Redford on Prop 90--And My Response

Me

[agooga]

My ultra-liberal friend sent a big email list of people and me this missive from Robert Redford, urging people in California to vote against Prop 90 based on concerns for how the law might impact the government's ability to protect the environment.

Here is what was sent to me:

"We had no idea."

You're going to hear that a lot if Proposition 90 passes next month. Millions of people are going to wake up the morning after Election Day and wish they'd read the fine print.

Please don't be one of them.

Prop 90 is the single most dangerous threat that has ever been leveled at our state's environment. As a native and long-time resident of California, I don't say that lightly.

Prop 90 will make it virtually impossible for our state and local governments to do their job of protecting the wildlife, wild lands and other natural resources that make California the special place that it is.

The way Prop 90 works is simple. Anytime our government wants to protect some vestige of open space or save an old growth forest or restrict offshore oil drilling, Prop 90 would empower hordes of people to sue the government and collect compensation if they feel their properties or businesses have been compromised.

If Prop 90 is enacted, environmental protection will grind to a halt, because we the taxpayers will be unable to afford the billions and billions in payouts. And guess what? Paralyzing government is exactly what Prop 90 aims to do.

This cynical ploy is so insidious -- and yet potentially popular -- because it's masquerading as a law that will protect our homes and businesses from government seizure under the power of eminent domain.

Well, I'll be first in line to defend private property and protest government seizure. But not if the "cure" is a hundred times worse than the disease!

Prop 90 is nothing but a stalking horse for a group of out-of-state, anti-government extremists who would impoverish Californians both environmentally and financially.

Don't wake up the morning after Election Day and wish you'd read the fine print. Read it now at http://www.noProp90.com/

And make sure your friends, family and colleagues in California read it, too. Please forward them this email right now.

NRDC has joined with a broad coalition of citizen groups who are fighting hard to turn back this unprecedented attack on our environment. (You can see the full list of opponents at http://www.noprop90.com/coalition/index.php)

Please do your part by spreading the word to everyone you know. Tell them to vote "No on 90" on Election Day.

Sincerely,

Robert Redford

P.S. Newspapers across the state are urging a No vote on 90. You can read their editorials at http://www.noprop90.com/media/articles/?set=article_j6dcq2bwmxw4ax

And this is my response to my friend-- what I'd like your input on is any rebuttals to Redford's environmental concerns. My concern is strictly property rights, and that is that, but what do you say to someone who doesn't have the same passion for indiviudal liberty and property? Is there a rebuttal on the matter of the environment?

You didn't think you were going to get this by me without a comment, did you???

:-P

Since you know I'm (still) a libertarian, then you know that I fear and loathe all things governmental-- unless there is no credible alternative.

A lot of people seem to be saying about Prop 90, that if it only stopped at the basic premise of eminent domain, they'd be all in favor of it, right? That seems to be your premise as well.

However, the further provisions are the icing on the cake for conservatives who truly believe in the idea of declawing government-- to make government actually WORK to show that a taking (any taking) is justified and to compensate the victim for their losses-- and if you think about it, a ban on eminent domain abuse MUST also include provisions for economic impact.

From the SF Chron:

"But a remarkable coalition has risen up against Proposition 90 out of a concern with provisions that require governments to compensate property owners when a law or regulatory action results in 'any substantial economic loss.'"

Wow-- that must really strike fear into the hearts of liberals everywhere. Heaven forbid that a law actually makes it harder for the government to fleece it's citizens of their property and livlihoods without just compensation.

From San Diego Union Tribune:

"Within the measure, critics say, lurks a direct assault on the fundamental right of cities and counties to carry out land-use policy. "We would essentially be neutered," Willis said."

(Uhhmmm... that's the idea smart-guy) What Mr. Willis meant to say is that he and many other state politicians will lose a lot of bribe money. Furthermore, they will have to pay to secure these lands with taxpayer money, and taxpayers have been known to be a little judgemental at election time. Bummer. And what is this talk of a "Fundamental" government right? Government serves the people, and the people give government it's powers-- not rights-- to do what it needs to do. Small point, I know, but it just illustrates how the press FAILS to grasp the concept of natural rights in this country. Sheesh.

There is NO GREATER right in this nation other than your right to your property. Property rights include not only your home, but your body, your income, your time, your intellectual capacity and everything that is produced from these personal exercizes. Property rights TRUMP governmental "needs" every time. EVERY TIME.

Sadly, we seem to be forgetting that we are not subjects, anymore.

But don't worry. If Prop 90 passes, it will probably be overturned by the 9th Circuit, anyway.

JP

http://www.pacificresearch.org/pub/sab/entrep/2006/CA-props/Prop90.pdf

[agooga]

Your thoughts on prop 90 and the environment are appreciated.

[lowbridge]

Your thoughts on prop 90 and the environment are appreciated.

Did you know that Kerry served in Vietnam?

[agooga]

Didn't expect much.

[lowbridge]

Do you prefer Netflix or Blockbuster? :-)

[agooga]

Awwwww! And here I was tryin to be all serious and shit!

[Seadog Bytes]