|
The Ex-Candidate by Edwin deSteiguer Snead ISBN 1-891429-16-7 81-Articles, 153-pages $14.95 |
|
Losing An Election March 18, 1988 First, the embarrassment and disappointment of losing an election only lasts for about a day. Second, there is a tremendous sense of relief that there is no more campaigning to be done, and no need to take on a public job with no simple answers and no possibility of satisfying all the people who would demand your attention. Third, is the appearance of so many friends and supporters, and the newly acquired skills of reaching out to strangers. During the campaign there is a tremendous sense of urgency and importance in every hour. The old, every day sense of meaninglessness is overwhelmed by a passion to get the TRUTH to everybody. The candidate knows without a doubt that he is doing the Lord’s work. Campaigning is LIVING at the peak of intensity. Obviously, running for office is not for everybody, but it’s too important to be left to lawyers and politicians. Any one who has a reason to complain about the government should consider taking an active part in it. But if you think of public office as a means to personal gain, forget it. The pay is too low, the hours too long, and the cost of getting the job may be twenty times the salary or more. If you get in it for the money, you will just be part of the problem. On the other hand, if you are lucky and clever enough to have lived as long as you have, and to have accumulated more than you need, maybe it’s your name that is being called. To continue living like you have been, you depend on smart and honest governors, legislators, judges, commissioners, mayors, councilmen and party chairmen. The wisdom you have accumulated may be exactly what is needed somewhere, and there is no better way to invest your time and money for the benefit of your children. If you think you hear your name being called, even faintly, volunteer. It will begin the most exciting time of your life. And if you are really not needed now, the Lord and the people will give you an honorable discharge.
Power Companies Could Lead Us into 21st Century Editor’s Note: This is a letter the candidate, Mr. Snead wrote before losing the Super Tuesday, March 8, 1988 Republican primary. The remaining writings are as an ex-candidate.
To: Directors and Managers Electric Generating Utilities
This is an unusual time in history, and it presents some unique opportunities for the electric power industry which may not be repeated soon. Our Navy is fighting to protect oil for our trading partners. The promise of nuclear power has lost its public appeal. Our national effort in space is suffering a crisis in leadership. We are beginning to suspect that the Soviets want peace. The Soviets have developed the world’s largest spacecraft. (The name is Energia.) Coal-fired power plants cost twice as much as gas or oil fired plants. Coal prices are being held up by monopolistic railroad transportation prices. Environmentalists are worried about carbon dioxide and heat in the atmosphere. Nearly all practical sites for hydro-electric power in Texas have already been developed. There are still large areas of unsettled land in the world, particularly Texas and Brazil. I believe the time has come to form an international co-op of electric utility companies and private investors to begin to develop a ring of Solar Power Satellites. One of my classmates from Texas A & M, Hubert Davis, who designed the spacecraft that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin stepped out of onto the moon, was also NASA’s chief investigator for the Solar Power Satellite, originally proposed by Dr. Peter Glaser. He concluded that it would work and produce power at a reasonable cost, but the initial investment was far too much to squeeze out of the taxpayers. However, in the thirty years it would take to build, the world’s electric utility companies would have to spend seven times as much on nuclear and coal-fired plants to meet the expected demand. Because the system would release no waste gasses and waste heat into the atmosphere, it would make the environmentalists see the utilities as heroes rather than villains. It would be seen as a thrilling adventure by young people who were aroused by our trips to the moon, but have been disappointed by the recent failures in our space program. It represents an ideal project for cautious cooperation with the Soviets, friendly competition on a vast scale, and diversion of vast amounts of labor and wealth from dangerous weapons to useful tools for mankind. This is the perfect example of “beating swords into plowshares.” Where can we start? The project is obviously far too large for any one utility company, and perhaps even for a nation which is spending more than its income. The answer is on land. The last item which will be needed happens to be the first which must be acquired, and the cheapest. Receiving antennas which convert microwave energy from space into direct current, called rectennas, will be built on elliptical areas about five miles in diameter. A forest of devices similar to TV antennas will be supported on an open frame ten or more feet above the ground. Sunlight and rain will fall through, and cattle can graze normally under it. Birds will fly through the beam without any effect, although airplanes will experience temporary radio interference. Sites for these receiving antennas must be acquired now, while they are still available and cheap. Since they will not need to be occupied for many years, they might be acquired by options with a very small initial cash outlay. At the same time land should be acquired for transformer sites, power lines and service roads to connect the receiving sites to the power grid. The power companies could signal to the world that they are moving aggressively into the twenty first century just by starting to negotiate for the necessary land. Another real estate acquisition will be larger and needed sooner. Since about five per cent less fuel is required for rockets launched from the equator, the co-op should acquire a launching area of a hundred square miles or more in the Amazon Valley and fronting on the Atlantic Ocean. This could probably be a gift from the Brazilian government, since their people would expect to supply the site with most of the food, fuel, power, lumber, steel and cement for thousands of technicians working there. A very low-cost early requirement is the drafting of a charter for the proposed international co-op in English, Russian and Portuguese. Another friend of mine, Art Dula, is a Houston patent attorney familiar with INTELSAT, and who has been negotiating recently with the Soviets on space transportation. As a first step, I would suggest that your directors and staff plan a seminar discussing the possibilities with Hubert Davis, Art Dula, Peter Glaser and myself. We may have a unique opportunity to lead the whole world into the twenty-first century.
Sincerely yours, Ned Snead On The Panama Canal March 20, 1988 In the last week of the Republican Senatorial campaign I found a book written in 1977 by Congressman Philip M. Crane entitled, Surrender In Panama—The Case Against The Treaty. The more I read, the madder I became. The entire text of all the Panama Canal treaties are in the book, including: Hay-Pauncefote Treaty of 1901—with Britain Hay-Herran Treaty of 1903—with Colombia Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty of 1903—with Panama Friendship & Cooperation Treaty of 1936—with Panama Treaty of Mutual Understanding & Cooperation of 1955—Panama Panama Canal Treaty of 1977—with Panama The provision which bothers me most is Article XII[2](b) “During the duration of this Treaty, the United States of America shall not negotiate with third states for the right to construct an interoceanic canal on any other route in the Western Hemisphere, except as the two Parties may otherwise agree.” I find it hard to believe that either Jimmy Carter or Lloyd Bentsen have ever read the text of the Treaty they approved. Their days may have been completely filled by official duties, conferences with aides and visitors from home, and by campaigning for the next election. They had to rely on others to tell them that, on balance, the Treaty was acceptable. In August of 1977 Lloyd Bentsen received 1,889 letters or phone calls with 99 per cent asking him to vote AGAINST the treaty, and yet he voted for it. I saw Mr. Bentsen in Washington last week and told him that the Panama Canal would be a big issue in this year’s general election. He told me that he visited Panama in 1977 and was convinced that failure to ratify the treaty would be playing right into the Castro’s hands. I wonder if a hundred thousand letters from Texans could have stopped him from giving away this extremely valuable national asset which may be essential to the defense of the Western Hemisphere. However, I don’t want to be one who complains without offering a possible solution. The smartest lawyer I know told me that according to Constitutional Law, a treaty has the same force and effect as an act of Congress, and when two conflict, the most recent overrides the earlier. Therefore, a bill could be passed by both Houses of Congress and approved by the President to nullify any part of all of the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977. I have personally asked Senators Strom Thurmond and Lloyd Bentsen and Congressman Beau Boulter if they have considered this possibility. Apparently none had, but Mr. Boulter has promised to look into it. Possibly the old canal is obsolete, being too small for modern supertankers and aircraft carriers, but without it we must have the right to build a larger sea level canal. I have been excavating rock for 35 years, and my rough estimate for a ditch 1,200 feet wide, 60 feet deep and a hundred miles long would require moving about three billion cubic yards of material. At two dollars per cubic yard, it would cost about six billion dollars, roughly the cost of one aircraft carrier complete with airplanes, but without the fleet of escort ships. Such a project would bring immense prosperity to Mexico or any Central American country where it might be built. It would also benefit American suppliers of machinery, explosives and tools, and reduce our need for a larger navy. I have been called a visionary. OK, here is one of my visions, and I want to share it with every Congressman, Senator and challenger in the country. Please, somebody, pick up the ball and run with it. ... |
|
The Ex-Candidate by Edwin deSteiguer Snead ISBN 1-891429-16-7 81-Articles, 153-pages $14.95 |
