FReepmail me to be added or removed to the ECO-PING list!
Makes some sense for a democrat!
Posted on 10/31/2005 9:39:46 AM PST by GreenFreeper
To: National Desk, Congressional Correspondent, Real Estate Reporter
Contact: Linda M. Johnson of National Association of Realtors(r), 202-383-7536 or lmjohnson@realtors.org
SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 30 /U.S. Newswire/ -- U.S. Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-Calif.), addressing Realtors(r) at a forum here, said the current endangered species law needs reform because it is failing the habitats and the species its supposed to protect.
Cardoza also updated Realtors(r) on other federal issues at a legislative and political forum held yesterday during the REALTORS(r) Conference & Expo here, Oct. 28-31.
Cardoza has cosponsored legislation with Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) that balances the need to protect endangered species with the need to support private property rights and economic development. The Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act, which was approved by the House of Representatives with bipartisan support last month, would reform and improve the 1973 Endangered Species Act.
The bill, H.R. 3824, addresses many of NAR's policy principles on new and better ways to recover and protect endangered species. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, only 10 of 1,264 endangered species have recovered and been removed from the list over the act's 30-year history.
"The Endangered Species Act, which was enacted during the Nixon administration, provides a roadmap to preserve endangered habitat and species. But aspects of it are failing species and failing all of us who live in a bureaucratic environment," Cardoza said.
"I've been working with my colleague Richard Pombo on a plan that replaces critical habitat with recovery habitat. Our bill will designate a recovery plan before we designate habitat. You need to figure out what it takes to save a species before you take land. If the government does take private land, it must properly compensate the property owner," Cardoza said.
Cardoza also addressed President Bush's federal tax reform panel's expected recommendation to make several changes to the mortgage interest deduction (MID). "There's a proposal to change the way we tax ourselves. Changing the mortgage interest deduction is a really bad idea. I don't think it's going to pass Congress, but that doesn't mean they're not going to try," Cardoza said. "With the mortgage interest deduction fight, you've got to kill it so dead that they never, ever offer it as an alternative again."
Rep. Lincoln Davis (D-Tenn.) also opposed altering the mortgage interest deduction. "When you talk about changing the mortgage interest deduction, you're talking about revising a tax deduction for families," Davis said.
Davis also weighed in against the recent Supreme Court Kelo v. City of New London decision that allows local governments to seize private property in the name of enlarging their tax base and promoting economic development. "To take a person's private property for use by another private group-I don't think the Constitution supports that. Personal property rights are one of the most important things our Constitution is based on. It's clear the Supreme Court made the wrong decision," Davis said.
Cardoza said, "I believe if the government takes the extraordinary step of taking property under eminent domain, the owner should not have to pay capital gains tax on the property, and that's why I've introduced a bill that does just that."
"The real estate industry help drives the economy and provides opportunity for citizens," said Cardoza, who used to be a Realtor(r). "Real estate is a great primer for serving in Congress-you have to adapt quickly, think on your feet and work hard."
Cardoza also praised NAR's political operation. "Realtors(r) have the most effective lobbying corps in all of Congress bar none. You're the cream of the crop. One of things Realtors(r) do well is respect both Democrats and Republicans and not be manipulated by the party in power," he said.
Cardoza said he fought to make it easier for families living in high-cost markets to purchase their own homes by supporting efforts to increase the conforming loan limits for high-cost areas under the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, H.R. 1461. In addition, he is a sponsor of the Community Choice in Real Estate Act, H.R. 11, that would keep banking conglomerates out of real estate, and the Community Homeownership Tax Credit Act, H.R. 1549, that would enact an affordable housing production tax credit.
Mor than 26,000 Realtors(r) from across the United States are expected to attend the four-day conference.
---
The National Association of Realtors(r), "The Voice for Real Estate," is America's largest trade association, representing more than 1 million members involved in all aspects of the residential and commercial real estate industries.
Information about NAR is available at http://www.realtor.org . This and other news releases are posted in the Web site's "News Media" section in the NAR Media Center.
http://www.usnewswire.com/
-0-
/© 2005 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
FReepmail me to be added or removed to the ECO-PING list!
Makes some sense for a democrat!
Yup, the rewrite is perfect for real estate manipulators.
All of these onerous laws initially allowed people through their representatives to overide any "negative impacts" to anything.
The fact that this has been conveniently forgotten justifiably marks these abused laws for extinction.
I don't particularly like the rewrite either but its a step in the right direction.
That's the problem with most endangered species (as well as just about any ecological dilemma)- You can benefit something without negatively impacting something else.
I'm not up to speed on this new legislation. Which parts of this re-write are offensive?
The idea that property owners will be compensated for regulatory takings is correct.
Anything in the bill on economic factors trumping ESA land set asides for endangered critters?
Indeed, but requiring a 50% loss before compensation kicks in is not.
Anything in the bill on economic factors trumping ESA land set asides for endangered critters?
That's already in NEPA. The agencies and the courts ignore it.
As I read it, it provides no compensation if the private landowner is precluded from using his property because the use, though otherwise lawfull, would "take" a species - harass harm, trap, injure or impair an essential life function such as breeding by modifying habitat.
It only pays under recovery plans - which are supposed to be voluntary anyway.
I haven't read it.
The existing ESA specifically prohibits any “take” of endangered species as follows in USC 1532:
The definition of "take" is the worst part of the existing ESA. For example, it prohibits collection, which could be for the purpose of propagation. From the list you just wrote, the definition of "take" has been expanded, which would make it worse than the old law.
There is no treaty authority for adding "harm" or "impair an essential life function" to the ESA. The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) Article 1, Chapter 1 that reads:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.