Genuine tragedies in the world are not conflicts between right and wrong. They are conflicts between two rights.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
I am profoundly ambivalent about the prospect of the Gateway Pacific Terminal being built here in Whatcom County.
While I have grave doubts and substantial concerns about this project, I am unwilling to take a position in opposition to this project. This is likely to come as a surprise to those who know me well, and not a particularly pleasant surprise at that.
So, here's the deal.
I am willing to take an official position against the Gateway Pacific Terminal after I have evidence that the local unemployment rate for union labor is at parity with the rest of Whatcom County. Right now, it isn't even close. In fact, right now, it isn't even in the same quadrant of the galaxy.
But before any union members, or anyone else, gets it into their head that I have bought into the pro-GPT arguments... allow me to retort.
I don't trust SSA Marine further than I could throw a fit.
My skepticism of corporations is well documented. So it bears mention here that I believe there are good corporate citizens in the world. And I don't mean that I'm allowing for the theoretical possibility of a good corporate citizen in the sense that I'm allowing for the possibility of Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster, either.
I'm talking about corporations like Bristol-Myers Squibb, Campbell Soup Co., McGraw-Hill, Dell, and Boeing. The list of ostensibly good corporate citizens is very short and it's faint praise that damns... it is literally a list of Magnificent Bastards.
Calling a corporation a good citizen is tantamount to saying "of all the sociopaths out there, your sociopathic tendencies present the smallest and most manageable danger to yourself and others. Thanks a pantload."
It's like comparing Hannibal Lecter and Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs and saying, "if I had to pick which serial killer was the better citizen... I'd have to go with Lecter."
It's like... well, I could go on, but you get the idea.
SSA Marine is not a good corporate citizen. At all.
In terms of corporate citizenship, SSA Marine is Buffalo Bill who just wants to make pants out of your skin, not Hannibal Lecter who could be persuaded that the world is more interesting with you in it.
SSA Marine was engaged in vigorous union busting in Longview, California just last year. And all evidence available to me as of this writing convinces me that SSA Marine will slit the throats of local labor the moment the opportunity to do so presents itself.
The fact that local labor is willing to even consider snuggling up to such a forked tongued viper of a corporation as SSA Marine is further evidence of the hardships being endured by local labor in this economy. It isn't that local unions don't know how anti-union SSA Marine is. It's that... this is how bad the job market is now.
I may have some reputation as being an environmentalist, but I'm also an unemployed environmentalist. The job market, both nationally and locally, is one harsh mistress and those of you who are opposing GPT on the grounds that the GPT jobs are not great jobs need to be mindful of that fact.
Environmentalists are winning the argument, but they are not solving the problem.
Yes, there are relatively few jobs to be generated by GPT, and yes there are even fewer long term high-wage jobs than lying-ass SSA Marine is claiming. Way to win the argument. Yippee.
But that doesn't solve the problem.
The point that is being missed here is that those who have been unemployed for literally years are in no position to be terribly picky about what jobs are created today and tomorrow.
Oh my. I just sounded like I might be drinking the GPT Kool-Aid... or if not that... at least taking a deep whiff from the pitcher. Let me correct that.
Because while environmentalists are winning the argument without solving the problem... labor isn't even winning the argument.
Take the matter of the so-called inevitability of coal being shipped here, the argument that "they will just ship the Coal to Canada if they don't ship it from here".
Bravo Sierra.
Listen up, folks.
This argument that "the coal will just be shipped to Canada if it isn't shipped here" is based on the notion that it is no big deal how the coal gets shipped. Can't send it from Whatcom County? No big deal, they will just send it a few miles north and send it from Canada.
No, actually, it must be a pretty damn big deal.
If it is cheaper to send the coal to the Tsawwassen facility in British Columbia than it is to build the Gateway Pacific Terminal here, then it makes no economic sense to build GPT.
If it would cost the same to send the coal to BC as it would cost to build GPT and ship it here, then it also makes no economic sense to build GPT.
If it would cost slightly more to send coal to BC than it would cost to build GPT and ship it here, then it still makes no economic sense to build GPT.
The only reason that it makes any economic sense for anyone to build a facility as undeniably expensive as GPT here in Whatcom County for the purpose of shipping coal (and very little else) for twenty some odd years is if it is much more expensive for that coal to be shipped by other means, including shipping the coal to an existing facility just a few miles north of here.
I urge the reader to bear in mind that corporations act in their own (allegedly enlightened) interest. Always.
Not to beat this horse too repeatedly, but it seems to me that folks are operating on the assumption that SSA Marine is building GPT as some sort of favor to us in Whatcom County.
That sounds rather absurd when phrased that way, but really... why do you suppose that there is so much interest in building GPT rather than shipping coal to an already built and already online nearby facility in Tsawwassen, BC?
SSA Marine is planning to spend countless millions of dollars on a facility to ship coal here because... ? [and I am still waiting for someone to finish this sentence with something that makes more sense than...]
... because it is in SSA Marine's economic self-interest to build it here. That's why.
... because not building GPT is more expensive than building it. (And, yes, you really should have taken that blue pill, but that's neither here nor there.)
And thus, the most telling aspect of this entire saga has gone unheeded, right under every one's radar.
While the environmentalists are making their argument about the undeniably real dangers of coal, locally and globally... and while labor is making its argument about the undeniably dire need for jobs locally... no one is talking about who is really being done any favors here.
Because, as I see it, SSA Marine needs Whatcom County much more than we need them.
They need a deep water port on this seaboard.
We have what they need (Cherry Point) and they can't get what they need anywhere else.
They can't build GPT anywhere else. They have already tried. As things stand now for SSA Marine, it's Cherry Point, or nothing, folks.
To put it more bluntly, we have the upper hand over SSA Marine. And we are acting like they have the upper hand.
We are in a strong position and we appear to be unaware of it because we have been in such a weak economic position for so long we seem to have forgotten what a strong position feels like.
That is understandable, but it is still a mistake. In my opinion, we need to assert the relative strength of our position to SSA Marine until the corporation confronts who is doing whom the favor here.
How badly do they want GPT? If they want it as badly as I think they do, they will stop acting like they are doing us any favors. Because they're not.
They will stop with the arrogance, like prematurely building roads on Cherry Point without a permit.... for example.
When you are living day to day, hanging on by your fingernails, it is difficult to look past tomorrow.
Which is precisely what SSA Marine is counting on, as I see it.
The element of this entire tragedy that sets my teeth most on edge is just how artfully and cunningly the 1% has turned the rest of us against each other.
Admiral Akbar is correct. It is a trap. And we are falling right into it. Labor vs Environmentalists. Right on cue. And SSA Marine is sitting back and letting these factions duke it out. Biding its time. Waiting. Watching. Preparing.
Regardless of the precise eventual outcome (which I am just barely humble enough not to claim to be able to predict) if the local community continues on its current path of winning arguments without achieving any solutions, we will suffer more environmental impact that we otherwise would have to suffer, and we will gain fewer good jobs than we would otherwise gain. With the lone "winner" being SSA Marine... an entity which, I assume, has great faith in zero-sum games.
I can't stand with labor in support of GPT, and I can't stand against labor in opposition to GPT.
So, until I can come up with a solution, I chose to stand aside.
The priorities in taking sides on this issue should be: #1 environment, and #2 jobs. Saying you won't take sides until it is demonstrated that we don't need the jobs shows a reversal of those priorities. If a project is clearly bad for the environment, it shouldn't be done, end of story, no matter how many jobs it creates. I'm sure building a nuclear power plant or a toxic waste incinerator in Bellingham would create good paying jobs. But clearly the environmental costs have to be considered first.
ReplyDeleteClean up the waterfront and start development. Waterfront renovation will provide hundreds of jobs, not just a handful. I'd post an argument regarding the health concerns of transporting even more coal through Bellingham, but the Coal Train Facts site has all the information anyone would need to make an informed decision. Ever seen a coal fire? http://www.coaltrainfacts.org/key-facts
ReplyDeleteShane, this seems to be the linchpin of your argument that we can have both GPT jobs and a clean environment:
ReplyDelete"[W]e have the upper hand over SSA Marine. And we are acting like they have the upper hand.
We are in a strong position . . ."
Who is this "we" of whom you speak?
I think that you must be referring to "we, the agencies and elected officials with permit authority," because no other "we" has leverage over GPT.
I'm hardly an agency-basher, but I must say that the tree-clearing episode makes that premise supect to me. When at least one public agency treats a large project sponsor differently than it treats the general public, it doesn't provide loads of confidence that "we, the permit-granting agencies" are interested in using "our" strong position in a way that's protective of the public.
And of course, none of this addresses the transport issue. Even if it is possible to build North American's largest coal terminal next to an aquatic reserve without imposing more costs than benefits, "we" appear to have minuscule leverage over transport of the raw material. Does that matter?
Excellent comments all around, everyone!
ReplyDelete@Jean
You are spot on with your observation that the "we" manifests itself as as elected officials with permitting authority.
I am referring to "we" the community at large that puts our elected officials in office, either by our actions or our lack of actions.
I am not approaching this from the traditional perspectives that I have heard very many times before.
I believe that there is a pall over this entire story that is based on folks not seeing their ability to change this equation.
I want people to see that "we", the public at large, have much more say in how this matter is resolved than the options I am seeing and hearing being discussed publicly thus far.
"We" can bend the elected agencies with permitting authority to our collective will, in the event that we decide what that collective will actually might be.
The problem is that "we," the public at large, doesn't have a single interest.
ReplyDeleteThere's the "we" that has already decided to support this project because they will gain quantifiable, short-term, economic benefits.
There's another "we" that is concerned about more diffuse, long-term, difficult to quantify impacts, such as impacts on health, impacts from accidents on land and at sea, and impacts on livelihoods that aren't directly related to to GPT.
The first set of "we" generally has an easier time exerting leverage than the second set of "we." Money is quantified and easy to argue. Money provides a motive and a means to organize. Money provides direct leverage.
That's as true in "our" community as in any other.
I've provided an example of evidence that leverage AGAINST a protective interpretation of environmental laws has been exercised effectively by the money "we". If Labor intends to exercise countervening leverage to ensure the enforcement of environmental laws and the imposition of truly protective mitigation requirements, more power to them. Or rather, us (I'm a union member, and proud of Labor on Labor Day). And evidence that those demands are being made, and that the leverage needed to obtain them really exists, would be most welcome.
I'm still interested in your take on how the "pall" can be lifted when it comes to coal transport. Is there leverage to change that equation? The only approach I've seen from project supporters so far is denial. No pollution! No problem with delays! Won't affect other passenger and freight transport! Which is, as I'm sure you know, so much bull pucky.
If project supporters faced up to coal transport issues and explained how "the community" -- from Billings to Bellingham, as they say -- can be made whole, the "equation" would look a whole lot different. And of course, that's the topic of the most recent Get Whatcom Planning post.
Again, thanks for the excellent comments Jean!
ReplyDeleteWhen I wrote this article, I had no expectations that it would fit any of this rather chaotic mass of tooth paste back into any conceivable tube.
Rather, I am sussing out what it is that the public at large is doing right now. So, far there is a very active No Coal contingent with boundless energy, but which appears to be in no danger of applying that energy to any use any time soon. There is the Union contingent who are desperate for jobs. The many signs I see around the area that say "Good Jobs Now" might as well say "Any Jobs Now" or "Will Work for Coal".
How the pall can be lifted must wait to be answered after there is a sense THAT the pall can be lifted at all.
When the conventional wisdom was that it was humanly impossible to run a mile faster than four minutes, no one ran a mile in less than four minutes. Scientific "proof" of this impossibility was published at one point.
But someone entertained the notion that it could be done at some point, and then someone did it.
I find Elisabeth's points about the Waterfront redevelopment in Bellingham as a potential source of relief for local skilled union labor to be encouraging. Since those are jobs that seem just as tangible as the jobs promised by lying-ass union-busting SSA Marine, they are the most credible alternative out there for union labor locally.
Right now, everyone is rhetorically hunkered down in a formation of political trench warfare that promises to be just as pleasant and as successful a tactic as it proved to be in World War I.