WSJ: Paying for Property (Oregon's Measure 37 on "regulatory takings")

Wall Street Journal ^ | November 9, 2004 | Editorial

[OESY]

Property rights may not draw as many headlines as gay marriage, yet we'd like to draw readers' attention to an important initiative that Oregonians approved last week. The measure is proof that voters can make sensible decisions on even emotional environmental issues. It's also a precedent for land owners that could spread to other states,

Measure 37 dealt with the growing abuse of "regulatory takings." These have become a big favorite with environmentalists, who see them as a backdoor way of stopping development even on private land. In Oregon, for instance, regulations have forbidden property owners from cutting down their own trees or building on their own lots. The state government isn't obliged to pay a dime for these new, privately owned state parks.

Measure 37, which passed Tuesday with 60% of the vote, doesn't forbid authorities from regulating land use. But it does excuse owners from rules enacted after they bought their land or compensate them for complying. The immediate effect will be to stop the most frivolous land-use regulations, since state and local governments can't afford the millions of dollars it'd take to pay for all the land they "take" in this fashion.

This is the second time Oregonians have passed the measure, the first version having been tossed out by the liberal Oregon Supreme Court on a technicality. In the intervening four years, greens have opposed any new measure as an environmental calamity. Yet hundreds of thousands of rural and suburban folk, some with dreams of new homes, others with ambitions to start businesses or expand farms, recognized this for the hyperbole it was. Owning property is, after all, a basic Constitutional right -- as Oregon voters just reminded the nation.

[pillbox_girl]

We've voted this one in before. Each time some liberal activist protein waste of a judge overturns the will of the voters. Expect the same again.

[xzins]

property ping to basic article

[CenturionM]

Will this do anything to help the farmers in Klamath Falls?

[OldFriend]

Glad the WSJ chose to highlight this win. Seems to me Oregon also voted DOWN a chance to provide health care to ALL citizens a few years ago.

They have the reputation of being far lefties, but it would seem they have a strong sense of self preservation too.

[crazyhorse691]

I voted for it knowing full well that some liberal judge would overturn it and the state would not appeal. Sooner or later I figure that our elected officials will realize what the voters are saying. I am full of optimism. Thats all that sustains me here.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

You don't have the 5th Amendment in Oregon ?

[crazyhorse691]

Only when it benefits our government, does the constitution count. Afterall, it's just a piece of paper open to interpretation. I think I am getting too cynical. Stubborn but cynical.

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!!!!

[mysterio]

Why is this a surprise? We still rent our property from the government. There is no land ownership in our country. Try not paying your government rent and see what happens. The government rents us our property, and they are lousy landlords.

[houeto]

Why is this a surprise? We still rent our property from the government. There is no land ownership in our country. Try not paying your government rent and see what happens. The government rents us our property, and they are lousy landlords.

BINGO!!!

[Issaquahking]

Eric in the Ozarks, look at land ownership by the government from east coast America, to west coast. In states like Nevada and Utah, over 85% is owned by the fed. hence the government trys to steal what they think is theirs. Read some of the previous posts - according to the government, you just rent the land. If you don't believe it, try not paying taxes, and we who the real owner is.

Also read the Klamath threads here in FR (just type it in the search block) Some very serious, and interesting activity took place prior to 9/11.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I've had a long interest in the "takings" clause of the 5th Amendment. In 1978, a new federal surface mining law went into effect, usurping landowner's rights to dispose of their land and no compensation was ever offered.

[blackie]

Property Rights ~ Bump!

[Issaquahking]

Yuppers, we basically "lost" 200 hardrock claims in the Wrangell/ St. Elias "park".