Missouri is proactive
So, why didn’t Missouri receive all the attention following its new immigration laws? Answer: no Mexican illegals to demonstrate; no bus loads of LaRaza members from L.A.; no Mexican flags waving. The “Show Me” state practices its nickname.
In 2007, the state voted English as its official language for all governmental proceedings and services. In 2008 a measure was passed requiring all law enforcement officials to verify the immigration status of any person arrested and inform federal authorities if the person is found to be here illegally.
Missouri law enforcement officers receive training to enforce federal immigration laws. Illegals do not have access to benefits such as food stamps and health care through Missouri HealthNET.
A 2009 measure ensures Missouri’s public institutions of higher education do not award financial aid to individuals here illegally.
So while Arizona has made national news for its new law, Missouri has been proactive in addressing this growing problem by sending a clear message: not welcome to receive public benefits at the cost of Missouri taxpayers.
Amnesty is about the votes. Nine other states are following suit while the U.S. government uses taxpayer money to fight Arizona for following the law.
There is a process — it’s called a green card, or work permit. All who follow the law are welcome. This is an illegal trespass situation. They are not immigrating. They do not want citizenship, they want the benefits of our taxpayers that their country refuses to provide.
Calais Tea Party of St. Croix Valley
Cow town east
Congratulations to Eastport’s new head cowboys Kevin Raye, Chris Gardner, Skip Rogers and Tom Critchley.
Cattle drives were a major economic activity in the American West when 20 million cattle were herded from Texas to Kansas for shipments to Chicago and points east. The need for periodic rests by riders and animals along the way led to the development of “cow towns” across America. Because of extensive treatment of cattle drives in fiction and film, the cowboy became the worldwide iconic image of the American.
Now you can list Eastport as one of America’s great cow towns. With a potential modern day cattle drive of thousands of pregnant cows to Eastport for shipment overseas we can stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Dodge City, Wichita, Abilene, Cheyenne and Amarillo.
Last week Eastport Port Director Chris Gardner announced: “We have been permitted for the cows. After much consternation, we were able to work with the federal delegation and get the USDA to permit our operation. This is no small news. This could mean big things for the port.”
Eastport is celebrating our new cargo.
Kudos to Port Director Gardner, Sen. Kevin Raye, Sens. Snowe and Collins, Carol Woodcock, Gail Kelly and Federal Marine Terminals including Skip Rogers and Tom Critchley for all of their hard work in making this happen. We have an amazing hometown team of long-ball hitters.
Eastport, Maine is America’s newest great “Cow Town.”
LNG won’t work
Any further discussion of LNG in Passamaquoddy Bay is futile. There are three deal-breakers in place, two of which have been there since 2004.
The Canadians oppose LNG vessels in Head Harbour Passage, within Canadian waters. Without Canadian cooperation, no LNG application in Passamaquoddy Bay can succeed.
Passamaquoddy Bay meets none of the standards for responsible siting of an LNG terminal set by the Society of International Gas Terminal and Tanker Operators. Yet Calais LNG and Downeast LNG have consistently ignored them.
Why would they choose not to follow these industry-recommended guidelines?
Are they, like BP, more interested in corporate profits than in the human and environmental costs?
And there are huge domestic reserves of natural gas within our own country. With everyone clamoring for “energy independence,” why would a company buy natural gas from Algeria or Russia or Chile, and transport it as LNG to Passamaquoddy Bay? The cost of such gas would be much higher than that extracted from American sources, and we would be subject to the whims of unstable Third World countries.
No matter how fervently Calais and our legislators push these projects, there is no future for either of them. Calais and Robbinston would do better to spend their time and energy on sustainable projects closer to home that will return real and lasting benefits to our communities.