The Certainty Of Pro-Mining Editorials, Legislation
I read this recent Journal Sentinel editorial blog posting - - Sand mining bill needs adjusting - - and I thought, I've seen this movie before.
It was nearly two years ago, when the iron mining bill surfaced, and the Journal Sentinel editorial board had this to say - - Yes to an iron ore mine; no to a bad Assembly bill
You know with certainty that when the sand mine de-regulation bill emerges from its "adjusting," the key corporate-first priorities originally inserted by special interests and their legislative operatives as the bill's core - - its raison d'etre - - will remain intact.
That is why they named the bill the Regulatory Certainty Act.
Which calls for greater regulatory (wink-wink) authority vested in the Wisconsin DNR - - and don't be fooled by this sudden burst of GOP statism; Walker has stacked the upper echelons of the DNR with transfers from the builders and other powerful private sector interests whose task is to deregulate from within.
It's not for nothing that Walker went out of his way to appoint a DNR Secretary, Cathy Stepp, with her "chamber-of-commerce mentality."
That'll embed you some certainty when it comes to mining permitting and all its related
regulation de-regulation opportunity.
And speaking of certainty - - the latest special interest and GOP buzzword for government-by-room-service - - where is the certainty for citizen fairness and a leveled playing field?
Where is the certainty that clean air, fresh water and public budgeting is not give over and away to these sand and iron mining businesses at the expense of everyday people living downstream and downwind?
Why does State Senator Tom Tiffany, (R-Hazelhurst), keep introducing bills to reward mining interests - - the sweetheart sand mine de-regulation bill, the unsuccessful effort to close northern forest land where iron mining might someday occur, and the iron mining bill itself that earned this truth-in-journalism headline in The Capital Times:
Mining bill author admits it will cause environmental harmMy position: If you hand over legislating, and regulating to special interests and lawmakers who know their bills are going to harm the environment, you will get a polluted environment - - and that goes for the political environment, too.
The Journal Sentinel can do better than calling for "adjusting" another bad bill.
And it could begin asking why there is so much certainty in the legislative process on behalf of the same special interests.
Guess you deserve some credit for calling out journal communications, albeit in a very small way.
Reasonable people can disagree on many things -- most all of your posts are important topics that the rest of the journal communications noise machine will not touch -- at least not with the intention of informing or determining what is reasonably truthful.
Why you don't use your background to become a media watchdog (at least as you post here), I don't know -- but I accept -- it's your blog.
Thanks for showing some spine here -- journal communication and the right-wing noise machine across Wisconsin created our "divide and conquer" governor and the extreme divisive politics.
I can only hope that, as you continue to blog about important issues -- and you do come forward with a progressive perspective -- you will do more to highlight how radical extreme politics is enabled and empowered by the mighty wurlitzer.
Propaganda does work and it does matter -- we would not have toxic mining bills and a faux "debate" about whether or not there will be more polution because environmental protections are being relaxed or removed.
In the end -- it is the media narrative and cover that got us where we are today.
Atleast today, for the first time I can remember seeing (longtime reader), you are calling out journal communications for its role here.
Thinking he elevated Stepp's ability by giving her any kind of "mentality." Bambi killer.
Post a Comment