Publisher's Commentary
Clinton Administration's plan to create a
Delta Regional Authority deserves questioning
Scott Coopwood   Conventional wisdom, which seems sorely lacking these days, says that if it walks like a duck, flies like a duck and quacks like a duck, you can generally assume that you are dealing with a waterfowl of some sort.
  Unless of course it is a duck that has been created by the Federal Government, in which case this particular duck would be articulated in focus groups and designed by someone who likely had a Doctorate in duckology. Part of that duck would be subcontracted through major corporations, cost overruns would stall the project, and the poor duck would be subjected to
various regulatory compliance issues that would likely end up creating a duck that gobbles.
Such is the case with the Clinton Administration's plan to create a Delta Regional Authority.
Sounds good and looks good, until you examine the feathers.
  In the eighth year of his Administration, Bill Clinton, Al Gore and Secretary of Transportation Rodney Slater, have decided that it is now time to save the Mississippi Delta.
In order to do that they have proposed the creation of a seven state Authority that would, in some respects, be similar to the Appalachian Regional Commission. This Authority would have a whopping $159 million budget to address the needs of the Mississippi River Delta. Now for the feathers.
  In this proposed Authority, there are seven states encompassing approximately 220 Counties.
In Mississippi, someone has decided that there are 45 Counties in the Delta. That's right, over half of the State of Mississippi has magically joined the 18 true Delta and part Delta Counties. Now, if you were going to spend $159 million dollars in the true Mississippi Delta, you might make an impact. Spreading $159 million across seven states and 220 counties is
ludicrous. Including 45 Mississippi Counties in the service areas is just plain dumb.
  Out of that $159 million, you will have to support a bureaucracy that stretches across seven states. After it is all said and done, you can count on a minimum of 20 percent of the funds to accomplish this. Much of the $159 million is funny money that includes funding already slated under existing programs such as the Great River Bridge and I-69.
  It is interesting to note that in the midst of creating this flavor of the month endeavor, the same Administration that is working to help us has also chosen not to include funding for the Greenville bridge project. Nor have they included funding to assist Mississippi Valley State University and other projects that have proven both their need and performance.
  After it is all said and done, this looks like an election duck to me.
 

Scott Coopwood
Publisher

Back