Having worked for the United States Government in one capacity or another, I can truly feel the pain and suffering that Thomas F. King went through in dealing with the different government agencies in his work. In this week’s reading, the only thing I felt was pure frustration on his part in dealing with the government as a whole. All types of government, local, state and federal seem to work on the attitude of doing as little work possible, in as little time as possible (or some cases as much time as possible), to be able to make the most off the contract or kickbacks from entity doing the real job.
King made it very clear that no one entity with in the government structure either wanted to work together or wanted what was best for either the tribe, ranchers or people about what was sacred or their way of life. It will always be those with the most money wins. SHPO’s are too understaffed to deal with all the financial, environmental and religious entities within a proposal to adequately see that all sides of the proposal are taken into account.
King’s argument seems to be that Section 106 of the National Historical Preservation Act either needs to be revised or completely done away with. Section 106 should be amended to the point where agencies that are brought into what preservation project need to be able to communicate and work together. We all know that this is why there was the creation of the Homeland Security arm of the government. A change within the certain government sectors takes very much patience and time. As King stated changes can happen by something as simple as going and voting.
