Push your Senators to S1313

imported post

Grandma,

I think seizing private property by local governments to construct Walmarts, McMansions etc is wrong. I'm not even sure that seizing private property for public purposes is a good idea unless the owners are more than adequately compensated for their trouble. However, isn't this a local/state issue? How is this a federal issue?
 
imported post

Grandma, They don't provide the text of the Bill. Therefore, I wouldn't vote for a Bill I don't know what it says. And I don't know anything about the sponsoring organization, American Family Association,and remain suspicious.
WW.gif
 
imported post

Rokid, it is a federal issue due to the 5th amendment. The Kelo descision effectively deleted the words "for public use" from the 5th amendment. The federal issue is to re-establish the meaning of "public use" in the 5th amendmentto not include "economic development" therefore making local government actions in violation of that unconstitutional. It also applies directly to all cases of eminant domain power by the federal government and all cases of eminant domain power be state and local governments through the use of federal funds.

Wonder Woman, the text of the bill was not hard to find.
http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/doc_archive/jc_other/PHSB%20and%20PPA%202005%20billtext.pdf
 
imported post

Grandma,

I whole heartedly agree that this is a flagrant misinterpretation of the original intent of the 5[suP]th[/suP] amendment. It was never intended for private use, regardless if the transfer would benefit the community through increased economic development. I can barely imagine the abuse that will surely ensue across the country with the ‘for public use’ words misconstrued to mean private use. How these things even happen boggles my mind. I’ll certainly support this bill # S.1313. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
 
imported post




Apparently, Senator Cornyn is not popular in Texas. Therefore, he has decided to grandstand and pander to the publicwith S.1313. This is not serious legislation, it's a publicity stunt.If the Senate is silly enough to pass it (and who knows based on the Schiavo incident), it will be held unconstitutional.If the Senate wants to propose a constitutional amendment, fine. However, under the U.S. Constitution's separation of powers, the courts, not the Congress,interpret the law.This approach has worked fairly well over the last 200 years.

This is an issue that can, and should be, addressed by legislation, laws, and regulationsat the local level. If local politicians try to take your neighbor's house for a Wal-Mart or a baseball stadium, e.g. Arlington TX,throw the bums out of office.
 
imported post

Thanks, Rokid. I didn't think I was certifiable yet - almost though!
S_THUM113.gif
 
imported post

BTW, Grandma, any of my remarks on this subject have nothing to do with you and all the generous contributions and helpful information you continue to provide on the board. I am just responding to the political issues involved. Hope you realize this.
WW.gif

 
imported post

Wonder Woman wrote:
BTW, Grandma, any of my remarks on this subject have nothing to do with you. .... I am just responding to the political issues involved.
No sweat, W_W. .....understood from the 'git-go!' Responses directed to the stated issue are about the issue, not about the presenter of the information. If some get excited about the subject at hand, they can be excited either direction -
snowman_throwing_snowballs_lg_wht.gif




By-the-way, your openness in your responses & your honest opinions are appreciated & valued. ...as are others.

BLOOMI127.gif
whitehaired3.gif
gm
 
Back
Top