Vox

Musings, rants, rambling, general nonsense

AZ Proposition 120 (2012)

Posted on | November 1, 2012 | No Comments

Prop 120: Repeals Arizona’s disclaimer of all right and title to federal public lands within the state and declares Arizona’s sovereignty over public lands and all natural resources within its boundaries.

There are two specific issues that we face here in Arizona which I believe have inspired this proposition; fire and water.

FIRE: Arizona, handcuffed in our forest management by federal regulations, has been unable to properly harvest, thin, and clear timber. The unfortunate effect of the bureaucratic “good intentions” to leave the forests ‘natural’, is to leave them unnaturally vulnerable to bigger, hotter, more destructive fires. Fires that are harder to fight, fires that put more people at risk. Fires that, because of regulations meant to protect flora and fauna, cause greater, longer lasting damage to both.

The folly of allowing such forest overgrowth is further exposed by the adjoining Indian Reservation. Free from the over-reaching policies of bureaucrats with no real-world knowledge or experience, the devastating Wallow fire was checked at the border between federal treeline and tribal.

Touring the area, Jonathan Brooks, tribal forest manager for the White Mountain Apache Tribe, said forest-management strategies unhindered by environmental litigation and drawn-out federal government processes helped check the wildfire here.

For decades, the tribe has cleared young trees, logged larger trees and burned underbrush to replicate the natural burn-and-growth cycle of the Ponderosa pine forest. Brooks said that made it easy for firefighters to create a backfire here to deprive the approaching Wallow Fire of fuel.

Tribal land is sovereign and therefore not subject to federal regulations – and has therefore been actively and efficiently managed. Perhaps if Arizona land was sovereign, we could maintain our forests, too.

WATER: We have a little town here in Arizona called Tombstone, you may have heard of it. The “Town To Tough To Die” is in the fight of its life. The US Department of Agriculture and the Forest Service are withholding water from the citizens, by denying the town’s attempts to repair their pipeline – a pipeline that has been supplying Tombstone’s water since 1882.

The big hold-up is over allowing the repairs to be made using heavy equipment. The USDA is claiming such machinery would damage the forest land, a stance that ignores a blatant fact of the case. The pipeline was destroyed by wildfires and mudslides – natural events that caused far more damage to the area than a bulldozer would have, particularly if they had been allowed to begin repairs immediately.

A federal bureaucracy so blind to reality that it feels justified blocking the quick & efficient repair of such vital infrastructure as a water pipeline, requiring instead that the work be done with hand tools & wheel barrows, has no business making those decisions.

Certainly, pencil pushers in D.C. have no concept of how people live in the real world – they have only the ‘truths’ they’ve absorbed from other pencil pushers in other unnecessary regulatory agencies fighting to maintain their power.*

Proposition 120, it seems, is meant to address just these sorts of battles; specifically, who cares more and knows better how to manage the state’s resources, Arizona itself or regulators 2,300 miles away.

I fully support Arizona’s efforts to remove the boot of government from the neck of common sense. My reservations are:

  • Is the language clear & specific enough? A risk we run when passing legislation in reaction to current or recent events, because we want to do something, is not seeing the potential unintended consequences & long-term effects.
  • Is the language strong enough to withstand the inevitable court challenges?After all, the Obama administration has shown a willingness to sue our state over laws with which it disagrees.
  • Are there any teeth in the amendment? What reason do we have to believe passing this proposition will truly change what is happening here and in Tombstone?

Barack Obama’s administration has gone to extraordinary lengths in obstructing Tombstone’s efforts at re-establishing their water supply. Should he retain the White House, there is no reason to expect that to change – nor is there reason to expect him to suddenly respect Arizona’s claims to and attempts at self-government (Tenth Amendment be damned!) even if we pass Proposition 120.

  • A “yes” vote shall have the effect of repealing Arizona’s disclaimer of all right and title to federal public lands within the state and declaring Arizona’s sovereignty over public lands and all natural resources within its boundaries. This excludes Indian reservations, lands of the United States, and lands over which jurisdiction has been ceded by the state of Arizona.
  • A “no” vote shall have the effect of keeping current constitutional law related to public lands and natural resources within Arizona’s boundaries.

This one is a YES for me, as I currently understand it. If you have opinions on it, pro or con, please share them in the comments.

* The phenomenon of people who know the “right” way to do things, but are utterly and completely wrong, is humorously illustrated by Mike Rowe in his 2009 TED talk.

This one failed


Enhanced by Zemanta


Comments

Leave a Reply





Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.