Follow us on Facebook

Latest Comments

ND Outdoors Sites


Featured Link


Login Form

Support NorthDecoder

Search This Site


Amazon Search Widget

Feature Stories

The Low Road

Amazon Search

JoomlaWatch 1.2.12 - Joomla Monitor and Live Stats by Matej Koval
Weekenders III PDF Print E-mail
Written by Jim   
Friday, 18 February 2011 10:28

Helms Quotation(Cross-posted, with permission, from The Prairie Blog)


The chief regulator of the North Dakota oil industry, Lynn Helms, was asked by a reporter last week if he was interested in knowing what goes into the water used in fracturing oil shale to release the oil, and if oil drilling companies should be required to disclose what goes into the water. Helms said he doesn’t believe it’s necessary to know what’s in fracturing fluid. “We’d just bury ourselves in information doing the full disclosure thing. I don’t think people read ingredients on food they buy at the grocery store. This would just alarm people.” Well, it is good to see that there are evidently still some “traditional families” left in North Dakota, maybe the Helms family included. The husband gets up in the morning and goes off to work to support his family. The wife goes to the market and buys groceries and has supper ready when her man comes home. He blithely eats his supper without having a clue what’s in it, but he doesn’t have to worry because there are regulatory agencies like the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture who make sure there is nothing unsafe in his food. Kind of like our regulatory agencies here in North Dakota making sure that there’s nothing unhealthy being pumped into oil wells under the ground on which our food is grown and our cows are grazed. Oh, wait, that’s right, our regulatory agencies don’t do that here in North Dakota.


I took advantage of the nice weather this week to drain and refill our hot tub, which sits just outside our back door. Easy job. I just hooked up a garden hose to the drain pipe, ran the hose out into a snow bank, and let it drain. I went out to check on it an hour later. The hot water coming out of the hose had melted the snow under the snow bank, and the snow bank had collapsed into itself. Just sayin' . . .


The merits of the new federal health care law touched off some lengthy arguments in the North Dakota House this week. Republicans, who control the House, approved a resolution asking Congress to repeal the federal health care bill. Republicans also endorsed a separate law that says North Dakotans can't be required to buy health insurance. Hmmmm. I found this on the North Dakota Insurance Commissioner’s website, in the Commissioner’s Auto Insurance Handbook:

Q. Do I have to buy auto insurance?

A. North Dakota state law requires that all motor vehicles registered and operated in the state carry certain minimum insurance coverages.

More specifically, North Dakota law says you cannot legally drive a car in North Dakota unless you have an insurance policy that includes $30,000 worth of personal injury protection (PIP), or no-fault insurance - $25,000 per person, $50,000 per accident for uninsured motorist coverage - $25,000 per person, $50,000 per accident for underinsured motorist coverage - $25,000 worth of bodily injury or death coverage for one person per accident - $50,000 worth of bodily injury or death for up to two people per accident - $25,000 for destruction of property of others per accident. When you sign up for insurance with a licensed insurance company in the state of North Dakota, you will be mailed an insurance card, which you must keep in your vehicle at all times to serve as proof of coverage. This proof of coverage must be surrendered any time a police officer or state trooper requests it. Note to Commissioner Hamm: Better run downstairs and tell the Legislators we’ve got a little conflict problem here.

Meanwhile, over on the Senate side, Sen. Margaret Sitte, who also says government can’t force you to buy health insurance, filed a bill to force you to undergo counseling before divorcing. Apparently the government forcing you to buy something is constitutional when you agree with it.The state of North Dakota recently sued the federal government, challenging the constitutionality of the health care affordability act. The argument was that forcing individuals to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional. Sitte has since introduced a bill that would essentially force divorcing couples to attend 10 one-hour counseling sessions as a condition for granting their divorce. Sitte says state government can, apparently, live by a different set of rules and force citizens of North Dakota who are divorcing to purchase counseling sessions at their own expense, four of which are required to focus on financial counseling.


The associated Press this week reported that the North Dakota Office of Management and Budget has revised its predictions for tax collections this year and raised its projection by almost $47 million. Which prompted the following responses from two of the most conservative men in the North Dakota Legislature:

• Jeff Delzer, Chairman of House Appropriations: “”I would say it probably doesn’t change anything with what we’re trying to do at all. It’s a pretty small number for what we have.”

• Al Carlson, House Majority Leader: “ . . .$40 million doesn’t make that much difference. It just helps balance the books.”

Isn’t it amazing how a little jingle in your pocket changes your whole outlook on life and legislating?


Cutting the budget is a good thing to campaign on, and Senator John Hoeven did just that in 2010. But it’s amazing how your perspective on things can change. The Minot Daily News this week reported Hoeven paid a visit to the Minot Air Force Base and did a little scrambling in the face of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which is going to limit the number of ICBMs in the U.S. and Russia. I can see him almost tripping over his words as he toured construction sites for a new base dormitory, a new missile training facility and new facilities in the Pride Building for the 69th Bomb Squadron, the new and second squadron of B-52s.

  • "The facilities, the people, the equipment that's coming in here is important. Minot is a very, very important part of our nuclear arsenal.
  •  “The treaty will determine how many ICBMs there will be at the three bases Minot, Malmstrom in Montana and F.E. Warren in Wyoming.
  • "Right now there's 450 (ICBM’s), but remember, we can keep all the silos. None of that's been determined yet, but from my perspective I think that would be the right approach, obviously, to keep all the silos even if there is some reduction in the number of missiles.
  • “The nuclear weapons at Minot AFB are very, very cost effective at a time when this country has real budget issues."

And that’s not even the biggest news regarding the military in North Dakota. Over in the U.S. House, according to a blog report from Kristen Daum on the Forum website, Republican Rep. Rick Berg says he has successfully added language to the FAA Reauthorization bill that could mean a further boost for military operations in Grand Forks and Minot.Berg authored an amendment that calls for four new test sites for Unmanned Aircraft Systems, with the sites’ locations to be determined by established criteria. Previously, the FAA bill included no new test sites for unmanned planes. If the bill passes, the new sites would allow officials to study the effectiveness of allowing UAS to share airspace and runways with commercial aircraft. The FAA bill is expected on the House floor in March, Berg’s office said. Two weeks ago, North Dakota Sens. Kent Conrad and John Hoeven offered their support for the Senate counterpart to Berg’s amendment. The selection criteria established in this amendment would place both Minot and Grand Forks Air Force bases in prime positions to benefit from this testing and potentially be chosen as testing sites, Berg’s office said. “Expanding the use of unmanned aircraft systems holds enormous potential for both military and private sector innovation,” Berg said in a statement. “The use of unmanned aircraft offers numerous possibilities for core North Dakota industries and will provide new opportunities for agriculture, education, and border security.” Berg added, “North Dakota has long been a leader in the research and expansion of this technology, and I am confident that the creation of new testing sites will open the doors for this industry’s continued success in our state.”


Comments (5)add comment

nimrod said:

What a crock!
Helms should be fired.
February 19, 2011
Votes: +0

Chet said:

His quot'
Helms' quotation -- "... this would just alarm people..." -- could be translated to "If people had ANY idea what kind of poison, or how much, we are letting the oil companies pump into the aquifer they would be $#!?ing their pants."

What could possibly go wrong?!? (Oh, this.)
February 19, 2011
Votes: +0

What the Heck said:

For anyone who's interested, here's the review from a documentary titled Gasland. I didn't see it, apparently it aired on HBO in June 2010. I've ordered it from Amazon. Here's the product description:

In 2009, filmmaker Josh Fox learned his home in the Delaware River Basin was on top of the Marcellus Shale, a rock formation containing natural gas that stretches across New York, Pennsylvania and huge stretches of the Northeast. He was offered $100,000 to lease his land for a new method of drilling developed by Halliburton and soon discovered this was only a part of a 34-state drilling campaign, the largest domestic natural gas drilling boom in history. Part mystery, part travelogue, and part banjo showdown, Gasland documents Josh's cross-country odyssey to find out if the controversial process of hydraulic fracturing - or fracking - is actually safe. As he interviews people who live on or around current fracking sites, Josh learns of things gone horribly wrong, from illness to hair loss to flammable water, and his inquiries lead him ever deeper into a web of secrets, lies, conspiracy, and contamination - a web that potentially stretches to threaten the New York Watershed. Unearthing a shocking story about a practice that is understudied and inadequately regulated, Gasland races to find answer about fracking before it's far too late.

There's also a website where donations are taken.
February 20, 2011
Votes: +0

Sto Again said:

Well, there is a difference between making drivers have car insurance, than there is making EVERYBODY buy health insurance, but I'd be willing to say that the government can make everybody buy health insurance, as long as the government can then make everyone contribute to a 401(k) plan. Of course we'd get rid of all the government funded pension plans and social security (for retirees) because it wouldn't be needed anymore.
February 20, 2011
Votes: +0

nimrod said:

The difference is that in North Dakota in the 21st century, you can choose to reject using 20th century automotive technology, and instead walk, ride a horse, ride a bike, or use public transportation to get from your home in Warwick to your doctor's appointment in Devils Lake. I guess in winter you could snow-shoe. Health care is different -- you can't go to a clinic and have the business manager say, sorry, you don't have health insurance, so you can't have an x-ray, a cat scan, or a shot of penicillin. Oh, wait . . .
February 21, 2011
Votes: +0

Write comment

security image
Write the displayed characters