+menu-


  • Category Archives Acts that Enable? and Acts that Disable
  • Understanding WA DC Politics 1883-2017

    Despite the host of management and organizational studies, Washington exposés and critiques of bureaucracy very little information is available about the working world, and everyday conduct of the top people in government.

    June 25, 2017 There is no LEFT or RIGHT in my 937th comment, there is only the WRONG that has been progressively committed, against the best interest of American citizens by WA DC POLITICIANS et al, behind our backs, behind closed doors.

    Despite the information available on the internet, very little information has been documented and provided to the working people in America, by the public media on the everyday conduct of the top people in the U.S. government..

    To and for the understanding of a reasonable person, I submit the following

    Understanding WA DC Politics 1883- 1952- 1977- 1979-2017

    ———————————————————————————-

    1883 UNDERSTANDING THE CIVIL SERVICE MERIT SYSTEM?

     Approved on January 16, 1883, THE PENDLETON ACT established a merit-based system of selecting government officials and supervising their work. THE ACT ALSO MADE IT UNLAWFUL TO FIRE OR DEMOTE FOR POLITICAL REASONS EMPLOYEES WHO WERE COVERED BY THE LAW

    —————————————————————-

    1952 UNDERSTANDING THE PLUM BOOK?

    The Republican Party popular war hero General Dwight D. Eisenhower and won the hotly-fought presidential contest, in a landslide with 442 electoral votes, ending 22 consecutive years of Democratic control of the White House.

    After  Eisenhower was elected president, after the hotly-fought presidential contest, the list was written and published by the defeated Democrats in 1952

    ———————————————————————————

    MY MISUNDERSTANDING “A GOVERNMENT OF STRANGERS”

    Due to my ignorance,  on Nov  11, 2016, three days after President Trump was elected, my understanding of a government of strangers was the 7000 SES operatives permanently embedded in the U.S. government.  

    ———————————————————–

    1977 – 2007 UNDERSTANDING A GOVERNMENT OF STRANGERS:

     EXECUTIVE POLITICS IN WASHINGTON?

    Methodology: Interviews with 200 civil servants and political appointees from different departments and at different career stages.

    Summary of Heclo: A government of strangers – From WikiSummary …

    wikisum.com/w/Heclo:_A_government_of_strangers

    Aug 14, 2007 – Political executive officers are supposed to guide and control, rather than … 1977. A government of strangers: Executive politics in Washington.

    Overview · ‎Abstract: · ‎Question: · ‎Chapter-by-Chapter Notes

    Overview

    Abstract:

    The book’s main objective is to explore the process by which high-ranking political executives and bureaucrats interact with each other in Washington. Political executive officers are supposed to guide and control, rather than merely reflect, the various interests in the executive branch. However, they are ill-suited to do so: they come to power being strangers and amateurs. Heclo studies the relationship between executives (presidential appointees) and bureaucrats (civil servants). The former are interested in political control, and the latter in policy continuity.

    Question:

    General research question: Can politicians guide what government does by controlling the people who do it? To what extent does appointment power make political control of the bureaucracy possible?

    • What are the implications of the politicization of the bureaucracy for political control (as embodied in political executives) and bureaucratic autonomy (as embodied in high-level civil servants) within the executive branch?
    • How do political executives (interested in political control) and bureaucrats (interested in administrative continuity, bureaucratic autinomy) interact with each other in Washington?

    Answer:

    High ranking civil servants strike a balance between the demands of political executives and bureaucrats. Bureaucracies pit the ambitions and plans of career bureaucrats against those of political appointees, who are at an organizational and informational disadvantage. Because the process of career advancement of high-ranking civil servants has been politicized, they may balance the demands of political executives and bureaucrats.

    High ranking career officials who are part of a civil service system add a third dimension to the interaction between political executives and bureaucrats. They are supposed to be responsive to the legal authority of political heads, but they also have institutional responsibilities and a longer time horizon than the political heads. “The civil service idea in Washington may be a counterpoint for balancing strictly political and bureaucratic demands, but it rests on slippery foundations” (32).

    Political executives can usually do better by evoking conditional cooperation rather than invoking their authority. (220) Conditional cooperation comes from developing trust with civil servants, building alliances within the agency and outside the agency (interest groups, media, other agencies, administration), and choosing strategically which goals to pursue.

    Place in the Literature:

    Sides with Seidman (1998), Neustadt (1960) regarding the power of the presidency and the constraints imposed by the internal structure of the executive. Does not address the issue of congressional dominance directly (thus, neither confirms nor denies). Discussion of “marrying the natives” suggests some degree of bureaucratic independence.

    General Argument:

    • Presidential campaigns do not produce action programs that can be precisely legislated and then put into play by the bureaucracy.
    • Transition teams are likely to be poorly organized and political appointments (and the movements of their bureaucratic counterparts) are made after the fact.
    • Therefore, these decisions are made in haste under incomplete information. Under these circumstances, it is reasonable to believe that executives will use criteria on which information is available (i.e. political affiliation and service to the party or its members) as a basis for decision-making.
    • Higher-level staffing decisions, even within the civil service, become de facto political appointments (with political attachments to both the executive and relevant congressional actors, i.e. subgovernments and iron triangles).
    • Relationship of top civil servants and political appointees is therefore “smudgy,” i.e. not well defined. Because this relationship is not well defined, there is an absence of political and policy leadership within the bureaucracy. Political appointees “go native,” undermining presidential control, while bureaucrats are increasingly controlled by elected officials.
    • For this reason, policy implementation within the bureaucracy is not characterized by rational, hierarchical modes of interaction, but rather by establishing cooperation. This occasions the development of strategic planning and support-coalition formation.
      • The original purpose of the civil service is undermined.
      • Principal-agent relations are not clearly established and information is not efficiently disseminated.

    Suggested shape of reform:

    The establishment of a senior civil service (called Federal Executive Officers) in which rank is attached to individuals, not to jobs (unclear how this would bring about more predictable relationships between bureaucrats and political appointees, although it would make for the routinization of the post-filling process).

    Methodology: Interviews with 200 civil servants and political appointees from different departments and at different career stages.

    ————————————————————-

    1978-1979 UNDERSTANDING THE SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE (SES)?

    Overview & History – OPM

    https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/senior-executive…/overview-history/

    History. The Senior Executive Service (SES) was established by Title IV of the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) of 1978 (P.L. 95-454, October 13, 1978) and became effective on July 13, 1979.

    ———————————————————————

    OPM CORRECTIVE ACTIONS REQUIRED?

    “(c) If the Office makes a written finding, on the basis of information obtained under the program established under subsection (b)(2) of this section or otherwise, that any action taken by an agency pursuant to authority delegated under subsection (a)(2) of this section is contrary to any law, rule, or regulation, or is contrary to any standard established under subsection (b)(1) of this section, the agency involved shall take any corrective action the Office may require.

    UNDERSTANDING 2014 VETERAN’S SCANDAL the 300 SES employees involved? Understanding why not “ONE” was fired and Understanding why they all collected their bonuses?  

    ——————————————————————-

    2014-2017 UNDERSTANDING THE MERIT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM?

     IT IS UNLAWFUL TO FIRE OR DEMOTE OVER 9,000 (SES) FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE LEADERSHIP AND SUPPORT POSITIONS IN THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR POLITICAL REASONS

    INDEED, IN 1883 THE  MERIT-BASED SYSTEM WAS  SELECTING GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS

    AND SUPERVISING THEIR WORK.

    —————————————————————

    JUNE 25, 2017  UNDERSTANDING?

    Trump 76: Plum Book 9,000 SES-GS jobs 1952 – 2016 | Darrell Smith …

    https://www.linkedin.com/…/trump-76-8000-presidential-appointments-plum-book-d…

    Jan 5, 2017 – December 2016: The Government Printing Office released the United States Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book) for 2016 on 5 Dec … The Plum Book contains data (as of June 30, 2016) on over 9,000 Federal civil service leadership and support positions in the legislative and executive branches of the Federal Government that may be subject to noncompetitive appointment.

    ———————————————————————————

    The bottom line…..

    June 25, 2017 There is no LEFT or RIGHT in my 937th comment, there is only the WRONG that has been progressively committed, against the best interest of American citizens by WA DC POLITICIANS et al, behind our backs, behind closed doors.


  • The Elwha River Limbo Land

    The Elwha River Limbo Land

    SOME 1,100 ACRES OF LAND WITH AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE?

    ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED AUGUST 10, 2012  By Lynda V. Mapes  Seattle Times staff reporter

    WHAT WILL BECOME OF “THE SO CALLED PROJECT LANDS”? THAT USED TO BE UNDER THE ELWHA DAM AND LAKE ALDWELL?

    THEY WERE TO BE SET ASIDE FOR USE, AS, BY ELIGIBLE PARTY’S?

    THAT IS THE SO-CALLED PROJECT LANDS WERE SET ASIDE, “ACCORDING” TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ELWHA ACT, PASSED BY CONGRESS IN 1992.

    WERE THEY FACTUALLY?  SPECIFICALLY? SET ASIDE BY CONGRESS IN THE 1992 ELWHA ACT??

    WHY IS CLALLAM COUNTY WA NOT LISTED AS AN ELIGIBLE PARTY FOR A CLALLAM COUNTY RECREATIONAL AREA?

    WHEN CONGRESS AUTHORIZED REMOVAL OF THE DAM SOUTHWEST OF PORT ANGELES IN 1992, THE SO-CALLED PROJECT LANDS WERE TO BE SET ASIDE EITHER FOR USE AS

    1. A STATE PARK,
    2. A NATIONAL PARK OR
    3. A NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, OR
    4. BE TRANSFERRED TO THE LOWER ELWHA KLALLAM TRIBE.

    SO FAR, THE TRIBE IS THE ONLY ELIGIBLE PARTY THAT HAS A PLAN AND A DESIRE FOR THE LAND.

    AUGUST 10, 2012 THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE INTENDS TO LAUNCH A PUBLIC PROCESS TO DECIDE THE LONG-TERM DISPOSITION OF THE LAND, BUT AT THE MOMENT HAS NO FUNDING TO PAY FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OR ENVIRONMENTAL-IMPACT STATEMENT, NOTED TODD SUESS, ACTING SUPERINTENDENT FOR OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK.

    THE AGENCY IS AWARE THE TRIBE WANTS THE LAND, BUT CAN’T JUST TURN IT OVER. “WE NEED TO HAVE A PUBLIC PROCESS,” SUESS SAID.

    FOR NOW, THE PARK SERVICE, WHICH ALREADY MANAGES 85 PERCENT OF THE ELWHA WATERSHED, IS MANAGING THE LANDS. PARK RANGERS ARE PROVIDING LAW ENFORCEMENT AND OFFERING INTERPRETIVE WALKS ON SOME OF THE PROJECT LANDS, EXCLUDING THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES, WHICH ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND PROTECTED.

    NO MATTER WHO ENDS UP OWNING THE LAND, MORE THAN 700 ACRES OF IT ALONG THE RIVER AND IN ITS FLOOD PLAIN WILL REMAIN IN ITS NATURAL STATE IN PERPETUITY,

    WITH PUBLIC ACCESS MAINTAINED.

    THAT IS ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ELWHA ACT, PASSED BY CONGRESS IN 1992.

    ——————————————————————

    QUESTION THIS….. SOME 1,100 ACRES OF PUBLIC LAND WAITING IN OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK LIMBO LAND SINCE AUGUST 10, 2012?

    ACCORDING TO ???? 

    THAT IS “ACCORDING” TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ELWHA ACT, PASSED BY CONGRESS IN 1992.

    READ THE ELWHA ACT, WHAT DID IT PROMISE? CLEAN WATER? HOW MUCH WATER? POWER REPLACEMENT? PUBLIC ACCESS INTO PERPETUITY? 

    WITH ALL THE FALSE NEWS NOW DAYS….

    THIS IS THE LAW, READ IT,  YOU DECIDE…

    Public Law 102-495 102d Congress An Act

    https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-106/pdf/STATUTE-106-Pg3173.pdf

    Oct 24, 1992 – 24, 1992. 106 STAT. 3173. Public Law 102-495. 102d Congress. An Act … SHORT TITLE. This Act may be referred to as the “Elwha River Ecosystem … of the Projects and his plans for the full restoration of the Elwha.

    ———————————————————————————-

    ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED AUGUST 10, 2012 at 9:00 pm Updated February 11, 2016 at 12:49 pm

    Elwha tribe finds legendary creation site, wants uncovered land

    WHAT WILL BECOME OF THE LANDS THAT USED TO BE UNDER THE ELWHA DAM AND LAKE ALDWELL, including sacred lands of the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe?

    Section Sponsor Share story

    By Lynda V. Mapes Seattle Times staff reporter

    SLOWLY EMERGING FROM WHAT USED TO BE UNDER LAKE ALDWELL AND ELWHA DAM ARE SOME 1,100 ACRES OF LAND WITH AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE.

    WHEN CONGRESS AUTHORIZED REMOVAL OF THE DAM SOUTHWEST OF PORT ANGELES IN 1992, THE SO-CALLED PROJECT LANDS WERE TO BE SET ASIDE EITHER FOR USE AS A STATE PARK, A NATIONAL PARK OR A NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, OR BE TRANSFERRED TO THE LOWER ELWHA KLALLAM TRIBE. SO FAR, THE TRIBE IS THE ONLY ELIGIBLE PARTY THAT HAS A PLAN AND A DESIRE FOR THE LAND.

    That desire became even more intense last month, with the discovery of the tribe’s creation site. Long passed on in oral tradition, the sacred site is where, by tribal teaching, the Creator bathed and blessed the Klallam people, and where tribal members for generations uncounted sought to learn their future.

    But the site was covered by the waters behind Elwha Dam, and had not been seen by anyone in the tribe since construction of the dam between 1910 and 1913. Many feared it had been destroyed by blasting during dam construction — and some came to doubt if it had ever existed at all.

    Frances Charles, chairwoman of the tribe, said she and other tribal members visited the site last month after receiving a call from National Park Service cultural-resources staff, who believed they had found the site.

    “A group of us walked to the site and actually stood on the rock known to us as the creation site,” Charles said this week. “It was eerie in some ways. We were walking on the soil that had been underwater for 100 years, and witnessing the old cedars. It was emotional, with joy and happiness. We sang a prayer song and an honor song, and had the opportunity to stand there and really praise our ancestors and the elders for telling the stories.”

    To see that those stories actually were true was overwhelming, Charles said.

    “To so many out there, it was a myth,” she said. “To be able to feel the spiritual tie to the land, and know, yes, this is real, the stories that you have heard, they are true. It is very, very powerful and very humbling.”

    The park service also reported this week finding a site in another location within a former reservoir that documents human use as far back as 8,000 years ago, establishing it as one of the oldest known archaeological sites on the Olympic Peninsula. The park service collected material for analysis and reburied the site.

    For the tribe, the recovery of its cultural sites is a deeper dimension of the Elwha restoration, affirming the truth of the tribe’s presence here for so long.

    “The land continues to show us, it speaks,” Charles said. “To be able to go down there and feel the power of the water and the land, and look at a landmark that has been covered for so many years, now being able to breathe.”

    THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE INTENDS TO LAUNCH A PUBLIC PROCESS TO DECIDE THE LONG-TERM DISPOSITION OF THE LAND, BUT AT THE MOMENT HAS NO FUNDING TO PAY FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OR ENVIRONMENTAL-IMPACT STATEMENT, NOTED TODD SUESS, ACTING SUPERINTENDENT FOR OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK.

    THE AGENCY IS AWARE THE TRIBE WANTS THE LAND, BUT CAN’T JUST TURN IT OVER. “WE NEED TO HAVE A PUBLIC PROCESS,” SUESS SAID.

    FOR NOW, THE PARK SERVICE, WHICH ALREADY MANAGES 85 PERCENT OF THE ELWHA WATERSHED, IS MANAGING THE LANDS. PARK RANGERS ARE PROVIDING LAW ENFORCEMENT AND OFFERING INTERPRETIVE WALKS ON SOME OF THE PROJECT LANDS, EXCLUDING THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES, WHICH ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND PROTECTED.

    NO MATTER WHO ENDS UP OWNING THE LAND, MORE THAN 700 ACRES OF IT ALONG THE RIVER AND IN ITS FLOOD PLAIN WILL REMAIN IN ITS NATURAL STATE IN PERPETUITY, WITH PUBLIC ACCESS MAINTAINED. THAT IS ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ELWHA ACT, PASSED BY CONGRESS IN 1992.

    But the tribe, if it comes to steward the lands, also would like to use some portions of the remaining property outside the archaeological sites and river corridor for housing or economic development, said Robert Elofson, director of river restoration for the tribe.

    In addition to protecting the tribe’s cultural resources, transfer of the property to the tribe would help the Lower Elwha Klallam realize a long unmet need for an adequate land base, Elofson said.

    When the United States purchased the core of what is now the tribe’s reservation in the late 1930s, the superintendent of the then-Office of Indian Affairs stated that six sections of land, almost 4,500 acres along the Elwha River, would be the appropriate size of the reservation for the tribe — which was far smaller then.

    But in the end, the government acquired only 300 acres for the tribe — and took another three decades to finally convey the land for the tribe’s reservation in 1968, in part because of opposition by sport fishermen.

    The tribe has continued to buy land ever since on its own, and today has about 1,000 acres along the Elwha River. But the reservation still is missing the lands that used to be under Elwha Dam and its reservoir.

    “We lost a lot of land,” said Adeline Smith, one of the oldest living members of the tribe. “There were campsites along the river, and at least two big settlements. The medicinal plants, the berries, the wildlife, they were all part of our life by the river.

    “It was ours and our way of life. I hope someday it will be again.”

    Lynda V. Mapes: 206-464-2736 or lmapes@seattletimes.com. On Twitter @lyndavmapes.

    Lynda V. Mapes: 206-464-2736 or lmapes@seattletimes.com; on Twitter: @LyndaVMapes. Lynda specializes in coverage of the environment, natural history, and Native American tribes.

    —————————————————————

    WHAT WILL BECOME OF “THE SO CALLED PROJECT LANDS”? THAT USED TO BE UNDER THE ELWHA DAM AND LAKE ALDWELL?

    A CLALLAM COUNTY CONCERNED CITIZEN EXPRESSED INTEREST ON MARCH 9, 2017

    THE ELWHA RIVER PROJECT LANDS THAT WERE A PUBLIC TOURIST RECREATIONAL DESTINATION?

    WHAT HAS BECOME OF THE ELWHA RIVER CAMP GROUNDS, FOR PUBLIC CAMPING, PICNICS, FISHING, ALLOWING A PRIVATE WALKS ON PUBLIC TRAILS,  UN-ESCORTED BY ONP PARK RANGERS, PEACEFUL HIKING TRAILS,  SOLITUDE WITHOUT ONP RANGERS INTERPRETATIONS ,  A BOAT LAUNCH, RESTROOMS, A STORE, AND OUR CITIZENS WAY OF LIFE. I HOPE SOMEDAY IT WILL BE AGAIN.”

    THIS IS A  CLALLAM COUNTY CONCERNED CITIZEN EXPRESSING  INTEREST

    Behind My Back | The New Elwha Bridge and Rest Stop?

    www.behindmyback.org/2017/03/09/the-new-elwha-bridge-and-rest-stop/

    Mar 9, 2017 – With the replacement of the Elwha River bridge by WSDOT at an … Why stop with just a Clallam County rest stop on the Norm’s Resort Property …

    THESE ARE CONCERNED CITIZEN’S OF CLALLAM COUNTY EXPRESSING  INTEREST

    Clallam County WA | Citizen Review Online

    citizenreviewonline.org/category/clallam-county-wa/

    Posted on March 9, 2017 by Pearl Rains Hewett, www.behindmyback.org. The New Elwha Bridge and Rest Stop? Who knew? What Rest Stop?


  • Obama’s Infrastructure “The Fast Act”

    (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ”Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act” or the ”FAST Act”.

    TALL ORDERS, this is a 490 page document

    WITH ALL THE  DEMOCRAT’S BELLS AND WHISTLES EMBEDDED

    Elaine Chao sworn in as transportation secretary – The Washington Post

    www.washingtonpost.com/…sworn-in…transportation…/3d12bd26-e80b-11e6-903d-9b…

    Jan 31, 2017 – Elaine Chao was sworn in as transportation secretary by Vice … STORY: Trump transportation secretary pick Elaine Chao confirmed in Senate, …

    ——————————————————————————
    I’m sure somebody in the Trump Administration  is reading it….
    TO FIND OUT WHAT’S IN IT.
    ———————————————————————-
    I did not read the full report.
     BUT, I DID READ ENOUGH TO RED FLAG PARTS! (below)
    ————————————————————————

    Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act or the FAST Act – FHWA …

    https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/

    On December 4, 2015, President Obama signed the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Pub. L. No. 114-94) into law

    ——————————————————————————
    THE DEMOCRAT’S FACT SHEET AND THE DEMOCRAT’S  FUNDING
    HOW MANY AMERICAN TAXPAYERS DOLLARS HAVE THEY SPENT SINCE ENACTMENT?
    HOW MUCH HAVE THEY GOT STASHED?

    Sec. 1402. Highway Trust Fund transparency and accountability.

    Sec. 1403. Additional deposits into Highway Trust Fund.

    Apportionment – FAST Act Fact Sheets – FHWA | Federal Highway …

    https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/apportionmentfs.cfm

    Total funding for Federal-aid highway formula programs. 

    THE FAST ACT AUTHORIZES A TOTAL COMBINED AMOUNT ($39.7 BILLION IN FY 2016, $40.5 BILLION IN FY 2017, …

    ———————————————————————

    JUST ASKING? JUST SAYING…

    HOW MANY TIMES HAVE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS BEEN TAKEN BY THE GRANTED?

    —————————————————————————–

    Surface Transportation Block Grant Program – FAST Act Fact Sheets …

    https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/stbgfs.cfm

    [FAST Act § 1109(a)].

    THE STBG PROMOTES FLEXIBILITY IN STATE AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATION DECISIONS AND PROVIDES FLEXIBLE FUNDING TO BEST ADDRESS STATE AND LOCAL …

    —————————————————————————

    RED FLAGS?
    THE  DEMOCRAT’S BELLS AND WHISTLES EMBEDDED
    —————————————————————-
    TAKEN BY THE GRANTED UNDER SEC. 79002?
    ————————————————————

    SEC. 79002. REALLOCATION OF FUNDS.

    TITLE LXXX—CHILD SUPPORT ASSISTANCE

    Sec. 80001. Requests for consumer reports by State or local child support

     enforcement agencies

    TITLE LXXVIII—TENANT INCOME VERIFICATION RELIEF

    Sec. 78001. Reviews of family incomes.

    TITLE LXXIX—HOUSING ASSISTANCE EFFICIENCY

    Sec. 79001. Authority to administer rental assistance

    Sec. 32101. Revocation or denial of passport in case of certain unpaid taxes.

    Sec. 75001. Exception to annual privacy notice requirement under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act

    Sec. 1409. Milk products.

    Sec. 24303. Vehicle event data recorder study.

    Sec. 1301. Satisfaction of requirements for certain historic sites

    Sec. 1302. Clarification of transportation environmental authorities.

    Sec. 41009. Funding for governance, oversight, and processing of environmental reviews and permits.

    Sec. 1415. Administrative provisions to encourage pollinator habitat and forage on transportation rights-of-way.

    Sec. 5512. Access to National Driver Register.

    Sec. 1413. National electric vehicle charging and hydrogen, propane, and natural gas fueling corridors.

    Sec. 1414. Repeat offender criteria.

    TITLE XLIII—PAYMENTS TO CERTIFIED STATES AND INDIAN TRIBES

    Sec. 43001. Payments from Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund

    ———————————————————————–

    [PDF]FAST Act – Congress.gov

    https://www.congress.gov/114/bills/hr22/BILLS-114hr22enr.pdf

    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

    (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fixing Amer-

    ica’s Surface Transportation Act’’ or the ‘‘FAST Act’’.

    (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—

    The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

    1. R. 22 (A 490 page report

    Subtitle C—Acceleration of Project Delivery

    Sec. 1301. Satisfaction of requirements for certain historic sites

    Sec. 1302. Clarification of transportation environmental authorities.

    Sec. 1303. Treatment of certain bridges under preservation requirements.

    Sec. 5512. Access to National Driver Register.

    PART I—DRIVER PRIVACY ACT OF 2015

    Sec. 24301. Short title.

    Sec. 24302. Limitations on data retrieval from vehicle event data recorders.

    Sec. 24303. Vehicle event data recorder study.

    TITLE XXXII—OFFSETS

    Subtitle A—Tax Provisions

    Sec. 32101. Revocation or denial of passport in case of certain unpaid taxes.

    Sec. 41007. Litigation, judicial review, and savings provision.

    Sec. 41008. Reports.

    Sec. 41009. Funding for governance, oversight, and processing of environmental

    reviews and permits.

    TITLE XLIII—PAYMENTS TO CERTIFIED STATES AND INDIAN TRIBES

    Sec. 43001. Payments from Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund

     

    DIVISION F—ENERGY SECURITY

    Sec. 61001. Emergency preparedness for energy supply disruptions.

    Sec. 61002. Resolving environmental and grid reliability conflicts.

    Sec. 61003. Critical electric infrastructure security.

    Sec. 61004. Strategic Transformer Reserve.

    Sec. 61005. Energy security valuation

    TITLE LXXV—ELIMINATE PRIVACY NOTICE CONFUSION

    Sec. 75001. Exception to annual privacy notice requirement under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act

    TITLE LXXVIII—TENANT INCOME VERIFICATION RELIEF

    Sec. 78001. Reviews of family incomes.

    TITLE LXXIX—HOUSING ASSISTANCE EFFICIENCY

    Sec. 79001. Authority to administer rental assistance

    1. R. 22—10

    Sec. 79002. Reallocation of funds.

    TITLE LXXX—CHILD SUPPORT ASSISTANCE

    Sec. 80001. Requests for consumer reports by State or local child support

     enforcement agencies

    Subtitle E—General Provisions

    Sec. 5501. Delays in goods movement.

    Sec. 5502. Emergency route working group.

     Subtitle D—Miscellaneous

    Sec. 1401. Prohibition on the use of funds for automated traffic enforcement.

    Sec. 1402. Highway Trust Fund transparency and accountability.

    Sec. 1403. Additional deposits into Highway Trust Fund.

    Sec. 1404. Design standards.

    Sec. 1405. Justification reports for access points on the Interstate System.

    Sec. 1406. Performance period adjustment.

    Sec. 1407. Vehicle-to-infrastructure equipment.

    Sec. 1408. Federal share payable.

    Sec. 1409. Milk products.

    Sec. 1410. Interstate weight limits.

    Sec. 1411. Tolling; HOV facilities; Interstate reconstruction and rehabilitation.

    Sec. 1412. Projects for public safety relating to idling trains.

    Sec. 1413. National electric vehicle charging and hydrogen, propane, and natural gas fueling corridors.

    Sec. 1414. Repeat offender criteria.

    Sec. 1415. Administrative provisions to encourage pollinator habitat and forage on transportation rights-of-way.

    Sec. 1416. High priority corridors on National Highway System.

    Sec. 1417. Work zone and guard rail safety training.

    Sec. 1418. Consolidation of programs.

    Sec. 1419. Elimination or modification of certain reporting requirements.

    Sec. 1420. Flexibility for projects.

    Sec. 1421. Productive and timely expenditure of funds.

    Sec. 1422. Study on performance of bridges.

    ———————————————————–

    TITLE LXXV—ELIMINATE PRIVACY NOTICE CONFUSION

    Sec. 75001. Exception to annual privacy notice requirement under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act

    SO WHAT’S NEW ON WIKI LEAK?

    “YEAR ZERO”… 8000 PAGES

    IN 1954 THOSE IN POWER KNEW IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF TIME.


  • The Federal Fault of Land Grabbing

    GIVE US BACK OUR STATE LAND

    LET OUR PEOPLE GROW and farm, and sow,, and reap, and ranch, and mow, and harvest, and log, and mill, and mine, and build, and manufacture, and create jobs.

    It is our heritage, it is who we are and what we do, it is our way of life, it is our source of employment and income, it provides our shelter, the roof over our heads, food on our tables and heat from our hearth, indeed it has been  the  lot of our lives for many generations of American  families.

    We are American citizens. We had sovereign enabling state land. We were and are public and private property owners. We the people were and are the best stewards and caretakers of our state and private land.

    So we saw that there is nothing better for a person than to enjoy their work, because that is their lot That each of them may eat and drink, and find satisfaction in all their toil. We know that there is nothing better for people than to be happy and to do good while they live

    —————————————————————————————-

    February 26, 2016 Toni Webb is a candidate for Commissioner of Josephine County, Oregon

    THIS IS SNIPPET OF HER STORY… Oregon candidate exposes social, economic catastrophe caused by federal control in Josephine County

    TO: Candidates running for President of the United States

    This letter is to inform you of the struggles faced by the people of Josephine County, Oregon, due to ongoing problems with the federal government’s control of our public land, including our once-productive forests. Bad policies and misguided management by federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management, have left our rural county economically and socially devastated.

    —————————————————————————————-

    How can  the American people prosper and gain from their toil?

    When Obama’s executive orders, his anointed appointed and  non-government agencies including appointed judges, use every trick in the book, by hook or by crook to grab, control, restrict, regulate and prohibit  all private and state public land use?

    How can  the American people prosper and gain from their toil?

    START HERE

    American Lands Council – A Constitutional Means To Financial …

    www.freedomworks.org/…/americanlandscouncil-consti…

    FreedomWorks

    Nov 29, 2013 – Federal Lands Map The American Lands Council recently came to Oregon to discuss the dichotomy … There is a Federal Fault Line between states that had their lands granted to them after statehood and those that didn’t;.

    States that had their lands granted to them after statehood?

    —————————————————————–

    Read this…

    The ENABLING ACT February 22, 1889

    Posted on March 9, 2014 11:10 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    Way back then, the Federal Government  and the elected representative gave to and enabled American citizens,  they made  donations of public lands to such states.

    Moving forward 125 years, “We the People” of Washington State (the Western United States), are in a battle with the Federal  and state Governments  and our elected representative struggling to preserve, protect,  maintain the use of,  intent and purpose of the  public lands that were given to us in TRUST.

    —————————————————————————————–

    How can the American people prosper and gain from their toil?

    JUST GIVE US BACK OUR STATE LAND?

    IF ONLY IT WAS THAT EASY….. REMEMBER THIS PART?

    Obama’s  executive orders, his executive land grabs, his federally anointed appointed and  NON-GOVERNMENT agencies including appointed judges, use every trick in the book, by hook or by crook to grab, control, restrict, regulate and prohibit all private and state public land use?

    Executive Orders Matter

    Posted on October 5, 2015 6:22 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 13514, CLIMATE CHANGE Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, establishes an integrated strategy for sustainability within the Federal Government. Under the Executive Order, each agency is required to evaluate their climate change risks and vulnerabilities to manage the effects of climate

    ——————————————-
    CLIMATE CHANGE: OBAMA EXECUTIVE ORDER 13514
    Things that matter TRUTH AND POLITICS
    IT’S AS EASY AS ONE, TWO THREE…
    (1) FEDERAL Planning Steps Set a Mandate
    The Obama administration estimated the emissions limits will cost $8.4 billion annually by 2030.
    OBAMA’S RULE ASSIGNS CUSTOMIZED TARGETS TO EACH STATE
    “CLIMATE CHANGE WILL NOT BE SOLVED BY GRABBING POWER FROM STATES or slowly hollowing out our economy,” Bush said.
    ———————————————————————————-
    (2) STATE Planning Steps Set a Mandate
    THE ACTUAL PRICE WON’T BE CLEAR UNTIL STATES DECIDE HOW THEY’LL REACH THEIR TARGETS THEN LEAVES IT UP TO THE STATE TO DETERMINE HOW TO MEET THEM.
    IF STATES REFUSE TO SUBMIT PLANS, THE EPA HAS THE AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE ITS OWN PLAN

    (3) 2015 COUNTY Planning Steps Set a Mandate

    ———————————————————————————-

    BLM Bureau of Land Mismanagement

    Posted on February 29, 2016 9:33 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    February 26, 2016 Toni Webb’s  story is here… OREGON CANDIDATE EXPOSES SOCIAL, ECONOMIC CATASTROPHE CAUSED BY FEDERAL CONTROL IN JOSEPHINE COUNTY

    Liz and I both saw this … As the history of our three counties in three different states. Washington State, Oregon and Calif. Liz Bowen is from Siskiyou County, Calif. Pie N Politics Pearl Rains Hewett is from Clallam County WA

    I hope that you, as candidates for President of the United States, will seriously consider why the effort to transfer the ownership and control of public lands back to western states, like Oregon, IS SO CRITICAL TO OUR SURVIVAL.

    Dept. of Interior Deterioration

    Posted on May 4, 2014 10:32 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    —————————————————————-

    Our Public Land Heritage: From the GLO to the BLM

    The document is only 27 pages of how the federal government turned
    The GLOW of the Act Establishing Yellowstone National Park (1872) – Our ..

    AS A PUBLIC PARK OR PLEASURING GROUND FOR THE BENEFIT AND ENJOYMENT OF THE PEOPLE. INTO A OBAMA’S PERSONAL AGENDA. grabbing of our public land for conservation and protection under federal lands.

    —————————————–

    SHALL I GO ON….

    Behind My Back | High, Dry and Destitute

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/02/01/highdry-and-destitute/

    Feb 1, 2015 – High, Dry and Destitute WA State citizens, private property owners and farmers, in Skagit and Clallam County have been left HIGH, DRY AND …

    Calif. Farmers High Dry and Destitute

    Posted on February 29, 2016 8:52 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    Calif. Farmers HIGH, DRY AND DESTITUTE

    Obama admin allocates water for endangered fish, leaves …

    m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/24/obam

    The Washington Times

    Logo: The Washington Times · Home · NewsObama admin allocates water for endangered fish, leaves California farmers high and dry … Wednesday, February 24, 2016 … some farmers are looking at another year of a zero federal water … “We’ve got to not only take a look at providing project [water] yield, we’ve also got …

    Washington State citizens, private property owners and farmers, in Skagit and Clallam County have been left HIGH, DRY AND DESTITUTE by WA State DOE WATER RULES.

    SO WHAT’S NEW? ENDANGERED FISH BEFORE FARMERS, FOOD AND THE ECONOMY.

    YEP… AGAIN AND STILL, FLUSHING TRILLIONS OF GALLONS PEOPLE WATER DOWN THE ENDANGERED SPECIES TOILET.

    ——————————————————————

    Behind My Back | WOTUS “Water Runs Down Hill”

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/09/04/wotus-water-runs-down-hill/

    Sep 4, 2015 – WOTUS rule – Pacific Legal Foundation https://www.pacificlegal.org/wotus. Pacific Legal Foundation PLF Principal Attorney M. Reed Hopper, …

    ————————————————————————————-

      Category Archives Public Access to Public land

      WOW Stop the 2016 WILD OLYMPICS

    Posted on April 23, 2016 8:08 am by Pearl Rains Hewett

     

    ENUF… ONE LAST QUESTION

    Behind My Back | Are You A Normal Person?

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/05/18/are-you-a-normalperson/

    May 18, 2015 – If you‘re a normal person, you‘d answer “yes, people usually are more important … www.behindmyback.org/2015/02/01/high–dry-and-destitute/.


  • Obama’s 1.8 Million Acre Public Land Grab

    Obama’s 1.8 Million Acre Public Land Grab

    IN MAR 3, 2015 – NEARLY HALF OF THE WEST WAS OWNED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

    Obama’s new 2016 MONUMENTAL, monuments LAND grab will almost double the amount of land Obama has already Grabbed from “We the People” of the United States of America
    ————————————————

    Divided Lands: State vs. Federal Management in the West …

    www.perc.org/articles/divided-lands-state-vs-federal-management-west
    MAR 3, 2015 – NEARLY HALF OF THE WEST IS OWNED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. In this … to replace the failing public land system, this study is required reading.”.

    ——————————————————————–

    GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OR MISMANAGEMENT?

    U.S. Code: Title 43 – PUBLIC LANDS | US Law | LII / Legal

    www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/43
    Legal Information Institute

    U.S. Code: Title 43PUBLIC LANDS … LAND MANAGEMENT (§§ 1 to 25) · CHAPTER 2 – UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (§§ 31 to 50d) · CHAPTER …
    ————————————————————–

    This brings the total land and WATER Obama has unilaterally Grabbed UNDER THE ANTIQUITIES ACT to about 265 million acres, far more than any previous president.

    After Obama had already grabbed 1,142,036 acres of public land? And provided recreational opportunities as defined under Wild Olympics, Wilderness, Wild and Scenic Rivers?

    Republicans slam Obama’s latest ‘land grab’ – Washington …

    www.washingtontimes.com/…/obama-designates-…
    The Washington Times

    Jul 10, 2015 – Obama’s designation of monuments just anotherland grab,’ … than 1 million acres in California, Texas, and Nevada, designating the land as …

    THE DESIGNATIONS FREQUENTLY ANGER CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS, WHO SAY HE IS ABUSING HIS POWER AND SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO ACT WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF CONGRESS AND STATE LEGISLATURES.

    ———————————————————–

    THESE WILD DESIGNATIONS FREQUENTLY PROVOKE AMERICAN CITIZENS.

    The Wild Olympics Scam

    www.wildolympicsscam.com/

    www.wildolympicsscam.com/
    stop the wild olympics, agenda 21, land grabs; will devastate rural communities.
    ———————————————————–

    A MILLION HERE… A MILLION THERE …

    Obama grabs another million acres of land for ‘monuments’

    www.americanthinker.com/…/obama_grabs_another_…
    American Thinker
    Jul 11, 2015 – Obama grabs another million acres of land for ‘monuments’ … More than 330,000 acres have also been set aside for a monument at Berryessa …
    RECREATION OR OTHER TYPES OF LAND-USE ACTIVITIES SHOULD HAVE AS MUCH LOCAL INPUT …

    —————————————————————-

    REALLY BIG WORLD THINGS THAT PROVOKE AMERICAN CITIZENS

    WOW… Feb. 2016 OBAMA’S almost infamous (well known for some bad quality or deed). for the world’s second largest Public land grab, since Public land grabbing by the government started.

    With 3 new monuments, Obama creates world’s second …

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/…/with-3new-…

    The Washington Post

    3 days ago – President Obama declared three national monuments in Southern California on Friday, creating the world’s second-largest desert preserve and …

    united-states.world-news.online/…/with-3-new-monuments-obama-create…
    3 days ago – Celebrating the California Desert National Monument. The year 2015 was full of … The Latest: Obama move protects 1.8m acres of Calif. desert … NATIONAL MONUMENTS: Obama sets aside sweeping Calif. desert lands.

    Our Public Land Heritage: From the GLO to the BLM

    www.blm.gov/…/public…/history/…/Our_P…
    Bureau of Land Management
    ————————————
    1785 – Land Ordinance allows settlement of public domain lands and …. Act preserves and protects prehistoric, HISTORIC, AND SCIENTIFICALLY SIGNIFICANT SITES ON PUBLIC …. RESOURCES PROTECTION ACT REQUIRES PERMITS FOR EXCAVATION OR REMOVAL OF THESE.

    ————————————————-
    Biggest WORLD GRABS that provoke American citizens

    World’s Largest Dam Removal Unleashes U.S. River After …

    HISTORIC PLACES IN OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK SCIENTIFICALLY SIGNIFICANT SITES

    HISTORIC PLACES IN OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK

    15 Elwha River Hydroelectric Power Plant
    Elwha River Hydroelectric Power Plant
    December 15, 1988
    (#88002741)
    N end of Lake Aldwell
    48°05′42″N 123°33′18″W
    Port Angeles
    18 Glines Canyon Hydroelectric Power Plant
    Glines Canyon Hydroelectric Power Plant
    December 15, 1988
    (#88002742)
    N end of Lake Mills at Elwha River
    48°00′11″N 123°35′54″W
    Port Angeles

    ———————————————————————————–

    Our Public Land Heritage: From the GLO to the BLM

    The document is only 27 pages of how the federal government turned
    The GLOW of the Act Establishing Yellowstone National Park (1872) – Our ..

    AS A PUBLIC PARK OR PLEASURING GROUND FOR THE BENEFIT AND ENJOYMENT OF THE PEOPLE. INTO A OBAMA’S PERSONAL AGENDA. grabbing of our public land for conservation and protection under federal lands.
    ——————————————————–
    Little things that provoke the AMERICAN CITIZENS

    Did You Know? You cannot fish from “FISHING BRIDGE” in Yellowstone park?

    The Fishing Bridge was historically a tremendously popular place to fish.

    Until 1973 this was a very popular fishing location since the bridge crossed the Yellowstone River above a cutthroat trout spawning area.
    IT IS NOW A POPULAR PLACE TO OBSERVE FISH.

    Frequently Asked Questions: Fishing Bridge and Lake Village

    —————————————————————-

    Our Public Land Heritage: From the GLO to the BLM

    FROM GLOW TO GLO THE DOCUMENTED HISTORY BLOW BY BLOW
    From the purpose and intent of Historic Acts of the U.S. congress to…
    OBAMA’S ABUSE OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS etal.
    ACTING WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF CONGRESS AND STATE LEGISLATURES.
    —————————————————————

    1872- Establishment of Yellowstone National Park A PUBLIC PARK OR PLEASURING GROUND FOR THE BENEFIT AND ENJOYMENT OF THE PEOPLE.
    ————————————————————————————
    1889 – THE ENABLING ACT (not mentioned in this history lesson)

    Behind My Back | The ENABLING ACT February 22, 1889

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/03/…/the-enabling-act-february-22-1889/
    Mar 9, 2014 – Way back then, the Federal Government and the elected representative gave to and enabled American citizens, they made donations of public …
    ———————————————————

    1906 – Antiquities Act preserves and protects prehistoric, historic, and scientifically significant sites on public lands and creates national monuments.

    1911 – Weeks Act permits the federal purchase of private land to protect the headwaters of rivers and watersheds and calls for cooperative fire protection efforts.

    1916 -Stock Raising Homestead Act authorizes homesteads of 640 acres and separates surface rights from subsurface (mineral) rights.

    1926 -Recreation and Public Purposes Act allows conveyance or lease of public lands to state and local governments for outdoor recreation purposes

    Recreation and Public Purposes Act

    Outdoor Recreation Legislation
    https://workforce.calu.edu/confer/…/OutdoorRecreationLegislationI.htm
    Recreation and Public Purposes Act of 1926 … purposes. 21. Watershed-Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 1954 http://laws.fws.gov/lawsdigest/watrshd.html.

    1934 -Taylor Grazing Act authorizes grazing districts, grazing regulation, and public rangeland improvements in western states (excluding Alaska) and establishes the Division of Grazing (later renamed the U.S. Grazing Service) within the Department of the Interior

    Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 – Bureau of Land Management

    1937 -Oregon and California (O&C) Revested Lands Sustained Yield Management Act requires O&C Railroad lands to be managed for permanent forest production and provides for watershed protection,
    regulation of streamflow, and recreational facilities.

    1942-Extensive withdrawals of public lands for military and defense use begin, with more than 13 million acres withdrawn in 2 years.

    —————————————-

    1946-Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is established within the Department of the Interior through the consolidation of the General Land Office and the U.S. Grazing Service.

    BLM – The Bureau of Land Management

    www.blm.gov/
    Bureau of Land Management

    The Bureau of Land Management administers 264 million acres of public lands, located primarily in the 12 Western States, containing natural, historical, cultural, …

    Grazing Service + General Land Office = Bureau of Land Management

    General Land Office-To handle the rapidly growing public land business,
    Congress created the GLO in 1812. The GLO handled all public land issues, including sales, patents and land entries. Surveyors were sent out with tools of the trade to record in their notebooks all mines, salt licks, salt springs, mill sites, water courses and the quality of the lands. This information helped purchasers and homesteaders make informed decisions about the lands offered.

    Grazing Service- With westward expansion came increases in livestock
    grazing and deteriorating rangelands. Between 1870 and 1900, the number
    of beef cows tripled, and the number of sheep quadrupled. The sheer
    numbers of livestock, combined with drought in the early 1930s, set the
    stage for the development of a new government agency. With the passage of the Taylor Grazing Act in 1934, Congress established the Grazing Service to manage public land grazing

    Bureau of Land Management-On July 16, 1946, the GLO and the Grazing Service merged and became the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) within the Department of Interior. Eventually, the era of homesteaders and land sales passed.

    Today, the BLM manages land under the principle of “multiple use” to allow all citizens the opportunity to use and enjoy public lands.

    In addition, the BLM now has the National Landscape Conservation System-whose mission is to conserve, protect and restore nationally significant landscapes, which include many of the great American western landscapes.

    Original land surveys and settlement records, still managed by the BLM, help tell the rich history of the American West.

    1953-Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to lease mineral lands more than 3 miles offshore; the BLM assumes responsibility for leasing through competitive sales. Oil well operation

    Recreation & Public Purposes Act

    Feb 11, 2014 – Recognizing the strong public need for a nationwide system of parks and other recreational and public purposes areas, the Congress, in 1954, …

    1954-Recreation and Public Purposes Act amends the 1926 act and allows the sale and lease of public lands for other purposes in addition to recreation
    Recreation and Public Purposes Act
    www.blm.gov/…/recreation_and_public.ht…
    Bureau of Land Management

    ————————————

    43 U.S. Code § 869 – Disposal of lands for public or ..

    www.law.cornell.edu › … › Chapter 20
    Legal Information Institute
    43 U.S. Code § 869 – Disposal of lands for public or recreational purposes … Lands so classified may not be appropriated under any other public land law unless the Secretary revises such … 741; June 4, 1954, ch. … section 869–2 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Recreation and Public Purposes Amendment Act of 1988’.”.

    1954-The BLM reorganizes and creates a state office system.

    1955-Multiple Surface Use Act withdraws common varieties of minerals from entry as mining claims and allows claim owners to use the surface for mining operation purposes only.

    1959- Wild Horse Protection Act prohibits the roundup of wild horses by aircraft and motor vehicles.

    1960- Public Land Administration Act allows the use of donations and cooperative agreements to improve and better manage public lands.

    ———————————————————

    The Public Land Law Review Commission (PLLRC), 1964 …

    is established to study public land laws and make long-term recommendations for public land use.

    One third of the Nation’s land; a report to the President and …

    leg.mt.gov/…/Committees/…/one-third-of-nation.pdf
    Montana Legislature

    We submit with pride the report of the Public Land Law Review Commission with our ….. 43 U.S.C. 5§ 1391-1400 (1964) as amended, (Supp. TV,. 1969). IX …

    ———————————————————————–

    1964-Wilderness Act protects undeveloped federal land to preserve its natural condition.

    1964-The BLM adopts a new logo

    1965-Land and Water Conservation Fund is established for federal acquisition of outdoor recreation areas.

    1966-National Historic Preservation Act expands protection of prehistoric and historic properties.
    —————————————————————————-

    ARE YOU AS SHOCKED AS I AM? Who knew that our Elwha River and Glines Canyon Hydroelectric power plants were placed on the National Register of HISTORIC PLACES listings in Clallam County, Washington on Dec 15, 1988?
    ————————————————————————————-

    1968 -Wild and Scenic Rivers and National Trails System Acts preserve sites with outstanding natural, cultural, scenic, historic, and recreational significance

    National Wild and Scenic Rivers – Bureau of Land …

    www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/…/Rivers.html
    Bureau of Land Management

     The Act provides three levels of protection: wild, scenic, and recreational. “Wildrivers are free of dams, generally inaccessible except by trail, and … river miles and approximately 1,001,358 acres (19% of the national system).

    1968 -Wild and Scenic Rivers and National Trails System Acts preserve sites with outstanding natural, cultural, scenic, historic, and recreational significance

    National Trails System – National Park Service

    www.nps.gov/nts/
    National Park Service

    The National Trails System is… …the network of scenic, historic, and recreation trails created by the National Trails System Act of 1968. These trails provide for …

    ———————————–
    1968-Johnny Horizon program promotes public awareness of BLM
    administered lands

    OK, so the Poster Child for environmentalists is Johnny Horizon
    This land is your land This land is my land

    ———————————————–

    Today is Feb.15, 2016

    LET’S START HERE… 48 YEARS LATER

    HOW MANY ACRES OF LAND IN THE USA?
    Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data – Federation of …
    2.27 billion acres of land in the United States. Dec 29, 2014
    The federal government owns roughly 640 million acres, about 28%

    AFTER 48 YEARS OF FEDERAL INDIAN GIVING

    By definition an Indian giver is an American expression to describe a person who gives a gift and later wants it back

    WHO’S LAND IS WHO’S

    HOW MANY DESIGNATED KINDS OF LANDS ARE THERE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?

    Hmmm?
    This would take several postings on my website.

    This land is your land This land is my land

    Just asking?  Just saying..

    For future reference, legal definition, legal ownership, future mitigation, legal action, when is a taking a taking by imminent domain, by restrictions and regulation, by willing seller, by coercing, threatening, bulling,  intimidation, destroying…

    when is a taking a taking? WHO’S LAND IS WHO’S

    This land is your land “YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY” I shall not trespass on your land.
    This land is my land “MY PRIVATE PROPERTY” You shall not trespass on my land.

    This public land NPS, is your/our million acres of land, in the Olympic National Park.
    THIS INHOLDER’S LAND IS MY PRIVATE LAND INSIDE THE OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK.

    This land is your TRIBAL land…. It is special land.
    This WOTUS LAND, THE ENTIRE LAND IS WETLAND

    ——————————————————————-
    IN MAR 3, 2015 – NEARLY HALF OF THE WEST WAS OWNED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

    Obama’s new 2016 MONUMENTAL, monuments LAND grab will almost double the amount of land Obama has already Grabbed from “We the People” of the United States of America
    1968- 2016 THIS LAND IS YOUR LAND THIS LAND IS MY LAND

    IN THE SHAD MY PEOPLE
    BY THE RELIEF OFFICE
    I SEEN MY PEOPLE
    AS THEY STOOD THERE HUNGRY
    I STOOD THERE ASKING
    IS THIS LAND MADE FOR YOU AND ME?

    —————————————————————————

    Elwha River Ecosystem and Fisheries Restoration Act (1992

    JANUARY 3, 1992 H.R.4844 AN ACT TO RESTORE OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK AND THE ELWHA RIVER ECOSYSTEM AND FISHERIES IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON.

    —————————————————————

    2014 World’s Largest Dam Removal Unleashes U.S. River After …

    —————————————————————–

    Elwha River claims section of road with massive washout …

    www.peninsuladailynews.com/…/20151123/…/311…
    Peninsula Daily News

    Nov 22, 2015 – About PDN … The river rose to 23.19 feet on Nov. 17 during a heavy rainstorm that produced 5.6 inches of rain on that date in the … “The washout was caused by a flooded side channel,” Maynes said Sunday. … 2015 7:08PM.

    —————————————————-

    Behind My Back | Go Find Your Park? Come Fix My Road?

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/01/…/go-findyourparkcomefixmyro

    Jan 28, 2016 – DEC 12, 2015 COME FIX MY ROAD REQUEST TO MY WA DC ELECTED REPS …. permalink. « Go Find Your Park ONP History Camp Louella …

    —————————————————

    Feb 14, 2016 Elwha: Roaring back to life

    The Seattle Times2 days ago

    ROARING RESURGENCE – The Seattle Times


  • Public Land Use? Howls of Complaints?

    I received information on, the Public ” HOWLING” on Public Land Use complaints against the feds, in an email from Liz Bowen Pie N Politics in California.

    Public lands ‘listening’ session brings howls of complaints …

    www.deseretnews.com/…/Publiclandslisteningsessionbri
    Deseret News

    15 hours ago – Public landslistening’ session brings howls of complaints against feds.

    17 Comments ». By Amy Joi O’Donoghue, Deseret …

    13 hours ago – Public lands ‘listening’ session brings howls of complaints against feds … Chris Stewart, R-Utah, convened the session in St. George — part of his congressional district — to let county …. Kick the Feds out of our state, period!
    ———————————————————-
    So, I sent a comment to…..

    Dear Senator Lankford,
    I received the following information in an email from a friend in California. It is an on-going country wide issue.
    We the people have no way of resolving this problem, other than forwarding this information to a concerned, responsive, elected representative in WA DC…..
    the bottom line…
    “Congress is really our last, best hope for solving this.”

    Thank you,
    Pearl Rains Hewett

    ————————
    Then… I made a comment on Pie N Politics website

    Pie N Politics | LizBowen.com

    lizbowen.com/?page_id=393

    Pie N Politics. Like many areas of the United States, citizens in Siskiyou County are finding government regulations are destroying their RIGHTS. This includes …
    ————————————————–
    my comment to Pie N Politics ….
    If you want an elected federal representative to “LISTEN” to your complaints and respond.. Senator Lankford, is your man.
    —————————————–
    Dear Senator Lankford,
    I received the following information in an email from a friend in California. It is an on-going country wide issue.
    We the people have no way of resolving this problem, other than forwarding this information to a concerned, responsive, elected representative in WA DC……
    the bottom line…
    “Congress is really our last, best hope for solving this.”

    Thank you,
    Pearl Rains Hewett
    ————————
    Sent and received by Team Lankford!
    Thanks
    Thank you for reaching out to Team Lankford! Your form has been successfully submitted. Someone on our team will get back to you as soon as possible.
    ———————————————————————————
    I have three (3) mostly, usually, unconcerned, unresponsive elected representative in WA DC
    Rep. Derek Kilmer, and Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell.
    And, I have three (3) mostly, usually, unconcerned, unresponsive elected representative in WA State
    Rep. Steve Tharinger, Kevin Van De Wege and Senator Jim Hargrove
    And, I have three (3) mostly, usually, unconcerned, unresponsive elected representative, Commissioners in Clallam County WA.

    ————
    I have been, well… sort of howling at all nine (9) of them, mostly D-WA representatives, sending them emails, and asking them questions for years.. about restricted public and private land use, among other things.

    And, all nine (9) of my elected representatives are mostly D-WA, are mostly, usually, unconcerned and unresponsive. period.

    Like, I might as well have been howling at the moon…

    ———————————————————-
    Fortunately, My grandson set up this website for me… registered 2013-01-29.
    Today is 2016-01-23, I’ve spent nearly three years researching, documenting and posting over 650 comments on restricted public and private land use, among other things.
    —————————————————————————–
    Well, Like I said….
    IF YOU WANT AN ELECTED FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVE TO “LISTEN” TO YOUR COMPLAINTS AND RESPOND.. SENATOR LANKFORD, IS YOUR GO TO MAN.
    ———————————————————————-
    My comments matter, as a matter of fact… I even got a Christmas card

    (I know a robo card)

    However, the bottom line on Senator Lankford Christmas card is…
    Stay Connected!
    If you would like more information on these topics or any other legislation currently before the U.S. Senate, please do not hesitate to call my D.C. office at (202) 224-5754. My Oklahoma City office can be reached at (405) 231-4941 and my Tulsa office at (918) 581-7651. You can also follow me on Facebook or Twitter or Instagram for updates on my work in Congress.
    —– Original Message —–
    From: Sen. James Lankford
    To: phew@wavecable.com
    Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 7:20 AM
    Subject: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

    ————————————————————-

    BACK TO THE HOWLING…

    Public lands ‘listening’ session brings howls of complaints …
    www.deseretnews.com/…/Public-lands-listening-session-bri…

    WHO’S LISTENING?
    Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, Jason Chaffetz R-Utah, Rob Bishop R-Utah, as well as Rep. Bruce Westerman, R-Arkansas
    ———————————————————————————
    I received the following information in an email from Liz Bowen Pie N Politics in California.
    full text…
    By Amy Joi O’Donoghue,
    Deseret News
    Published: Friday, Jan. 22 2016 10:00 p.m. MST
    ST. GEORGE — Four U.S. congressmen spent several hours Friday hearing a litany of complaints asserting federal land management agencies are harming families and livelihoods and need to be reigned in — if not eliminated altogether.
    Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, convened the session in St. George — part of his congressional district — to let county leaders and others air their views on federal public lands management in Utah.
    The list of grievances was long: grazing reductions, wild horse and burro overpopulation, agencies colluding with environmental groups in illegal, backdoor meetings, heavy-handed law enforcement tactics and dismissive attitudes by faceless bureaucrats that are harming rural life in Utah.
    “Is there any question or any wonder why people are angry? It seems glaringly obvious to me why people are angry,” Stewart said.
    “It did not used to be this way, and it does not have to be this way in the future.”
    Commissioners from six rural counties in Utah implored Stewart and Reps. Jason Chaffetz and Rob Bishop, R-Utah, as well as Rep. Bruce Westerman, R-Arkansas, to fix what’s wrong with the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service, emphasizing they’re at the breaking point.
    “Elected officials have tried to protect their constituents from the overreach the best we can, but it is tough to compete with special interest groups,” said Washington County Commissioner Victor Iverson. “Congress is really our last, best hope for solving this.”
    Iverson and others blasted agencies for “sue and settle” policies that have left Western lands in paralysis for grazing, timber production, ranching and other uses.
    “Range management is more a result of lawsuit than science,” Iverson said. “Special interest groups sue the land management agencies and they agree to settle on terms that do not benefit the general public and are almost never disclosed. … There is an overabundance of failed public policies.”
    Beaver County Commissioner Tammy Pearson described struggling ranchers held hostage by the proliferation of wild horses that are ruining a drought-striken range for cattle, wildlife and other uses.
    Pearson, a rancher herself, said the situation is dire.
    “Producers have exhausted their financial reserves, have lost their faith in federal agencies and have been backed into a corner by those agencies and so-called environmentalists and advocacy groups,”

    she said. “This grief has caused the uprisings that we see in Nevada, Oregon, and quite possibly in Utah.”
    Westerman, who said the BLM does not operate in his state, said it was clear to him there is a problem that has to be addressed.
    “We are all going to have disagreements on something as passionate as how federal public lands are used. It is more the process that I am worried about. Broken promises. Collusion. Lack of trust. Closed door meetings, circumvention of the law and double standards. Those are not the kind of words that are beneficial to our country regardless of what location you are at.”
    Stewart told the crowd he is committed to finding a solution given the realities that are playing out in Utah and elsewhere in the West.
    “You cannot protect Utah families if you don’t give them hope for the future,” he said. “And you can’t give them hope for the future if they feel like the federal government has a boot at their throat.”
    Email: amyjoi@deseretnews.com
    http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865646022/Public-lands-listening-session-brings-howls-of-complaints-against-feds.html
    —————————————————————————

    Congressional committee rails on BLM over Washington …

    WOW Snippets, full text below….

    “These issues are not only important to not only Utah, they are important to the whole country,”

    Members of a congressional subcommittee skewered the acting director of the Bureau of Land Management of Utah Friday over a proposed land use plan they say ignores the will of residents and the letter of a 2009 public lands law for Washington County.

    “We are here because Congress is hearing a crescendo of complaints about

    “We are here to get to the bottom of it.”

    BLM tactics and policies across the country, and St. George seems to be a poster child of BLM bad behavior,” said Tom McClintock, R-California and chairman of the House Natural Resources Federal Subcommittee.

    The agency’s preferred action in the land use plan released last year proposes to reduce grazing by 40 percent in those national conservation areas,

    restrict St. George’s access to up to 37 percent of its water

    and does not include a northern transportation corridor through the Red Cliffs area in Washington County, according to critics.

    —————————————————————————-

    Ful ltext

    Congressional committee rails on BLM over Washington …

    www.deseretnews.com/…/Congressionalcommitteerails-on
    Deseret News

    23 hours ago – Congressional committee rails on BLM over Washington County land … about a Bureau of Land Management proposed land use plan they …

    ST. GEORGE — Members of a congressional subcommittee skewered the acting director of the Bureau of Land Management of Utah Friday over a proposed land use plan they say ignores the will of residents and the letter of a 2009 public lands law for Washington County.

    “We are here because Congress is hearing a crescendo of complaints about

    “We are here to get to the bottom of it.”

    The subcommittee convened the rare field hearing after McClintock said they’d heard a litany of complaints over the BLM’s draft resource management plans proposed for the Beaver Dam Wash and Red Cliffs National Conservation Areas.

    The plan is being crafted as a result of the 2009 Public Lands Omnibus Act, which McClintock said embodied the spirit of compromise and was held up as a model for locally generated public lands planning across the nation.

    “This subcommittee doesn’t normally hold hearings on individual land use plans. But it appears that the BLM, which administers nearly half of the land area of Washington County, has ignored the will of Congress and thumbed its nose at the people whose taxes support this government and whose livelihoods and quality of life are now directly threatened by it.”

    The agency’s preferred action in the land use plan released last year proposes to reduce grazing by 40 percent in those national conservation areas, restrict St. George’s access to up to 37 percent of its water and does not include a northern transportation corridor through the Red Cliffs area in Washington County, according to critics.

    Washington County Commission Chairman Alan Gardner and St. George Mayor Jon Pike both testified at the hearing — held at the Dixie Convention Center in St. George — that they were left out of BLM’s planning process and surprised at the plan’s components when it was released.

    “I would have expected to have had many discussions with the BLM about all of these issues that have been raised today,” Pike said,

    particularly since they concern water rights.

    “I would have liked to have had those conversations before the plan was released.”

    Acting BLM Utah Director Jenna Whitlock defended her agency and disputed the allegation local elected officials were not involved in the planning stages.

    “We really feel like we have a good record,” she said, adding she believes the proposed plan follows the 2009 law.

    The hearing, which was attended by Utah Reps. Jason Chaffetz, Chris Stewart and Rob Bishop, drew sympathetic comments from Rep. Bruce Westerman, R-Arkansas, who said these divisive land issues impact everyone.

    “These issues are not only important to not only Utah, they are important to the whole country,” he said, adding that he had read about the controversy 1,000 miles away in his home state. “It appears to me that the law is being ignored, this law passed by Congress. This seems to be a pattern with the BLM. … Do you recognize that you are creating some really bad publicity for the BLM across the country?”

    ———————————————————————–

    I am compelled to insert this comment.

    “If you want to understand why so many people distrust the federal government, this is a good example,” @RepChrisStewart re BLM plans

    ————————————————————————

    And, this  comment.

    Iverson and others blasted agencies for “sue and settle” policies that have left Western lands in paralysis for grazing, timber production, ranching and other uses.

    The issue of “WILD NON-PROFITS”  undue partisan influence on the US government, is not only important to Utah, the “WILD NON-PROFITS” are a threat to the Public use of public  and private land in the whole country.

    ———————————————————————————

    Friday’s hearing was packed with members of the public sporting “Wild Utah” pins who are supportive of BLM’s planning efforts that are designed to conserve the desert tortoise, which was added to the Endangered Species list in 1990 and conserve desert landscapes.

    Paul Van Dam, one of the witnesses who testified at the subcommittee hearing, said the BLM is a responsive agency and was engaged with the public while it crafted its proposed plan.

    ———————————————————–

    Really…”If you want to understand why so many people distrust the federal government, this is a good example,” @RepChrisStewart re BLM plans

    —————————————————-

    “I have dealt with the BLM for a long time,” said Van Dam, who used to head up the grass-roots environmental organization called Citizens for Dixie’s Future. “My experiences are positive.”

    —————————————————————————–

    Sorry, I can’t resist this one..

    no duh… radical non-profits usually do have a positive experience with the BLM

    ———————————————————–
    the bottom line…

    “These issues are not only important to not only Utah, they are important to the whole country,”
    Email your comments to Senator Lankford, Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, Jason Chaffetz R-Utah, Rob Bishop R-Utah, as well as Rep. Bruce Westerman, R-Arkansas they are are listening..

    Rep. Chris Stewart told the crowd he is committed to finding a solution given the realities that are playing out in Utah and elsewhere in the West.

    “Congress is really our last, best hope for solving this.”
    Thank you,
    Pearl Rains Hewett


  • Congress Must Act on Water Issues

    Congress Must Act on Water Issues

    May 24, 2014 It takes an act of the U.S. Congress to make SETTLEMENT/QUANTITY (AC-FT/YR) of reserved water rights with Indian tribes.

    ——————–
    Our Federal Elected Representatives, as members of congress, Must Act on Water Issues

    ———————————————————————–

    Today, December 3, 2015 Rep. Greg Walden released a draft water agreement (A 69 PAGE DOCUMENT)
    114TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION H.R._______________
    (a) SHORT TITLE
    This Act may be cited as the Klamath Basin Water Recovery and Economic Restoration Act of 2015.

    Rep. Greg Walden PROPOSED DRAFT FOR FEDERAL LEGISLATION IS A PREREQUISITE TO SOLVING LONG TERM WATER ISSUES, On, quantities of Indian Reserved water rights that have not yet been determined or settled by congress.

    INDEED, IT DOES TAKE AN ACT OF THE U.S. CONGRESS TO APPROVE AND IMPLEMENT WATER BASIN AGREEMENTS, TO IMPROVE NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SUPPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND SUSTAIN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION IN RIVER BASINS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND THE INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

    —————————————————————————

    December 3, 2015 NEW POST ON PIE N POLITICS

    SUMMARY OF REP. GREG WALDEN’S 69 PAGE DRAFT KLAMATH LEGISLATION
    WATER CERTAINTY FOR AGRICULTURE: The draft authorizes and implements the water agreements in both the Upper Klamath Basin and the Klamath Project, providing for a long-term and certain water supply for farmers and ranchers.

    POWER CERTAINTY FOR AGRICULTURE:
    The draft directs the federal Bureau of Reclamation to provide affordable power for farmers, ranchers, and communities in the Basin.

    TRANSFER OF FEDERAL FOREST LANDS TO KLAMATH AND SISKIYOU COUNTIES: The draft transfers 100,000 acres of U.S. Forest Service land each to Klamath and Siskiyou counties. The lands would be used for timber production to grow jobs in rural communities and improve forest health.

    TRANSFER OF FEDERAL LANDS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDS TO KLAMATH TRIBES IN EXCHANGE FOR WAIVING SENIOR WATER RIGHTS:

    UNDER THE DRAFT, THE KLAMATH TRIBES WOULD WAIVE THEIR SENIOR WATER RIGHTS CLAIMS.

    IN EXCHANGE, THE TRIBES WOULD RECEIVE 100,000 ACRES OF U.S. FOREST SERVICE LAND FOR TIMBER PRODUCTION ALONG WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDS FOR TRIBAL MEMBERS.

    NO FEDERAL DAM REMOVAL: THE DRAFT DOES NOT AUTHORIZE, FUND, OR EXPEDITE FEDERAL DAM REMOVAL. That process is left up to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. It also does not create federal liability from dam removal.
    —————————————————————————————-
    Our Federally Elected Representatives for WA State, as members of congress, Must Act on long term solutions to citizens Water Issues.

    Behind My Back | High, Dry and Destitute

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/02/01/highdry-and-destitute/

    Feb 1, 2015 – High, Dry and Destitute WA State citizens, private property owners and farmers, in Skagit and Clallam County have been left HIGH, DRY AND …

    ———————————————————————

    I am sending this demand to my elected Rep. Derek Kilmer and Senators Murray and Cantwell.

    ————————————————————————-

    Behind My Back | Tribal Water Approved by Congress?

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/05/24/tribalwaterapproved-by-congress/

    May 24, 2014 – SETTLEMENTS APPROVED BY CONGRESS Updated August 2011 … (2) Fallon Paiute Shoshone Indian Tribes Water Rights Settlement Act of …

    ——————————————————————————————
    http://www.heraldandnews.com/breaking/walden-releases-draft-water-agreement/article_c2f39ac4-99f5-11e5-8bdc-0f740314a1ce.html?utm_medium
    Liz Bowen | December 3, 2015 at 5:41 pm | Categories: Klamath River & Dams | URL: http://wp.me/p13fnu-6oc


  • Educations Most Onerous Provisions

    Educations Most Onerous Provisions

    —————————————
    ONEROUS by definition (of a task, duty, or responsibility) involving an amount of effort and difficulty that is oppressively burdensome.

    ————————————–
    2002 THE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND (NCLB) WAS AN “ONEROUS” FEDERAL LAW PASSED BY CONGRESS. It was to effect what (curriculum) STUDENTS were taught (using common core) by their TEACHERS in public schools.

    —————————————–
    CURRICULUM—2002 T0 2012 HOWEVER GRAND (THE FEDERAL EDUCATION) PLANS MAY BE—CAN ONLY BE THAT PORTION OF THE (common core curriculum) PLAN THAT ACTUALLY REACHES THE STUDENT.

    ———————————————-
    EMPHASIZING THE OUTCOMES OF TEACHING COMMON CORE CURRICULUM AND LEARNING

    —————————————————–
    TEACHING? TEACHING IS A SYSTEM OF ACTIONS INTENDED TO PRODUCE “LEARNING”, TO CAUSE THE STUDENT TO “LEARN” and acquire the desired knowledge, skills and also desirable ways of living in the society.

    ————————————————————-
    It is a process in which LEARNER, TEACHER, COMMON CORE CURRICULUM and other variables are ORGANIZED IS A SYSTEMATIC AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WAY TO ATTAIN SOME PRE-DETERMINED GOALS.

    —————————————–
    Which brings us to the OUTCOME OF “NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND”

    ———————————————–
    IN 2012 SAT READING AND WRITING SCORES DROPPED TO LOWEST IN HISTORY

    ——————————————————————-
    In 2012, the Obama ADMINISTRATION began “BEATING THE NCLB DEAD HORSE” by offering flexibility to states regarding specific CURRICULUM requirements of NCLB IN EXCHANGE FOR RIGOROUS AND COMPREHENSIVE TESTING.

    ———————————————-
    IN 2015 SAT SCORES AT THE LOWEST POINT IN A DECADE Sept. 3, 2015 “Simply doing the same things we have been doing is not going to improve these numbers

    —————————————
    In 2015, the Obama ADMINISTRATION, The U.S. CONGRESS continues “BEATING THE OLD NCLB DEAD HORSE” BY CHANGING THE NAME? TO”THE EVERY CHILD ACHIEVES ACT” YET ANOTHER, ONEROUS FEDERAL LAW
    And, simply continuing to do the same thing the Obama ADMINISTRATION, The U.S. CONGRESS has been doing since 2002 BY CREATING ANOTHER COMMON CORE CURRICULUM “ONEROUS” FEDERAL LAW

    ——————————————–
    PER SENATOR CANTWELL SEPT. 2015
    “THE EVERY CHILD ACHIEVES ACT” (ECAA) MAKES A NUMBER OF IMPORTANT CHANGES TO SOME OF “NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND’S” EDUCATIONS MOST ONEROUS PROVISIONS.
    —————————————————————————–

    The bottom line…
    THE “NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND” REWRITE WILL CONTINUE TO DRIVE THE ONEROUS NATIONAL COMMON CORE  EDUCATION AGENDA UNDER THE NEW NAME “EVERY CHILD ACHIEVES ACT (ECAA)”

    ———————————————————
    Every Child Achieves Act: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing
    —————————————————————————-
    THE 21 MOST ONEROUS PROVISIONS IN THE EVERY CHILD ACHIEVES ACT (ECAA)

    ——————————————————

    Read this  complete unedited document verifying the above comments.

    ———————————————————–
    Every Child Achieves Act: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing
    www.americanprinciplesinaction.org/…/every-child-achieves-act-a-wolf-i…
    Jul 1, 2015 – American Principles In Action has just released a list of 21 reasons to oppose the Every Child Achieves Act.
    The Every Child Achieves Act – A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing
    No Child Left Behind Rewrite Will Drive a National Education Agenda The following is a nonexhaustive list of fatal problems with the bill.
    ————————————————
    1. The Every Child Achieves Act (ECAA) is 792 pages, 122 pages (20%) longer than No Child Left Behind (NCLB) — hardly a move in the right direction.

    2. Proponents cite the inclusion of new language restricting the U.S. Department of Education (USED) from, for example, coercing states into adopting the Common Core national standards. However: a. That language largely replicates existing protections (see Robert
    Eitel & Kent Talbert, The Road to a National Curriculum, PIONEER
    INSTITUTE, no.81 (2012)); b. As with existing protections, the proposed provisions fail to provide an enforcement mechanism for the states and thus depend on the goodwill of USED or congressional action (which was non-existent when USED foisted Common Core on the states); c. ECAA negates the protections anyway: A stated purpose is for state alignment to the same “college-and-career-ready” standards –language that is code for Common Core. Sec. 1001. See further discussion below.

    3. ECAA continues the USED-state master-servant relationship, requiring states to submit education plans and giving USED enormous authority to approve them. Sec. 1111(a)(4).

    4. ECAA retains federal testing mandates that children be tested for math and English in each grade 3-8 and for science once in each of the following grade spans: 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12. It also requires that these test scores be used as a “substantial” portion of a school’s grade to determine which schools will be identified for interventions, thus continuing the “teach-to-the-test” environment of NCLB. Sec. 1111(b)(2)(B)(v)(I)(aa)-(bb) and Sec. 1111(b)(3)(B)(iii)(II).

    5. ECAA adds to the list of federal programs a state must consult in developing its plan and requires standards to be aligned with federally approved workforce and early-childhood standards. Sec. 1111(a)(1) & Sec.1111(b)(1)(D).

    6. If a state plan fails to meet the requirements of a listed program, USED has the authority to disqualify the state plan unless the state agrees to make the mandated changes. Any prohibitions on USED’s interfering with state standards, assessments, and accountability don’t apply to the “requirements” of the Act. Sec. 1111(a)(4),(5).
    7. ECAA requires statewide curriculum standards, assessments, and accountability systems to prepare students “for postsecondary education or the workforce,” i.e.,
    “college- and career-ready.” The preparation for postsecondary education must (theoretically) enable the student to succeed “without remediation.” All this is code language for Common Core-aligned standards. Sec. 1111(b)(1)(D), (b)(3)(B). It thus puts downward pressure on states to keep Common Core standards, or similar standards, in place.
    8. ECAA contains a requirement for states to “demonstrate” that the state standards are “aligned” to the same criteria used to establish Common Core: “entrance requirements, without the need for academic remediation, for the system of public higher education.” Any prohibition included to stop USED from coercing states to use Common Core or other specific standards is meaningless. USED won’t have to force anything, because alignment to the same criteria as “college-and-career-ready” is a requirement of the bill. Sec. 1111(b)(1)(D)(i)-(ii).
    9. ECAA mandates that a state’s accountability system penalize schools that don’t enforce the requirement that 95% of all their students take the state assessment: The state must provide “a clear and understandable explanation of how the State will factor this requirement [95% student participation in state assessments] into their accountability system determinations.” This is an attack on parental rights and the Opt-Out movement. Sec. 1111 (b)(3)(B)(vi).
    10. ECAA dictates particular types of testing that are extraordinarily expensive, have a history of failure, and are designed to inject more intrusive psychological data-collection and psychological profiling/manipulation into the assessments. Sec. 1111(b)(2)(B)(vi) and (xiii).
    11. ECAA maintains NCLB’s requirement that the state assessment produce not just test scores, but “individual student interpretive, descriptive, and diagnostic reports.” Unlike NCLB, ECAA requires assessment on behavioral/skills-based standards rather than truly academic standards. The data produced under this language could resemble a psychological profile of the student. Sec. 1111(b)(2)(B)(x).
    12. States in PARCC and SBAC are currently required to make these profiles available to USED. Nothing would prevent USED from making other states submit those student-level profiles as well. ECAA’s limitations on what data USED may demand are too weak; USED may demand information from any “existing State or local data source.” Sec. 1111(a)(6).
    13. ECAA does nothing to stop the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) from implementing its planned and unconstitutional affective probing of students’ “mindsets,” “grit,” or other psychological traits.
    14. ECAA removes protection against socioemotional profiling in the statewide assessments (eliminating NCLB’s prohibition against including assessment items that “evaluate or assess personal or family beliefs and attitudes”) and fails to protect against other psychological data-gathering in any other federal education program covered by ESEA.

    15. ECAA continues to give the federal government influence over how states grade their schools in state accountability systems. Although it claims states may design their own systems, it negates real discretion by detailing the framework of that system and its most important requirements. Sec. 1111 (b)(3)(B)(iii).

    16. While NCLB required academic standards and achievement levels be applied to “public elementary and secondary schools,” ECAA extends the tentacles of federal control into public preschools by making this a requirement for “all public schools” and “public school students,” not just elementary and secondary. Sec. 1111(b)(1)(B)-(C).

    17. ECAA’s Early Learning Alignment and Improvement Grants (Sec. 5902) offer new federal funds that states “shall use to develop, implement, or improve . . . a statewide system . . . of voluntary early care and learning.” a. Note that this program is not exclusively for early educational programs and includes “early care,” or childcare. b. Any funding under this grant must be made available through “existing Federal, state, and local sources,” including Head Start and the Child Care and Development Block Grant, two very expensive and ineffective programs. c. States must demonstrate how they will pay for the program after the three-year federal grant expires. d. There is no evidence that such early-childhood programs have educational benefit, and significant evidence that they may actually do academic and emotional harm. e. These programs do, however, benefit the central planners by allowing government bureaucrats to gain influence over children from their earliest years.

    18. ECAA requires the statewide preschool standards to align with federal standards established under Head Start and the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) Act of 1990, creating national standards and achievement levels for our youngest students. Sec. 1111(b)(1)(D)(iii). These federal standards are heavily socio-emotional and result in the compilation of psychological data on young children.
    19. ECAA includes “school climate” formula grants. This risks giving the federal government enormous power to model citizenship, to influence what is an appropriate world-view, and to pressure schools to suppress student expression of orthodox religious values. Sec. 4103, et seq.
    20. Through these formula grants, ECAA funds “extended learning opportunities,” such as before- and after-school programs, summer programs, etc., to ensure children spend less time with their families and more at school. Sec. 4105(a)(B). The grants also fund “comprehensive school-based mental health services and supports” that will enable “early identification of social, emotional, or behavioral problems . . . .” Sec. 4105(a)(D)(ii)(I). This is more governmental surveillance of students’ attitudes and mindsets.
    21. ECAA also allots money to fulfill Sec. Arne Duncan’s expressed desire of having schools become “21st –century community learning centers” (it even uses that exact terminology). Sec. 4201 et seq. This funding would encourage students to rely on the government school, not family or church, for “a broad array of . . . services, programs, and activities, such as youth development activities, service learning, nutrition and health education . . . counseling programs . . . [and] financial literacy programs . . . .” [Do the drafters not see the irony of having the federal government promote “financial literacy”?] And to help out politically connected corporations, these programs should include “career and technical programs, internship or apprenticeship programs, and other ties to an in-demand industry sector or occupation for high school students . . . .” Sec. 4201(a)(2).
    ——————————————————————————————–
    Snippets from Senator Cantwell’s response….
    On July 16, 2015, I joined my colleagues in the Senate in passing the Every Child Achieves Act (S.1177), a bill to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act AND REPLACE THE BADLY BROKEN NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT.
    The Every Child Achieves Act (ECAA) makes a number of important changes to some of No Child Left Behind’s MOST ONEROUS PROVISIONS.
    ONEROUS by definition, (of a task, duty, or responsibility) involving an amount of effort and difficulty that is OPPRESSIVELY BURDENSOME.
    THE EVERY CHILD ACHIEVES ACT (ECAA) IS 792 PAGES, 122 pages (20%) longer than No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
    ———————————————————
    Curriculum, it turns out, is indeed much more than the idea of specific subjects IT CAN BE CHARACTERIZED NOT ONLY BY WHAT IT DOES INCLUDE BUT ALSO BY WHAT IT INTENTIONALLY EXCLUDES.


  • Senator Cantwell on Public Education

    Senator Cantwell on Public Education
    I sent two comments on public education to my federally elected representatives
    Senators Patty Murray, Maria Cantwell and Representative Derek Kilmer.

    ————————————————————
    Testing Revolt In Washington State
    Posted on September 9, 2015 10:33 am by Pearl Rains Hewett
    ——————————————————————————–
    Common Core Education vs. Charter Schools
    Posted on September 6, 2015 12:14 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment
    ———————————————————————————

    Snippet from Senator Maria Cantwells’ robo response OFFICE

    I have heard from so many of my constituents about the need to improve the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to better support Washington’s students and teachers. I am heartened that THE SENATE PASSED THE EVERY CHILD ACHIEVES ACT, which offers an opportunity for real progress in our nation’s K-12 schools.
    ————————————————————————–

    Is Senator Maria Cantwell supporting concerned Parents and Grandparents?
    ——————————————————————-

    The Every Child Achieves Act (S.1177)

    You can read this 5 PAGE Government DOCUMENT…

    ———————————-
    The Every Child Achieves Act of 2015
    www.help.senate.gov/…/The_Every_Child_Achieves…
    United States Senate
    1. The Every Child Achieves Act of 2015. TITLE I –. Lets states develop accountability systems – The bill ends the federal test-based accountability system of No …

    —————————————————————————-
    Or, you can read.

    The Every Child Achieves Act (ECAA) a 792 page Government document
    ———————————————————————————

    OR… You can read it below or download …

    Every Child Achieves Act: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing

    www.americanprinciplesinaction.org/…/every-child-achieves-act-a-wolf-i…
    Jul 1, 2015 – American Principles In Action has just released a list of 21 reasons to oppose the Every Child Achieves Act.

     

    No Child Left Behind Rewrite Will Drive a National Education Agenda The following is a nonexhaustive list of fatal problems with the bill.
    1.The Every Child Achieves Act (ECAA) is 792 pages, 122 pages (20%) longer than No Child Left Behind (NCLB) — hardly a move in the right direction.
    —————————————————————————
    One response …. From: the robo response Office of Senator Maria Cantwell

    —– Original Message —–
    From: Office of Senator Maria Cantwell
    To: phew@wavecable.com
    Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 9:09 AM
    Subject: From the Office of Senator Cantwell

    Dear Ms. Hewett,
    Thank you for contacting me about elementary and secondary education. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

    On July 16, 2015, I joined my colleagues in the Senate in passing the Every Child Achieves Act (S.1177), a bill to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and replace the badly broken No Child Left Behind Act. As you may know, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) is the federal government’s comprehensive K-12 education law. This bill now heads to a conference committee where conferees will reconcile the differences between this bill and the House-passed Student Success Act (H.R.5).

    The Every Child Achieves Act (ECAA) makes a number of important changes to some of No Child Left Behind’s most onerous provisions. ECAA repeals adequate yearly progress (AYP), giving states the responsibility of developing their own goals and test-based accountability systems. This is especially important in Washington since the U.S. Department of Education revoked our state’s waiver, resulting in Washington losing flexibility over how to use crucial federal funding. The Every Child Achieves Act ends states’ needs for waivers and restores power over low-performing schools to the states.

    This bill also includes a new grant program to encourage states to improve high-quality early education. There is clear and convincing science that early childhood education plays an important role in preparing students to succeed in kindergarten and throughout their school career. In March, I signed a letter to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions urging significant new investments in quality early learning programs as part of a reauthorization of ESEA, and I am pleased that this bill includes a provision to expand access for early childhood education.

    The Every Child Achieves Act also includes a dedicated funding stream to support partnerships between schools, businesses, universities, and non-profit organizations to support student achievement and teacher training in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) subjects. I am a strong supporter of these partnerships and was a cosponsor of legislation that created this program in 2001. I am especially pleased that this reauthorization contains a provision that places an emphasis on increasing access to STEM subjects for women, minority students, low-income students, and other groups that are frequently underrepresented in STEM careers. I strongly believe STEM education is critical to keeping American students competitive in the 21st century.

    Unfortunately, there are a number of proposals that I supported on the Senate floor that did not receive enough votes for inclusion in this bill. One of these was an amendment offered by Senator Al Franken (D-MN) that I cosponsored. This provision is aimed at prohibiting discrimination against students based on sexual orientation or gender identity in public schools, and holding schools accountable for ignoring both discrimination and harassment. I have been a longtime supporter of this proposal, known as the Student Non-Discrimination Act, and am disappointed that the full Senate failed to adopt it.

    I also supported a number of amendments that would strengthen accountability in the underlying bill. While it is important that states have the power to set their own goals and design plans for improvement that fit their unique needs, there should be guardrails in place to ensure that states do not ignore chronically failing student subgroups or extremely low-performing schools. It is my hope that the need for increased accountability will be appropriately addressed in the conference committee.

    I have deep concerns about the House-passed ESEA reauthorization bill, the Student Success Act (H.R. 5). This bill contains a provision known as Title I portability that would allow federal dollars to follow students to any school district and any school. Portability would drive resources away from high-poverty districts and schools, devastating the schools where these funds are most needed. I strongly opposed proposals to adopt portability in the Every Child Achieves Act, which failed to receive enough votes for inclusion.

    I have heard from so many of my constituents about the need to improve the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to better support Washington’s students and teachers. I am heartened that the Senate passed the Every Child Achieves Act, which offers an opportunity for real progress in our nation’s K-12 schools. It is my hope that the bipartisan effort we have seen throughout the crafting and consideration of this bill thus far will continue in the conference committee.
    Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.

    Sincerely,
    Maria Cantwell
    United States Senator
    For future correspondence with my office, please visit my website at
    http://cantwell.senate.gov/contact/

    ——————————————————–
    Another response….From: the robo response Office of Senator Maria Cantwell

    —– Original Message —–
    From: Office of Senator Maria Cantwell
    To: phew@wavecable.com
    Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 9:09 AM
    Subject: From the Office of Senator Cantwell

    Dear Ms. Hewett,
    Thank you for contacting me regarding charter schools. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

    A quality public education is at the core of the American promise of opportunity and equality for all. Providing a free education to every child, regardless of ethnicity, religion, social background, or ability, is one of our government’s most important responsibilities and one that should not be taken lightly. As you know, charter schools are publicly funded, independently-managed schools that operate under nonprofit organizations. Currently, 42 states and the District of Columbia have charter schools.

    On September 4, 2015, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Washington’s charter school law violates the state constitution, which states public school funds may only be used to support “common schools.” In this decision, the Court voted that charter schools are not “common schools” because they are run by appointed boards or nonprofit organizations, and therefore not subject to local control and accountability.

    This ruling strikes down Washington’s charter schools law, which passed in November 2012 when Washington voters approved Initiative 1240. This initiative created the nine-member Washington State Charter School Commission, which manages and oversees Washington’s charter school system. Since its establishment in 2013, the commission has approved nine charter schools across the state. On September 9, the commission announced it would no longer continue to operate.

    This issue is under the purview of the Washington state government, I recommend that you contact your state representative or state senator to express your views by calling the Washington State Legislative Hotline at 800-562-6000 or through the legislature’s website at http://www.leg.wa.gov. However, should this matter be considered by the United States Senate, please rest assured that I will keep your views in mind.
    Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.

    Sincerely,
    Maria Cantwell
    United States Senator

    For future correspondence with my office, please visit my website at
    http://cantwell.senate.gov/contact/
    ———————————————————————

    My bottom line comment…….
    AS PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS
    We HAD NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND and we have NO CHILD LEFT INSIDE
    ———————————————-
    AND, NOW WE HAVE  A NEW 792 page FEDERAL ACT (LAW).
    The Every Child Achieves Act (ECAA) is 122 pages (20%) longer than No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
    AND, WE AS CONCERNED AMERICAN, PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS, STILL HAVE NO CHILD LEFT OUTSIDE OF FEDERALLY CONTROLLED PUBLIC EDUCATION.
     — hardly a move in the right direction.
    Question is? what are we, AS CONCERNED PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS,  going to do about it?

  • Ecology’s Back “Amended Plus ” SMP WAC’S

    Ecology’s Back “Amended Plus ” SMP WAC’S
    This is an area of statewide concern. Ecology is “BEGINNING” rulemaking “TO AMEND SEVERAL” of the rules related to implementation of the Shoreline Management Act (SMA)

    ———————————————-
    Please send this out to notify

    ALL WA STATE VESTED PRIVATE SHORELINE PROPERTY OWNERS

    ————————————————–
    ECOLOGY STATES
    We have already reached out to INTERESTED parties such as the
    WA Department of Commerce (for Growth Management Act consistency), Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC) and Association of Washington Cities (AWC).

    ——————————————————–

    ECOLOGY STATES
    We will communicate with STAKEHOLDERS through the agency email lists (WAC Track and program lists), a rulemaking web page, e-mail, and regular mail.

    We intend to get feedback and early input from A LOCAL GOVERNMENT SOUNDING BOARD.

    WE WILL CONSULT WITH INTERESTED TRIBES.

    ECOLOGY STATES

    WE WILL RELEASE A PRELIMINARY DRAFT RULE FOR INFORMAL COMMENT SO WE CAN GET MORE INPUT …..”BEFORE WE PROPOSE A FORMAL DRAFT RULE (CR-102) FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.”

    We will hold “PUBLIC HEARINGS” on the draft rule (CR-102) that are accessible to interested parties throughout the state.
    —————————————————————-
    IS COUNTY GOVERNMENT INTERESTED?
    ARE VESTED SHORELINE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS INTERESTED?

    —————————————————————-

    HOW INTERESTED PARTIES CAN PARTICIPATE IN THE DECISION TO ADOPT THE NEW RULE AND FORMULATION OF THE PROPOSED RULE BEFORE PUBLICATION:

    (List names, addresses, telephone, fax numbers, and e-mail of persons to contact; describe meetings, other exchanges of information, etc.)
    Rule Coordinator:
    Michelle Wilcox, SEA Program,
    WA State Department of Ecology,
    PO Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504-7600.
    Phone: 360-407-7676.
    E-mail:smarulemaking@ecy.wa.gov.

    —————————————————————–
    —– Original Message —–
    From: Dumar, Laurie (ECY)
    To: ECOLOGY-WAC-TRACK@LISTSERV.WA.GOV
    Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 4:56 PM
    Subject: Ecology rulemaking filing: Shoreline Management Act

    Ecology filed the following rulemaking with the Office of the Code Reviser:

    September 2, 2015
    Rule preproposal

    • Permits for oil or natural gas exploration activities conducted from state marine waters (WAC 173-15)
    • Shoreline management act – streams and rivers constituting shorelines of the state (WAC 173-18)
    • Shoreline management act – lakes constituting shorelines of the state (WAC 173-20)
    • Adoption of designations of shorelands and wetlands associated with shorelines of the state (WAC 173-22)
    • State master program approval\amendment procedures and master program guidelines (WAC 173-26)
    • Shoreline management permit and enforcement procedures (WAC 173-27)
    Thank you for using WAC Track!

    ________________________________________
    Visit us on the web or social media.
    Subscribe or Unsubscribe

    ————————————————–
    This is attachment A

    RULEMAKING IS NECESSARY TO:

    1.CLARIFY THE PROCESS TO COMPLY WITH THE PERIODIC REVIEW REQUIREMENT PER RCW 90.58.080 as the first round of Shoreline Master Program
    (SMP) REVIEWS WILL BE DUE TO ECOLOGY JUNE 2019;

    2. Simplify the process for approving minor updates to SMPs;

    3. Update the list of shorelines of the state to be consistent with the SMP updates;

    4. Ensure consistency with amendments to statute since the last rule revision;

    5. Capture any administrative updates since the last rule revision;

    6. Consider clarifying the planning process for water-dependent uses INCLUDING SALMON NET PENS; AND,

    7. Consider including a new section on planning for coastal hazards.
    ——————————————————————————————
    THIS IS A REALLY BIG LAND GRABBER…..
    DESIGNATING THE ASSOCIATED SHORELANDS AND WETLANDS

    • Adoption of designations of shorelands and wetlands associated with shorelines of the state (WAC 173-22)

    ——————————————————————————————
    Ecology’s full text
    Ecology rulemaking filing: Shoreline Management Act
    Chapters 173-15, 173-18, 173-20, 173-22, 173-26, 173-27 WAC
    Shoreline Management Act (SMA) Rules
    PREPROPOSAL STATEMENT OF INQUIRY
    CR-101 (June 2004)(Implements RCW 34.05.310)
    Do NOT use for expedited rule making
    Agency: Department of Ecology AO #15-06
    Subject of possible rule making:
    Ecology is beginning rulemaking to amend several of the rules related to implementation of the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) RCW 90.58,
    SPECIFICALLY:
    • Chapter 173-15 WAC -Permits for Oil or Natural Gas Exploration Activities Conducted from State Marine Waters
    • Chapter 173-18 WAC -SMA–Streams and Rivers Constituting Shorelines of the State
    • Chapter 173-20 WAC -SMA–Lakes Constituting Shorelines of the State
    • CHAPTER 173-22 WAC -ADOPTION OF DESIGNATIONS OF SHORELANDS AND WETLANDS ASSOCIATED WITH SHORELINES OF THE STATE
    • Chapter 173-26 WAC -State Master Program Approval/Amendment Procedures and Master Program Guidelines
    • Chapter 173-27 WAC -Shoreline Management Permit and Enforcement Procedures

    Statutes authorizing the agency to adopt rules on this subject :RCW 90.58.060 REQUIRES ECOLOGY TO PERIODICALLY REVIEW AND UPDATE WAC 173-26.

    The last rule update was in 2011 and focused mostly on GEODUCK AQUACULTURE.

    OTHER CHAPTERS ARE BEING INCLUDED IN THE UPDATE TO IMPROVE CLARITY AND CONSISTENCY ACROSS THE RULES.

    Reasons why rules on this subject may be needed and what they might accomplish:
    This is Attachment A……

    Reasons why rules on this subject may be needed and what they might accomplish:
    RULEMAKING IS NECESSARY TO:

    1.CLARIFY THE PROCESS TO COMPLY WITH THE PERIODIC REVIEW REQUIREMENT PER RCW 90.58.080 as the first round of Shoreline Master Program

    (SMP) REVIEWS WILL BE DUE TO ECOLOGY JUNE 2019;

    2. Simplify the process for approving minor updates to SMPs;

    3. Update the list of shorelines of the state to be consistent with the SMP updates;

    4. Ensure consistency with amendments to statute since the last rule revision;

    5. Capture any administrative updates since the last rule revision;

    6. Consider clarifying the planning process for water-dependent uses INCLUDING SALMON NET PENS; AND,

    7. Consider including a new section on planning for coastal hazards.

    Reasons why rules on this subject may be needed and what they might accomplish (continued)
    Identify OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES THAT REGULATE THIS SUBJECT AND THE PROCESS COORDINATING THE RULE WITH THESE AGENCIES:

    Local governments must follow the SMP Guidelines (Chapter 173-26 WAC) when drafting their local shoreline master programs.

    The Guidelines translate the broad policies of the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58.020) INTO STANDARDS FOR REGULATION of shoreline uses.

    We have already reached out to interested parties such as the
    WA Department of Commerce (for Growth Management Act consistency), Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC) and Association of Washington Cities (AWC).

    Process for developing new rule (check all that apply):
    Negotiated rule making n/a
    Pilot rule making n/a
    Agency study n/a
    OTHER (DESCRIBE)
    We will use standard rulemaking.

    We will communicate with stakeholders through the agency email lists (WAC Track and program lists), a rulemaking web page, e-mail, and regular mail.

    We intend to get feedback and early input from A LOCAL GOVERNMENT SOUNDING BOARD.

    WE WILL CONSULT WITH INTERESTED TRIBES.

    WE WILL RELEASE A PRELIMINARY DRAFT RULE FOR INFORMAL COMMENT SO WE CAN GET MORE INPUT …..”BEFORE WE PROPOSE A FORMAL DRAFT RULE (CR-102) FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.”

    We will hold “PUBLIC HEARINGS” on the draft rule (CR-102) that are accessible to interested parties throughout the state.

    HOW INTERESTED PARTIES CAN PARTICIPATE IN THE DECISION TO ADOPT THE NEW RULE AND FORMULATION OF THE PROPOSED RULE BEFORE PUBLICATION:
    (List names, addresses, telephone, fax numbers, and e-mail of persons to contact; describe meetings, other exchanges of information, etc.)

    Rule Coordinator:
    Michelle Wilcox, SEA Program,
    WA State Department of Ecology,
    PO Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504-7600.

    Phone: 360-407-7676.
    E-mail:smarulemaking@ecy.wa.gov.

    VISIT THE SEA PROGRAM RULE
    web page at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/rules/rulemaking-index.html

    Join the Listserv at http://listserv.wa.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A0=ECOLOGY-SHORELINE-RULE
    Learn more about Shoreline Master Programs at:
    http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/shorelines/smp/index.html

    DATE 09/01/15 CODE REVISER USE ONLY
    NAME (TYPE OR PRINT)
    Gordon White
    SIGNATURE
    TITLE Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program Manager