It responded to an editorial that claimed the adoption of the Growing
Greener II bond issue was miraculous proof that everyone agreed to increased government spending on this one thing. Furthermore, he saw it as evidence that "timely government intervention" is a viable political strategy for PA Democrats.
This was more than enough to prompt me to write the LTE below.
PS -- I appreciate that the editor printed it given that
it's now old news and that it explains LP thinking while
criticizing the Rs and Ds.
Pittsburgh City Paper, June 15, 2005
Environmental Fig Leaf
It wasn't unprecedented agreement that passed the Growing Greener II (GG II) bond issue ("Potter's Field", June 1) as much as unprecedented misunderstanding.
At the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania state convention in early May, our understanding led us to overwhelmingly pass a resolution opposing the GG II bond issue. We did so for two main reasons.
First, environmental matters such as mine drainage are only symptoms of a greater problem. That problem is a scandalous system that permits mining interests to damage surrounding property and then walk away under a protective shield of bankruptcy. GG II deceives us into trading our property rights for corporate welfare. Its adoption fuels more of that trade.
Second, what does GG II really mean when its wording talks about borrowing $625 million for things like "protection," "preservation" and "initiatives"? It means protection of politicians' jobs by the preservation of public dependence on government by trading votes for initiatives that return us our own money. It's "walking around money" in a trendy enviro-green wrapper.
GG II has about as much to do with the environment as the Republican and Democratic parties have to do with political choice.
Mark Crowley, Plum
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
Growing Greener -- Thinking again from a Libertarian perspective from Plum
Mark Crowley's letter to the editor runs in the City Paper: