Posted on 03/18/2008 1:17:02 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Topeka — Agreements with Mexico and Canada are setting the stage for construction of a huge highway that will gobble up Kansans’ property and jeopardize U.S. security, representatives from a wide range of groups said Monday.
“Through incrementalism, apathy and inattention, our national sovereignty is being sacrificed on a cross of greed, socialism and globalism,” said state Rep. Judy Morrison, R-Shawnee.
Morrison has introduced House Concurrent Resolution 5033 urging Congress to withdraw from further participation in the North American Free Trade Agreement and Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.
At a hearing before the House Federal and State Affairs Committee, truckers, labor officials and lawmakers and advocates from Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas urged approval of the resolution.
Committee Chairman Arlen Siegfreid, R-Olathe, said he didn’t know if the committee could comprehend all the information submitted on the subject and work on the measure within the last three weeks of the legislative session.
“I think I’ve got a little reading to do. I have not made a decision yet, but it’s getting very short,” Siegfreid said.
Owen de Long, a political consultant from Merriam, said plans are in the works to build a NAFTA superhighway that will be one-quarter of a mile wide to transport Asian goods throughout the United States that are off-loaded at Mexican ports.
De Long said it will be impossible to police the huge amount of cargo containers. “That’s how terrorists will arrive in Kansas City,” he said.
Some officials have repeatedly denied the existence of plans to build the highway.
But David and Linda Stall, founders of CorridorWatch in Texas, testified that because of NAFTA, Texas is in the middle of considering a Trans-Texas Corridor that has been criticized by landowners.
You’re a transplant and apparently haven’t been here long enough to understand the mind and culture of Texans.
If it weren’t for every Tom, Dick and Californian wanting to move here, we wouldn’t have near the problems we have now. (and not just road problems)
Sorry if you’re offended but, at your insistence, you left me little choice.
How long do I have to live here to be considered a Texan in your book?
When you stop thinking like an out-of-towner. Maybe never.
If you think I’m talking out my ass, I have a long history with people from other states. They all love it here but, some will never *get it*.
Trust me on this: Texans don’t want this thing and it’s not a phobia. It’s our right to self-determination.
I’ve lived in Texas over half my life, all of it as an adult.
I get it. Because I don’t think like you doesn’t mean I don’t get it.
Build the damn road. It’s a road for cripe’s sake.
Maybe you like sitting behind an 18 wheeler on the loop of whatever city you live in.
Real Texans have places to go, and they want to get there now.
Don’t ever question my Texan credentials again.
“Don’t ever question my Texan credentials again”
If you feel that strongly about Texas maybe, you’re showing some progress.
Get out to some of these small communities that will be effected by the TTC and talk to the residents, farmers and ranchers who have lived there for generations. You might get a different opinion and awareness.
That's not the question. The question is whether this would be beneficial overall to the state and to the country.
That can be debated. I'm not going to debate that some Texans are opposed to it. They clearly are.
I've lived in Texas longer than most current Texans have. So, I don't want to hear about "progress." This is my state, and I want what is best for it. Period.
You and I can disagree about how that happens, and that is why this is a useful place for discussion. Let's try to keep it that way.
Agreed!
See my new tagline.
~~~
I do advocate doing it intelligently, but the proposed corridor layout is one of the least intelligent concepts I have seen in a lifetime of engineering.
For example, the cost of overpasses (to cross that closed-in corridor) increases by ~$3,000 per foot of corridor width -- and that is for every simple, two-lane crossover that is built. Enclosing services that are not needed or do not belong in a closed-in highway-grade ROW ("right-of-way") not only requires far more land to be taken, but it greatly multiplies the cost of providing crossovers.
Each of the "services" shown in that kludge of a multi-service corridor has different gradient requirements. Power lines, for example, can go cross-country 'most anywhere -- and, after they are built, the land beneath them can still be used for purposes like livestock grazing. Case in point: our electric co-op's highline crosses our place; I keep the ROW mowed, and it is one of our favorite places for picnics and kids' birthday parties.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please point out to me on a map one place where you have to use an expensive overpass to merely go under a power line or over a pipeline.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And railroads have more stringent gradient requirements than do trucks -- and trucks are more grade-sensitive than POVs. And High-Speed Passenger Rrail is even far more roadbed-gradient sensitive than all of the above. (Not to mention that HSPR is useless as teats on a boar hog anywhere in rural [which is most of] Texas...)
~~~~~~~~~~~~
IOW, simply drawing all those things together on a sheet of paper does not make them successful occupants of a single corridor ROW.
I have put many engineering hours (you have seen some of my graphics here on FR) analyzing the TTC and proposing workable alternatives. I repeat:
"In fact, I insist that the TTC "corridor" as proposed is not a design but, is, rather, a political scheme"
and...
“I’m not going to debate that some Texans are opposed to it”
Could of fooled me!
If a new road is going to be built in Texas, not at my expense, and paid for by the users of that road, then I’m all for it.
Yes, I want the landowners in the path of the roadway to be fairly compensated. I want all reasonable accomodations to be made for it to be as non-disruptive as possible.
But this is a huge state, and there are many places where no structure is even 10 miles close to another.
Again, unless you’re opposed to any new road ever, why not do one in a very thoughtful manner?
If you have a better route for the TTC, let’s see it.
Just say “no” might work for drugs, but it doesn’t work for needed roads.
Why, because you think I’m dumb and don’t realize I’m debating on these threads?
I’d personally just have the railroad where it’s best to put a railroad, and the highway where it’s best to put a highway, and so on. The problem with bundling everything together is that you’ll lose some routing optimization for each piece of infrastructure.
That’s true, but this concept also minimizes the impact on landowners. You’d think landowners would be for it.
Instead of having part of your land taken for a freeway, another part for a pipeline, and then a railroad track coming through it as well, it’s all concentrated into the smallest amount feasible.
It’s going to happen regardless. Let’s do it smart, even it isn’t optimal for all parties concerned. It takes less land.
Why do fuel prices have anything to do with whether we need a new road?
If we need a new road at $3/gallon, I'm sure we'd need one at $1/gallon.
If the tollroad becomes a very commercial gateway, it will spark development along it.
That's a given, since free markets work. If nothing else, developers will pay for the offramp and the needed accomodations/fuel/whatever.
OK, then, here’s a more pragmatic reason to slim down or stop this corridor. There are people quoted in news articles indicating their willingness to stop the “frickin’ road” using armed force. Do you really think there’d be such vitriol if they were simply putting in a 300-foot-wide interstate?
Goods coming in trucks from Mexico, bypassing the American union worker truckers and dockworkers. Not a big union fan but these are Americans who will not have jobs - or maybe they can work in the gas stations and restaurants that will dot the sides of the highways... as we know, free trade has created millions of new jobs in the USA.
http://www.corridorwatch.org/ttc/index.htm
Pretty good site run by Texans.
Why do fuel prices have anything to do with whether we need a new road?
Fuel prices are climbing, and eating into everyone's budget. Less money in your pocket= less driving, less traffic.
The TTC is a toll road, hence, you will pay yet again to drive from point A to point B. Less money= less of a reason to take that discretionary side trip.
Also, TXDot recently "discovered" a $1B accounting error. Do you really want them overseeing this boondoggle?
CorridorWatch.org notes that TxDOT has put the anticipated cost of the first four priority corridors at between $145 and $184 billion. Based on the Auditor's findings the cost of those priority corridors could well exceed $754 billion.
Regardless of the source of construction funds, the entire cost including maintenance, operation, interest, and return on investment will be paid almost exclusively by Texas consumers. Toll road and rail users will pay directly while consumers of goods and utilities transported on or across the corridors will pay indirectly. Taxpayers will also foot the bill for the billions of dollars that flow from other state taxes and fees expended in this project.
If nothing else this report demonstrates that the TTC concept is poorly defined and has no reliable financial structure.
So, 900 feet more means that Texans will shoot construction workers?
We shouldn't build the corridor because of threats by domestic terrorists?
I’m not really concerned about how much it costs, since I won’t be paying a dime for its construction.
I probably won’t even be driving on it after it’s built.
That’s so clever, equating angry landowners with domestic terrorism. What’s next, accusing the patriots at Lexington and Concord of domestic terrorism against the British Crown?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.