Remarks given at the I-69 New-Terrain Remonstrance Hearing, Indpls., 8-30-00   Foreward: This writer believes that any new extension of I-69 should be done by upgrading I-70 to Terre Haute and US 41 because of the disruption to the peoples, land, landscape and communities that exist in Southern and Southwest Indiana; a now-irreplaceable part of Indiana that would be wrongfully changed forever if the contemplated road were built.        The interior of Southwest Indiana, being perhaps the most representative part of Southern Indiana in general, is in need of being preserved as intact as possible for its intrinsic value, both landscape-wise and as a "cultural refuge" -- a touchstone -- as it is still closest to the concept of "traditional Indiana"; an endangered species, if you will.  Not all of Indiana easily lends itself to the wholesale, cookie-cutter, bulldozed-over version of economic development so in vogue in the rest of the state and most of America in general.  Most of Southern Indiana that remains undeveloped needs to stay that way.  Observant writers to various state newspapers have noted that the most development that could be realistically anticipated in such parts is of the superficial, defacing type -- to both the landscape and human spirit... specifically: gas stations, fast food joints and motels centered around the exits.  These businesses generate only marginal livings for the local employees, not giving the dramatic economic improvements that are held forth like carrots-on-sticks by the cheerleaders for the proposed New-Terrain route.        The roadway and the road-building activities involved for a new-terrain route would be inordinately disruptive to the landscape, the land-owners, the communities, the local Amish, to say nothing of plant and animal life, as copiously noted elsewhere by informed parties in reputable print sources.  These parts of the state, through a type of serendipitous benign neglect, have become a preserve-of-sorts of the way Indiana used to be:  more rural, less-developed; having a slower, more authentic way of life and look about it.  Just as the Jefferson Proving Grounds has inadvertently preserved a large, notable tract of land in its close-to-natural state, the fact that Southwest and Southern Indianaisn't  developed as much isnot  a bad thing.        The people living there know exactly what it's like and choose to either stay there or move elsewhere.  No one is sentenced to live there against their will.  This state, having the 2nd-worst rate of suburban sprawl in the nation behind Texas, doesn't need to bulldoze anew into a now-rare remaining sector and import into it that homogenization representative of the main part, forcing onto the Southern and Southwest sectors the shallow culture and values inescapable for us here (in Indianapolis), solely for the interests of landscape-defoliating retail developers and road construction companies.  The interior of these parts should STAY relatively undeveloped and intact, close to what they are now, a subtle-yet-tangible cultural resource for the inhabitants and the rest of us.  It exists now as an object-lesson of that much-touted new concept of Cultural Tourism, needing only to be seen for what it is and preserved,if  we step up to the plate and have the gumption and foresight to act and deny this route, through means such as this hearing or binding statewide ballot propositions, putting the whole question up to the vote, if necessary.       The areas being discussed are the soul of Indiana and grow smaller each year already.  Books such as Hartley Alley's l965 "Southern Indiana" and the National Geographic's March, 1976 article on Southern Indiana by James Alexander Thom give glimpses of this area and reveal how we stand to lose even more if this road goes through.  Indiana photographers such as Darryl Jones, Rich Clark, INDOT's official lensman Bill Kelley and myself can attest to the fact that our state is indeed photogenic and still has representative areas left of land and lifestyles harking back to the Indiana of our collective memory.  Indiana is not a large state -- the smallest West of the Alleghenies -- but weused  to have the country's biggest "best" hardwood forest and North America's largest wetlands, the Kankakee Valley, patronized by European royalty for its hunting; both long-gone in the interest of development concepts of the times.  Should we allow history to repeat itself in this next area in question?  Granted, Evansville wants better connections with Indianapolis.  Also, the Evansville-Terre Haute corridor needs improving.  Bloomington has spoken through their city council that they don't want I-69 in their town.  Many or most of those in the interior of the Southwest of the state don't want I-69 there, either, save for the vested or beholden interests.  If we "must" have a 69 extension, so that dollars aren't "lost" to Illinois and so that we can export our jobs to Mexico more quickly and expediently, put the road where people want it and can appreciate it, in the US 41 corridor, even if it ends up costing more or utilizing more miles.  Governor O'Bannon: You grew up in Southern Indiana. Don't let city slickers and other politicians unduly influence you against your better judgement. Why not be true to your roots and help to spare Southwest and Southern Indiana of despoilment, at least for our grandchildren's future enjoyment and cultural needs if not for our own.  They will thank us that we put our feet down, through hearings like this, and binding ballot propositions if needed, and saved what's left of theReal Indiana  for them, though some in the here and now don't have priorities like that.