Comment Period is Open on Vista Farms

The 30-day public comment period is open on the issue of flood zones and Vista Farms. If you are a resident of Cayce or own property there, now is your chance to let your voice be heard. Comments may be submitted through Cayce City Manager Johnny Sharpe. They are due by 5 pm on May 6 and can be mailed to Johnny Sharpe, 1800 12th St. Extension, Cayce, SC 29171.

I'll be posting more details on this story as I come across them.

UPDATE: Looks like this issue isn't important enough to make it onto the City of Cayce's website (apparently, neither is the month of April, they're still showing March's calendar). I've posted on the striking similarities between the Vista Farms Disinformation Project and the News site on the City of Cayce's official website. Previous post here.

What Would Jesus Do?

Apparently JC has taken a side in the democratic primary. And his endorsement is...(drum roll, please)...Hillary Clinton. Who knew JC's political consultant was Carl Rove?

Props to Not Very Bright for the story and pic.

Sometimes the truth smells funny

This gem came from WaPo columnist Bill Kristof in today's Post:

Solar power is one of the most hopeful technologies but still produces about 0.01 percent of U.S. electricity. The U.S. allocates just $159 million for solar research per year — about what we spend in Iraq every nine hours.

Source.

This Just In...Elitist Obama Can't Bowl; Clinton Found Drunk in Darlington Infield

Not only has barrack Obama lost his title as Kingpin of the Democratic Party, but now, in what can only be rationalized as a moment of disgrace and shame, has taken out his elitist anger on the little guy. That's right, for all you little guys who cling to your guns and bibles and immigrant hate in lieu of your economic interest and political ideals, Obama's not the guy for you (well, that shouldn't really be news).

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton recalls how her "diddy" took her out behind the cottage and taught her to shoot. She then proceeded to get wasted with disenchanted PA voters. But did anybody notice what she ordered for her shot? Crown Royal. That's right, good ole gal Hillary went all top shelf on those voters. And let's just guess who picked up the tab. Think she sprung for it with a couple of her $109 million confirmed dollars (many of which I'm sure she earned at her job at the mill...before it closed *sob*)?

So here's the skinny on this "elitist" tag that's been stamped on Obama's forehead. John Kerry went hunting. John McCain gave the commencement address at Liberty University. Hillary Clinton got drunk. Connecticut aristocrat George W. Bush talks with a thick Texas accent. When it comes to black people, Bill Clinton "feels your pain." John Edwards is the son of a mill worker. Mitt Romney joined the NRA. All pandering to overgeneralized perceptions of their target constituencies. All Barack Obama did was identify a problem, call it what it was, and attempt to find a solution. Who wants a president who does that?

The Problem With Fortune 500 Conservatism

I would like to issue a challenge to any neo-con out there to square his/her views with traditional conservative ones (e.g. Edmund Burke, NOT Rush Limbaugh). In the title of this post I am borrowing a phrase I heard during a course on business crimes - "Fortune 500 Conservatives". I have given a lot of thought as to what that phrase means and I have decided that it is best applied to those who identify with the "neo-conservative movement".

To make this conversation relevant, here are a few things that sicken me about the neo-con hijacking of our government that has occurred over the past 7 years:

(1) People at the FAA have been threatened with their jobs for...well, doing their jobs. Source.
(2) The Dept. of Justice has been politicized to the point that their legal opinions have become little more than punditry. Source. Source. Source.
(3) The FDA is in bed with pharmaceutical companies. Source.
(4) The Fed bailing out a failing investment bank that got caught in a tangle of irresponsible investments. Source.
(5) The privatization of our military. Source. Source. Source.

And those are just a few.

My beef with the Fortune 500 Conservatives is that their "political philosophy" is completely self-serving, disingenuous, and serves as an eroding force to the underpinnings of our system of governance. The proper role of government regulatory agencies such as the FAA and FDA is to ensure that the public safety remains a concern to corporations who are increasingly more concerned with the bottom line and who do not seem to mind a little collateral damage, so long as the venture remains profitable. Putting industry insiders in charge of regulatory agencies is a classic case of the fox watching the hen house.

Fortune 500 Conservatives are disingenuous in that they distract their "base" voters with red-herring issues such as abortion, gay marriage, and flag-burning to attain positions of power and then proceed to loot the government power coffers for their own benefit. All this comes at the expense of the American public and causes a significant portion of voters to continually vote against their own interests. And what is more insulting is that when a political candidate calls these people out, such as here, that person is immediately tagged as out of touch or elitist.

Over the past 7 years we have witnessed a large scale hijack of our government, particularly the agencies that are supposed to be guarding the public from being savaged by powerful corporations and inhuman forces of the private sector. For example, after telling us over and over how scared we should be of terrorist threats our government set up the Office of Homeland Security. Sounds like a good idea. I'm all for "homeland security". Of course what most of us did not realize is that in the process the director of the DHS, now Michael Chertoff, has the power to waive laws that get in the way of his intended projects.

Let's think about that last fact for a moment. One guy, who was never elected, has the power to unilaterally circumnavigate laws passed by Congress (all elected) to further projects that he and his army of bureaucrats have initiated. And for what do you think DHS uses this vast power? Stopping the latest Al-Quaeda threat? Strengthening the security around nuclear power plants? Nope, they're waiving environmental regulations to expedite the building of a fence along our border with Mexico. Source. If that is not eroding the separation of powers, the single-biggest check and balance on government provided our Constitution, then I don't know what is.

And Castles Made of Sand...

So here I am, flogging the dead horse about flood insurance and risk and coastal/riverine development, and then there's this. Not only are we subsidizing the flood insurance for high cost/high risk development on the coast at the federal level, but we are also spending upwards of $100 million state tax dollars to subsidize the sand on which those monstrosities are built. And why are we renourishing the beaches? Because they are made of sand and sit directly next to nature's most powerful erosionary force- the ocean. I guess we'll never learn.

Louisiana Supreme Court Rules for Insurance Company in Katrina Lawsuit

The Louisiana Supreme Court recently decided a case involving private insurance of the flood damage resulting from Hurricane Katrina. The insurance policy at issue, like almost every other insurance policy that is not subsidized by the NFIP, contained the standard exclusionary clause for flood damage. The trial court and court of appeals both ruled that the word "flood" as used in the policy was ambiguous and, therefore to be construed against the insurance company. Those courts further found that because the flood that caused the damage resulted from failed levees and because "flood" as construed by the courts did not exclude flood damage from man-made causes, the policy covered the damage. The total judgment against the insurance company was upwards of $800,000.

The Louisiana Supreme Court overturned the lower courts, however, and declared that "...the entire English speaking world recognizes that a flood is the overflow of a body of water causing a large amount of water to cover an area that is usually dry
land," and that "flood" was therefore not ambiguous.

The disaster in New Orleans of 2005, due to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, should serve as a warning to all of us that building things in the path of destruction is a bad idea. Insurance companies caught onto the idea years ago and began excluding certain types of damage from their coverage. Because of the greatly heightened risk factors associated with buildings in flood-prone areas, private insurers got out of the business of insuring flood damage. Our federal government, in all of its wisdom, took the place of the market-driven insurance industry and began subsidizing the development of high flood risk areas. Not surprisingly the program is now close to bankrupt, with a Congressional overhaul in the works that, instead of cutting back the program and acknowledging that some areas simply do not conduce to development, adds wind coverage to the mix and puts the NFIP in arguably worse shape than it ever has been.

Meanwhile, we have sensible courts like Louisiana's Supreme Court who read private policies as they were intended to be read and continue to allow private insurers to contract out of covering flood damage. On the whole, its an untenable situation that seems to have no good end in sight.

Here in SC, meanwhile, we have continuing coastal development (that is not only increasing in volume, but also in size and value) as well as developers trying to build on our riverine flood plains. All this in the wake of some of the worst floods on record in the Midwest.

The Louisiana Supreme Court opinion can be found here.