by Jesse J. Lewis, Sr.

This article should be everybody’s New Year Resolution. Down through the years the City of Birmingham has fought a lot of battles. In addition to refighting the Civil War, we also changed Birmingham from a coal mining town to a financial and medical research center. Birmingham is not only being looked at by major corporations from other cities, but world-wide. The door of opportunity has opened. It is now time for us to walk through the door. Here are some things we can do that require very little finance and lots of hard work.

Priority No. 1, is to fix our educational system. The timing is good because we are in the process of choosing the next superintendent. He/she must bring a different vision to the table. That vision should be academic excellence in every category needed to achieve excellence. Our school system should be designed so that in after pre-school, every kid who enters the first grade should have knowledge of a foreign language and one musical instrument. By the time they are in the third grade they should be accomplished in one musical instrument and have a working knowledge of one foreign language. The school system should open all year long so that there is special schooling for those who excel and those students, like me, who do not learn fast.
Would you believe that the District of Columbia has turned their school system around, so much so they are now in the Top Ten school systems in America? Incidentally, the superintendent they fired started all of this. Presently, enrollment is up from private and charter schools moving into the public schools. We don’t need to reinvent the wheel; just look at what the Top Five school systems are doing and do that, whatever it is.

Priority No. 2, build a multi-purpose facility with seating capacity of at least 35,000 that can be used for all sports. Along with this we need a Five-Star hotel to be built in the Uptown District. Someone may say, we just built one, but we need to build another one.

Priority No. 3, fix The Fourth Avenue District. It would be an easy fix. This area served as the business, social and cultural center for Blacks with activities similar to those in the predominately white districts. The businesses located in the area included barber and beauty shops, mortuaries, saloons, restaurants, theaters, photographic studios and motels. These Black businesses and their successors continued to do well throughout the ’60s. We have more to offer on Fourth Avenue than Beale Street in Memphis, Tennessee. If I recall correctly, Beale Street has one blues joint and one B-B-Que joint, and they are packed every night.
The key to rebuilding Fourth Avenue is the Masonic Temple. Everything is in place. The Black business district was not only “alive” during the daylight hours but “thrived” throughout the night. Friday and Saturday nights, the streets were filled with crowds of people visiting bars or just out for a stroll. Live entertainment made the district “the place to be.” Performers such as Duke Ellington, Lucky Millender, Claude Hopkins, Jimmy Lunceford, Sonny Blount (Sun Ra), Fess Whatley (Southland Greatest Swing Band) and Louis Armstrong were known to frequent the Masonic Temple. Not only was the Masonic Temple used for entertainment, it housed Black professional offices and was the state headquarters for the Masons and Order of Eastern Stars.

Priority No. 4, building a sports mecca. All we have to do is put the Park & Recreation Board, Birmingham Housing Authority, and the City Board of Education together and utilize all the property that they own together, which includes Legion Field and the Crossplex, to turn out the best baseball and soccer players, basketball players, football players, golfers, swimmers and tennis stars.
It’s hard to believe that as athletic as Black people are, we have only one well-known Black professional male golfer and not one known female. My guess would be that there is not a white school in the SEC that has a tennis star, swimmer, golfer or soccer player and very few baseball players enrolled.

Priority No. 5, creating a downtown outlet mall. We have a lot of empty store buildings in downtown. It would be easy to take a five block square and build a shopping Center. In this five block square, there should be no traffic except for buses. All around the square there should be free parking and free bus rides if you shop in the district. Buses should run every five minutes to and from the mall.

I would like to add that we cannot afford  to break any laws. No robbing, stealing and killing each other. The jail house and prison systems are packed with African-American women and men.

By  Mahari A. McTier

I recently read a book by John Hope Bryant, Founder and CEO of Operation Hope, titled ‘How The Poor Can Save Capitalism’, and he successfully makes his case that the poor can save capitalism.  It was the most unique and radically outside the box analysis of the current state of capitalism. He cleverly made his point in a simplistic way that was not convoluted with economic statistics, academic theory, or philosophical rhetoric. The book is simply practical in its delivery.
The book was about saving America. All of America. Not Black folks or Asians, Latino, or Native American folks. It’s not about white folks. It’s about all of us. The reality is this, whether you are Black, white, red, brown, or yellow, increasingly everyone just wants to see more green – U.S. currency, that is.
I think it’s fair to start by defining poverty according to John Hope Bryant. The HOPE Doctrine on Poverty says that there are three things that define poverty and struggle more than any set of financial numbers ever could: self-confidence, self-esteem, and belief in oneself; role models and environment; aspirations and opportunity. Or lack of these things. It is my opinion that most people don’t decide when they start the journey of life that they want to be poor. The face of poverty is not always who we think. The myth is that only low income people are poor or suffer the consequences of poverty. America has millions of people living with a sense of staggering uncertainty. These aren’t just the poor. I call them the nearly poor, the almost poor, the could be poor, and the temporarily poor. This class of Americans could range from a homeless man on 4th Avenue to a midlevel manager making $50,000 a year. They are one paycheck away from losing everything. They are constantly choosing which bill they will pay this month, or calling Alabama Power to ask if they can put a little on it. America must understand that these people keep our country going.
Statistics show that the bottom 80 percent of the American workforce spends 90 percent of its income, whereas the wealthiest 1 percent spends only 49 percent.  Ordinary Americans are the fuel in our tanks, and if Wall Street, banks, and large corporations are going to survive, they need this segment of the economy to become more economically strong and stable. This means that America must expand opportunity through well-paying jobs and small businesses, along with financial inclusion and financial literacy.
There is a group that believes that trickle-down economics is the answer. Trickle-down economics means that if you provide tax breaks and incentives to the top (rich), economic prosperity will flow down to the bottom. It never works the way it is scripted. If I have $100 million and I receive a tax-break that nets me an additional $5 million, what am I going to do?  Go to the local Walmart and spend it?  No, I am most likely going to pile it on top of my other millions and not put it back into the economy. But when you economically empower and financially educate the bottom of the pyramid you will be building a stronger capitalistic system because they will spend and put it back into the economy. Sounds simple, but trying to get Washington to understand this simple concept is like talking to a brick wall and expecting it to talk back.
The answer sounds simplistic in theory, but there is work that must be done on the parts of everyone for this to work. The wealthy must understand, accept, and implement strategies that will empower the bottom. Even if their motives are selfish, it doesn’t matter, everyone will win. The poor must understand that this system is not about handouts or a transfer of wealth.  With this opportunity will come hard work, no-excuses, and a commitment to financial literacy.

(Mahari A. McTier is a Financial Advisor with Tier 1 Advisors, LLC and can be reached at maharimctier.tier1@gmail.com.)

By Verla Wiley
NATIONWIDE(BlackNews.com) – Like Michael Brown and Eric Garner, I am African American. The circumstances involving the deaths of these two young men are horrendous as are the unconscionable efforts made to avoid a proper hearing in each case. Unfortunately, Brown and Garner made the ultimate sacrifice in a system that is deeply flawed. Instead of utilizing the more open and transparent public preliminary hearing process, secret grand juries failed to indict the police officer responsible for the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and the officer in Staten Island, New York, for the choke hold death of 43-year-old Eric Garner. Since the deaths of these African American men and others, people across the country have been protesting against racial profiling, excessive police force and the failure of the criminal justice system to hold those responsible, accountable for their actions.
For the last 15 years, I have also been denied the right to a public trial by jury. I’’ve been forced to file three consecutive separate, but related civil rights complaints (1999-2014), because of the denial by the courts to rule in favor of my 7th Amendment right to a jury trial in any of the cases.
In May 2005, I retired after thirty-nine years of service from the Broadcasting Board of Governors, (BBG) as an International Radio Broadcaster in the Africa Division of the Voice of America, the largest BBG network. I continued my service after retirement as a union volunteer vice president with the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE Local 1812). I have now been associated with the BBG for over 45 years.
Like the police officers, the BBG is known for the harsh treatment of its people. For the last 10 years, the BBG has ranked at or near the bottom in surveys conducted by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), as one of the worst-managed agencies in the federal government.
On December 5, 2011, I filed a Pro Se, “Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial”, a personal civil rights lawsuit in the U.S. District Court. My complaint alleged discriminatory and retaliatory treatment, as well as constitutional violations of my First Amendment right to freedom of speech and assembly, Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreasonable searches, Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection of the law, and Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. At the center of the discriminatory treatment were several measures designed to restrict my access and nullify my rights, including my right to exercise my personal choice to work in the field of advocacy work.
Just as the Brown and Garner cases were diverted to a grand jury instead of a public jury trial, my civil rights lawsuit was redirected to an administrative process by Judge Robert Wilkins via the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA). The case centers around a restrictive Black-Codes-like “Building Access” policy the BBG created especially to implement against me. “Black Codes” were laws passed by southern states in the 1860’s after the Civil War, restricting African Americans’’ freedoms. I am the only retiree, (African American), that the policy was rigidly enforced against; the policy did not apply to Caucasian union retirees, who were similarly situated.
The Complaint included a litany of discriminatory, retaliatory and harassing actions with the intent to restrict my movement around the building. In March 2006, the BBG terminated the agreement that allowed retired union officials unfettered access into the Cohen Building. I am the only retiree who could no longer use the retired identification badge to gain entry into the building… I was forced to daily sign in as a visitor and be photographed… be escorted at all times, even to the restroom and cafeteria… subjected to invasive body searches of a sexual nature… required to complete security forms designated only for prospective employees… followed around the Cohen Building by security guards… deemed a “security risk”… and placed under surveillance, inside and outside the Cohen Building. When these BBG actions did not discourage me from coming into the building, an unsigned memo titled “Building Access” dated August 24, 2004, outlining the above restrictions was given only to me.
A hearing was held on July 22, 2013, and I expected Judge Wilkins to set a trial date since the BBG did not address my allegations. Instead, the judge issued an ORDER for the parties to address several FLRA cases researched by the court to establish whether I could file an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) charge as a non-employee. The judge ignored the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statutes (FSLMRS), which cover employees only. I told the court that I am not an employee of the union nor the BBG. The union could not file a ULP because I am not in the bargaining unit nor can I file as a union official on my own behalf. The court was the only avenue I had to address my personal lawsuit.
Judge Wilkins told me that the cases he researched allowed me to file a ULP charge as a non-employee. However, none of the cases he researched were filed with the FLRA by a non-employee representative, therefore, the case review exercise did nothing to disprove my position or strengthen the argument for dismissal of my case. One case Judge Wilkins used to dismiss my lawsuit, National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) v. Social Security Administration (D.C. Circuit 1992), was invalidated by the AFGE Assistant General Counsel who helped litigate the case. The General Counsel pointed out that the case had nothing to do with discussing the rights of non-employees to enter onto agency premises, but instead involved the labor union, NTEU, the charging party in the ULP charge.
Hearing transcripts indicate there was no intention of reviewing my case in a light favorable to me. When asked about my status by Judge Wilkins, BBG Counsel agreed with me and argued several times that under the Collective Bargaining Agreement and 5 U.S.C. 7116, Ms. Wiley had no rights, and that a ULP can only be pursued by a union or a current employee. Judge Wilkins continued to ask leading questions until the BBG reversed its position stating the Agency believes that Ms. Wiley does have standing to file its complaint, but the agency would respond that it is not a ULP.
The Brown grand jury hearing transcripts show that prosecutors asked police officer Darren Wilson leading questions designed to strengthen his self-defense claim. A prosecutor told Wilson, “You felt like your life was in jeopardy,” followed by, “And use of deadly force was justified at that point, in your opinion?” The transcripts also show that prosecutors did not ask for an indictment regarding Wilson. Instead, they acted as Wilson’’s defense attorney and challenged witnesses who contradicted the police officer’’s testimony.
The evidence shows that my case is not an unfair labor practice nor union grievance issue. It is “personal animus” against an African American for advocacy work, and perpetuated in a way that effectively disguises that motive in a cloak of “internal security” that complicates the situation. I describe the situation as D.A.W.W.B. – Doing Advocacy Work While Black.” United States Attorney General Eric Holder recently gave a speech at Morgan State University about “racial inequality” and the recent public episodes of racial bigotry in which he said that it should not obscure the greater damage done by more systemic forms of prejudice and discrimination. The Attorney General warned that if we concentrate on that, “we are likely to miss the more hidden, and the more troubling reality behind the headlines.”
The Constitution provides that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, without due process of law. Judge Wilkins now joins a chorus of court judges who have used the 7th Amendment as a Sword of Damocles above my head. My pursuit of a jury trial began in Chief Judge Thomas Hogan’’s court in April 1999. It has been an expensive, costly endeavor. The Complaint, including filings with the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, lasted for almost 10 years (1999-2008), before it was closed without a jury trial. The racial/sex discrimination case was re-opened in March 2014, to address a Transcript Redaction Notice.
In 2009, the discrimination and retaliation continued. I filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle’s courtroom. Documents confirm that the BBG considers me a “security risk.” I sought more documents to find out the underlying reason/s why, so that I can address the allegations. Judge Huvelle eventually granted summary judgment to the BBG, however, my lawyer, who is Caucasian, collected attorney fees, which is unusual when the client does not prevail. (2009-2010)
On September 16, 2013, Judge Wilkins granted summary judgment to the BBG and once again I was denied a jury trial (2011-2014). There were nine counts. Count 7 was dismissed with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. The remaining 8 constitutional counts were dismissed without prejudice for failing to exhaust administrative remedies. Instead of recognizing the constitutional issues in my personal lawsuit, the court reduced the matter to that of an administrative practice which is completely violative of its judicial responsibility under Article III. Filing a ULP would have been untimely and irrelevant to my right to seek redress from the District Court for blatant and indefensible violations of my constitutionally-protected rights. On August 29, 2014, I filed a “Complaint of Judicial Misconduct” against Judge Wilkins, who, after three years serving as U.S. District Court Judge, was appointed on January 15, 2014, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The July and September 2013 transcripts show what I believe to be unethical behavior; that the court acted as judge, jury and co-counsel for the defense. I made a request to the Judicial Council of the District of Columbia Circuit to investigate my allegations as well as the relevance and authenticity of the cases Judge Wilkins used to dismiss my case on a technicality for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
My experiences over the years as a civil rights and union activist taught me that the courts, attorneys and the BBG have used various techniques to prevent citizens from obtaining justice because they are African American or minorities who stand up for their rights, as well as advocates like myself who protect the rights of all people. My advocacy work not only caused the removal of abusive BBG managers throughout the years, but encounters with self-serving attorneys caused me to dismiss them for misrepresentation and misconduct; one attorney was eventually disbarred, another had to reimburse for missed deadlines and non-appearance at hearings, two others tried to force inadequate settlements; and yet another redirected the focus of my allegations on race and sex discrimination, and the case was dismissed.
With regard to my current 2011 Complaint, I subsequently filed an appeal on October 10, 2013. The Court of Appeals not only upheld the District Court’’s decision, but denied my requests for an Oral or En Banc hearing. In July 2014, the court issued the dismissal based on my submissions to the court, which is a violation of my First Amendment right to be heard. Several questions having direct relevance based on the errors of the District Court were presented to the appeals court who ignored the issues and did not honor its legal requirement to provide comprehensive and conclusive description about each question or error presented.
A review of my attempts for the last 15 years to obtain due process reveal that the Jim Crow laws of the past are still alive today within the halls of justice. The right to a public jury trial is recognized as a fundamental civil right under Article III of the United States Constitution. Yet, the manipulation of the justice system that works to ensure that justice for all is denied, serves to reduce the words “EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW” that appear above the United States Supreme Court Building to mere rhetoric, and reinforces the belief concerning the exclusion of justice for people of color. The 15 years that I have waited for fair exercise of my 7th Amendment right to a jury trial, and unencumbered exercise to the fundamental right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, serves to erode the premise of those words etched along the highest court in the United States.
In an amicus brief filed by the Black Women Lawyer’s Association of Greater Chicago, Inc., (Grutter v. Bollinger) regarding the University of Michigan and racial preferences, they point out that “The Supreme Court itself had a major role in framing the issues and shaping the impact of race in this country through its decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, and Plessy v. Ferguson, among others. As those cases demonstrate, not even this court was immune from discriminating against African Americans in this country. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that no segment of American society has been immune from the legacy of discrimination that began with the institution of slavery and continues today in other forms.”
Understanding our Black History is what helped me through these painful years. I have experienced what it feels like to be detained as the legacy of slavery and the Black Codes-like policy in its implementation restricted my movement in the Cohen Building of the Broadcasting Board of Governors where the union office is located. My Caucasian colleagues were never exposed to demeaning security searches conducted pursuant to a “policy” that opened the door to sexually harassing contact with my person. They did not have to continually consider the looming threat that I had to fear in terms of security following me around the building and the possibility of being taken out in a humiliating fashion for failing to obtain an escort. Fear of the possibility of being unceremoniously escorted out of the building still haunts me, and has caused me to reduce my trips to the Cohen Building. Instead, I often remain at home and participate in union meetings via telephone conference, and communicate with employees via email and telephone about any negative situation they may be facing.
The Cohen Building itself embodies a piece of American history dating back to the segregation era. There are many restrooms located in close proximity to each other. The larger restrooms once carried a sign on the door, “WHITE ONLY” and the smaller restrooms read, “COLORED ONLY.” The signs have been taken down. But I am being told in this day and age that I cannot go to either restroom without an escort.
My only infraction of the rules was that I tried to help somebody, and in doing so the situation escalated into a matter of “national security.” The evidence shows that the courts displayed dishonesty and improper motives when all of my lawsuits were dismissed without giving a jury the opportunity to hear my valid civil rights and constitutional claims.
Dorian Johnson was given the opportunity to be heard, but his eyewitness account was not believed in the Brown grand jury proceedings. Mr. Johnson was at the scene and saw his friend, Michael Brown, gunned down. He provided testimony rebutting police officer, Darren Wilson’’s claim that he was defending his life against a deranged aggressor. A review of Black History and the justice system in this country bears witness to the fact that the court system is more likely to believe the testimony of a white person more so than a Black person. Wilson was allowed to give four hours of self-serving testimony at the grand jury proceedings to support his self-defense claims.
If the prosecuting attorneys had filed charges against the police officers in the Brown, Garner and other similar cases, a preliminary hearing would have occurred and steps would have been taken to protect the rights of all who were involved. What the public saw in these situations was the criminal justice system at its worst.
As the voices from the past speak out to us, we have to keep fighting, we have to keep marching, protecting and protesting, because who will save us, but us.
HANDS UP! DON’T SHOOT! I CAN’T BREATHE!
Verla Wiley is a Civil Rights & Union Advocate. She can be reached at 301-538-1945 or vmwiley@aol.com.

by Senator Hank Sanders

We forget that young people are powerful in so many ways. They change things culturally. They change things socially. They change things economically.  They change things educationally.  They change things technologically. We forget that young people are powerful in changing things.
The many ways young people change things are far too numerous to explore in this Sketches. Therefore, I want to review just one front on which young people profoundly changed things.  I know that Dr. King is given the credit for changes wrought during the American Civil Rights Movement. And he deserves great credit but not all or most of the credit. We forget that it was young people who were truly on the front lines in changing things.
Let’s start in 1955. We hear about Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. We hear about Mrs. Rosa Parks. We hear about their roles in the Montgomery Bus Boycott. But it was a 15-year-old girl who set the stage for Rosa Parks, Dr. King and others. Her name was Claudette Colvin. When the bus driver ordered her to get up from her seat so a white man could sit down, Claudette refused. She was dragged off the bus, arrested and eventually adjudged as a juvenile delinquent. However, Claudette subsequently became a member of Mrs. Parks’ NAACP Youth Group, and her “sit down experience” on the bus deeply touched Mrs. Parks. It moved  her to action. If Claudette Colvin had not stood up by sitting down, we may never have heard of Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King, Jr. We forget that young people are powerful.
Bruce Boynton of Selma was still a teen in 1958 when he took a stand. He was on his way home from Howard University Law School when he insisted on being served at the bus station’s only lunch counter in Virginia which was for White only.  He was arrested and jailed.  He filed a lawsuit, Boynton v. Virginia, which went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.  The Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to segregate interstate passengers and transportation facilities. Boynton’s actions inspired the Freedom Riders Movement to test whether the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision really meant anything or was just another piece of paper. We forget that young people are powerful in changing things.
Four college students sat down at the Woolworth Lunch Counter in Greensboro, North Carolina in 1960, seeking to be served like whites. They were David Richmond, Joseph McNeil, Ezell Blair, Jr. (Jibreel Khazan) and Franklin McCain. When they were not served, they refused to leave. It became known as a sit in and ignited a movement. The actions by these four men inspired others to sit in at various locations across the South. This was another take off on what Bruce Boynton had done in 1958. We forget that young people are powerful in changing things.
Unlike the young people in other places, the young people in Nashville, Tennessee had guidance and training from Jim Lawson. However, the young people were the real moving force in the Nashville Movement. Leaders such as Diane Nash provided leadership not only during the Nashville Movement but across the South. We forget that young people are powerful in changing things.
In Birmingham, the movement appeared to be on its deathbed. Then public school students came to the rescue by the thousands. Without these students facing dogs, fire hoses, Bull Connor and other challenges, we may not have had the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which insured public accommodations for African Americans across the country. We forget that young people are powerful in changing things.
The Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) was a moving force across the South. They went where others feared to tread, including Selma, Alabama. It was students such as Bernard Lafayette, who took the Selma Movement to the next level. Since Dr. King never went anyplace that other people were not already in movement, except for the work of the young people, he may never have come to Selma. It was young people who moved the masses of adults, including teachers, to march. Of course, this does not take anything away from Mrs. Amelia Boynton Robinson and other members of the Courageous Eight. However, the roles of youth get lost in the narratives of history. Without the youth of Selma, we may not have a Voting Rights Act. We forget that young people are powerful in changing things.
I personally recall my participation in the Voting Rights Movement. We were moving to the rhythm of our own spirits. No adults decided for us. I also recall that youth moved separately in the tracking movement in Selma in the early 1990s. It was young people who decided to occupy Selma High School. We adults did not know about it until it had happened. There are so many more examples: the Dream Defenders who occupied the Governor’s office in Florida; the Dreamers in the Immigration Movement; the young people in the current Justice Movement spurred on by the deaths of Trayvon Martin, Jordan Davis, Michael Brown, Eric Garner and others.
I have watched Alecha Irby of Selma organize marches in support of Trayvon Martin, get arrested in the State Capitol working for the expansion of Medicaid, and lead protests in the Birmingham area in the Black Lives Matter Movement. We must never forget that young people are powerful in changing things.
EPILOGUE – Too often we talk about young people. It is usually negative. We forget that young people are powerful forces for positive change. We forget that they move to the rhythm of their own spirits.

  How society uses materials and dispose of materials basically affects our environmental and economic future. This leads me to the topic of fracking. Oftentimes we do not think about where we get our natural gas. Fracking starts with a bore hole drilled thousands of feet below ground, cutting through many geological layers and aquifers, that are a few hundred feet below the surface.
Proponents claim that fracking has created jobs and lowered natural gas prices. More production of oil and shale resources means lower prices. Oil prices will lower for cars and heating the home. From my urban planning view, as gas prices go down, the more urban sprawl may occur. Also, you will begin to see larger vehicles being purchased. As a consumer of gas for driving my automobile, it is encouraging to see gas prices go down.
Proponents for fracking say that it creates substantial economic benefits for jobs. For instance, jobs resulting from fracking are people working in the manufacturing, shipping, and laborer field to name a few. Another benefit from fracking is an increase in tax revenue. When tax revenue increases there is a direct impact on economic growth.
Opponents say, fracking could pose risks to the environment and health through air pollution and contributing to global warming emissions. They are concerned with potential contamination of drinking water in wells. Proponents claim this concern can be eliminated by making sure that the well you drill to pump the water and chemicals through the shale to fracture it and release the gas is sealed properly.
Opponents say that property damage could result from drilling. Some claim that there are earthquakes from the deep-well injections of the wastewater into the gas-producing shale.
I encourage further research that would lead to creating a balance between the economic benefits and the environmental safety challenges. This goal to achieve balance is one of the largest challenges in improving our environment. In order to examine balance, we must conduct a cost-benefit analysis. This analysis offers a way of achieving superior environmental results at a lower overall cost to society than other available approaches.
I leave you with the premise that further studies are needed on fracking to ensure that we leave the environment better than the way we found it for the next generation. We, as consumers, should be mindful of how we use natural gas materials such as gasoline because it affects our environmental and economic future. We must be better stewards.

L’Tryce Slade, MRP, JD
Slade, LLC
www.sladellc.com