER BY TERRORISTS!
For GLARING INCONSISTENCIES, KNEE-JERK REACTIONS, and IGNORING A CONGRESSIONAL MANDATE, I award the TSA this GOVERNMENT GOOF-UP AWARD!
Posted by Mamma on Jan. 09 2004,9:45 pm
I may have fallen asleep somewhere along the line.....my nephew is a union worker and gets a union newsletter once a month. It lists in his union newsletter that Albert Lea has a library in the planning stages. This is the second month it has been in there.....did I miss something? 
Posted by hearsay on Jan. 10 2004,9:03 am
from what i heard Sparks promised the librarian her new library over a year ago.
Posted by kid dyn-o-mite on Jan. 10 2004,5:45 pm
He said that because he knows he controls everybody and everything. That's your Albert Lea folks...ain't ya proud?
Posted by Torked on Jan. 10 2004,9:14 pm
Well, I for one am more than a little upset about a new library in the planning stages! My taxes went up outrageously because of the High School and the Courthouse so I will be damned if I have to pay for a new library, and I do not live in Albert Lea, I live in the county. The Albert Lea Public Library has been called that forever, and now they probably want the county folks to pay for the thing so they'll re-name it, the Freeborn County Public Library. I think we should really have an all out campaign on this one. All out war!!!! If they need some space then go to one of the many, many vacant buildings around town and if that isn't good enough then I think we should bring in every damn newspaper and radio station in the State and start to bring down those very people that have railroaded through every proposal the silent majority has been opposed to in the last 4 years. Start a get rid of Sparks petition. It will work even if he is not our city manager any longer (anyway, when the new one comes aboard shortly) Part of his salary is being debated to possibly coming from public monies as we speak. Do Not vote for Jean Eaton, Mary Kron, Amundson, Mathiason, Behrends, Springborg in Nov. That is truly the power we have and can exercise. They do not want bad publicity, that is number one. I mean have you seen even one controversial editorial in the Albert Lea Tribune since the new editor took over? At least Dylan allowed that.
Posted by minnow on Jan. 10 2004,10:41 pm
Jean Eaton, Mary Kron, Amundson, Mathiason, Behrends, Springborg[/u]Now there's the hit list....the dirty six...
Posted by Gabby on Jan. 12 2004,9:07 am
LOL, Torked. You mention a "get rid of Sparks campaign, and the people not to vot for, yet you fail to mention a couple that should be on that list. Don't forget, Fjelstad's campaign promise WAS to get rid of Sparks, yet he's the one who did the quick spin to recess the council and convene the Port Authority that put Sparks where he is today.What about Erdman and his 1/2% tax push? Run them all out!
Posted by guest on Jan. 12 2004,9:15 am
What about Marin? For being a minister he does not know how to play nice with others. He is down right rude to the other councilors during meetings. He also wanted to cut the department budgets by not allowing the staff to go to training classes, yet he has gone to neumours seminars around the country supposidely on Council business. The best part is, he takes his whole family on the tax payers buck.
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 15 2004,11:22 am
You heard it here first--but it just hit the papers today. To see just how screwed-up and ineffective the TSA is, click the link< http://www.cnsnews.com/....5c.html >
It details how the TSA has intentionally sabotaged the armed pilot program. TSA was against it in the first place, but 80% of airline pilots wanted the program--so it was MANDATED BY CONGRESS.
TSA wants armed Air Marshalls on board the aircraft (though they have NEVER thwarted a hijacking in 30 years!), they allow ANY Federal employee to carry a gun (including such "crime fighters" as the Dept. of Education and the Peace Corps), but they have done everything they can to thwart Pilots (you know, those guys who really have a stake in this issue) from being armed--even when certified!
TSA=Thousands Standing Around--Billions of dollars spent--hundreds of thousands of employees--the ruination of an entire industry, air travel denied to smaller communities. Feel safer yet?
If there are any Bush Bashers on this thread--I'm WITH you on this one--"Homeland Security" and "TSA" are the most innefective and dangerous government agencies out there!
Posted by GEOKARJO on Jan. 15 2004,12:34 pm
Just think about if Hitler had our technology
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 15 2004,12:57 pm
Who needs a crazed dictator when our own GOVERNMENT creates their own version of the SS? There are several hundred Hitlers in Congress--on both sides of the aisle! Even when they TRY to do the right thing--like mandating that the TSA implement the right to defend airline cockpits--the Frankensteinian Monster they created thumbs its nose at them!
Posted by minnow on Jan. 15 2004,6:37 pm
The people demanded they're representives remove some of their freedom and money and make life harder for them so they could say they were doing their part in fighting terrorism.
Posted by Mel on Jan. 16 2004,8:02 am
Striping away our civil liberties in the name of homeland security.
Posted by Goodyear Pimp on Jan. 16 2004,9:04 am
| Quote |
| Striping away our civil liberties in the name of homeland security. |
Any else here notice that while the media was so focused on the US capture of Saddam that congress passed more portions of the new "PATRIOT ACT 2"? I wonder why there was and still is no media coverage?
We were all scared when those planes swan-dived into the towers, OK? But what separates real Americans from the faux variety is that real Americans don't turn in their spines to the hatcheck lady in times of stress. People in this country today hear the word terrorist and immediately snap into action -- which means locking themselves in the bathroom, defecating on the Constitution and using the Bill of Rights to wipe their ass.
Yes, the administration is stripping away the civil liberties while everyone just lets it happen. I mean, nobody wants to look unpatriotic or like a terrorist by standing up for their rights.....
"... Proceeded on the sound principle that the magnitude of a lie always contains a certain factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people in the very bottom of their hearts tend to be corrupted rather than consciously and purposely evil, and that, therefore, in view of the primitive simplicity of their minds, they more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a little one, since they themselves lie in little things, but would be ashamed of lies that were too big.
Such a falsehood will never enter their heads, and they will not be able to believe in the possibility of such monstrous effrontery and infamous misrepresentation in others; yes, even when enlightened on the subject, they will long doubt and waver and continue to accept at least one of these causes as true. Therefore, something of even the most insolent lie will always remain and stick -- a fact which all the great lie-virtuosi and lying-clubs in the world know only too well and also make the most treacherous use of. “-- Adolph Hitler "Mien Kampf"
Start arming yourselves now, because we are going to have to have another civil war to get our freedom back!
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 16 2004,12:13 pm
Goodyear--I absolutely agree! Blame it on the Administration, Blame it on Congress, Blame it the innate nature of people to "do something" in response to a perceived threat--but the Patriot Act, TSA, "Homeland Security"--all are examples of a great Federal Power Grab--making us more insecure than ever.I shouldn't limit criticism to the Federal level. State and local governments are also using the "terrorist" threat to enact stringent additional laws--restricting access, fingerprinting citizens, including new restrictions. In this small, midwest community, we are building a new Judicial Center because "there isn't enough security in the old courtrooms". Yup, you read about terrorists shoot-em-ups all the time--NOT! (Oddly enough, they built those same courtrooms right next to the street, where they can be hit with CAR BOMBS!)
Government agencies are so paranoid that they feel the need for more firepower--full automatic weapons for the Sheriff's department, and sidearms for FAA written test inspectors, Peace Corps. officials, and Department of Education officials!
I believe, in my lifetime, there WILL be a Civil War or Armed Insurrection in the U.S.--this time, East & West. It will be minor skirmishes--not like the scale of the last Civil War. It will put the police and the military in compromising positions as to whether they will take action against the "rebels". It will probably occur between the Red States and Blue States--and will be fought over States Rights and Individual Rights. Most people in the Red states want no part of an increased government presence--they just want to be left alone.
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 16 2004,5:53 pm
I heard the city cop in Fairmont got Federal Homeland Security money for video cameras to put up to watch for terrorists. Somethings wrong here, for sure.
Posted by buzzup on Jan. 16 2004,5:59 pm
| Quote (jimhanson @ Jan. 16 2004,12:13:pm) |
| I believe, in my lifetime, there WILL be a Civil War or Armed Insurrection in the U.S.--this time, East & West. It will be minor skirmishes--not like the scale of the last Civil War. It will put the police and the military in compromising positions as to whether they will take action against the "rebels". It will probably occur between the Red States and Blue States--and will be fought over States Rights and Individual Rights. Most people in the Red states want no part of an increased government presence--they just want to be left alone. |
Are you nuts?
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 16 2004,6:08 pm
Maybe, but I heard he has an F-117 in storage at the AL airport just in case he needs it. But the question is, will he be RED or BLUE?I thought the latest (1860's) Civil War was about STATES RIGHTS...
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 17 2004,1:41 pm
No, just predicting more Ruby Ridges, Waco's, Oklahoma City's, etc. Not saying it's right, just that there will be more and more of them.There is no question that the "great divide" has already happened--look at the disconnect between the red and blue states--urban vs. rural, East vs. West. Eighty-eight percent of the land mass is red, but the vote is split as evenly as possible.
There is no question that people on both sides have taken an "us vs. them" attitude--inclreasingly divided, increasingly strident. Political civility is at an all-time low. We have a number of people like Dennis Miller that will not run for office because it would mean moving into Washington, with all of its problems, and the immovable inertia of government resisting cuts--protecting its own "turf"--leaving only those who LIKE dealing with the government to run the country--"the inmates are running the asylum!"
I know I could never consider living on the East Coast again. The "civil" war is already being waged on an economic front--States like South Dakota, for example, actively recruiting and attracting not only large New York firms like Citibank--but also advertising daily on KSTP radio 1500 in St. Paul for Minnesota industries to leave their high-tax state and move to South Dakota (and they are succeeding). North Carolina is the largest recipient of New York businesses. As more and more businesses move out of the major cities, the cities become more and more dependent on Federal programs --paid for by people in the "rest" of the country--increasingly polarizing the electorate.
The issue affects those in the regular military and the National Guard. After Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Oklahoma City, there was talk of, and limited use of, government troops or equipment to maintain order. There is a thin line between PROHIBITION of use of Federal troops to keep the peace, and LEGITIMATE USE of Federal troops to maintain order. National Guard Troops may be ordered by the Governor, or, in some cases (Civil Rights in Little Rock, for example) by the Federal Government to ensure Constitutional rights. With the new duties imposed on them by Homeland Security (guarding transportation facilities, etc.) Guardsmen I know say that they wouldn't have a problem shooting a terrorist, but if it came to a civil disturbance (Kent State, for example, or policing the Mexican border), they want no part of firing on civilians. They say they have talked about it formally at Guard meetings ("you must"), and informally after ("I'm not sure I would")--we won't know until the next "mobilization" of Guard troops.
Are we becoming more divided as a nation? YES. Are we becoming more uncivil? YES. Are States competing economically against each other? YES. Is this trend likely to continue? YES. Is the government making more use of Federal troops and equipment for "policing"? YES. Are those troops questioning whether they will take sides? YES. Will there likely be more Wacos, Ruby Ridges, Kent States, Little Rocks, Los Angeles riots, Watts, Detroit riots, etc.--ALL of which used Federal troops or agents?--YES. Actuarial tables say I should expect to live another 31 year--are these things likely to happen within that time frame? YES.
Civil War?--perhaps not--maybe we should call it UNCIVIL WAR.
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 18 2004,3:04 pm
That post kinda reminds me of the president's speech on the movie 'Independence Day'.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Jan. 20 2004,10:59 pm
| Quote |
| They that give up Essential Liberty for temporary Safety, deserve neither Libertly nor Safety-Benjamin Franklin |
By congress and Bush enacting the "Usurping the Rights of the American People Act, not only gives the gov't way too much power, but also gave the terrorists a huge victory over America.
This BS law does nothing to stem the tide of violence, it only punishes law abiding Americans, a person bent on death and destruction will find any means to do so.
I agree with Jims assesment of a civil war, but I would call it Revolution II, it is comming to a head, our forefathers fought the evil brits and threw off the chains of oppression. As now the people of the US are just plain tired of the BS.
Just like Jefferson said, "The tree of Liberty must be shed with with blood of tyrants and patriots from time to time"
As he knew that gov't tends to usurp more and more power from the people.
Wars end, Revolutions come back around for a second tour,
"Greed and corruption of the Federalist is in it's nature, it is the patriot that keeps it in check"-Patrick Henry
Posted by minnow on Jan. 21 2004,12:14 am
"I mean, nobody wants to look unpatriotic or like a terrorist by standing up for their rights....."Except da Minnow. You all know my record. I stood up and said the right thing and was crucified by this crowd last year because I remebered and took to heart Benjamen Franklin wise words.
Now everybody else is getting on board. That's just another example...proof if you will, that I'm just a tad smarter than most of this crowd and am a true and real hero.
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 21 2004,10:28 am
Worldnet Daily ran a copy of a new report on aviation security--the report said that despite the Billions of dollars spent on Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration (or "The School for the Assinine"), the disruption of an entire industry, creation of widespread fear in the flying public, elimination of air service to smaller communities--flying is no safer than BEFORE the Federal government got involved, and foreign governments have reciprocated by forcing U.S. passengers to undergo the same process. Since other countries don't have access to the same electronic databases that we do, it can add an hour to incoming foreign Customs clearances. Link to article < http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36689 >A funny observation was made by the aviation security firm creating the report. The TSA has recently instituted a "watch list" of suspected terrorists, and instituted fingerprinting of ARRIVING passengers.
| Quote |
| AND IF AN ARRIVING PASSENGER IS FOUND TO BE ON A TERRORIST THREAT WATCH LIST, ISN’T THIS PROCESS AT LEAST ONE PLANE RIDE TOO LATE? |
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 23 2004,8:29 pm
Yup, just as many plane crashes occur as they did before Homeland Security.Maybe the media is sending people thru the gates to disrupt things just to get a story...
Worldnet Daily sounds trustworthy to me, though.
What media person is always quoting the absolute truth?
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 23 2004,9:06 pm
Number of terrorist plane crashes BEFORE Homeland Security-0.Number of terrorist plane crashs SINCE 9/11--0.
Number of hijackings EVER thwarted by 30 years of "air marshals" in the U.S.--0
How many Billions of dollars spent? How many Billions in losses in the airline industry? How many people inconvenienced to provide "eyewash"--including National Guardsmen for show at the airport--each with 5 bullets, and an unloaded gun? How many communities with reduced or eliminated air service?
These are the nitwits that have done their best to thwart the will of the people and of Congress by throwing every impediment into arming pilots (is there any doubt that if the pilots of any of those 4 aircraft were armed, there wouldn't have BEEN crashes into the WTC?). And these clowns think it's a good idea to fingerprint ARRIVING passengers--AFTER they've been on the airplane?
If these guys were at all effective, don't you think that the airlines and the flight crews would be clamoring for more TSA involvement? Is it any wonder that the aviation industry holds the TSA in such low regard--and fears what they may do next?
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 24 2004,5:43 pm
Don't you think that the government in general has too much power to regulate, legislate the power to agencies to enact rules (not just for air travel)?They are 'protecting' all of us for our 'own good' because they think we can't take care of ourselves.
I'm sure this was said 100 years ago too.
Posted by hoosier on Jan. 28 2004,10:18 am
Speaking of homeland security. Did you see on the news last week where an ex politician in some city(cant remember) was appointed to run the cities homeland security. One of the first things he did was go out and buy a 17,000 dollar plazma TV for his office, with tax payer homeland security funds. Do you really think this is the only guy doing this?
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 30 2004,4:30 pm
Montyman's comments made me wonder about the ratio of government employees to to general population was. It was difficult to find, but did come up with this site< http://web.ask.com/redir?b....e=0&o=0 >The good news is that the growth of direct federal employees as a percentage of the general population is actually declining (not nearly as much as it should be of course). The bad news is the state and local direct employee count is growing far more rapidly than the general population.
The site states that approximately 10% of the populace is DIRECTLY employed by Federal, State, and local government. It includes the military and the post office. It does not include teachers, or workers in government-related industry, like defense. It also does not include Social Security.
That's a lot of people DIRECTLY working for the government, but fewer than I would have expected. It was also interesting to note that Federal employment has been nearly flat since the end of WW II, but note the steep rise in local and State employment.
Census statistics by State and County abound--most between 17% and 25%--but the charts do not show what is included.
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 30 2004,10:53 pm
Have you ever thought that the number of government employees is directly related to the FACT that government (international, federal, state, and local) at all levels has created a monster, because the politicians think that they are omnipotent, with infinite wisdom, using their false ideal of representing their constituents to feed the growth of government?They are really no smarter than the rest of us, you know.
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 31 2004,4:26 pm
You nailed it, Montyman. With 10% of the populace DIRECTLY working for government, and a large percentage of the population regularly receiveing SOME kind of check from the government (social security, medicare, crop payments, welfare, job retraining, disaster relief, etc.), we have somewhere around 25% of the populace beholden to the government. Add in all the people that SELL things to the government, and it seems like HALF THE COUNTRY is beholden to the government. Since only about half the country works (some are too young, or too old)--that means EACH WORKER IS CARRYING A GOVERNMENT WORKER ON HIS BACK! NO WONDER I'M TIRED! (only somewhat sarcastic!)
Posted by irisheyes on Jan. 31 2004,6:37 pm
Yep, and those groups are going to be rallied to vote in every election (national & state especially) for the candidate that promises the most money. Plus, they'll picket the candidates that get elected and try to cut spending.Then many of the active supporters are promised jobs, get careers as civil servants, devoting their service to the rest of the public.
(very sarcastic)
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 31 2004,7:10 pm
Did you notice that most of jim hanson's list concentrated on handouts and entitlements?There is nothing wrong with the BASIC services that a government supplies, but when the politicians, pacs, special interest groups, lobbyists, etc. get their noses into the picture, the theory of providing minimum service goes out the window.
We need to re-examine government at all levels, and decide what we really want it to do for us.
Posted by jimhanson on Feb. 01 2004,11:19 am
| Quote |
| Then many of the active supporters are promised jobs, get careers as civil servants, devoting their service to the rest of the public. (very sarcastic) |
(sadly sarcastic)
Posted by jimhanson on Feb. 01 2004,11:32 am
| Quote |
| We need to re-examine government at all levels, and decide what we really want it to do for us. |
(sarcasm)Every law should have a "sunset"--an automatic expiration date. The law would have to be re-examined--maybe we can get rid the the U.S. Tea-tasting Board (about $500,000 per year), that makes sure we don't get tea cut with other substances--it has been around since the Revolution!
While we're on a "wish list"--the best idea to come out of Perot's presidential bid was a cap on spending. Set the total tax burden at whatever figure you want--but they can't spend more. "Take my tax money, send it to Washington, throw it down a rathole--BUT IF YOU WANT ANY MORE, YOU HAVE TO ASK ME!".(a vote would have to be taken to raise the tax rate). How else do you protect yourself against an entrenched government bureaucracy that always wants to "do more" (equates to "spend more")? Ask Ann Coulter asks (rhetorically) "How much is enough? Government always wants to do more--asks us to "invest" more. Right now, government is taking nearly half of our income. Would they be satisfied with 55%? 60%? How much is 'enough' for government?"