Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SOLD DOWN THE RIVER. How Haley Barbour sabotaged eminent domain reform
Reason Magizine ^ | May 11, 2009 | Damon W. Root

Posted on 05/11/2009 1:22:48 PM PDT by mick

Since the Supreme Court's notorious 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of New London, which allowed that municipality to seize private property on behalf of the Pfizer Corporation, 43 states have passed laws protecting property rights against Kelo-style eminent domain abuse. Mississippi is not one of those states. But that nearly changed in March 2009 when the Mississippi legislature voted overwhelmingly in support of a proposed law which would have guaranteed that "the right of eminent domain shall not be exercised for the purpose of taking or damaging privately owned real property for private development or for a private purpose; or for enhancement of tax revenue; or for transfer to a person, nongovernmental entity, public-private partnership, corporation or other business entity." But none of that mattered to Republican Gov. Haley Barbour, who promptly vetoed the bill, claiming it would cripple his ability to lure large corporations into the state.

(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Mississippi
KEYWORDS: barbour; bsarticle; eminentdomain; haleybarbour; lping; propertyrights; reform; stupidauthor
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last
Talk is cheap. Actions count when you say you are a Conservative.
1 posted on 05/11/2009 1:22:49 PM PDT by mick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bamahead

!


2 posted on 05/11/2009 1:23:19 PM PDT by rabscuttle385 ("If this be treason, then make the most of it!" —Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mick

Haley just screwed himself for any future consideration.


3 posted on 05/11/2009 1:24:48 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mick

Unfortunately, some of the negative things said about republican leaders are true.


4 posted on 05/11/2009 1:25:43 PM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: pissant

He’s done. Turns out Haley is just another wet weasel RINO with a fungible set of principles. He is now an official entry on my RINO $hitlist.


6 posted on 05/11/2009 1:28:41 PM PDT by Czar ((Still Fed Up to the Teeth with Washington))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy; KLT; montesquiue; Downsouth55; Michael Knight; ejonesie22; bkwells; DogwoodSouth; ...

Ms ping


7 posted on 05/11/2009 1:31:39 PM PDT by WKB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mick

Will put this on my “Do Not Read RINO List”. LOL


8 posted on 05/11/2009 1:33:09 PM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Haley just screwed himself for any future consideration.

Yep, he's showing himself to be yet another corporatist GOP hack, which IMO is the worst species of RINO - those who think corporations should have more rights than citizens.

9 posted on 05/11/2009 1:34:35 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mick
But none of that mattered to Republican Gov. Haley Barbour, who promptly vetoed the bill, claiming it would cripple his ability to lure large corporations into the state.
Eminent Domain reform isn't what would keep large corporations from relocating to Mississippi.
Being Mississippi is what keeps large corporations from relocating to Mississippi!
It's not the poorest state in the union for nothing.
 
10 posted on 05/11/2009 1:34:41 PM PDT by counterpunch (In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mick

Haley Barbour is friends and business partners in a restaurant with one of the biggest Democrat lobbyists in Washington DC.


11 posted on 05/11/2009 1:37:07 PM PDT by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Haley just screwed himself for any future consideration.

*******************

Yes, not that I was ever a fan, but this is completely unacceptable.

12 posted on 05/11/2009 1:38:49 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mick
I feel certain there another side to the story not told here. It probably has something to to do with a specific action which spurred the bill, or the veto. I will hold my thoughts until the rest of the story comes out.
13 posted on 05/11/2009 1:40:18 PM PDT by elpadre (AfganistaMr Obama said the goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaeda" and its allies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mick
"the right of eminent domain shall not be exercised for the purpose of taking or damaging privately owned real property for private development or for a private purpose; or for enhancement of tax revenue; or for transfer to a person, nongovernmental entity, public-private partnership, corporation or other business entity."

I have a bit of a problem with that because here is Kansas we have a case where eminent domain was used to acquire land for a private developer to build the Kansas Speedway. The goal of the Wyandotte County government was to spur economic development in the area hoping that higher sales tax revenues would lead to lower taxes - at the time Wyandotte had the highest property and personal property taxes in the state. To make a long story short, the goal of attracting additional economic development succeeded far beyond anyone's wildest dreams - stores, hotels, water parks, theaters, minor league ball park, all built as a result of the Kansas Speedway being there - and all the residents of the county have had their taxes lowered every year and the level of their services increasing over the same period.

I'm not in favor of using eminent domain willy-nilly, but this is a case where using those powers to aid a private developer led to real benefits for everyone in the county. According to this law, the county would not have been able to do that and odds are the race track and all its benefits would have been lost. I think that this is a decision best left to the states and that the Supreme Court was right in refusing to overturn the Connecticut court decision. Right or wrong, its for the states to decide.

14 posted on 05/11/2009 1:41:21 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385; Abathar; Abcdefg; Abram; Abundy; akatel; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; Alexander Rubin; ..
"Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions." --James Madsion



Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
15 posted on 05/11/2009 1:43:01 PM PDT by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Barbour went RINO when he jumped on the ‘soak the insurers’ bandwagon after Katrina in the name of populism...


16 posted on 05/11/2009 1:44:27 PM PDT by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: trisham

Yea. This is a 100% unacceptable position for anyone calling themselves a conservative or libertarian.


17 posted on 05/11/2009 1:49:40 PM PDT by Brookhaven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: mick
Gov Barbour vetoed the bill because he said it was "too broad". He has called a special session to address the issue,
... to formally regulate the government's use of eminent domain to take private property for economic development projects. "It would be a very, very strict process would have to be accomplished before any private property could be taken," Barbour said Tuesday at the Capitol.
It is doubtful that MS would have landed either the Nissan plant in Canton, or the Toyota plant in north MS if the land could not have been secured for these massive manufacturing projects. Whoever said Mississippi isn't 50th for no reason is correct. We had almost 100 years of single party (democrat) rule in this state. If you want to see corrupt party politics, you'll never see a better example than the Dem party in MS, unless you're looking at the Dem party in CA, NY, NJ, IL, etc, etc, etc.
18 posted on 05/11/2009 1:50:28 PM PDT by grandpa jones (obama must be exhausted, having to tote that giant brain of his around all the time.,.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mick
From the Governor's veto statement:

"After full consideration, I am vetoing House Bill 803... If the Mississippi Legislature had set out to devise a law to make it highly unlikely that Mississippi could attract major projects with large numbers of jobs like Nissan, Toyota, PACCAR, Stennis Space Center or facilities along the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, House Bill 803 would do the trick. None of these huge job creation projects would exist in Mississippi today without the prudent, lawful use of government’s power to take private property by eminent domain."

Extremely disappointing. Liberty is nowhere in the equation here.

19 posted on 05/11/2009 1:51:09 PM PDT by americanophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Yeup and the Democrats keep PROGRESSING ALONG. While we attack our own.


20 posted on 05/11/2009 1:51:33 PM PDT by Paige ("All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing," Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
I'm not in favor of using eminent domain willy-nilly, but this is a case where using those powers to aid a private developer led to real benefits for everyone in the county.

*******************

Not everyone, if the "right" of eminent domain was required.

21 posted on 05/11/2009 1:52:19 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
I think that this is a decision best left to the states...

Concur...States should be deciding many issues that are now being subjected to the one-size-fits-all federal government approach.
22 posted on 05/11/2009 1:54:00 PM PDT by PerConPat (A politician is an animal which can sit on a fence and yet keep both ears to the ground.-- Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

“I have a bit of a problem with that because here is Kansas we have a case where eminent domain was used to acquire land for a private developer to build the Kansas Speedway. “

This is how basic rights get lost. People point to exceptions to the rule and say “but we bent the rules this time because it was for a really good cause.” Once you start creating exceptions to a rule, the rule ceases to exist.

George Bush said “I have abandoned free market principles to save the free market.” Do you really think he saved the free market, or did he just open the door so Obama could step through and destroy the free market?


23 posted on 05/11/2009 1:55:35 PM PDT by Brookhaven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

I’m not in favor of using eminent domain... EVER!

Taking someone’s home or land when they don’t want to give it up because the public will benefit is just as wrong as if you reach into their wallet to take their money.

How much do you have in retirement accounts? With your logic it would be fine for the government to take your pension, IRAs, and 401k to spread it around to others who may not have retirement money. The public would benefit so it must be alright, eh?


24 posted on 05/11/2009 1:55:39 PM PDT by anonsquared (Where's Harry Tuttle when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
at the time Wyandotte had the highest property and personal property taxes in the state.

So big government uses a big government solution and it happens to work. Care to guess the ratio of government incentives that work to those that don't?

Chicago opened, closed, limited and reopened State Street a major shopping district downtown. None of it worked.

Read Bastiat. The trouble is between the seen and the unseen. Wyandotte could have lowered taxes, cut spending, and encouraged development by reducing regulations and zoning restrictions. All of which are pro-individual liberty. Using force successfully to get your economic way is not an American value. At least not originally.

25 posted on 05/11/2009 1:56:06 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Agreed.


26 posted on 05/11/2009 1:57:21 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: grandpa jones

So MS could not lure them in without abusing individual liberty? The medicine is as bad as the cure.


27 posted on 05/11/2009 1:58:12 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mick
The real wreathed evil villains in the Kelo case are the miserable maggots who elected their local government that started this mess.
28 posted on 05/11/2009 2:02:27 PM PDT by Mark was here (The earth is bipolar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grandpa jones

Don’t try to talk reason...
Don’t know you that this is FR??

Knee-jerk reactions based on headlines alone are all we care about here!

Off to the library with you - silly silly silly - did you actually waste your time on research?
Discussion? Reason? Context?
Balderdash!

All we want are black and white absolutes!
Gov. Barbour, despite the fact he guided his state through the Katrina crisis like a Sherpa on a hidden goat trail, saving thousands of lives and millions of dollars, and despite how he made the incompetents over in NOLA look like, well, incompetents - despite all that Haley is now officially evil and contemptible and nothing can change that no matter what good he has ever done before or may ever do in the future, even if he does work out better EmDom rules in MS.


29 posted on 05/11/2009 2:03:06 PM PDT by BlueNgold (... Feed the tree!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Paige

Yes, the dems roll along as supposed conservatives act like dems, yet can’t figure out what’s wrong with this simple picture.


30 posted on 05/11/2009 2:04:02 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mick

I have always liked Haley B. This is disappointing to me...


31 posted on 05/11/2009 2:04:07 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
So big government uses a big government solution and it happens to work.

And your solution is for bigger government, i.e. the Feds, to tell state and local governments what they can and cannot do? Am I missing something here?

Care to guess the ratio of government incentives that work to those that don't?

But what about when they do work? You hear about cases like the Kelo's in Connecticut. How do you know they aren't the exception rather than the rule?

Chicago opened, closed, limited and reopened State Street a major shopping district downtown. None of it worked.

I remember that. I'll bet eminent domain wasn't part of it though.

Wyandotte could have lowered taxes, cut spending, and encouraged development by reducing regulations and zoning restrictions.

Sure they could.

32 posted on 05/11/2009 2:06:18 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: anonsquared
How much do you have in retirement accounts? With your logic it would be fine for the government to take your pension, IRAs, and 401k to spread it around to others who may not have retirement money. The public would benefit so it must be alright, eh?

That's not an accurate analogy. People didn't have their property taken without compensation, they got fair market for it. So if I have a 401K worth $100,000 dollars and the government wants to give me $100,000 for it then where am I out anything? Regardless of what they do with it?

33 posted on 05/11/2009 2:08:09 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
And your solution is for bigger government, i.e. the Feds, to tell state and local governments what they can and cannot do? Am I missing something here?

Yes, you are missing something. I never said that the Feds should get involved. Neither did the story. Haley Barbour wants the convenience of picking and choosing the winners. That is right out of the political class's playbook.

But what about when they do work? You hear about cases like the Kelo's in Connecticut. How do you know they aren't the exception rather than the rule?

In America, the ends don't justify the means. We have a Bill of Rights just to clarify that. Use of Eminent Domain for private gain is based on majority rule. By its nature it violates individual rights because it bases the decision on whether the majority benefits. So net-net your loss in rights is mitigated by the financial gain. Can't you see where that leads?

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Buddy, that's socialism 101.

My comment: Chicago opened, closed, limited and reopened State Street a major shopping district downtown. None of it worked.

Your reply:I remember that. I'll bet eminent domain wasn't part of it though.

You've already started down the path, no? Big government is big government. They did it because they could, not because it was right or their lives/finances were at risk. It was a big experiment and the guinea pigs were the people who lost jobs, incomes and wealth. Had the stadium in Wyandotte failed would you still be a cheerleader for it? Are you actually arguing that central planners know better? How would you know in advance what will be the right decision?

My comment:Wyandotte could have lowered taxes, cut spending, and encouraged development by reducing regulations and zoning restrictions.

Your reply:Sure they could.

On that we agree. Wyandotte was sending a message to the marketplace with its high tax and I suspect high regulatory burden - don't invest here.

34 posted on 05/11/2009 2:20:04 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
So MS could not lure them in without abusing individual liberty? The medicine is as bad as the cure.

Good question. Probably not. The competition with Alabama and Tennessee for automobile manufacturing is very stiff.

In Barbour's defense, let me say that he wants to be able to bring good jobs to the state, and at the same time, make sure that the use of eminent domain for private purposes is limited, as well as clearly defined, to prevent the type of abuse that occurred in Kelo.

35 posted on 05/11/2009 2:20:44 PM PDT by grandpa jones (obama must be exhausted, having to tote that giant brain of his around all the time.,.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
So it is fine for someone to loose their property to someone else more politically connected? Sad that you think so little of property rights. Eminent Domain is fine for roads, power line and gas line easements, things vital to society. Private entertainment complexes don't get it. I do not care how much graft is promised. The property for the track should not have been taken.
36 posted on 05/11/2009 2:20:50 PM PDT by Mark was here (The earth is bipolar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BlueNgold
All we want are black and white absolutes!

You're absolutely correct. Why should some farmer be allowed to hang onto the land that has been in his family for generation when some other private entity can generate far more money for the government.

Come to think of it, why should your kids choose what they want to study in college? Let the government figure out what career course they should take to maximize tax revenues and then force them to follow such a route.

37 posted on 05/11/2009 2:21:50 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Fair market value especially for property is a subjective thing. Ask anyone who has had their property confiscated by the government and they will tell you that they did not get fair market value.

The property in the Kelo case was beachfront. Did the town give them what the government thought their old house was worth or did they give them the true value of the land if multiple developers were allowed to bid on the land to develop it? Like most cases in government THEFT, it is an inside deal with government officials getting payback money in one way or another. Just look at Senator Feinstein and her husband for blatant examples of this.

If the government comes after retirement accounts, it will be when stocks are headed for a run and they will give you what they were worth at a low point. You’ll also lose the tax free status of any Roths and the benefits of compounding. If you think the government workers are looking out for the best interests of Americans, then you have bigger problems than I can solve in this forum.

Finally, if you don’t believe in PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS and think that government knows best, then move to China.


38 posted on 05/11/2009 2:24:05 PM PDT by anonsquared (Where's Harry Tuttle when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
People didn't have their property taken without compensation, they got fair market for it.

*****************

Let's say I own five acres of land that my town has decided would make a nice little park for all the citizens of my town. I'm given fair market value through eminent domain for my property. Let's also say that there isn't another five acre plot that is in the same kind of neighborhood or anywhere as close to my job, an excellent local hospital, our friends and so on. How is this fair compensation?

39 posted on 05/11/2009 2:26:51 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: grandpa jones

The risk is, as always, good guys can be trusted, but what about the next governor? The history of government/politics usually is full of nefarious characters with just a tiny smattering of heroes.

That is my concern.


40 posted on 05/11/2009 2:32:44 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
it is a valid concern.

The legislature sustained his veto, even though the original bill passed both houses with enough votes to override. The special session will be an opportunity to craft a good bill, with the necessary restrictions to prevent future abuse by whomever is sitting in the governor's mansion.

41 posted on 05/11/2009 2:37:54 PM PDT by grandpa jones (obama must be exhausted, having to tote that giant brain of his around all the time.,.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: mick
. . claiming it would cripple his ability to lure large corporations into the state.

That word, lure, is used frequently by political types across a wide spectrum, but especially by Chamber of Commerce officials and city "planners."

Whether the author is paraphrasing what Barbour actually said or not, the implication is clear: we offer up some goodies to attract the victim into our snare.

States and local governments that operate in this style are despicable examples of the American way.

The honest way to attract business to your state/county/city/special district is to reduce taxes. And not just for those wishing to relocate, but for all.

42 posted on 05/11/2009 2:48:17 PM PDT by logician2u
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

My point was that Gov Barbour is calling a special session to deal just with this ... yet all some people hear is veto = bad. If the law was poorly written then get together and fix it. Please please please pay attention, follow what they do, and pressure them to get it right. But this issue is not dead and they are currently dealing with it. I just get tired of the one shot, you;ve been great but I don’t like what you did today so go to hell, love ‘em or hate ‘em attitudes around here.


43 posted on 05/11/2009 3:03:06 PM PDT by BlueNgold (... Feed the tree!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: BlueNgold
I just get tired of the one shot, you;ve been great but I don’t like what you did today so go to hell, love ‘em or hate ‘em attitudes around here.

The problem is, you are getting a political class that caters to the powerful instead of giving everyone a level playing field. And that is why the Tea Parties are happening. If Barbour or Jeb Bush or any of the others on the 'listening' tour can't figure that out, the GOP will go the way of the Whigs. The middle class is getting sick of getting crapped upon by those we send into elective office to represent us. And it is chilling when our lives and property are viewed as an asset for the benefit of the state. In that regard, I hold NO tolerance for Barbour's position here.

44 posted on 05/11/2009 3:07:10 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: mick

Great find mick. Taking your advice and paying attention to this guy. Don’t like what I see.


45 posted on 05/11/2009 3:07:53 PM PDT by Al B.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WKB
Hmmmm, first both MS Senators vote for the 2009 Porkulus spending Bill, and now Haley does this.

Not good, not good.

46 posted on 05/11/2009 3:13:34 PM PDT by Col Freeper (FR is a smorgasbord of Conservative thoughts and ideas - dig in and enjoy it to its fullest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
"Wyandotte could have lowered taxes, cut spending, and encouraged development by reducing regulations and zoning restrictions. All of which are pro-individual liberty. Using force successfully to get your economic way is not an American value. At least not originally."

Indeed.
Also set a dangerous precedent. One heard only by the minds who understand this crap, calling the process "Doing business in America.

The message is simple: "We'll do whatever it takes, trash whatever rights and trample whoever gets in the way, to accommodate you".
All it takes of course is money. The more money the faster the desired "solution".

What kind of people are attracted by this asinine tack?

Wyandotte best savor the momentary gain, it'll be fleeting. The costs will be enormous to those remaining, while those responsible simply move on to the next mark.

47 posted on 05/11/2009 3:26:02 PM PDT by Landru (Arghh, Liberals are trapped in my colon like spackle or paste.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Landru

Yes, the history of “stadium” building would read like a Detroit epitaph if it were honestly stated.


48 posted on 05/11/2009 4:08:21 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Haley just screwed himself for any future consideration.

Agree -- apparently he's just another corporate statist.

49 posted on 05/11/2009 5:03:11 PM PDT by ellery (It's a free country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BlueNgold

Click the link up top and read the whole article. It would appear that Barbour vetoed the bill that would essentially close that gaping wound in the “redevelopment” law and preserve private property. The “bill” he wants considered in this “special session” would SPECIFICALLY EXEMPT the very takings the original bill outlawed. In other words, Barbour is a thief and wants to go on being one.


50 posted on 05/11/2009 5:04:58 PM PDT by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson