Fractivists now publicly admit they don’t care if local control initiatives lack a legal leg on which to stand in court — greenies would declare an even greater victory when communities go bankrupt trying to defend their ungovernable efforts.
Energy in Depth found the smoking gun admission in a Reuters news report. The Pennsylvania activist quoted is part of the same national campaign backing Colorado’s local control fractivists:
“And if a town goes bankrupt trying to defend one of our ordinances, well, perhaps that’s exactly what is needed to trigger a national movement.”
So the battle plan by Cliff Willmeng and his national backers is to get the so-called local control measure on the ballot “to protect individuals and communities from corporate activities such as fracking, mega-mining, factory farming, sewage sludge dumping, GMO farming, pesticides, and many more.”
Essentially, they want the power to block farming, fracking, and mining, but have found a cunning way for taxpayers to foot their legal bills.
A law professor from Boston College also quoted in the article brought up another interesting side effect of “local control.” If communities can reject rights that are protected by the state and nation, what is to stop them from re-segregating schools?
Or for that matter, what’s to stop them from deciding gay marriage or the legalization of marijuana is bad for the community?
We’ve argued consistently that the local control amendment is a Pandora’s box filled with unintended consequences. The fact that communities could be forced into bankruptcy to defend such inequities is just one more reason to kick local control to the curb.