The Boerne Star (Boerne, Tex.), Vol. 96, No. 46, Ed. 1 Friday, June 8, 2001 Page: 4 of 26
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: The Boerne Star and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the Patrick Heath Public Library.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Page 4A
The Boerne Star
Friday, June 8, 2001
Energy supply in demand
i Eight years of neglect and short-
] sighted policies have brought our
• country to the worst energy supply
: crisis since the 1970s.
• Energy shortages are hurting mil-
t lions of Americans: drivers are pay-
: ing sky-rocketing prices for gaso-
( line, on average 30 cents to 40 cents
‘ per gallon more than a year ago.
• Winter heating bills in some states
, have tripled, Californians are experi-
encing rolling blackouts and high
fuel costs are destroying jobs in the
' transportation, lumber and agricul-
ture sectors. A fundamental imbal-
ance of supply and demand has
brought on this crisis.
We rely on foreign imports for
more than 56 percent of our oil. Our
energy infrastructure has been
allowed to deteriorate. Not a single
major oil refinery has been built in
nearly 25 years; our outdated net-
work of generators, transmission
lines and pipelines is in critical need
of modernization.
Unless we act, the situation is only
going to deteriorate. America’s future
energy needs far outstrip current lev-
els of production — over the next 20
years, US. oil consumption will rise
by 33 percent, natural gas consump-
tion by more than 50 percent and
demand for electricity will rise by 45
percent.
The President has issued an energy
call to arms — a balanced energy
policy that includes:
* Modernization and expansion of
our energy infrastructure;
* Diversification of our energy sup-
plies;
* Strengthening American’s energy
security;
* Modernizing and increasing our
conservation and efficient energy use
programs.
The President’s plan aggressively
addresses the toughest problem areas
we face: production, delivery and
consumption. Our greatest challenge
right now is delivery bottlenecks —
we don’t have enough pipelines or
refineries. It approaches the situation
head-on, pushing for the creation of a
new, high-tech energy delivery net-
work.
I plan to offer legislation that will
complement the Administration’s
energy initiatives by creating two
kinds of tax credits? one set to
IN THE U.S. SENATE
Kay Bailey
Hutchison
i U.S. SENATOR
December 31, 2001, a taxpayer can
show he or she has reduced home
oil
Education means higher pay for workers
The wage gap between workers with college
degrees and high school dropouts has increased
steadily over the last two decades.
In 1980 the median weekly income for work-
ers with no high school diploma was $222,
while workers with a college degree earned
$376, according to the United States Bureau of
Labor Statistics. The wage differential increased
significantly between 1980 and 1997, until
workers without a high school diploma earned
weekly wages averaging $321, while pay for
energy consumption 10 percent when those with college degrees averaged $779.
compared with usage over the same
period the previous year.
In spite of the economic benefits of training
IN THE TEXAS SENATE
Jeff Wentworth
TEXAS SENATOR
* Allowing a $250 tax credit to any
taxpayer who purchases a fuel-effi-
cient motor vehicle, one that operates
above 27.5 miles per gallon, in calen-
dar year 2001.
This is just common sense. If peo-
ple lower their energy consumption
at home by 10 percent, or buy a fuel-
efficient car, let’s give them a tax
credit. Having fuel-efficient homes
and vehicles and continuing efforts to
explore alternative energy sources are
all significant elements in making
America more energy self sufficient.
But it is also critical that our
domestic producers have the incen-
tives to keep their wells pumping.
The only permanent way to address
the supply problems that are driving
consumer oil and gas prices sky high
is to boost domestic production. My
legislation encourages production
from existing oil and gas wells by
offering incentives that will make
them more cost-effective to operate.
It is estimated that my bill would
spur the reopening of 75,000 domes-
tic oil wells able to produce 250,000
barrels of oil a day; it includes a cor-
responding provision to encourage
natural gas production.
More than 150,000 domestic oil and
gas wells were closed during 1997
and 1998, when oil prices fell below
$10 per barrel. This cut daily domes-
tic oil production by 500,000 barrels
per day. Though prices are higher
today, many independent producers
are reluctant to incur the high costs
associated with reopening these wells
without assurances that they will not
face additional losses if oil prices
again fall below break-even levels.
Another ramification of that bleak
period was the crippling loss of ener-
encourage production from marginal gy-sector jobs: More than 65,000
wells, and another offering tax incen-
tives to individuals who cut their per-
sonal energy consumption. My pro-
posals include:
* Offering a tax credit for small oil
and gas producers of marginal wells
(those producing fewer than 15 bar-
rels of oil per day).
* Allowing a $250 tax credit if, dur-
ing the period from June 1, 2001 to
well paying American jobs disap-
peared, 18,000 in Texas alone. These
are jobs we should bring back to
America.
Curtailing dependence on foreign
sources is the only way discourage
disruptive spikes in energy prices.
America’s long-term economic and
national security may well depend on
it.
Write us a letter ...
The Boerne Star welcomes letters on any public issue. Letters may be mailed,
faxed, e-mailed or hand-delivered but must contain the writer’s name, address
and phone number. Addresses and telephone numbers are for verification pur-
poses only and will not be published. Names and city of residence will be pub-
lished. We reserve the right to edit all letters for style and content. Call 249-2441
with questions regarding the submission of letters to the editor for publication.
Worth Quoting ...
“Life is like a bank account. You only
get back what you put in. Experience is
the interest.”
-Annon.
Bible Verse ...
“Do not be hasty in word or impulsive in thought to bring
up a matter in the pressence of God. For God is in heaven
and our are on the earth; therefore let your words be few.”
- Ecclesiastes 5:2
THE Boerne Star
EDITOR I PUBLISHER
Edna Keasling
Managing Ediitoi
Staff Writer
Sports Editor
Typesetter
Typesetter
EDITORIAL
Kent Mahoney
Joni Simon
Nick Taylor
Molly Meckel
Elaine Provenzano
Director
Account Executive
Account Executive
ADVERTISING
Suzi Morgan
Diana Busheme
Judy Eoff
PRODUCTION
Composing Manager Rebecca G. Bayer
Composing Yvonne Sillence
CIRCULATION
Subscriptions Elaine Provenzano
Subscriptions Dana Smith
FRONT DESK
Receptionist Elaine Provenzano
Receptionist Dana Smith
BOOKKEEPING
Office Manager
DISTRIBUTION
Circulation manager
Maria Huerta
John Nation
CONTRIBUTING WRITERS
Mary Alice Yelverton, Vera D’Spain, Regina Alexander, Dr. John P. Kelly, Tom Lanier, Peary Perry, John
Powell,The Doctor, Jan Wrede, Kathy Senkbeil, Jo-Ann Power, Margie Belles, Ellen Damstra, Bill King,
Lemuel T. Sinclair, Paula White, Jim Pendley, Ron Warden, John Cornyn
T:
TEXAS PRESS
ASSOCIATION
MEMBER OF Texas Press Association,
National Newspaper Association,
South Texas Press Association, Texas Gulf Coast Press Association
282 N. MAIN • (UPS 059-740)
P.O. Box 820 • 830-249-2441 FAX 830-249-4607
THE BOERNE STAR is published twice weekly for $28 per year in Kendall County, $35 elsewhere in Texas and $50 per year
outside of Texas by The Boerne Star, 282 N. Main, Boerne, Kendall County, TX. 78006. Periodical postage paid at Boerne, TX.
POSTMASTER: Send changes of address to THE BOERNE STAR, P.O. Box 820. Boerne, Texas 78006-0820.
The Boerne Star welcomes letters on any public issue. Letters may be mailed, faxed, e-
mailed or hand-delivered but must contain the writer’s name, address and phone number.
Letters should not exceed 300 words. Addresses and telephone numbers are for verification
purposes only and will not be published. Names and city of residence will be published. We
reserve the right to edit all letters for style and content. Call 249-2441 with questions.
and education, the demand for skilled workers
exceeds the state’s supply. Recognizing that
Texas’ economic future and that of millions of
workers is linked directly to their training and
education, the 77th Texas Legislature passed
bills to assist Texans in their pursuit of a higher
education.
A $200 million appropriation was approved
for the TEXAS Grant program, which began in
1999 with $100 million. The TEXAS Grant
program originated from legislation I co-
authored with Senator Rodney Ellis, D-Houston,
during the 76th Legislative session.
The new appropriation will help provide col-
lege educations for a total of 100,000 students
from Texas families with incomes up to $40,000.
These grants cover tuition and required fees for
up to four years. Further information about the
TEXAS Grant Program is available toll-free
through the Texas Financial Aid Information
Center at (877) 782-7322.
Access to higher education in the Hill Country
received a tremendous boost when the
Legislature earmarked $1 million for The Texas
Hill Country University Center. Texas Tech
University will be the lead school of the multi-
institutional teaching center that will have sites
in Fredericksburg and Junction.
House Bill 1212 by Representative Jim
Dunnam, D-Waco, would provide more financial
help for students by allowing them to pay sum-
mer session tuition and fees in installments.
Currently, students may use this method of pay-
ment for only the spring and fall semesters.
To keep pace with the technology sector’s need
for trained personnel, Senator Ellis authored SB
353, which I and other senators co-authored. SB
353 establishes the Texas Engineering and
Technical Consortium to increase the number of
engineering and computer science graduates
from private and public colleges and universi-
ties. The bill also would implement collabora-
tive efforts among universities, engineering and
computer science departments and private tech-
nology companies.
If Texas is to remain attractive to companies
which rely on educated and highly skilled work-
ers, we must meet the state goal of enrolling
500,000 more students in higher education by
2015.
Senate Bill 573 by Senator Teel Bivins, R-
Amarillo, requires the Texas Higher Education
Coordinating Board to establish a statewide pub-
lic awareness campaign to increase the number
of students enrolled at Texas colleges and uni-
versities.
Texas ranks a miserable 48th in the nation in
percent of high school students earning college
degrees. We Texas legislators, educators and
parents must all work together to do a better job
to ensure that our young Texans continue to earn
the degrees that will provide them with the qual-
ity of life they naturally desire for themselves
and their future families.
Can I tell my ex-wife how to spend my child support?
Q: My ex-wife has custody of my
two children and I pay child sup-
port regularly. She spends the
child support on rent and utilities,
but I want the money to go to the
children as spending money. Do I
have any right to tell my ex-wife
how to spend the money?
A: Child support is ordered by the
court to be paid by the non-custodi-
al parent to the custodial parent for
the care and maintenance of the
children. The Texas Family Code
clearly provides that the custodial
parent has the right to determine
how to use the money.
Raising a child is expensive,
evenwhen the custodial parent
receives child support. Often, cus-
todial parents rely on child support
payments to cover rent, utilities and
food. If a non-custodial parent
wants to do something extra for the
child, he or she can purchase dia-
ASK THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
John Cornyn
TEXAS ATTORNEY
GENERAL
ments made through the state reg-
istry as ordered by the court.
Presents or other money given
directly to the children are gifts and
can not be counted as child support.
Monthly child support is set by
the court according to the guide-
lines in the Texas Family Code.
Support is normally set at 20 per-
cent of the non-custodial parent’s
monthly net income for one child,
25 percent for two children, up to a
limit of 40 percent for five or more
children who are in the care of the
same custodial parent.
pers, toys, food and presents for the A fairly typical order would
children. However, credit for child require payment of $300 per month
support will only be given for pay- for the support of two children.
That is only $10 per day to clothe,
feed and house two children.
Q: Can a parent take custody of
the child instead of making child-
support payments?
A: Both parents must provide for
the child, no matter which parent
has primary custody. Child support
is normally paid to the custodial
parent for the benefit of the child.
A change in physical custody does
not end the child support order. To
change child support orders, the
new custodial parent must go to
court to have legal custody
changed. This will end the previous
child support order, although any
money owed to the former custodi-
al parent must be paid, and estab-
lish a new order for the new custo-
dial and non-custodial parents.
Federal regulations do not allow
the Office of the Attorney General
to provide services for custody or
visitation disputes. The Attorney
General encourages mediation of
these issues, and most cases are
resolved by agreement. In the rare
case where custody and/or visita-
tion are seriously contested, the
Office of the Attorney General
encourages each parent to hire a
private attorney.
If you cannot afford a lawyer, you
may be eligible for federally funded
legal assistance. Look in the phone
book under “Legal Aid” or “Legal
Services.” Sometimes the court will
appoint a lawyer for the child.
Many law schools operate legal
clinics at which law students assist
people under the supervision of a
law professor or other lawyer.
Contact the law school nearest
you for more information.
For more information on the child
support services offered by the
Office of the Attorney General,
visit our Web site at
www.oag.state.tx.us. Or you can
call the Child Support Division at
(800) 252-8014.
Letters to the Editor
Just the facts, Joe
Dear Editor:
In his letter of May 25, 2001, Mr.
King claims that I failed the “Joe
Friday Test.” Fair enough. Life is,
after all, about distinctions, and I
am actually starting to enjoy this!
First, I suppose that doctors and
scientists have been concerned
about arsenic in our drinking water
for much longer than just the past
twenty-five years. Seems to me
we’ve had standards for approved
water supplies in effect all of my
life. But, is this at all relevant?
Second, I don’t care what the
“National Academy of Sciences,”
the “World Health Organization,”
or the “European Union (EU)” do
or recommend unless and until their
efforts are based on reputable sci-
entific findings. I specifically
referred to the only two research
studies which appeared to link lev-
els of arsenic many times higher
than the 50 parts per billion
approved in the United States with
some forms of cancer. The distinc-
tions are many. Research studies
based on statistical analysis do not
demonstrate cause and effect—they
only estimate the degree to which
one or more variables in question
may be associated with one anoth-
er. The researchers in Taiwan and
Chile freely admitted that other
variables not studied (diet, genetic
differences, hereditary factors) may
explain the higher occurrences of
certain cancers far better than the
absurdly high concentrations of
arsenic in the local water. And I
state again, I was unable to find
any research on populations located
in the United States which appeared
to link any health problems with
levels of arsenic which do not
exceed the current standard. What
the socialist governments of the EU
do as a matter of politics is the sci-
entific equivalent of my daughter
arguing, “But Daddy, Jessica gets
to....”
Third, the Amendments to the
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
passed in 1996 did NOT establish
the arbitrary standard of 10 parts
per billion directed by President
Clinton. Remarkably, these amend-
ments directed the EPA to review
and revise the existing 50 parts per
billion standard in the event “sci-
ence” and “cost estimates” warrant-
ed a lower standard. The EPA has
been wrestling this gorilla for the
past five years. In my article, I
asked whether, in fulfilling this
mandate, the EPA would someday
determine that “a lower standard is
both beneficial and cost effective.”
It may; and that standard might be
30, 25, or even 20 parts per billion.
But again, I would hope that any
change is based on science and eco-
nomics, and NOT politics. Am I
wrong to demand that my govern-
ment act responsibly and not arbi-
trarily? As inconvenient as this
apparently is for Mr. King, I keep
bringing it up because Section III
(Regulatory Program),
Subparagraph “Standards and
Regulation Development” of the
1996 Amendments to the SDWA
directs the implementation of a
strict process of “good science” and
“cost benefit analysis.” Before
arrogantly painting me as some sort
of uncaring, uncompassionate, risk-
taking, fool-hardy, drooling
Neanderthal incapable of feeling
anyone’s pain, I wish Mr. King
would READ THE LAW. Instead,
he unwittingly exposes the con-
tempt and disdain President Clinton
had for “the law;” most of us, how-
ever, had already painfully figured
this out.
Fourth, most of the objections to
the new standard came from local
communities which felt they did
not have the money to pay for such
an arbitrary decision. Mr. King
refers to a single mining company
which voiced its concern as report-
ed in the Los Angeles Times (and
nowhere else that I could find). Is
he inferring that a mining company
or any other manufacturer or pro-
ducer in the United States has any
less of a right to demand responsi-
ble government than I do? And
most of the corporations with
which I am familiar make political
contributions to both parties just to
hedge their bets. Except Microsoft,
and Bill Gates certainly paid a high
price for his “political arrogance,”
didn’t he?
Fifth, I did not imply anything
with regard to children being
“injured by the current high stan-
dard.” I stated that the current
standard of 50 parts per billion was
in effect all during President
Clinton’s reign, and that “I recall
neither any complaints nor any
reports of poisoned children during
his presidency.” Even if the new
standard had remained in effect, it
would not have been implemented
for five years, yet President Bush is
being pilloried for “poisoning chil-
dren.” Can Mr. King name any?
Perhaps one? I’m all ears. If
President Clinton were so con-
cerned about “the children,” it
seems to me this issue would have
taken precedence over gays in the
military back in 1993.
Sixth (I saw this train wreck com-
ing), Mr. King is correct that I
referred to the Brookings Institution
Joint Center for Regulatory Studies
in my article. And, Mr. King is
correct that, in this case, the “joint”
part of this collaboration was the
American Enterprise Institute
(AEI). I did not use any labels or
other inflammatory language in my
No smoke, no
mirrors, just
more facts
Dear Editor:
It’s time to cut through the ’smoke
and mirrors’ and give your readers
the complete story about the oppo-
sition to GBRA’s Canyon Permit
Amendment.
This debate between water users
is being characterized as a ‘water
war’ between competing factions
over how water will be managed
and distributed from Canyon Lake.
In reality, the Canyon Permit
Amendment is the first test case for
the implementation of the Senate
Bill 1 Region L Water Plan as well
as the future State Water Plan.
Opponents to the amendment are
trying to hold others ’hostage’ by
attempting to delay the permit
article; I tried to limit my debate to amendment’s approval by TNRCC.
“just the facts.” And I intentionally
avoided any mention of the AEI
because I knew how Mr. King
would respond. Characteristically,
Mr. King refers to the AEI as “one
of the most right-wing, industry
apologist around.” Ok, I’ll stoop to
his level and play this ridiculous
game of name-calling: “For those
who do not follow these things,”
the Brookings Institute is one of the
“most left-wing, America-bashing,
one-world government, tax-increas-
ing, tree-hugging, free enterprise
challenged” organizations around.
Nevertheless, the JOINT report
concluded that President Clinton’s
actions were arbitrary, most likely
cost prohibitive, and that the new
standard would result in an
INCREASE of ten residual death
each year.
Mr. King, I’ll take the “Joe Friday
Test” any time, but let’s try to reach
an agreement on what a “fact” is or
should be. A fact is a very special
type of information which is char-
acterized by both “relevancy” and
“reliability.” I take offense at any
suggestion that I have betrayed the
public trust by omitting information
which is either irrelevant, unreli-
able (as in wrong), or both. To
include such gibberish violates the
high standards of intellectual hon-
esty which I thought appropriate for
this debate, and would, ultimately,
reduce me to Al Gore’s level.
QED. Ball’s in your court.
Andy Pickard
Their motive is to win this ’test
case’ so that they can ultimately
influence and control the overall
development and content of the
statewide Plan.
In 1997, the Texas Legislature
passed S.B. 1 that created sixteen
statewide water planning regions.
Each regional group was charged
with conducting a ’grass roots’
water planning effort to identify
and recommend options and strate-
gies that would produce a State
Water Plan to meet our needs for
the next 50 years.
Region L, which consists of the
ten counties in GBRA’s statutory
district plus eleven additional coun-
ties, has (1) held more than 100
public meetings (2) spent over one
million dollars to publicize the
process and provide for public
input and (3) been involved in this
ongoing effort since 1997.
Rapid growth in the Guadalupe-
Blanco River Authority’s ten-coun-
ty statutory district, as well as the
surrounding region, has placed a
tremendous demand on existing
water supplies. This is especially
true of underground aquifers,
whose limited supplies are often
stressed during hot, dry weather.
Unless everyone who cares about
their future water supply takes a
stand to demand passage of the per-
mit amendment, communities, busi-
nesses, schools and citizens in the
See LETTERS, page 5A
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Matching Search Results
View three places within this issue that match your search.Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Keasling, Edna & Mahoney, Kent. The Boerne Star (Boerne, Tex.), Vol. 96, No. 46, Ed. 1 Friday, June 8, 2001, newspaper, June 8, 2001; Boerne, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1626673/m1/4/?q=technical+manual: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Patrick Heath Public Library.