Remembering Heroes of the Vietnam War

The Vietnam War Remembered…in Children’s Books



The years of the Vietnam War, though a dark and unsettling time, are still alive in the hearts of those people who were touched by its horrors and its triumphs.  I was a child during those years, a mere thirteen years of age when it concluded for the Americans in 1975, but it shaped my worldview and taught me hard lessons, and completely transformed, for good or ill, the lives of millions.

I was the youngest of seven children in a very ordinary family. I had five older brothers, the eldest of whom enlisted in the United States Navy in 1968. He served for a couple of years as a radar man on the destroyer, the USS Towers, and then inexplicably, in 1970, volunteered for a dangerous river patrol mission in South Vietnam. He was killed in May of 1970 when Viet Cong guerillas, hidden along the banks of the Dam Doi River, attacked his swift boat patrol. I was eight years old at the time, and my life and the lives of everyone in my family were changed forever.


As a result of the loss of my eldest brother, and the Vietnam Era tumult in America, I developed a curiosity about the war itself and wanted to dig deeper and know more about the experiences of the individuals who actually endured its terrible style of jungle warfare. As an adult I met a friend who had served on the carrier USS Midway during Operation Frequent Wind, the code name given to the evacuation of Americans and refugees out of Southeast Asia. He described how, at the very last moment before the Midway left the South China Sea, a tiny airplane packed with a Vietnamese pilot and his family, landed on the deck of the Midway. He described how the captain of the Midway had ordered  the Huey helicopters cluttering the runway to be pushed into the sea to make room for the little airplane, and how, upon its safe landing, the crew of the vast ship encircled the little family, shouting and cheering with triumph and relief.

I was deeply moved by the story, and a little flabbergasted that I had never heard the account before.  The heroic rescue of Major Bung-Ly and his family is well-known to those who were on the Midway, but I felt compelled to share this story far and wide, especially with young people. In my research I discovered that no depictions of the miraculous landing of Bung-Ly’s Cessna O-1 Bird Dog existed in literature for children, or even teenagers. And so, I set out to correct a shameful omission of history and enshrine the story of the “Little Bird Dog and the Big Ship” within the pages of a children’s book.


I found a publisher who was willing to contract for two books and so decided to do a historical non-fiction series titled “The Heroes of the Vietnam War: Books for Children.”  Book one of the series, “Little Bird Dog and the Big Ship” was published in the spring of 2012, and book two, “Saving the Vietnamese Orphans,” was published the following September.

My personal memories of the end of the Vietnam War were somewhat foggy. Nevertheless, I could recall some details of Operation Babylift, the heroic humanitarian airlift that took thousands of orphaned and unwanted children out of Southeast Asia in April of 1975. My most poignant remembrance was of the disastrous first flight of Operation Babylift during which a C-5 Galaxy carrying hundreds of children, crewmen, volunteers and reporters lost its rear hatch due to a mechanical malfunction.

As a grown woman, I was fortunate to meet a gentleman during my travels who had been a flight engineer on that doomed initial flight of Operation Babylift. He survived the crash which sent the massive aircraft into a rice field outside of Saigon, taking the lives of hundreds of children and adults. His memories were vivid, and though difficult, he shared them with me in a series of interviews which became a reference for my second book.

My research efforts for “Saving the Vietnamese Orphans” connected me with many key figures of Operation Babylift including Captain “Bud” Dennis Traynor, the pilot of the C-5 that crashed, Betty Tisdale, the “Angel of Saigon,” and Lana Noone, the adoptive mother of two Vietnamese orphans and one of the founders of the Asian-American adoption network, which blesses the lives of orphans and adoptive families to this day. President Gerald Ford was the leader and advocate, an adopted child himself, who made Operation Babylift possible through funding from the U.S. Government and military support for the humanitarian agencies which coordinated this incredible undertaking.


My curiosity about the Vietnam War and those who served has uncovered more than just the harsh and traumatic events of conflict. Treasures of heroism and compassion have emerged as well. Though set in the midst of political strife and bloody war, historical gems such as the story of Bung-Ly and his little Cessna Bird Dog, and that of Operation Babylift, deserve to be revealed, and kept alive within books for generations yet to come. As the author of “The Heroes of the Vietnam War: Books for Children,” one of the questions I am asked most often is, “why did you choose the Vietnam War as the subject matter for children’s books?” My answer lies in the fact that through the clouds of confusion and turmoil surrounding the Vietnam Era, the light of valor and compassion still shines forth from the lives of those who were saved by the efforts of heroes.

By Marjorie Haun  5/24/15

Under Government’s Green Thumb

May 24, 2015

Green power lines hogtie poorest Texans

By   /   May 21, 2015      

   AP file photo

TEXAS TURBINES: Getting wind power to consumers is proving a costly proposition for Texans.


By Kenric Ward |

“Green” power is smacking Texans with higher utility bills, but Democratic lawmakers in Austin, aided by wayward Republicans, don’t care. They’re stalling legislation that would reel in wind-energy costs.

The price of putting up power lines to connect wind farms in West Texas to customers in the central and eastern parts of the state has blown away initial estimates. The $4.9 billion venture has hit $6.8 billion, and counting.

Photo courtesy of Troy Fraser

TILTING AGAINST WIND: State Sen. Troy Fraser wants to rein in the ballooning costs of wind projects.

The Senate passed SB 931 to curb the program and relieve ratepayers, but Democrats determined to push more wind power have blocked the measure in the House. The bill, authored by state Sen. Troy Fraser, R-Abilene, is on deathwatch with barely more than a week remaining in the legislative session.

Texans will pay an average of $300 more per year on their electric bills to fund the power-line project. Continued expansion would increase costs.

State Sen. Eddie Lucio of Brownsville was the lone Democrat to vote for Fraser’s bill.

“Texas ratepayers have paid an enormous sum to expand the transmission system to support the (state’s green energy) mandate,” says Lisa Linowes, executive director of, a research group critical of the costs and benefits of such ventures.

“It’s easy to get the projects approved and there is essentially no environmental oversight, so why not?” she noted.

Texas Public Utility Commissioner Kenneth Anderson has questioned the long leash given to wind generators in the name of promoting “clean” energy.

“How long do you have to subsidize something before it’s finally grown up?” Anderson asked. “Wind does not have to meet a schedule. They’re just a price taker.”

Critics point to Germany, where reliance on wind power blew up the cost of electricity and hit poorer residents particularly hard.

According to European Union data, Germany’s average residential electricity rate is 29.8 cents per kilowatt hour — double the rates in neighboring Poland and France, and almost 2.5 times the U.S. average.

“It is a form of ultra-regressive taxation,” says Robert Zubrin, president of Pioneer Energy and a senior fellow with the Center for Security Policy.

Josiah Neeley, Texas director of the market-oriented R Street Institute, acknowledges that even if SB 931 reins in the government-designated Competitive Renewable Energy Zones, Texans will be paying a premium for wind power for years to come.

Neeley says Fraser’s measure is important “because it sends a clear signal that markets, not politics, should decide what kinds of energy Texans use.”

Linowes agrees. “The wind industry is apoplectic about this,” she told Watchdog. “If Texas (approves SB 931), other states will follow.”

Kenric Ward is a national reporter for and writes for its Texas bureau. Contact him at (571) 319-9824. 

Kenric Ward is a veteran journalist who has worked on three Pulitzer Prize-winning newspapers. A California native, he received a BA from UCLA (Political Science/Phi Beta Kappa) and holds an MBA. He reported and edited at the San Jose Mercury News and the Las Vegas Sun before joining in 2012 as Virginia Bureau Chief.

Reposted with permission by 5/24/15

Native Americans harmed by new Obama fracking regulations

May 21, 2015

New Obama administration fracking regs especially hurt Native Americans   

By Jillian Melchior |

Last summer, as President Barack Obama visited the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in Cannon Ball, North Dakota, he called the economic and educational hardships faced by Native Americans “a moral call to action.” The president has claimed he will write a “new chapter” by keeping promises to Native Americans, but sadly, his administration’s recent regulations deny Native Americans economic opportunities they sorely need.

Consider that the Department of the Interior last week released top-down regulation of fracking on tribal lands, which the federal government holds in trust. These redundant rules leave American Indians at a competitive disadvantage, quashing a huge opportunity for economic growth.

Tribal lands host an outsized — and grossly underdeveloped — share of energy resources. As the Washington Times recently noted, “About 25 percent of the nation’s onshore oil and gas reserves rest underneath tribal lands, but those lands account for roughly 5 percent of U.S. production.”

Development of these resources could change the lives of American Indians. The Council of Energy Resource Tribes estimates the energy resources on tribal lands could be worth as much as $1.5 trillion. In addition to raising revenue, energy development would also create good jobs, even for workers with little education.

Christopher Halloran /

DRILL, BABY, DRILL: Although Native American lands account for a large chunk of the nation’s gas reserves they are generally underdeveloped.

Native Americans desperately need this sort of economic boost. More than one in four live in poverty, according to the Pew Research Center. Their high school graduation rates linger at 17 percent below the national average. Even as the economic recovery continues, native people continue to experience roughly double the unemployment rate of the nation.

Nonetheless, the federal government’s dysfunctional relationship with tribes has crippled energy development, according to a February 2014 report by the Property and Environment Research Center.

“On Indian lands, companies must go through at least four federal agencies and 49 steps to acquire a permit for energy development, compared to as few as four steps off reservations,” writes the report’s author,  Shawn Regan. “The effect of this complicated bureaucracy is to raise the cost of entering into resource development agreements with tribes or individual Indians.”

Under the management of the federal government, tribal fossil fuel sales dropped 21 percent between 2003 and 2013, according to the Energy Information Administration. On state and private lands, they grew 34 percent during the same time period.

Native Americans know the federal government is stifling their energy development and economic growth. Testifying to Congress last April, James “Mike” Olguin, acting chairman of the Southern Ute Indian Tribal Council, denounced the “unacceptable, bureaucracy-driven delays in federal approval of mineral leases and drilling permits.”

Olguin described how, on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, tribes “watched their non-Indian neighbors get rich from mineral resource development, as their Indian lands remained unleased and undrilled month after month while awaiting federal approval and permitting.” He decried the “punitive effect of those delays on the poorest individuals and communities in the U.S.”

Likewise, the National Congress of American Indians recently wrote that it “urges Congress and the Administration to remove barriers to the deployment of these energy resources that offer immense benefits to tribes, Native citizens, surrounding communities, and the American economy.”

Instead of loosening the red tape restraining energy development on tribal lands, the Obama administration tightened the bonds. The Department of the Interior issued new regulations on hydraulic fracturing that apply only to federal and Indian lands, not state or private property.

Energy developers who are considering exploration on Indian lands know they will face new requirements on wastewater disposal, well construction and disclosure. Why bother with the added hassle and expense?

Already, states have led the way in creating sensible fracking regulation. They know their residents, environment and economies better than the federal government does, and they’ve crafted policies to match the unique needs of their state. American Indians should have the chance to do the same on their lands.

The Department of the Interior’s new fracking regulations make it harder for American Indians to compete and to have their shot at the American dream. Unless the Obama administration reconsiders, tally this down as just one more broken promise.

MelchiorJillian Kay Melchior writes for National Review as a Thomas L. Rhodes Fellow for the Franklin Center, parent organization of She is also a senior fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum.



Reposted with permission by  5/21/15

EPA: “Saving” the Environment will Kill Ya

Will the EPA’s Clean Power Plan save you money or clean your clock?

By   /   May 13, 2015  /   6 Comments

        AP photo

THE COST TO GET CLEANER: A study sponsored by an energy group warns that 43 states will see double-digit increases in electricity prices in the next decade if the EPA’s Clean Power Plan is enacted.

By Rob Nikolewski │

The Obama administration and theEnvironmental Protection Agency is on the verge of instituting a Clean Power Plan that would mark the first federal measure to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from the nation’s existing power plants.

The EPA says the new rules will save money in the long run, but a recent study comes to a much different conclusion — estimating that 43 states will see their electricity prices increase by double-digits in the next decade, with 14 states having peak-year increases of more than 20 percent.

“You see no benefits from spending all this money and it’s driving up energy prices for families,” said Paul Bailey, senior vice president for federal affairs and policy at the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, an industry group opposed to the proposed rules.

The group also questions whether the new rules will make any discernible difference in reducing the effects of climate change.

It’s another chapter in a long-running debate that has raged since the EPA announced the proposals last June, aimed at reducing CO2 emissions 30 percent by 2030.

EPA critics question whether the Clean Power Plan is the best way to balance economic realities with potential public health benefits while industry and political leaders in energy states such as coal-rich West Virginia accuse the EPA of overstepping its bounds by using the Clean Air Act to enforce the new rules on individual states.

The regulations would govern the estimated 2,417 fossil-fuel-fired power plants in the United States that account for 39 percent of the nation’s CO2 emissions — the largest single source.

NERA Economic Consulting, an economic research firm based in Boston, estimated it would cost between $366 billion and $479 billion over the next 15 years to fully comply with the new regulations, with many of those expenses passed on to energy consumers.

After crunching the numbers for all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, NERA estimated that ratepayers in every state will see electricity prices go up under the EPA regulations during 2020-2029 and that all but seven will see prices rise by 10 percent or more.

During peak years — when electricity usage is at its highest — the NERA study predicts that consumers in 14 states will see potential increases of more than 20 percent.

Utah and Wyoming are two of the hardest-hit states, with the study predicting that Utah ratepayers may see a 24 percent average increase in the next decade, with a potential 26 percent peak-year spike. Wyoming could see a 22 percent average increase, with as much as a 26 percent peak-year increase.

Here are the NERA estimates for all 50 states:

clean power plan analysis1

Chart from the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity

“This will really hit low-income people especially hard,” Bailey said, pointing to data showing that families with pretax earnings of less than $30,000 spend a disproportionate amount on energy expenses.

In a report released last month, the ACCE took the NERA data and broke them down to come up with estimates for the costs and impacts on families in each of the 50 states. 

EPA defends its plan.

The Clean Power Plan will maintain an affordable, reliable energy system, while cutting pollution and protecting our health and environment now and for future generations,” the agency says on its website, and emphasizes the Clean Power Planoffers states flexibility to devise “building blocks” to meet emissions reductions.

Critics of the NERA study point to the fact it was paid for by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity and endorsed by other industry groups, including the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers and the National Mining Association.

“This information has been used in congressional hearings, it’s been used on the floor of the House and the Senate, it’s pretty solid information,” Bailey said.

Related: EPA carbon plan will kill 38,000 Virginia jobs, report says 

The EPA insists the Clean Power Plan will be a net plus for public health as well as the economy.

“Every dollar invested in the Clean Air Act returns $4 to $8 in economic/health benefits,” the agency said in an email to “Utilities are already investing in clean energy and EPA’s proposed rule propels that ongoing progress.”

The statement echoed remarks made by EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy when the plan was unveiled, saying the new rules will deliver up to $90 billion in climate and health benefits by 2030. When it comes to soot and smog reductions, “for every dollar we invest in the plan, families will see $7 dollars in health benefits,” McCarthy said.

“When states take advantage of energy efficiency — when the effects of our plan are in place in 2030, average electricity bills will be 8 percent cheaper,” the EPA statement went on to say.

Earlier this month, Nature Climate Change, a monthly peer-reviewed scientific journal that researches global warming, came out with its own study on the EPA power plant standards and touted the regulations’ benefits.

The Nature Climate Change study looked at three different scenarios and advocated adopting a “stringent but flexible policy” emphasizing demand-side energy efficiency — that is, instead of adding more generation to the system, getting utilities to pay energy users to reduce consumption.

But a spokeswoman for the the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity rapped the NCC study, saying its researchers ignored that coal makes up about 40 percent of the nation’s electric power.

“While these academics are hypothesizing about unproveable consequences, what’s known is that families are struggling to pay their monthly bills and companies are struggling to stay in business — and any increase in energy costs will burden them unnecessarily,” said Laura Sheehan, senior vice president for communications.

Opponents of the Clean Power Plan claim the expense from the EPA’s rules won’t make much difference in the climate, pointing to analysis from another EPA rulemaking that CO2 concentrations would be reduced by less than 0.5 percent, that global average temperature rise would be reduced by less than two-one hundredths of a degree and sea level rise would be reduced by 0.3 of a millimeter — the thickness of three sheets of paper.

“These numbers are sort of like kryptonite for the EPA,” Bailey said in a telephone interview. “They do not like to admit that the Clean Power Plan will have no effect on global climate change.”


“We know that acting on climate isn’t just a moral responsibility we must accept — it’s an economic opportunity we can seize, to sharpen our competitive edge, create jobs, strengthen international ties, and catalyze global action,” the EPA statement to said.

The Clean Power Plan looks to push power plants to transition from coal to cleaner sources of energy and the NERA study predicts it will lead to coal generation dropping by 29 to 71 percent.

Two coal companies and 14 states are challenging the EPA in court, saying the agency lacks the authority to issue the regulation and is overstepping its bounds by treading on ground previously reserved for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and individual states.

But public utility commissioners, environmental and energy agency leaders in 14 other states have come out in support of the EPA.

The final regulation for existing power plants is before the EPA while the final rule for new plants is currently before the Office of Management and Budget. The EPA is expected to sign off on the ruling for existing and new power plants this summer.

(Clarification: An earlier version of this story incorrectly described the status of final rules for existing and new power plants. It has since been corrected.)


Rob Nikolewski is the National Energy Correspondent for He is based in Santa Fe, N.M. Contact him at and follow him on Twitter @NMWatchdog.

Reposted with permission by  5/19/15

BLM to close Colorado roads that have been used by public for 50 years

May 17, 2015

BLM plan to close over 1,000 public routes riles western Colorado

By   /   May 13, 2015      

Watchdog Arena

MESA, Colo.—A plan that will close nearly 2,000 miles of public roads that have previously been open for use by the people of Mesa County is creating a public backlash against the Grand Junction field office of the federal Bureau of Land Management.

The BLM’s resource management plans (RMP) regulate the access and types of traffic allowed on roads on public lands. Road maintenance and seasonal closures are also detailed in such plans.

Shutterstock Image

NO COMMENT: Coloradans are up in arms over the BLM’s proposed plan to close off public routes that are heavily traveled with no clear justification.

But the most recent RMP in Mesa County indicates the BLM’s intent to limit access to public roads which have traditionally been open to motorized, horse, and foot traffic. Accessible routes will decrease from the current 3,469 miles to just 1,777. The BLM has not offered a clear justification for its planned road closures, which has left many in Mesa County frustrated and baffled.

The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel reported that people with physical disabilities are especially troubled by the BLM’s plans. TheMay 2 article detailed a protest by 250 who gathered outside the BLM field office in Grand Junction:

“As the gathering made plain, people with disabilities enjoy camping, fishing and hunting as much as anyone, but the travel management section of the BLM’s resource management plan for the area seems not to notice, protesters said.”

In the Sentinel article, Joyce Tullio, a regular user of the public routes who is dependent on medical oxygen, complained, “The areas we like to go in, they’re closing them off. People who can hike or ride bicycles … they can go in those areas, but I’m being locked out.”

The BLM, not unlike other federal agencies, is not required to collaborate with local governments when formulating RMP for a given area. The planned closure of roads, most of which were established decades ago, will effectively close off tens of thousands of acres of public lands to human access.

The Mesa County Board of Commissioners has expressed grave concern about the potential economic impact of such a move. Issues overlooked by the BLM in the latest plan included watersheds, oil and gas leases, and local economies. On May 8, the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel quoted a letter written to the BLM from the Mesa County Commissioners:

“BLM fails to adequately consider the effects its proposed management strategy will have on current and future oil and gas exploration and development activities, and the associated socioeconomic impact on Mesa County, its local communities, and the state of Colorado,” the letter says.

Reduced leasing opportunities also reduce the possible revenues due to the county from federal mineral leases, the commissioners’ letter says, as it notes that the proposed plan fails to account for development of the Niobrara and Mancos Shale formations, which hold significant oil and gas reserves.

The plan as proposed “contrasts with the federal government’s longstanding policy of encouraging responsible energy development and motorized trail use on federal lands under multiple-use principles,” the letter says. “The changes reflect a philosophy working to reduce and limit natural resource extraction throughout western Colorado’s federal mineral estate and force overcrowding of increasingly popular motorized recreation.”

The Mesa County Commissioners went on to request a six-month review of the BLM’s plans before the agency proceeds with any closures, which according to a BLM representative, is “unprecedented.”

There also appears to be conflicts between federal law and the BLM’s proposed closures. According to Brandon Siegfried, the President of the Public Lands Access Association,—as quoted in the Daily Sentinel—“Most of the routes facing closure were established 50 years ago or more. Federal law requires the BLM to treat such historic routes like highways, which cannot be closed through a resource management plan.”

In western Colorado, the ratio of federal-managed lands to private lands is significantly higher than in the rest of the state. Agricultural, economic, recreational, and various private interests of local citizens is dependent upon access through a vast and complex road system. 

Although the BLM may find the growing backlash from citizens and elected officials against its proposed road closures “unprecedented,” it is likely to grow in western Colorado.

This article was written by a contributor of Watchdog Arena, Franklin Center’s network of writers, bloggers, and citizen journalists.

Reposted with permission of the author  5/17/15

Extremist Enviros Wage War on Colorado Coal Jobs

May 15, 2015

This federal judge could stop local coal in Colorado

By   /   May 12, 2015      

 Wachdog Arena

MOFFAT, Colo.—Moffat County in western Colorado is run on fossil fuels, and local jobs in the coal industry comprise one of its key economic drivers. On May 8, a federal judge ruled in favor of the environmentalist organization, Wild Earth Guardians (WEG), which filed lawsuits against the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) on the basis that it was out-of-compliance when it approved the plans for the Colowyo and Trapper coal mining projects.

Shutterstock Image

COAL COUNTY AT STAKE: A federal judge has sided with a powerful environmental group whose mission is to wipe out coal economies in the Mountain West.

The OSM is a branch of the Department of the Interior, and oversees leasing processes for various surface mining operations on federally-managed lands. Lawsuits against the OSM, such as those filed by WEG, can impede, and even stop, coal exploration and extraction processes altogether.

The full withdrawal of OSM leases could potentially devastate Moffat County. According to a Craig Daily Press article, the Colowyo mine employs around 250 people and adds $12 million annually to local and state economies. With an entire population of less than 13,000—which is shrinking— the loss of 250 good-paying coal jobs poses a real threat to all sectors of the economy in Moffat County.

The federal judge in this case, R. Brooke Jackson, granted the effected companies a 120-day window in which to review and revise current plans, but the ruling leaves little room for error and will bring a close to all mining operations by Colowyo if full compliance is not met. According the Craig Daily Press:

The court has provided the Office of Surface Mining with 120 days to “take a hard look at the direct and indirect environmental effects of the Colowyo mining plan revisions and provide public notice and an opportunity for public involvement before reaching its decisions.”

If this process has not been completed within the 120-day window, an order to halt mining operations will be issued immediately.

In reference to the potential mine closures, Judge Jackson said, “I find that the benefits of immediate vacatur do not outweigh the potential harms.” His position seems to favor the scenic “view” from nearby recreational areas over human and economic concerns. The article goes on to say:

Jackson supported Guardians standing argument, stating that members of the organization, specifically Jeremy Nichols, climate and energy program director for Guardians, suffered a verifiable injury.

‘Using lands within view of the affected area may establish injury-in-fact when the aesthetic and recreational value of the lands would be harmed by the challenged activities,’ he wrote.

According to U.S. Census data, per capita income in Moffat County, at $24,577 per year, is well below the average in Colorado, which is $31,109. Mineral extraction, agriculture, and a small tourism industry provide the basis for the local economy.


But out of those economic sectors, jobs in the mining industry far outweigh the others in income and benefits. The average Colowyo job pays $44,000 per year.  And, according to one study by the National Mining Association, the indirect job creation for a typical coal miner is 1:3, so for every one coal job, there are three additional jobs created to support the mines themselves and the housing, schooling, and other needs of the miners and their families. The ruling by Judge Jackson could result in the loss of 1,000 jobs in Moffat County.

Unfortunately for the coal community in Moffat, and other regions of the country, WEG is relentless in their efforts to shut down mining operations. The Craig Daily Press article says:

The claim against Colowyo and Trapper mines was originally part of a larger complaint from [Wild Earth] Guardians regarding mines in New Mexico, Montana, Colorado and Wyoming.

The WEG website discloses their goal to eliminate all forms of coal mining in the Mountain West:

Wild Earth Guardians is challenging every new Interior Department plan to sell coal. We are forcing a new paradigm that will make coal more expensive and thus, clean energy more competitive. At every turn we will fight the coal industry to keep coal in the ground.

With the ruling in Moffat County by Judge Jackson, local coal companies face regulatory complications that will certainly make it more expensive to mine in the area, and if WEG has its way, it will become impossible.

This article was written by a contributor of Watchdog Arena, Franklin Center’s network of writers, bloggers, and citizen journalists.

reposted with permission of the author  5/15/15

New Colorado Law Bans EBT Cards at Strip Clubs, Pot Shops

May 12, 2015

By Arthur Kane |

DENVER —A bill intended to block ATM welfare withdrawals at strip bars, liquor stores, pot dispensaries and casinos, which was introduced after a series of stories exposed thousands of tax dollars taken out at those locations, passed the Colorado Legislature last month and Gov. John Hickenlooper signed it Friday.

House Bill 1255 sponsored by state Rep. Tim Dore, R-Elizabeth, and Rep. Dan Pabon, D-Denver was signed with about 30 other bills Friday, according to a news release.

In March, Dore told fellow lawmakers the legislation was prompted by a series of stories.

Photo Courtesy Colorado Legislature

FIGHT FRAUD: State Rep. Tim Dore, R-Elizabeth,  successfully got his bill that would require ATM owners to help stop welfare abuses at their shops signed into law.

“The Watchdog group that monitors issues throughout the nation (revealed this) and as soon as one organization looked at this, others verified it,” he said.

House Bill 1255 allows the Colorado departments of Human Services and Revenue to write rules requiring businesses to block their ATMs from accepting welfare-benefit cards. The bill also requires regular reports to lawmakers about illegal withdrawals, which have been banned under state and federal law for years, but found continued despite of lawmakers’ intent.

CDHS has opposed changes to welfare ATMs in the past but this year came on board after finding about $500,000 a year was withdrawn at locations prohibited by state and federal law — that’s about 1 percent of the total welfare withdrawals.

“It’s unusual for me as a social worker to support limiting access for people struggling with poverty,” CDHS executive director Reggie Bicha told the committee in March. “Colorado needs a balanced way to deal with this.”

The bill passed the House in March, the Senate two weeks ago and was sent last week to Hickenlooper.   

Arthur Kane is an investigative reporter who covers Colorado and Oklahoma. You can follow him at @ArthurMKane. If you have tips or investigative ideas, email him at

reposted with permission by  5/13/15

What really empowers a woman?

May 10, 2015

Though I can’t change any of it, and I know it can work for my good, sometimes I wish I had never made the stupid, disastrous choices that have impeded my progress and broken my heart. But the one thing I will never regret is the blessed choice I made to be a mom.

I’ve climbed slick rock monoliths without ropes and gear. I’ve run whitewater rivers in rafts, and body-surfed in the ocean. I’ve flown in tiny airplanes, to get a glimpse of my Western Colorado home from the intimacy of the sky. I’ve traveled here and there to conferences and commemorations and parties and just to hang out with friends, but the most adventurous thing I will ever do is be a mom.

I’ve been on stage, as the star of a play, as a character actor, or a member of the chorus. I’ve traveled as an entertainer, singer, done summer-stock theater, danced and emoted my little heart out. I’ve directed plays and worked behind the scenes on movies and television commercials, but the most creative thing I have ever done is to bring my kids into the world.

I’ve written books, and a gozillion articles. Sometimes I speak my words to a group–although I prefer the written word because, for me, the spoken word can be a struggle. I can write a prospectus, or a compliance matrix, or a grant, a short story or a silly skit, but the most important words I will ever write or speak, are those addressed to my children, in love, and testimony, and “what’s up?”

I’ve had jobs cleaning motels, serving in restaurants, in laundries and orchards, show business, schools, and in the halls of State Government, but the most important job I have had, or will ever have, is to be a mom.

I’ve enjoyed the company of dear friends, laughed ’till my face cramped up, goofed off, pulled pranks, quipped, punned, and imbibed in general silliness all of my life, but the most fun I have ever had is as a mom to four smart, funny, slightly off-beat kids.

I’ve influenced many people and used my words to influence the outcomes of important political causes and candidacies. I’ve used my network of friends and acquaintances to sway opinions and win hearts to the right side of an issue, but the most empowering thing I can imagine is being a mom.

I’ve suffered unspeakable regret, sorrow for my errors, pain for my wrongs, suffering for my sins, and spiritual estrangement for my defiance. Though I can’t change any of it, and I know it can work for my good, sometimes I wish I had never made the stupid, disastrous choices that have impeded my progress and broken my heart. But the one thing I will never regret is the blessed choice I made to be a mom.

I know little about eternity, or the mind of God, but one thing I do know about my Eternal Father and His plan, is that he has blessed me–a faulty, fragile, rebellious brat of a daughter–with the most precious gift mortality can offer. God has endowed me with the privilege of having four amazing, bright, loving–and a little rebellious–people in my life who call me “Mom.”

by Marjorie Haun  5/10/15

c 1505239_10201994636867991_2604915152435442845_n BrandonLeah IMAG0393_2 JesseCourier




If you didn’t vote for Romney because he’s a Mormon, do you regret it?

May 8, 2015

Mitt Romney, though an imperfect candidate with a mixed history, would not have allowed (through intent, mismanagement, neglect, and malice, as on the part of Barack Obama), the Middle East to become a chaotic, dangerous, bloody mess, and the American economic system to teeter on the verge of collapse.

If you opted NOT to vote for Mitt Romney in 2012 because he’s Mormon, or was too “moderate” as the governor of Massachusetts, I want to ask if you are now prepared to set aside your prejudices and unite with various factions of the Republican Party in order to win the White House in 2016?

Ask yourselves, if Romney had been elected in 2012 would…

  • …ISIS have taken over large regions in Iraq and Syria, and be spreading into other areas of the Middle East in a genocidal crusade against civilization?
  • …we be negotiating with Iran to form a treaty that will legitimize and facilitate their creation of nuclear weapons program that will threaten the existence of Israel, and create a 21st nuclear arms race between Muslim nations in the Middle East?
  • …Christians be persecuted, driven from their homes, and murdered by the thousands by rogue jihadi groups from Iraq to Africa?
  • …massive waves of illegal aliens from Mexico, Central America, African nations, and other unstable countries across the globe, introducing disease, terrorism, and millions of potential government dependents, be surging across our southern border?
  • …cities like Ferguson and Baltimore be in the process of ruination caused by riots and vandalism engendered by race hustlers like Al Sharpton and Eric Holder?
  • …legitimate journalists like Sharyl Attkisson and James Rosen be the targets of minions in the Administration and the Department of Justice, who want to shut them down and punish them for exercising their rights to free speech?
  • …medical costs soar and treatment options decrease under the socialized medical program called Obamacare?
  • …the IRS get away with targeting conservative and TEA Party organizations?
  • …92,000,000 Americans be non-participants in the workforce?
  • …nearly half of Americans be receiving some kind of government assistance?
  • …we have a national debt that is continuing to skyrocket, and is currently over $18,ooo,ooo,ooo,ooo?
  • …we have an out-of-control NSA spying on countless billions of phone calls and emails transmitted by ordinary Americans?
  • …the Veteran’s Administration be in an utter shambles, cheating thousands of wounded heroes out of their deserved benefits and medical treatment?
  • …hundreds of executive actions designed to sidestep the rule of law and implement a radical progressive agenda be enacted?
  • …incompetence and corruption in our federal agencies, from the Secret Service to the State Department, be the status quo?
  • 65% of Americans believe the country is headed down the toilet?

Folks, the list of disasters that have occurred under the direction of the Obama Administration is too long to detail here. But you get my point; Mitt Romney, though an imperfect candidate with a mixed history, would not have allowed (through intent, mismanagement, neglect, and malice, as on the part of Barack Obama), the Middle East to become a chaotic, dangerous, bloody mess, and the American economic system to teeter on the verge of collapse.

Perhaps NOT voting for Romney was a sort of revenge against the Establishment GOP. Perhaps it was drawing the line in the sand against a Mormon as the leader of the nation. Those matters are up for debate. What is not up for debate is the fact that when disgruntled Conservatives, harboring irrational prejudices, refuse to engage in the process because they don’t have what they believe is the perfect candidate, America suffers, the world suffers, and the future becomes very dubious and bleak for our children.

I hope and pray that for the future of free people and free nations, that a lesson has been learned, and 2012 will not be repeated.

by Marjorie Haun  5/8/15

Stoners vs the Environment

April 30, 2015

Earth Day and 420 marijuana festivities clash in Colorado



Shutterstock Image

A SURPRISING CONFLICT: Colorado’s marijuana industry is at odds with Earth Day, whose environmental movement initially brought about the marijuana culture.

By Marjorie Haun | Watchdog Arena

In Colorado, Earth Day, which arose from the 1970s environmental movement, coincides with the “420” Marijuana Festival. The era that gave us Earth Day also brought the marijuana culture into the public consciousness, which has evolved into a movement to decriminalize recreational marijuana use in many states.

In 2015, two years following the state’s legalization of recreational marijuana, there is a surprising clash emerging between the marijuana industry and environmental concerns.

Marijuana is a water-intensive crop, and one plant can require up to six gallons of water per day. Since marijuana was legalized in 2012, Colorado has awarded over 600 licenses to medical marijuana growers and nearly 400 to recreational marijuana growers.

Marijuana plants are grown in warehouses with capacities up to 3,600 plants, green houses with a capacity of 1,800 plants, home basements with a capacity up to 6 plants, and outdoor farms, which can hold thousands.Though there is currently no precise data on water usage, marijuana cultivation facilities in Colorado could be using hundreds of thousands of gallons of water per day, and millions per week.

Parts of Colorado are currently in what the National Climatic Data Center classifies as asevere drought.  The state has struggled for decades with regional water shortages, and Gov. John Hickenlooper’s water plan threatens to divert even more water from Colorado’s thirsty western regions. Complicating the issue for the marijuana industry is the fact that federal water cannot be legally used to cultivate the crop.

About 1.6 million acre-feet of Colorado’s agricultural water comes from federal resources, leaving marijuana growers with only private wells or municipal water as alternatives. Whether the water comes from federally managed water or municipal resources, there is still the problem of supply, and Colorado may be headed in the disastrous direction of California.

Recreational marijuana is currently illegal in California. Nevertheless, great attention is being paid to the amount of water going to illegal indoor and outdoor marijuana growing operations. California’s historic drought has impacted the state’s agricultural interests, threatening essential food crops, fisheries, and other industries.

A recent research article entitled “Impacts of Surface Water Diversions for Marijuana Cultivation on Aquatic Habitat in Four Northwestern California Watersheds” explains:

..that water demand for marijuana cultivation has the potential to divert substantial portions of streamflow in the study watersheds, with an estimated flow reduction of up to 23% of the annual seven-day low flow in the least impacted of the study watersheds.

The marijuana culture has historically been associated with the environmental movement, but available science indicates that the growing industry is environmentally problematic. Not only does the cultivation of marijuana require massive amounts of water, but the energy requirements for indoor warehouse and green-house growing operations are vast as well. A UC Berkeley study says:

The most significant environmental effect of cannabis production, and the one that varies most with different production practices, is energy consumption, especially fossil energy use with climate effects from release of greenhouse gas. Indoor-grown marijuana is an energy-intensive product by weight, using on the order of 2000 kWh per pound of product (for comparison, aluminum requires only about 7 kWh per pound).

It’s estimated that Colorado growers produce 287,259 pounds of marijuana per year, which requires 574,518,000 kWh of electricity, most of which comes from fossil-fuel generated resources. By one estimate, for every pound of marijuana produced, 4,600 pounds of CO2 are released into the atmosphere. Earth Day celebrants concerned with greenhouse gases should note the significant carbon footprint of Colorado’s marijuana industry.

California, which is rife with illegal outdoor grows, suffers from the denuding of the country side, soil loss and erosion as a result of poor marijuana farming practices. A form of water and soil pollution called “nutrient pollution” is also associated with marijuana cultivation. Fertilizers meant to enhance growth of the cannabis plants flow out with water that feeds the growing operations, whether through hydroponics or irrigated fields. The nutrient pollution from marijuana cultivation can be significant.

Colorado is currently struggling with problems stemming from a lack of information about what fertilizers and pesticides can be safely and legally used on marijuana plants.

The California Fish and Wildlife department reports that illegal stands of marijuana are the source of pollution in many of the state’s rivers and streams. In another story from California, illegal marijuana growers used rat poison to stop weasels from raiding their plants. The damage from this practice to wildlife and the environment was devastating and long-lasting.

Colorado’s legalized recreational marijuana, “pot tourism,” and a growing “edibles” industry, are celebrated each April 20 in downtown Denver, but as the environmental problems of marijuana farming become more apparent, it makes one take pause and wonder if those Earth Day “flower children” of the 1970’s might be on the verge of a new war with themselves.

This article was written by a contributor of Watchdog Arena, Franklin Center’s network of writers, bloggers, and citizen journalists.

WordPress SEO fine-tune by Meta SEO Pack from Poradnik Webmastera