Talk:International Boundary and Water Commission

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article name[edit]

just wondering if "International Boundary Commission" should indeed redirect here, since there's another organisation called "international boundary commission" (responsible for the boundary between the usa and canada).

USA the mighty steals water from weak Mexico[edit]

It is said that USA ignores the word of these treaties to this day and in fact lets only 30% of water flow to Mexico instead of 50%, claiming yankee farmers need it, causing mexican farmers to lose crop due to drought. Maxico is powerless, since America has huge military and ignores hispanos' grievances. There was a BCC documentary TV shown about this abuse of power. 195.70.32.136 18:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Format of article[edit]

I was just looking at this article and thinking about the format of it.

The "border and water treaties" section is copy pasta from the official website's history section, and I was thinking about breaking it into separate articles for separate treaties, and just having summaries here in this article. Blue Rasberry 23:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flag Article for Bias[edit]

This article has been edited by the IBWC itself without disclosing that fact. The IBWC official falsely characterizes a scholarly hundred-page law review article as “inaccurate” and “unpublished.” Leaving aside the question of how the IBWC official would know the article was “inaccurate” if it had been “unpublished,” the fact is that that the article was published on May 15, 2011 on the free public internet site maintained by Social Science Research Network, as noted in the original Wikipedia reference that the IBWC official deleted. The article was also published in both electronic and paper format by the University of Denver Water Law Review in “Spring, 2011,” months before the IBWC's deceptive claims.

The Federal Web Managers Council, an interagency group of senior federal government Web managers, condemns such anonymous agency editing of an article about itself. The Council has specific guidelines for an agency that wishes to correct what it views as inaccurate information on Wikipedia, which require self-identification as an agency employee and initiating a proposed change on the talk page for action by other editors. See http://www.howto.gov/social-media/wikis.

Federal agencies are also restricted from using appropriated funds for publicity activities by federal code. The term "publicity or propaganda" is a term of art found in the omnibus appropriations bill passed by Congress every year: “No part of any appropriation . . . shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized by the Congress.” E.g., Pub. L. No. 108-199, div. F, title VI, § 624, 118 Stat. at 356.

The General Accountability Office (GAO) has held that “an agency would be prohibited from expending appropriated funds to issue a press release that attempted ‘to persuade the public as to [its] importance … as a government agency.’” B-302504 at 8, available at http://www.gao.gov/assets/380/370969.pdfat 212069, Oct. 6, 1983. “We have also interpreted the restriction on publicity or propaganda as prohibiting what we refer to as covert propaganda, that is, materials that ‘are misleading as to their origin.’” Id. See also, GAO-05-643T, May 12, 2005 (“Video News Releases: Unattributed Prepackaged News Stories Violate Publicity or Propaganda Prohibition”), available at http://www.gao.gov/assets/120/111658.pdf.

Worse, the edits substituted yet another entirely flattering characterization and deleted the one paragraph and citation to law review article that provided the only counterbalance, supported by over 600 footnotes referencing other publications. I will reinsert the deleted content but I will not touch the agency's own self-glorification. The paragraph deleted by the agency follows. I am the author of the article in question.

In recent decades the IBWC has been heavily criticized as an institutional anachronism, by-passed by modern social, environmental and political issues. The U.S. Section especially has been described as secretive, beholden to special interests, and indifferent to environmental problems. The State Department has attempted to distance itself from responsibility for the U.S. Section, even claiming that it has no jurisdiction, notwithstanding numerous statutes that say otherwise. Critics, including the agency's own employees, say poor leadership has led to rapidly deteriorating levees, dams and water treatment facilities. See Robert J. McCarthy, Executive Authority, Adaptive Treaty Interpretation, and the International Boundary and Water Commission, U.S.-Mexico, 14-2 U. Denv. Water L. Rev. 197(Spring 2011) (also available for free download at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1839903). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Montana30 (talk • contribs) 16:20, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You seem very knowledgeable about this issue. What can I do to help you fix the article? Anyone may edit Wikipedia, including you. Be bold and make the article better! Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:26, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Blue. I just wanted to add a small bit of balance since it was 100% agency propaganda. I don't want to be accused of having a conflict because I used to work at the agency, as disclosed in the article I wrote and cited. That is why I added just a brief statement with the citation, which is directly supported by hundreds of additional citations within my article to other scholarly, government and other reports. Presumably many editors have such a direct interest in the subject in order to invest such knowledge and time. Indeed, I can't imagine how you have contributed so much. As explained above, however, IBWC's public affairs officer (she used her own name)has a much greater and undisclosed conflict, as well as unlimited time and taxpayer money to go back and (illegally) revise. Given your extensive involvement with wikipedia, have you had experience dealing with this sort of government propaganda on the site? I am curious if other agencies are engaged in similarly dishonest and illegal conduct. As for editing the article in more detail, I grant any needed permission to cite from my article, which actually includes a comprehensive history of the IBWC - much more so, and more accurately - than IBWC's website. I am however still a bit reluctant to do the editing myself. Montana30. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Montana30 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International Boundary and Water Commission. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:34, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on International Boundary and Water Commission. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:27, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:International_Boundary_and_Water_Commission&oldid=1207724638"