Government Collusion -- How the game is played

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
Post Reply
Serragon
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3444

Government Collusion -- How the game is played

Post by Serragon »

It seems to me quite often that no matter how involved I or my friends get in the issues that concern the area where I live, the cause of natural rights and liberty continues to be eroded. There are many reasons for this, but one major reason is the collusion between government and special interests. I will use and example that has happened multiple times over the last 40 yrs in my community to illustrate the problem:

1. National Forest Service (NFS) wants to come up with an new access plan.

2. NFS would like to limit some access and use of the forest. They work privately with like minded Special Interest Groups (SIG) who also want to limit access and use to come up with a plan.

3. NFS presents the plan and has a public process involving all interested parties to make comments and give input. During this process, the SIG use their ample resources that come from rich progressives to engage in a marketing campaign involving advertising and media that represents the NFS position. In this way, the NFS appears neutral. The people for the same or more access/use are generally local folks and have no resources to bring to bear.

4. After much public comment, a revised plan is presented that cuts back on some of the access/use restrictions. Nobody is happy, because no one has actually gotten what they wanted.

5. SIG sues NFS to try and stop the plan from being implemented or immediately after implementation of plan. Consider NFS position now. They are going to court to defend a plan they do not agree with. They have no real incentive win or fight this very hard. By losing, they achieve their original goals.

6. Problem here is that the SIG is out some cash via marketing/lawsuit. So the NFS settles with SIG out of court for some portion of their demands or they lose in court. As part of the settlement or loss, they agree to pay the SIG court costs.

7. Access/Use has been restricted. SIG has all or most of their cash. NFS is happy and gets to pretend it is out of their control. Locals are unhappy and frustrated. All of their time and effort has been for naught and their access and use of their local lands has been limited.

And this is how the game is played. We wonder sometimes why people in rural areas get so frustrated or feel so defeated. It is because this kind of nonsense has been going on for decades. Our local timber industry has fallen victim in part to these types of tactics. They are now working on limiting the ability of cattle ranchers here to ply their trade through agreements on wolves, native grasses, and water limits.

To make things worse, as the industries are driven out, people end up becoming employed by or welfare dependent upon the very government that put them into poverty in the first place. This then tears communities apart (like Burns, OR) when there is a conflict. People have to weigh the priciple of access to their lands to their actual employment.

ChristopherABrown
captain of 100
Posts: 107
Location: Santa Barbara California

Re: Government Collusion -- How the game is played

Post by ChristopherABrown »

Yes, that scenario sounds Familiar.

There was a collusive event here in Santa Barbara 20 years ago that was quite a bit worse than that because it was about infringing upon how much and how well the public could use free speech from the public access television studio.

State cable TV providers paid into a fund that was divided up between the counties who then built, equipped and operated studios. Because the studio was actually operated by the county it was subject to state and federal laws. There was the same kind of accountability, accessibility and impartiality as one could expect from any other governmental entity .

Apparently that was troublesome enough for the county to pretend that the studio was too expensive and that privatizing it through a non profit that would then operate it, would save the public money.

I had seen how wealthy people secretly paid professionals who came in and produced for them while the ordinary citizen could rarely get a crew together for a studio production. The public was pretty much limited to checking out cameras and bringing tape in to edit. No chance of a regular time slot with that; meaning that getting viewers was dependent on advertising (out of the producers pocket) for the production and time slots alotted.

The county had hearings and hired a "facilitator" to run the meetings. In this case they were called "busky group ". I saw that the three or four producers that were not wealthy (but still paid membership fees for crews) were already opposing the move to privatization so decided to bring a refinement to the structure of expertise available to the studio membership to create productions.

Many technical directors were only there for gaining experience so they could show that experience for jobs in the industry. I saw no problem with that but they tended to only want to work with wealthy producers who had slick, regular productions and ample viewership which could be attached to the directors resume.

I proposed there be a division of members between those of the public who simply had information they needed to get out and people seeking experience to later apply to professional employment. The idea was to create incentive for those going professional to work for the public trying to get a message out.

The division simply took coupons from businesses advertising, all that was allowed from biz to pay for advertising, and gave them directly to those helping the public to produce instead of to the producer/member. A guarantee of something for their dedication to get a show produced.

Those members seeking experience liked it and those members trying to get their message out loved it.

At the first public hearing I submitted a written proposal to be considered for the new non profit organization the county was planning to create and donate to. When I spoke in support of it from the audience as the attending public was encouraged to do, I found four or five people loudly opposing my proposal. The facilitators joined them but would not let me rebut their erroneous criticism.

The four producers that attended who were not wealthy and not secretly paying crew, could not believe what had happened.

The non profit organization was formed with no changes to the membership. I used a FOIA to get a list of the public attending, a requirement of the state to show that the public involvement for the proposed change existed. When I got the list, which was not easy, it showed 70 % of those attending were county employees.

Increased information to the public successfully curtailed by governmental collusion.

Public access broadcasting only occurs within the region served by the cable provider. If a producer wants to get their production aired in another city out of the region, their production must be submitted by a member residing in that region.

I discovered that no members anywhere would support for broadcast, productions from other producers of public access no matter where they were from and there was no way to inform them of the opportunity to support important production with vital information aside from sending a flyer for the bulletin board of the studio in the other faraway city for staff there to post.

That was in the day of 3/4" tape. At a cost of about $20 apiece plus mailing costs. After calling the studios and talking to staff to ask that tape be sent back, which they said they would do, in an included SASE, I never got one tape back.

My production (2003) documented depleted oxygen levels in streams from carbon emissions of automobiles using gasoline blended with MTBE (banned except for a waiver in California) that cause all coastal creeks to loose their algae filimintus, then frogs , then birds, then fish , then insects.

No one today, not even environmentalists knows what happened. They have no idea of how much life was in the terrestrial waterways.

Government was manipulated by the oil industry so the industry could get rid of stockpiled MTBE stored in Canada by methanex corporation because the EPA would not allow storage in the US. Tanks invariably end up leaking and then seriously polluting aquifers.

A case of government collusion making sure government collusion and it's impacts would not be shared.

User avatar
moonwhim
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4251

Re: Government Collusion -- How the game is played

Post by moonwhim »

It's called Agenda 21, these people are everywhere.

Post Reply