Weekly Opinion Editorial

Oklahoma needs Open & Campus Carry!

by Steve Fair

In 1995 Oklahoma passed the Self Defense Act aka the Conceal & Carry law. Since that time over 107,000 Oklahomans have taken the course and received a license to carry a weapon. There have been only 30 revocations, 85 suspensions related to felony arrests, and about 15 suspensions per year for failure to conceal. Licensed C&C holders represent about 2.8% of the population of the Sooner state.

*****
Last week, State Representative Mark McCullough, (R-Sapulpa), convened an interim study to review Oklahoma’s gun laws. “We are conducting a serious, thoughtful examination of Oklahoma’s gun laws,” McCullough said. “Our goal is to develop responsible proposals for expanding the right to carry firearms in self-defense.”

*****
During the study, members of the House Public Safety Committee heard testimony from Oklahoma City University law professor Michael O’Shea, a nationally recognized expert on the Second Amendment. O’Shea said Oklahoma’s Self Defense Act is unreasonably harsh in its concealment provision. The Oklahoma law states that the gun must be completely concealed from view and detection, meaning even accidental exposure of the weapon is a crime.

*****
Tim Gillespie, an official with Oklahomans for the Second Amendment urged lawmakers to amend state law to allow gun owners to openly carry a weapon on their own private property, saying such restrictions are unreasonable.

*****
During the study, legislators considered at a wide range of issues, including modifying the weapons permitting process, open carry, and possible constitutional issues that may need to be addressed in light of certain court rulings.

*****
It’s legal to conceal and carry in 49 of the 50 states. Only Illinois does not allow a citizen to carry a gun. Seems a little ironic because Chicago has one of the highest gun related crime rates in America, yet it’s ‘illegal’ to carry a gun in Chicago. The old adage is right- ‘when you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.’ Rocker Ted Nugent, an outspoken advocate for the Second Amendment, says, "If guns cause crime, all of mine are defective."

*****
Concealed handgun laws have reduced violent crime in America for two reasons. First, it reduces the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves from criminals.

*****
The upcoming Oklahoma legislature should consider two improvements to gun laws in Oklahoma:

*****
First, Oklahoma should have Open Carry. While many believe open carry would frighten people so gun toters should be considerate and “cover up” for the fearful’s sake, that argument doesn’t take into account the right of the gun owner to defend themself. A second argument against open carry is it makes you a target and that criminals will come after you if they see your gun. In a Department of Justice poll of violent criminals 57% said they fear a law abiding citizen with a gun more than they fear the police. The final and most compelling argument for open carry is that criminals do not openly carry their firearms. While law abiding people must conceal their firearms, it is also the preferred method of carry for criminals. It is not the gun you can see that is to be feared…it is the one you don’t see coming.

*****
The real purpose of passing open carry is to fix the ‘causal exposure’ problem that currently exists in Oklahoma’s law. This proposal failed to get past a Republican controlled House committee in the 2011 legislative session after being passed by both chambers and vetoed by the Governor in 2010.

*****
Second, Oklahoma should have Campus Conceal. There are no significant differences between carrying a concealed handgun on a college campus and carrying a concealed handgun in an office building, shopping mall, restaurant, grocery store, bank, or movie theater. Currently only Utah allows C&C license holders to carry on campus at their public colleges/universities. Fifteen states allow the individual schools to make the call, but only a couple of schools allow it.

*****
It seems some liberal educators are afraid students will pull their weapon after a tough test and plug them. According to concealcampus.org, since 2006 of the nine degree-offering public colleges in Utah not one single gun incident, including threats and suicide has occurred. Efforts to get this passed in Oklahoma have failed the past two legislative sessions after higher education administrators lobbied against it.

*****
Legal age Oklahoma college students should be allowed to exercise their constitutional right to bear arms on campus. These ‘gun free’ zones don’t work- ask Chicago. Former Vice President Walter Mondale, a Democrat, said, “Gun bans don't disarm criminals, gun bans attract them.”
Oklahoma legislators should be protecting citizen’s rights to defend themselves. The original intent and purpose of the Second Amendment was to preserve and guarantee, not grant, the pre-existing right of individuals to keep and bear arms.

Weekly Opinion EditorialHITTING THE WALL!
by Steve Fair

The U.S. debt ceiling- the legal limit on government borrowing- has been in the news lately, but little or nothing has been said about the looming US debt wall- the point in which the percent of government debt to America’s GDP begins to affect our economy. An Oklahoman is trying to change that.
****
On Sunday’s Fox News ‘Huckabee,’ Marc Nuttle from Norman, Oklahoma was interviewed by the Governor about the debt crisis in the US and across the world. Marc is an attorney based in Norman, Oklahoma, who specializes in international trade, international foreign policy and international political affairs. Nuttle is widely recognized for his expertise in forecasting political and economic trends. He represents corporations, business projects and political entities nationally and internationally.
*****
Nuttle is heading up an organization known as Debt Wall (http://debtwall.org/). At DW, they contend there is a limited amount of money that the world’s sovereign governments can borrow in any single given year without pressuring interest rates to rise above the point of affordability. They believe that limit is approximately 9% of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP) and the US will hit the wall by July 31, 2012. The Debt Wall Index is a countdown to this collision. Based on current projections of economic growth and government spending, Nuttle and his organization believe the US will hit the Debt Wall by July 31, 2012.

*****
Marc’s reasoning is this: The current U.S. spending deficit is about $1.67 trillion. The spending deficits of the rest of the nations in the world run another $9 trillion or so. Combined, there simply is not enough liquid capital in the world to fund $10 trillion in deficits at an interest rate taxpayer anywhere can actually afford.

*****
Nuttle believes that once the world governments run out of ready money to borrow — they’ll pursue other means like raising interest rates to pull investors and their equity from other markets. They’ll also turn up the presses and print more money, devaluing their currencies and causing inflation. During inflationary times, the middle and lower income earners always feel the biggest pinch.

*****
At debtwall.org, Nuttle has a top ten list of things you need to know about the looming debt crisis in America. http://debtwall.org/debt-crisis-index-what-you-need-to-know/ To summarize the ten points he is simply saying if we don’t get our debt under control, our lives will change dramatically from an economic standpoint once we hit the Debt Wall.

*****
On ‘Huckabee’ the Governor noted that if Nuttle’s projected date of July 31st of next year is correct then America will be in the midst of the 2012 presidential campaign when the wall is hit. “Isn’t it in the best interest of both Parties to deal with the debt issue?” Huckabee asked. “Certainly,” Nuttle replied. “The nation’s debt wall is not a partisan issue.”

*****
It isn’t a partisan issue, but it certainly seems that way. When you consider how difficult was to get the debt ceiling compromise through the House, it would seem many in Washington mistakenly believe we have a revenue problem, not a spending problem.

*****
Dave Ramsey broke down the US federal budget and debt to levels that we can better understand when he said the cuts Congress was like a family making 58K a year, spending 75K a year and have over 327K in credit card debt. The family decides to fix it, by reducing their annual spending to $72K. While the cuts got them going in the right direction, it reveals a complete disregard of the fact their deficit spending is not sustainable long-term. Even if they act now, some believe it might be too late.

*****
A month ago Peter Leeds of Penny Stocks, wrote in an op/ed http://augustafreepress.com/2011/08/15/peter-leeds-past-the-point-of-no-return/that America is past the point of no return on dealing with the national debt issue. “You've certainly heard the endless stream of negative economic news lately. America's fiscal house is in trouble, job growth has stalled, and we may be driving right into a double-dip recession. While giving their pessimistic economic outlooks, there is one thing that the doomsayers have gotten wrong - they aren't nearly worried enough. We've past the point of no return. In both America and globally, in less than two years, our societies will look very different, and possibly be almost unrecognizable. I expect very strong inflation, fueled by loose monetary policies and an unprecedented period of near zero interest rates,” Leeds predicted. Not a very rosy picture.

*****
If Leeds assessment is correct and the debt wall projection by Nuttle’s group is accurate, America may be in for a long period of economic recession, but until a majority in Washington starts slamming on the brakes and not just lightly tapping them, it appears the US will hit the wall like a crash test car. The problem is the American economy is in the car, not the dummies that got us there.

Weekly Opinion Editorial

LESS GOVERNMENT, NOT LESS REPRESENTATION!
by Steve Fair

State Representative Gary Banz, (R-Midwest City) is conducting an interim study next week to look at reducing the number of members of the Oklahoma Legislature by approximately ten percent.
*****
“As lawmakers, we constantly talk about the need for smaller government,” said Banz, a retired coach and educator. “My legislation lets legislators prove it in a way that shows we are truly committed to reducing the size of government.”
*****
If both chambers of the legislature approve Banz’s House Joint Resolution 1021, voters in November 2012 would have the opportunity to approve a constitutional amendment reducing the Oklahoma Legislature membership. The proposal would cut the number of seats in the Oklahoma House of Representatives from 101 to 91, and reduce the number of state senators from 48 to 43. If approved by the voters, t would not take effect until after the next redistricting- 2021.
*****
“I believe the Legislature needs to look at itself first,” Banz said. “If we ask agencies to consolidate, it is important for the Legislature to take the lead and do the same.”
*****
In 1921, Oklahoma’s population was just over two million and there were 92 seats in the Oklahoma House of Representatives. Each State Representative represented about 22,000 Oklahomans. In 1953, there were 124 members in the State House and the population was 2.2 million in the Sooner state and each lawmaker represented about 17,000 people.
*****
“The House has successfully operated with far fewer members in the past, and the chamber has also successfully downsized in the past,” Banz said. “History shows this idea is very feasible.”
*****
“This would be a significant change, and I want to solicit input from every corner of Oklahoma,” Banz said. “I think this is good policy, but also believe it should be carefully vetted.” You can express your opinion by contacting Banz’s office at 405.557.7395.
*****
Three observations about Banz’s proposal:
*****
First, you will get little argument Oklahoma state government is too big. When you consider the largest employer in the state is state government, lawmakers should to be seeking ways to downsize government and save taxpayers money. But just how much money would Banz’s proposal save?
*****
Rank and file Oklahoma state legislators make $38,500 annually and then there are expenses, benefits, and staff for each member. The savings resulting from eliminating fifteen district would likely be around a million a year- not an amount to be sneezed at, but when the Oklahoma state budget is 6.7 billion annually, the savings from this proposal are virtually insignificant.
*****
Second, are Oklahomans currently over represented? Oklahoma’s population in 2011 is 3.75 million. That means an Oklahoma State Representative has slightly over 37,000 population in their district- a State Senator around 75,000. Today’s legislators represent over twice the population a 1950s legislator represented. If the number of legislators were reduced, it would make it even more difficult for citizens to get to know their state legislator. It would also increase the amount of geography each lawmaker would represent. The more sparsely populated areas in a district would get likely little or no attention as legislators would ‘fish where the fish are.’
*****
Third, Banz’s proposal would hurt rural Oklahoma. A large percentage of Oklahoma’s population lives in the urban areas of the state. If the number of state legislators is reduced, those larger population areas would gain more power and rural areas would lose representation. In the 2011 redistricting, rural Oklahoma lost three House seats and one Senate seat to the urban areas. You can’t change the dynamic of population shifting to the urban areas, but if the total number of legislators is reduced, the influence of rural Oklahoma counties will be reduced proportionally.
*****
While I applaud Banz’s willingness to save taxpayers money, reduction of the number of legislators will not result in enough savings to really matter. It would make access to state lawmakers more difficult than it is now, and dilute the influence of rural Oklahoma. Oklahomans need less government, but we don’t need less representation.

Weekly Opinion Editorial

Feeding the Education Machine!
by Steve Fair

Governor Mary Fallin said last week she wants Oklahoma to produce 1,700 more college graduates a year. “We need a much higher number of college-educated graduates in our state,” Fallin said at an OSU town hall meeting. Currently Oklahoma produces about 27,000 college degrees a year.
*****
In “ Brain Gain 2010,” a 1999 strategy by the Oklahoma Regents for Higher Education, http://www.okhighered.org/studies-reports/brain-gain/braingainreport.pdf, the lofty goal of thirty eight percent of Oklahoma’s population was set by the Regents to have completed an Associate degree or higher by 2010. They failed to reach the goal- only about 20% of Oklahoma’s workforce has a college degree.
*****
The higher education lobby in Oklahoma has been very successful at feeding the education machine, but they have done little to improve the states per capita income. In fiscal year 2012, Oklahoma higher education will get 14.5% of the state budget.
*****
State Representative Corey Holland, (R-Marlow) wants higher education to be more accountable for the money they get from the taxpayers. Holland said in a June 2nd interview with The Duncan Banner http://duncanbanner.com/x775914909/Holland-hones-in-on-education-reform that he believes that higher education should be scruntized more. “I still think there are some areas that we really need to look at,” Holland said. “One of those is the spending that occurs in the higher education areas. “Essentially, all the other state agencies, when they incur cuts, they make cuts. They live in the reality of the economic climate. Colleges and universities, though, when they cut their budgets cut, they raise the prices for tuition. They pass it on to the students. There needs to be a lot more accountability on higher ed.”
*****
Of Oklahoma’s common education superintendents, more than two hundred make more than $100,000 annually. In contrast, Holland, a former teacher, said more than 2,000 higher education employees make more than $100,000 annually. “That’s just ridiculous,” Holland said. “It’s because there is not enough ability for the legislature to provide adequate oversight on their spending. If that doesn’t change, it’s going to continue to be a detriment of K-12 schools statewide.”
*****
Holland is correct that higher education has a funding mechanism that state agencies don’t have. Their consumer- the student- pays a large portion of the cost of their education. Colleges and universities just increase tuition to make up for the budget shortfall. They seldom lay off Profs or administration- they just take a price increase in tuition. At the town hall meeting in Stillwater, Fallin failed to mention that when the Oklahoma legislature cut higher eds budget this year (by 6%), OSU, OU and other state college students got a +4.8% tuition increase. An in-state OSU student is paying about $500 more this year, making the yearly tuition about $7,200.

*****
At the town hall meeting, Fallin agreed that asking State colleges and universities to produce more graduates would logically lead to a call for more higher education funding, but she did not commit to asking the legislature to increase higher eds budget, saying that savings should be squeezed out of ‘other areas.’
******
Fallin also announced that Oklahoma would participate in the “Complete College America” http://www.completecollege.org/program, a program whose stated goal is, “to significantly increase the number of Americans with a college degree or credential of value and to close attainment gaps for traditionally underrepresented populations.” Funded by several foundations, including the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, correctly state that while Americans are starting college at a record level, the graduation rates are flat.
*****
Oklahoma colleges already have a ‘Reach Higher’ http://www.okhighered.org/reachhigher/ program that encourages older students to complete their college degree online. The Reach Higher courses are repetitive and not very practical and while the ‘Reach Higher’ marketing brochure touts completion of the program as a stepping-stone to a better life, more pay, and personal satisfaction, little or no placement services are offered to graduates of the program. Like many higher education programs, it’s all about the tuition money.
*****
Educating Oklahomans is a worthy lofty goal, but is only one part of the puzzle. If Oklahoma college graduates don’t have a place to work when they get out of school, then Oklahoma colleges and universities are nothing more than a taxpayer funded business enterprise producing a product for other states and their industries. The key is moving Oklahoma forward is creating a business environment that will attract business and industry for those completing their education.
*****
Fallin said the future of Oklahoma’s prosperity depends on education. The reality is Oklahoma’s prosperity- humanly speaking- is dependent upon our marketing our state’s geographic location, citizen work ethic, natural resources and lifestyle. Just feeding an Oklahoma higher education machine is not the answer to moving Oklahoma forward.

Weekly Opinion Editorial

POPULAR VOTE WOULD HURT OKLAHOMA!
by Steve Fair

Last year, SB 841, authored by Senator Rob Johnson, (R-Kingfisher) and Representative Don Armes, (R-Faxon) passed out of committee and if it had been approved would have sent to Oklahoma voters a State Question to have Oklahoma join the National Popular Vote Compact. After an outcall from citizens throughout Oklahoma, the proposal was withdrawn and never was voted on in either legislative chamber.

*****
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is an agreement among states designed to replace current state rules governing the Electoral College system. If implemented, it would guarantee the election of the national popular vote winner. Eight states and the District of Columbia have passed the compact. Just last week, the country’s most populous state. California joined the compact. With the addition of California, proponents of the NPVIC have nearly half the electoral votes they need for the compact to take effect.

*****
The compact is based on Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, which gives each state legislature the right to decide how to appoint its own electors. Today, 48 states, including Oklahoma, award all of their electoral votes to the candidate with the most popular votes statewide. Proponents of the NPVIC claim that means we are electing the President and elect the President and Vice President of the United States by popular vote and this just simplifies the often misunderstood Electoral College system. You can read more about their proposal at http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/index.php.

******
Who are the people behind the NPVIC? The Chairman is Dr. John R. Koza, the inventor of the scratch off lottery ticket, and twice a Democrat elector in California. Dr. Kova is a good friend of Al Gore, who won the popular vote in 2000 but lost the electoral vote count to George W. Bush.

*****
Barry Faden, a Democrat, is the President of NPVIC. He is a San Francisco attorney who supported John Kerry in 2004. He contributed $2,000 to Kerry according to campaignmoney.com.

*****
Board members for NPVIC are Tom Golisano, the owner of Paychex, an HR company for small business and the owner of the NHL’s Buffalo Sabers. In 2008, Golisano, a registered Independent in New York state, gave one million dollars to the Democrats for their national convention. Chris Pearson is State Representative in Vermont. He is a member of the Progressive Party, one of only 6 in the 150 member body. Stephen Siberstein is a California Democrat who contributed $250,000 to the Center for American Progress, a left wing think tank.

*****
So why is NPVIC pushing a national popular vote? In fifty-six Presidential elections, only four times has the winner of the electoral vote not won the popular vote (1824, 1876, 1888, 2000), so why is there such a rush to move to a national popular vote? According to the NPVIC website, it is “to guarantee election of the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.” But that doesn’t seem to be real motive.

*****
When Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 by 500,000 over George W. Bush, liberals began a systemic attack of the Electoral College. Even though Bush won over 70% of the geography of the US and thirty states vs. Gore’s twenty, liberals still believe he stole the election. They know that large urban states tend to be more liberal than rural states, so moving to a popular vote system would give a definite advantage to a liberal.

*****
But the founders of our country were huge proponents of ‘states rights.’ The founders of our republic were avid supporters of state rights. James Madison, known as the father of the constitution, said, “In our complex system of polity, the public will, as a source of authority, may be the will of the people as composing one nation, or the will of the States in their distinct and independent capacities; or the federal will as viewed, for example, through the presidential electors, representing in a certain proportion both the nation and the States.”

*****
According to David Barton of Wallbuilders, the genius of the Electoral College is that it synthesized two important philosophies established in the Constitution: (1) the maintenance of a republican, as opposed to a democratic, form of government and (2) the balancing of power between the smaller and the larger States and between the various diverse regions of the nation. I would recommend you read David's 2001 article, "Electoral College: Preserve or Abolish? " at http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=95

*****
On Saturday, the state committee of the Oklahoma Republican Party voted to oppose any proposal to move to a national popular vote in the election of the POTUS. The vote was unanimous. This is one issue that both Oklahoma Republicans and Democrats must agree on; moving to electing the president by national popular vote would hurt Oklahoma.

Ann Colter

You will note I have dropped the link to Ann Colter's column from my list of recommended links. I have always admired Colter for her courage and candor, but it appears she has now endorsed the gay lifestyle by joining the Log Cabin Republicans- aka GOProud. Here is a link to the story concerning her joining up with the group.

http://www.inquisitr.com/133795/ann-coulter-goproud-honorary-chair/

“Ann Coulter is a brilliant and fearless leader of the conservative movement; we are honored to have her as part of GOProud’s leadership,” board Chairman Christopher Barron said in the group’s official statement. “Ann helped put our organization on the map. Politics is full of the meek, the compromising and the apologists — Ann, like GOProud, is the exact opposite of all of these things. We need more Ann Coulters.”

*****
Coulter, who has a history of anti-gay statements and who does not support marriage equality – at least not publicly – joins anti-tax activist Grover Norquist, online media mogul Andrew Breitbart, Republican strategist Roger Stone, and a slew of other noted conservatives, all of whom serve on the organization’s council.

*****
Disappointing, but in today's situational ethics society, not surprising....

Weekly Opinion Editorial

COOL CLEAR WATER!
by Steve Fair

W.C. Fields said, “I never drink water. I'm afraid it will become habit-forming.” Fields was right- water is habit forming. According to A.C. Nielsen sales of bottled water last year were over $60 billion. Water is a necessary precious resource. Wars have been fought over water and the right to use it. Oklahoma may be about to go to war with Texas over water rights.
*****
In early August, Oklahoma Speaker of the House Kris Steele, (R-Shawnee), and Senate Pro Temp Brian Bingman, (R-Sapulpa) appointed sixteen state legislators to a joint legislative committee to study Oklahoma’s water policy. State Senator Brian Crain, (R-Tulsa), an attorney, and State Representative Phil Richardson, (R-Minco), a retired veterinarian, are co-chairs of the committee. Capital Beat has an excellent story on those appointed. You can read it at http://www.capitolbeatok.com/_webapp_3944106/Legislative_leaders_name_Joint_Legislative_Water_Committee,_with_diverse_group_of_16_members
*****
The committee met for the first time last Wednesday and according to OETA, they focused on water laws and court cases governing the allocation and use of water in Oklahoma. A New Mexico environmental attorney, Chuck DeMars, reviewed ‘The Red River Compact’ with the committee members.
*****
‘The Red River Compact’ was signed in 1978 by member states to resolve and prevent disputes over waters of the Red River Basin that are shared between the neighboring states of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas, and to assure the receipt by member states of adequate surface flows and releases.
*****
The Red River Compact Commission consists of nine members -- two members from each of the four states (the director of the state water agency and a basin resident appointed by the governor) and a federal representative appointed by the President. The federal commissioner is a non-voting member and serves as Commission chairman. The Commission meets once each year.
*****
While provisions of the Red River Compact specifically state how much water each signatory state is allowed to develop or store on an interstate stream, the compact generally provides a means of working out problems between member states in an orderly manner, thus preventing the likelihood of litigation in most cases.
*****
But the Tarrant County Regional Water District sued the Oklahoma Water Resources Board and the Oklahoma Water Conservation Storage Commission to keep its permit applications from being dismissed while the matter was in court. Dallas Water Utilities, the North Texas Municipal Water District and the Upper Trinity Regional Water District have since become parties to the lawsuit.
*****
The TCRWD wants to divert more than 130 billion gallons of water from river basins just north of the Red River and provide it to the district's growing population(Fort Worth area), which has been projected at 4.3 million by 2060.
*****
The district filed permit applications in 2007 to capture water from three river basins in south central and southeastern Oklahoma before it enters the Red River and takes on too much salt to be drinkable.
*****
While selling water to our southern neighbors may seem almost treasonous to many Sooners, we must approach this issue in a rational logical way.
*****
First, north Texas is one of the fastest growing areas in population in the United States and they need water. If Oklahoma has a water surplus, that could provide millions of dollars in capital to help create jobs and opportunity for our state. The key is what is ‘surplus.’ How much water do we have in Oklahoma that we don’t really need? Selling water to Texas may be a prudent, wise decision, but determining what is surplus is the key. As this year’s record setting drought has shown, water can evaporate quickly in 100 degree temperatures.
*****
Second, allowing this case to go to trial in federal court is risky. Oklahoma could lose and Texas would get the water for free. The Tarrant County group has argued that Oklahoma has more than enough water for its needs and is violating the Red River Compact by not sharing it.
"There's enough water in the Kiamichi River basin alone to serve four times the population of Oklahoma," Jim Oliver, director of the Tarrant County group says. Indeed, the OWRB has said repeatedly that Oklahoma has more than enough water for our needs. If the court agrees with Texas, we give them the water. That’s even worse than selling it.
*****
Third, before we start selling water out of state, we should insure that every area of Oklahoma is taken care of, not just the SE corner of the state where there is an ample supply of water. This committee should be looking at ways to move Oklahoma’s water to other parts of the state to help suffering Sooners. I realize that may be a challenge logistically, but before we start selling water to others; we should be taking care of ourselves.
*****
Fourth, if the state sells the water to Texas, what happens to the money? Will it go to roads and bridges? Will it go to social programs? Will it just be thrown into the state’s general fund and used to shore up short budgets and more state employees? Any sale of water should move the state forward with long term investments in infrastructure like roads and bridges or aqueducts within the state to move surplus water from one area to another.