Link to article here.

Obituary: Trans Texas Corridor
By Roy Bragg
Express News
August 31, 2007
The Trans-Texas Corridor, a plan so flimsy and badly conceived that it attained the believability of an urban legend, died of its own greed and hubris Thursday.

Death came quietly to the ballyhooed plan — which had proposed spending billions of tax dollars to convert existing, state-built highways to toll roads and augment them with unnecessary superhighways — with the revelation that highway officials just wanted more money.

The stated goal of the TTC was to handle imaginary gridlock 50 years in the future. The case for the TTC, however, was argued with faulty data, questionable reports, inexplicable anecdotes, and diversionary arguments.

Death not reported immediately

The boondoggle actually died in December, when the Texas Department of Transportation came up with a cockamamie plan to buy back existing federal interstate highways and turn them into toll roads. The move would require Congress’ approval, and the agency was lobbying for it.

News of the plan didn’t surface until recently.

The December plan didn’t call for new roads. Rather, it unmasked the real goals of the TTC — squeeze money out of a citizenry whose lives revolve around highway travel. Drivers, in other words, were a captive audience. Tolls don’t require voter or legislative approval, and are essentially taxes without oversight.

TTC’s timely death comes after the controversy over the $9 million “Keep Texas Moving” advertising campaign. Polly Ross Hughes wrote about it today on MySA:

“It’s less than 50 cents a Texan,” Transportation Department spokesman Chris Lippincott said in defense of the ad campaign. “We could sit down and buy them a cup of coffee for that kind of money.”

As of this writing, Lippincott hasn’t bought coffee for me or anyone I know.

By Donna Parker

Bill Molina ’84 is an award-winning Hollywood cinematographer who toiled on film and episodic television shows such as Beverly Hills 90210, but now he is focused on ZIP codes closer to his Texas roots.

A recent winner of the Worldfest Houston Film Festival Platinum Remi Award for his feature documentary Truth be Tolled, Bill tellsthe story of foreign companies poised to make a fortune off the Trans-Texas Corridor and by charging tolls on existing Texas roadways already paid for by taxpayers.

“I never saw myself as a political activist. I just got really tired of seeing the direction our country is taking. When this issue of tolling our existing roads without a public vote came up, I got involved – not as a filmmaker – but as a concerned taxpaying citizen. There is a story to be told here not only about the double taxation of our roads but more importantly the TTC and the largest forcible eminent domain acquisition in U.S. history.”

Last year, Bill attended a public meeting on a proposed San Antonio toll road and noticed no one from the TV press was reporting on the debate or the other obvious toll issues.

“I picked up a video camera and started shooting these public meetings and became more annoyed that there was little or no press coverage. At one meeting, there were 800 people and I was the only one documenting the event with a camera. I ended up producing a documentary in order to share the truth with the public.”

Bill is currently retooling the film for a premiere in San Antonio later this month.

“My entire focus right now is this documentary. I’ve put my career on hold to produce this film. This is something for which people need to wake up and get involved. What’s at stake is far more than just a toll road.”

Always passionate about filmmaking, Bill also minored in speech and drama while at Trinity and credits several professors who served as mentors and jump started his career path.

“Steve Gilliam, department of speech and drama, was a great influence because he was very concerned about his students and gave us artistic freedom to be ourselves and accomplish what we could. Also, my advisor, David Thomas, department of communication, was instrumental in encouraging me to finish my first student film, Revelation, which was honored by the AMPAS (Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences) student competition, leading the way to University Film and Video grant for my next film project.”

Bill says the turning point in his professional life in Hollywood was directing his first feature film Where Truth Lies, starring his idol, Malcolm McDowell.

“That was a trip in itself…to have Alex sitting in my car discussing Kubrick’s Clockwork Orange.”

The other star was Kim Cattrall (of Sex and the City fame) and Bill almost blew that first meeting when he got caught in traffic, showed up late, and then couldn’t produce his wallet to pay for the dinner.

“I walked out of the restaurant thinking my career was over, but Kim called back within an hour and agreed to do the movie,” laughs Bill.

“Although I’m still star struck by Hollywood, I know that there are so many other important issues in the world and I just needed to produce a film that would actually make a difference.”

You may contact Bill at the following email address:
stormpictures@earthlink.net

For more information on his documentary, Truth be Tolled:
http://www.truthbetolled.com/

OPINION: Help wanted: sound transportation policy
by William Lutz
Lone Star Report
August 27, 2007

The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) says it needs to spend $9 million in taxpayer money to sell its vision of transportation policy to the public.

Maybe if TxDOT pursued rational transportation policies, the public support would follow, and it could spend that $9 million building and maintaining roads.

Listening to the state’s transportation officials, including Gov. Rick Perry and Commissioner of Transportation Ric Williamson, talk is like reading a cheap imitation of a George Orwell novel.

Borrowing money and deficit spending are called “innovative financing techniques.” The term “public-private partnerships” is used to describe mortgaging public property. Tax hikes are called “market-based” or “value-based” tolling or “market valuations.” Government-sanctioned monopolies are referred to as “introducing competition to transportation financing.”

Here’s why Texans ought to be concerned.

Borrowing carries a price tag. The Texas Constitution has traditionally eschewed deficit spending and required existing revenue to pay for existing spending. Now, the state wants to build most of its roads by borrowing, either publicly or by getting a private firm to agree to borrow money, build a road, and collect tolls.

There’s no such thing as free money, and often bond lawyers request concessions in exchange for the money fronted to the state. Many of these private financing arrangements prohibit the state from building free roads near a toll road, or require it to pay a stiff penalty if it builds a competing free road or wants out of the deal.
Secrecy. A 2005 transportation bill exempts draft copies of many road deals from public disclosure – even in the face of criminal subpoenas.

Prior to 2007, the terms of these deals weren’t even public until after the contracts were signed, and the terms set in stone. In 2007, the Legislature provided some additional transparency, but more sunshine is still needed to ensure informed consent from the public.

No checks and balances. The ability of TxDOT to rent state highways to private vendors without a legislative appropriation basically gives TxDOT a license to print money, without going though the usual appropriations process. The Constitution wisely gives the Legislature the power of the purse, and state assets should be pledged only in response to a public legislative appropriation.

The state also takes some highway spending “off-budget” by allowing the creation of regional mobility authorities to build state highways. Even the state auditor cannot precisely calculate how much the state spends on roads.

No fiscal restraint. TxDOT officials often claim that it would require a $1.20 increase in the gasoline tax to build needed infrastructure without tolling. This figure is a cost estimate of every project that a region might want to build in the next few years. Both the Governor’s Business Council and the State Auditor have taken issue with TxDOT’s calculations.

It also shows a lack of priorities at the agency. Most Americans would love a longer vacation, a fancier home, and a nicer car. But their wallets get in the way. Every day, Texans take their limited resources and differentiate between wants and needs. The government should do so also.

Tax hikes. Remember when Bill Clinton referred to taxes paid by the well-to-do as “contributions,” as if payment of taxes were somehow voluntary? Remember how much fun Republicans had lampooning all the rhetorical games Clinton played to avoid referring to his “deficit reduction” plan as a tax hike?

Well, it’s happening again. In the 2007 transportation compromise, Perry insisted on “market-based tolling,” whereby the tolls for new highways are set above the cost to build and maintain the road. Perhaps one could call a toll a “user fee” if the amount of the toll reflected the cost of building and maintaining the road (though even that’s debatable). But when money is taken from a government-sanctioned toll road monopoly and used to build other free roads, that’s a tax.

Simply stated, Perry is raising taxes.

These bad transportation policies are being promoted not only here but also by the U.S. Department of Transportation and in other states like Indiana, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. But just because George W. Bush likes something doesn’t make it right or conservative.

There is a better alternative. It starts with the recognition that building roads is a legitimate function for government, as recognized by the U.S. and Texas constitutions.

Further, user-based fees such as gasoline taxes and auto registration fees are appropriate ways to fund that service, provided that all revenue from those fees goes to roads.

Then, the state should do for transportation what it is already doing in health, education, and welfare policies – look at costs. Why has the cost of building roads increased so quickly? Is this legitimate? Are there ways to reduce these increases?

Registration fees should be adjusted so that overweight trucks pay their fair share. The relationship between damage to a road and weight is exponential, and the registration fees and taxes should reflect that. The gas tax should be adjusted to acknowledge that, on a per-car basis, the gas tax has declined due to improved fuel economy in cars and trucks.

Once the state has gone though that process, then and only then should discussion of tolling begin.

It’s time to stop pushing public policies that primarily benefit a select few highway contractors and investment bankers at the expense of the motoring public.

Instead, let’s put a spirit of public service back into TxDOT and enact transportation policies that provide accountability and frugality. Those policies wouldn’t take a $9 million PR campaign to sell to Texas voters.

Link to article here.

State Highway 121 was wrested from the grip of a foreign company, Cintra, and it’s now in the hands of the North Texas Toll Authority (NTTA), despite threats of sanctions from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Talk about brazen! However, 16 miles of this 26 mile project are already built and PAID FOR WITH GAS TAXES (it’s INEXCUSABLE that it’s now converted to a toll road!). To make things worse, SB 792 allows even our public tolling entities to charge the HIGHEST POSSIBLE TOLLS! The FHWA’s behavior, repeated threat letters of withholding our federal highway revenue, then backing off thanks to Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, then threats of sanctions, it’s clear the Bush Administration is a wholly-owned subsidiary of corporate hogs at the trough!

The FHWA is charged with protecting the public interest, and not only have they flouted that responsibility, they rabidly PROMOTED a foreign interest OVER the public’s, ON OUR DIME! James Ray at the FHWA let the cat out of the bag a few months ago, that the FHWA, Texas Transportation Commission, Perry, and Bush truly believe in state run capitalism (which is really fascism). This is beyond appalling…this has to be a criminal dereliction of duty!

Texas officials say they were forced to abort the Cintra concession
Toll Road News
August 23, 2007

• SH121
• Texas

Texas officials have revealed that in the past few days they discussed with the FHWA canceling the past approval of NTTA taking over SH121, together with canceling the Cintra concession. They got an assurance the cancelations would get Texas back in compliance with federal procurement law. They have sent us copies of two letters on the SH121 crisis both dated Tuesday Aug 21 TxDOT-FHWA, and FHWA-TxDOT.The first TxDOT-FHWA letter responds to Richard Capka’s blistering Aug 16 attack on Texas’ handling of the SH121 procurement which he cited as clear violations of federal law and regulations. See report http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/3092Addressed to Janice Brown, FHWA rep in Austin TX the letter is signed by TxDOT deputy Amadeo Saenz and foreshadows actions taken today by the governing Texas Transportation Commission (TTC). It says they will consider canceling the Cintra procurement and canceling the decision (called a minute order) previously approving NTTA for SH121.

The letter then says: “We request FHWA concurrence that (these) actions…will be sufficient to bring TxDOT into compliance with federal law and not be subject to (sanctions)…”

The letter adds that further FHWA action on environmental clearance of SH121 is “critically needed” to move forward on SH121. See TxDOT-FHWA letter here.

The response from FHWA rep Brown to TxDOT’s Saenz says that the two proposed cancellations would indeed bring TxDOT into compliance with federal law and remove the basis for federal sanctions. It also says FHWA is working for “timely completion” of the environmental review. See FHWA’s Brown’s letter here.

TxDOT unpersuaded NTTA bid better but decision was local

Texas officials say it was their assessment Cintra provided the sounder proposal but that they had agreed to devolve responsibility to the Dallas-Ft Worth area council of governments’ Regional Transportation Council (RTC) which preferred the late proposal by the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA). Under Texas law SB792 they say they are required to defer to the RTC despite their doubts about the choice of NTTA’s proposal.

At the Texas Transportation Council meeting today the two cancellations were made:

Agenda item 8a passed as a new minute order notes that a RFQ for SH121 was issued March 2005 and after shortlisting a formal RFP was issued mid Aug 2006. Feb 28 the commission “conditionally awarded” the concession or comprehensive development agreement to Cintra.

However the instructions to proposers authorized TxDOT to suspend or terminate concession contract negotiations at any time – providing for cancellation of the procurement.

The resolution passed today says simply: “The commission has determined that it is in the best interest of the state to terminate the CDA negotiations with Cintra…” and “It is therefore ordered that the procurement… is canceled.” See text of 8a here.

Agenda item 8b outlines the origins of the NTTA move with the RTC asking on Mar 26 if NTTA wanted to top the Cintra bid. NTTA submitted a huge document (almost entirely fluff and puff – TRnews) May 18, but the RTC accepted it. June 28 the TTC set the RTC to negotiate some substance with NTTA giving them 60 days to produce a project agreement plus another 45 days for financial close. Text of 8b here.

Today’s minute order cancels those requirements giving the parties more time, saying environmental clearance is likely to take longer than the 60 days. The department has to come back to the commission with additional agreements to enable NTTA to take over SH121 for a period of up to 50 years.

Deal not done until the money arrives

Texas officials say the deal is far from done yet. One official said he has doubts that NTTA can come through with the financing promised the RTC. They think NTTA has stretched its borrowing power to, and perhaps beyond, prudent limits.

But caught between FHWA protests and the RTC-NTTA, and the requirements of SB792 they say they had no other alternative.

The officials say the RTC has taken a gamble with NTTA now that the Cintra procurement has been cancelled.

“If the NTTA doesn’t come through it is back to square one. We have to start a procurement all over again.”

The three bids back in February

We were given the bids by the three finalists in the procurement won by Cintra in February, socalled Form Ks. Cintra’s offer more than doubled the next from Skanska with Macquarie a bit further behind in third place. See table nearby.

Cintra says accept TTC decision

José Lopez, Cintra’s Austin-based director issued a statement after the Commission meeting:

“While we believe our proposal – with its guarantee of $7.3 billion in new and additional revenue to the Metroplex for SH121 and other transportation projects – was the better option for the state and Dallas-Fort Worth, we respect the commission’s decision.

“We want to thank the commissioners and the staff at TxDOT for the time and consideration they have devoted to this issue. We know they are working diligently to address the serious mobility challenges facing Texans, and we wish them, NTTA and the Regional Transportation Council only the best as they move forward with SH 121 for North Texas drivers.

“…we look forward to continuing our work in Texas, the U.S. and around the world assisting officials meet the increasing demands on infrastructure by improving roadways, relieving congestion and enhancing driver safety in the most cost-effective and efficient ways possible.”

Agreement reached NTTA, Regional Council and Dallas District TxDOT

NTTA, the regional council and Dallas District of TxDOT say they have finalized an interagency project agreement for SH121. Jorge Figueredo the new executive director of NTTA signed the draft agreement and submitted it to TxDOT. After it is signed by the executive director of TxDOT NTTA will have 45 days to financial close and delivery to TxDOT of over $3.3b – $2,500m plus $833m representing 49 future annual payments. In return they get a 50 year lease of SH121 and the rights to the toll proceeds in a kind of public sector concession.

Bill Hale of TxDOT Dallas office and Michael Morris of the RTC said in statements today that fuel tax funds are not doing the job of generating revenues needed. They see monetization of toll projects like SH121 as the only way to build needed new roads.

SH121 is 42km (26mi) long running northeast-southwest in the northern part of the greater Dallas area from US75 toward Dallas Ft Worth Airport. It crosses the Dallas North Tollway at about its midpoint and somewhat parallels the Pres Geo Bush Turnpike some miles to its north. It runs through Collin, Denton and Dallas counties.

SH121 is being built as a 12 lane highway with 2×3 toll lanes in the center as expressway and a pair of 3-lane one-way frontage roadways on either side which hit cross streets at signals. Slip lanes will connect the toll expressway roadways with the frontage roadways for access and egress from the tolled lanes in a common Texas configuration.

Tolling will be all-electronic at highway speed – no cash collection.

The vast passions and political energy invested in controlling SH121 should give it a place in tollroad history.

Link to article here. Link to PDF of FHWA letter here.

Federal highway administrator sent blistering letter to Texas on SH121
Toll Road News
August 23, 2007

• SH121
• Texas

Richard Capka federal highway administrator has sent a blistering letter to Texas authorities saying the US Government will subject it to extra scrutiny for a period of two years – read: long delays – if it persists with procurement on SH121 in violation of federal contracting laws. FHWA legal counsel Robert Rae several weeks ago made criticisms of the proposed cancellation of the toll concession with Cintra in favor of the North Texas Tollway pointing out the legal problems posed. But Capka’s new letter turns up the heat substantially threatening serious sanctions against Texas.

Texas DOT’s procurement for the 121 project in accordance with Texas law SB792 “violates federal law” the letter says bluntly.

The letter dated Aug 16 spells out two breaches of federal law involved in the state’s handling of SH121:

– acceptance of the NTTA bid after the competitive procurement process had selected Cinta

– acceptance of a public sector bid in competition with private bids

TxDOT’s procurement process in SH121 “works against the very foundation” of federal provisions for competitive procurement, Capka writes. This is because NTTA was permitted to bid after the terms of Cintra’s bid had been public released – at the time TxDOT said it had selected Cintra.

“Allowing a bid submission after closure of a project’s selection is an egregious violation of the basic requirements of a fair and competitive process. Here the final bid submitted by Cintra, along with many other proprietary details of Cintra’s submission had been disclosed and were publicly available at the time NTTA submitted its proposal.”

This contravenes 23USC112.

The letter accuses of TxDOT in its implementation of SB792 of having introduced “uncertainty and doubt” into the procurement process.

TxDOT’s second violation of federal law, the Capka letter says is allowing a public entity to bid against a private entity: “Federal regulations specifically prohibit a public entity from bidding again a private entity,” says Capka citing 23CFR636.112

FHWA regulations do not allow federal aid funds to participate in any violation of federal law, therefore a variety of sanctions will be imposed.

The letter announces:

– withdrawal of the special exceptions program (SEP-15) waiver granted to expedite SH121 and two other unnamed highway projects for accelerated environmental clearance

– withdrawal of approvals for TIFIA federal loan and Private Activity Bonds support

– a request for reimbursement of the US Government for its expenses in incurred in considering and evaluating the TIFIA loan associated with SH121

– no future federal funds for SH121

– additional oversight and approval requirements for future Texas applications so long as Texas breach of federal law is not remedied

– more “far reaching compliance measures” if Texas violates federal law again

The letter ends on a conciliatory note saying that FHWA believes that TxDOT can come into compliance with federal law even at this late date – an apparent allusion to the Texas Transportation Commission not having signed off on the NTTA deal for SH121. The letter appears to be saying Texas can still be in compliance with federal law if it calls off aborting the Cintra procurement, and rejects the proposed long term lease to the NTTA.

That very subject is up for discussion at the Texas Transportation Commission today.

The letter leaked in Texas and is the subject of a Texas newspaper report this morning.

Link to article here

The Three Amigos, Erasing Borders?

Wesley Pruden / The Washington Times: Published: 08-22-07 Some of the folks who gave President Bush a country lickin’ on his immigration “reform” are spoiling for another round with him. The reason why is on display at the “Three Amigos” summit in Canada. Mr. Bush and President Felipe Calderon of Mexico are guests of Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper for another workout of a vaguely described scheme called the Security and Prosperity Partnership, which the White House says is nothing more than three amigos getting together to swap yarns, pull a cork and talk about NAFTA writ large. But a remarkably diverse group of skeptics, including congressmen of both parties, critics of unrestrained global trade, conservative activists and left-wing academics and trade unionists, say it’s free trade run amok. The mysterious partnership is known only to the few by the acronym SPP. Most of the reporters at the Canadian summit can barely hide their languor, treating SPP as just another boring economic story White House reporters can’t be expected to understand. The Associated Press describes SPP merely as “a way for the nations to team up on health, security and commerce.” Twenty-one Republicans and one Democrat have written to President Bush to tell him of “serious and growing concerns” in Congress about the “so-called” Security and Prosperity Partnership, and the House has adopted legislation barring U.S. transportation officials from even participating in meetings of the partnership. The congressmen mostly seem miffed that the White House is undertaking far-reaching agreements with Canada and Mexico without telling them about it. The conservative skeptics say these agreements chip away national sovereignty — that the aim is to establish a North American Union, like the European Union, with unelected bureaucrats empowered to form a super-government to dispossess everyone but the elites. The liberal skeptics argue that “the super-government” would be a tool of the multinational corporations, eager to drive down wages and make wetbacks of everyone without a corporation big enough to plunder cheap labor. The Mexican government, eager to export penniless Mexicans, is the most enthusiastic about the partnership and the billions of expected yankee dollars. Just two days after his election in 2000, Vicente Fox talked of his vision of a North American common market, a customs union, a common tariff, joint monetary policy and the “free flow of labor” across borders. It’s difficult to imagine what Mr. Fox calls a “free flow” of labor if what we’ve had for decades hasn’t satisfied him.

…that tells me something. When the President was directly asked if he denies there is a plan in place to merge the 3 countries, he DID NOT DENY IT, but rather tried the ol’ distraction method…look over here, aren’t my opponents a bunch of wild-eyed nut jobs? Read this article and look at the comprehensive areas where they seek to “harmonize,” “streamline,” and “integrate.” Notice who IS at the table, since we already know the public isn’t…Corporations!

This sort of elitist snobbery is an insult to Americans and the citizens of the other countries as well. Something else I noticed they agreed upon in the closed door meeting, to obligate the American taxpayer to fight Mexico’s drug war for them (rather than secure our border and get the Mexican government to do its job of rooting out their own drug cartels..Mexico is now the home of the richest man in the world, they have the resources, they just choose to allow their citizens to live in abject poverty while the wealthy ruling class ask the United States for hand outs). This provision showed up in the immigration bill under SPP. The grassroots defeated it, so what does Bush do? He unilaterally incorporates it into SPP policy AGAINST the will of Congress and the citizens of the United States.

What’s the pricetag? To what does it obligate the U.S. taxpayers? Was this provision EVER debated by our elected representatives in Congress?….NO! We live under the Bush-Perry elitist oligarchy (it’s no coincidence Perry gets a hit piece on the opposition in the Houston Chronicle today doing the same, ridiculing concerned citizens), and it’s high time we start calling for impeachment while we still have a country!

Link to article below, here.

PREMEDITATED MERGER
Bush doesn’t deny plans for N. American Union
President avoids question, ridicules ‘conspiracy theorists’ who believe it

The leaders of the United States, Canada and Mexico conferred over the Security and Prosperity Partnership

MONTEBELLO, Quebec – President Bush today sidestepped a direct question about whether he’d be willing to categorically deny there is a plan to create the North American Union.

Instead, he ridiculed those who believe that is taking place as conspiracy theorists.

The exchange came at a news conference held by Bush, Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon, and Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who met at a resort in the rural woods outside of Ottawa, Quebec, to discuss their latest work on the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

After the trio presented their prepared statement about the SPP, several reporters who had been selected in advance were allowed to ask questions.

When it came time for a question from a Fox News reporter, Bush was asked if he would be willing to categorically deny that there is a plan to create a North American Union, or that there are plans to create NAFTA Superhighways.

“As you three leaders meet here, there are a growing number of people in each of your countries who have expressed concern about the Security and Prosperity Partnership. This is addressed to all three of you. Can you say today that this is not a prelude to a North American Union, similar to a European Union? Are there plans to build some kind of superhighway connecting all three countries? And do you believe all of these theories about a possible erosion of national identity stem from a lack of transparency from this partnership?” was the question, according to a White House transcript.

Reporters at the news conference said he sidestepped, instead adopting the tactic that those who are arguing the European Union model of integrating nations into a larger continental union is being used in North America should be ridiculed.

He called it an old political scare tactic, to try to create a wild conspiracy and then demand that those who “are not engaged” prove that it isn’t happening.

Bush’s answer was:

“We represent three great nations. We each respect each other’s sovereignty. You know, there are some who would like to frighten our fellow citizens into believing that relations between us are harmful for our respective peoples. I just believe they’re wrong. I believe it’s in our interest to trade; I believe it’s in our interest to dialogue; I believe it’s in our interest to work out common problems for the good of our people. “And I’m amused by some of the speculation, some of the old – you can call them political scare tactics. If you’ve been in politics as long as I have, you get used to that kind of technique where you lay out a conspiracy and then force people to try to prove it doesn’t exist. That’s just the way some people operate. I’m here representing my nation. I feel strongly that the United States is a force for good, and I feel strongly that by working with our neighbors we can a stronger force for good.

“So I appreciate that question. I’m amused by the difference between what actually takes place in the meetings and what some are trying to say takes place. It’s quite comical, actually, when you realize the difference between reality and what some people are talking on TV about.”

Harper joined in. There’s not going to be any NAFTA Superhighway connecting the three nations, he said, and it’s “not going to go interplanetary either,” he said.

Harper said the SPP discussions that were held concerned such pressing issues as jelly beans. He said the business interests expressing their desires for progress on the SPP noted there were different standards in the United States and Canada, and there was a discussion about whether those standards could be made uniform for the U.S. and Canada.

Bush’s comments echoed the comments published just a day earlier in the Ottawa Citizen by David Wilkins, the U.S. ambassador to Canada.

“While conspiracy theories abound, you can take it to the bank that no one involved in these discussions is interested in, or has ever proposed, a ‘North American Union,’ a ‘North American super highway,’ or a ‘North American currency,'” he wrote.

“The United States, Canada and Mexico are three distinct, sovereign countries that practice democracy differently,” he wrote. “Each proudly defends its own interests. But our leaders also recognize that we share a continent in this post-Sept. 11 world, where terrorism is but one threat. We have a vested interest in working together to prevent potential threats outside North America – like those posed by pandemic flu or improperly labeled foods, for example – from penetrating our borders.

Wilkins wrote that the nations also are “exploring ways to detect radiological threats and coordinating emergency efforts along our borders in the event of a man-made or natural disaster. It just makes sense when you share thousands of miles of common border to share a common emergency-management plan.”

He said another goal is to reduce the cost of doing business across national borders.

“The Late Great USA,” which was criticized by President Bush at the conclusion of the SPP summit in Quebec

However, Jerome Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D. whose newly published book, “The Late Great USA,” uses the government’s own documentation to show the advance of a North American Union, said ridicule is the “last resort of someone who is losing an argument.”

Such tactics, Corsi said, “underestimate the intelligence of people listening, and people realize that the argument wasn’t answered.”

At the news conference, he noted, Bush failed to respond to the Fox News question with a denial of the plans for a North American Union.

And, Corsi said, “Bush did not address the fact that Texas Gov. Rick Perry vetoed a two-year moratorium on the Trans-Texas Corridor project,” believed to be the starting point for an eventual continent-wide grid of NAFTA Superhighways.

“Just to ridicule the idea, when he had a chance to categorically deny it, raises doubts in peoples’ minds, especially when these meetings aren’t transparent,” Corsi added.

The meeting this week, which focused on economic issues, was attended by representatives of dozens of multinational corporations anxious to have their manufacturing and sales processes smoothed.

However, Corsi said, “not one person who objects is permitted inside the room.”

At the same time, Bush did affirm that there is a plan under consideration for the United States to provide military assistance to Mexico’s military in its battles in the drug war, although officials were not ready to announce what that plan includes.

The three national leaders simply affirmed that drug trade is a continental problem and would demand a continental solution.

The formal statement from the three leaders referred to the “opportunities and challenges facing North America and [the need] to establish priorities for our further collaboration.”

They said the three nations already have agreed to a North American plan for avian and pandemic influenza, a “Regulatory Cooperation Framework,” an intellectual property action strategy and a “Trilateral Agreement for Cooperation in Energy Science and Technology.”

“The North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), announced last year in Cancun, has provided us with thoughtful recommendations on how we could strengthen the competitive platform for business,” the statement said.

The statement said the Regulatory Cooperation Framework will allow various rules to be streamlined across borders.

“In the coming year, we ask our ministers to consider work in areas, such as the chemicals, automotive, transportation, and information and communications technology sectors,” the statement said.

And the Intellectual Property Action Strategy “also gives us an invaluable tool for combating counterfeiting and piracy, which undermine innovation, harm economic development and can have negative public-health and safety implications,” the three said.

Food safety and border security also were discussed. “Our governments will continue to address the safety of food and products imported into North America, while facilitating the significant trade in these products that our countries already have and without imposing unnecessary barriers to trade,” the leaders said.

“It is sometimes best to screen goods and travelers prior to entry into North America. We ask our ministers to develop mutually acceptable inspection protocols to detect threats to our security, such as from incoming travelers during a pandemic and from radiological devices on general aviation,” the statement said.

But protesters who staged events in Ottawa as the meetings were moving forward, warned of the integration and harmonizing the SPP seeks.

“The SPP is pursuing an agenda to integrate Mexico and Canada in closed-door sessions that are getting underway today in Montebello,” Howard Phillips, the chairman of the Coalition to Block the North American Union, told an earlier press conference in Ottawa.

“We are here to register our protest,” Phillips added, “along with the protests of thousands of Americans who agree with us that the SPP is a globalist agenda driven by the multi-national corporate interests and intellectual elite who together have launched an attack upon the national sovereignty of the United States, Canada and Mexico.”

Connie Fogel, head of the Canadian Action Party, agreed with Phillips.

“Canadians are complaining that the SPP process lacks transparency,” Fogel told the press conference. “Transparency is a major issue, but even if the SPP working groups were open to the public, we would still object to their goal to advance the North American integration agenda at the expense of Canadian sovereignty.”