National Debt & Deficit Spending Molding Our Future
In the spring of 2007 I attended a Yellowstone Business Partnership Conference at Jackson Lake Lodge near Moran Junction. There were many good presentations along with quite a few "green" presentations.
I was surprised at the preponderance of Idaho and Montana businesses and Chambers of Commerce present. On reflection, this partly represented a clear domination of each respective state’s population relative to Yellowstone Park, the centerpiece of this organization.
There are nearly 700,000 people within the Yellowstone Business Partnership's area depicted in the map at left. Our counties within this region are: Lincoln, Teton, Sublette, Fremont, Hot Springs, and Park. Wyoming’s population fraction is only about 110,000 for those counties.
I observed that our voice in this organization is only quietly heard and easily drowned out by the vastly larger populations of Idaho and Montana. Wyoming must recognize that the larger Congressional delegations of these states have a louder voice with the federal bureaucracies.
Consider the ongoing threat of the Park Service to close Yellowstone Park’s East Gate. Bureaucracies never have enough money to do all that they want, so they must short someone in order to do what they consider important.
A bureaucracy will always choose to short that group seen as having the smallest voice. This minimizes the probability of having to retract any action they take.
Through this lens the Park Service’s East Gate decision is clear.
What I found interesting is the effect Wyoming’s skeptical attitude toward “Green Organizations” had on attendance at this conference.
There were many good presentations made. There were some that were long on “green” rhetoric and short on sound engineering, but on the whole this conference was worthwhile.
As noted above, there was small representation from Wyoming's communities, businesses, and lawmakers. I approached the Executive Director, Jan Brown, and asked her about this. She responded that the Yellowstone Business Partnership was "a bit too green" and that many within Wyoming did not wish to be seen at green events.
But the real issue is that these organizations will have great affect on Wyoming by the way in which they influence federal legislation and the way in which federal bureaucracies implement that legislation.
In the world of bureaucracies, if you don’t have a seat at the table you cannot have a voice in shaping the outcome.
Wyoming is struggling with how to go forward with an unavoidable conflict between protection of our precious way of life, development of our resources, and protection of our environment. Yet if we do not work to shape such organizations' perceptions and influence how their money is spent, we will eventually be “bought out” by those with money and influence.
What must we do?
First and foremost: Our state or county business organizations, associations, and chambers of commerce must attend these conferences. This is vital to ensure our voice is present and heard in the initial formulation of positions and proposals.
Second: Our lawmakers, federal, state and local, must attend such conferences. Certainly not all need attend. For example our federal congressional delegations have local staff members who can attend and ensure that good communications are present.
Our state legislators from appropriate counties and districts should attend. Not all of them, but two or three present at such meetings or conferences would not only enable good understanding of the thinking of these organizations, but also would send a message to the leadership of these organizations.
In addition, the crafting of legislation can reflect Wyoming's long view of protecting our way of life. In effect, our lawmakers can shape the work of these organizations by well-framed legislation done in advance.
Finally, it is at such conferences and meetings that bureaucracies first float problems and possible solutions to gauge the response. Once they are relatively sure of the support they want then they go forward.
If our leaders do not even hear of a proposed action until a bureaucracy publishes it for comment, we stand little chance of stopping something we see as dumb or poorly conceived.
It is in precisely this kind of organizational conference that the reintroduction of wolves began, probably 15 to 20 years ago, in casual conversations. The initial discussions were lost when people left the table, yet the idea grew and took shape. Then the scientific world blessed the reintroduction of wolves.
The lesson of our governing process is clear: you cannot win them all, but if you are at the table and make a good case, you can win more than your fair share or you can shape the result even if you can’t win the day.