How many times have we seen environmentalists and the affiliated entourage “spin facts” to reflect their personal views? The same liberal tactics are being used to unnecessarily create fear among Texans. Thus far, several versions of scare mongering prose has been used by the motley crew.
We have witnessed articles featuring quotes from the Sierra Club, Mother Jones, SEED, and others. When the first version of “facts” was discredited, different environmental groups were brought in for a “press conference of sorts.
The most recent statements attack the free market system that is resolving the costly chore of waste management for Texas and other states involved in an interstate compact. Disposal of low-level hazardous waste is a high cost proposition for states. Many states have tried to manage the whole process and failed. Thankfully, the states were able to partner with a high quality private enterprise company for solutions. This company is Waste Control Specialists (WCS).
Innuendo and rhetoric about private enterprise and associated profits indicate an aversion by the leftists to the way business is conducted in the United States. Mutually beneficial business agreements not only survive, but thrive in America’s free market system. To insinuate inequitable profit margins and fees is baseless and proof can be found in the state code as to the review of all fees on a regular basis. Perhaps a review of economics 101 or supply and demand would benefit the naysayers.
Quote directly from the Health and Safety Code Section 401.245
(b) The commission by rule shall adopt and periodically revise compact waste disposal fees according to a schedule that is based on the projected annual volume of low-level radioactive waste received, the relative hazard presented by each type of low-level radioactive waste that is generated by the users of radioactive materials, and the costs identified in Section 401.246.
Again, the rabble-rousers have elected to mislead the readers. At any point in the business relationship, there is legislation ensuring regular reviews of fees.
As stated in my earlier article, https://texasfor56.wordpress.com/2011/04/08/texas-propaganda-on-hazardous-waste-bill/ , liability bonds are posted by the company prior to each delivery to Texas. The environmentalists seemed to be shocked that Texas would take control of the facility after deliveries are completed. A review of other states and their practices indicated this is business as usual for a state to assume oversight of the facility. It is the choice of the state.
In a thinly veiled final attempt to discredit the company and the state for the transactions, moral hazard terminology was introduced to the hypotheses.
What Does Moral Hazard Mean?
The risk that a party to a transaction has not entered into the contract in good faith, has provided misleading information about its assets, liabilities or credit capacity, or has an incentive to take unusual risks in a desperate attempt to earn a profit before the contract settles.
The Moral Hazard definition simply does not apply to these circumstances.
There are interstate compacts involved, Federal oversight, State Agency oversight, and a multitude of additional checks and balances. The best practices have evolved over the years out of necessity by the states and the Federal Government. Moral Hazard would imply a situation that is not present in this transaction. Nothing is done prior to the contract being settled. There are no advantages to risk taking, and no incentives to alter schedules.
My hope is environmentalists and their minions will begin to focus on areas that could use their help. They clearly got this situation wrong, and need to give up the repeated desperate attempts to form scandalous pieces of fiction. The biggest question for Texas, is who is funding these lame publicity stunts by environmentalists and liberals, and why?Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )