Cox Is Blocking My Monthly Newsletter

For many years, I have produced a monthly newsletter on behalf of People for the West, a tiny 501(c)3, non-profit entity. PFW deals with issues of property rights and use of public land such as farming, ranching, forestry, mineral and fossil fuel production. In other words, PFW deals with industries that produce the basic materials of our economy, the industries that produce the real wealth.

I was emailing the newsletter to over 100 willing subscribers without problem until January. PFW does not charge for subscriptions. When I attempted to send out the February issue, the transmission failed due to spam blockers in Cox servers. I tried sending it out in smaller batches with no luck. My Cox accounts would not transmit to more than three recipients at a time.

I emailed Peter Lilly, Cox Vice President of Customer Care (peter.lilly@cox.com) to explain the problem and seek a solution. Within an hour, I got a call from his man in Phoenix, Thomas T. Thomas was sympathetic and together we conducted many tests. I should say that not only the Cox account dedicated to the newsletter was blocked, but all my Cox email accounts and my gmail account which goes through Cox servers had the same restriction. The problem was that Cox servers had deemed these accounts to be a source of spam. Thomas claimed that they could not change the servers, something I find hard to believe since they did change them to be more restrictive.

I consider this action by Cox to be an infringement of my rights of free speech and freedom of the press. I have not yet decided if I will want to take legal action.

In the meantime, I have created a People for the West page on my Wryheat blog (https://wryheat.wordpress.com/) which contains the current and some past issues of the newsletter.

Besides producing a newsletter, here is an example of what People for the West does:

● Back in 2003, the City of Phoenix wanted to buy State land under the Arizona Preserve Initiative to become part of the City’s “Sonoran Preserve.” The Arizona State Land Department does sell land from time to time via an auction process. The money goes towards education. But this was different. As a condition of sale, the State Land Department imposed a conservation easement on the land in question. The effect of this encumbrance is to limit potential bidders so the State receives less money. In competitive auctions, the State often receives as much as twice the appraised value. We also found out that this cozy arrangement between Phoenix and the State had been going on for some time.

● People for the West protested the sale, as is the right of any citizen. The grounds for the protest was that imposing the encumbrance of a conservation easement violated the Arizona constitution. Article 10, section 3 of the Arizona Constitution says: “No mortgage or other encumbrance of the said lands, or any part thereof, shall be valid in favor of any person or for any purpose or under any circumstances whatsoever.” This statement also occurs in the Arizona Enabling Act of the U.S. Congress. In a letter to the State Land Commissioner, we pointed out this fact. He consulted the Arizona Attorney General who agreed with us. The land sale was cancelled and since then, the State has not imposed a conservation easement on any land offered for auction.

● The Attorney General was probably aware of another part of the Arizona constitution, Article 10, section 8 which says: “Every sale, lease, conveyance, or contract of or concerning any of the lands granted or confirmed, or the use thereof or the natural products thereof made to this state by the said Enabling Act, not made in substantial conformity with the provisions thereof, shall be null and void.” Had the sale been contested in court, there was the danger that all previous sales under the same conditions would be declared null and void which meant that the State Land Department would have to take back the land and refund money to previous purchasers – a real mess.

Back to Cox:

● While the practice of reining in spam is admirable. Cox has, in my opinion, been over zealous to the detriment of legitimate customers. I urge Cox the rethink the matter and make provisions to allow customers to send email to up to 100 recipients without the customer having to buy an expensive business account. People for the West is not a business; it is merely an agent that provides information without charge. It was incorporated as a charitable entity so that we could accept tax-deductible donations. PFW does not solicit donations anymore.

Note to readers:

● Index with links to all my ADI articles: http://wp.me/P3SUNp-1pi

● My comprehensive 28-page essay on climate change: http://wp.me/P3SUNp-1bq

● A shorter ADI version is at https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2013/08/01/climate-change-in-perspective/