[jim_trent]

Your experiences are different from mine (12 years of working daily with it) If things are that bad where you are at, why don't you do something to fix it. The Supremes said that there was absolutely NOTHING preventing States from enacting more stringent requirements than are allowed by the Feds. In other words, they were bumping it back to you.

[SoCal Pubbie]

So, basically, you didn't address the points I made.

1. It should be patently obvious to anyone who's watched a Congressional hearing that they're theater.

2. How is one compensated for loss of future revenue?

3. How do we reconcile the differences between appraisal value and market value?

I'm not saying your posting has no merit, I just want answers to the questions.

[SoCal Pubbie]

Here's one that is NOT from my experience:

"The Arlington Sports Facilities Development Authority gave the Fanning family $1.09 million for their property in 1991. A real estate company had offered him $3.5 million three years earlier.

Fanning sued the stadium authority, claiming it had not given him a fair price for the ranch. The IRS, meanwhile slapped him with a $1 million tax bill in 1992, saying the land was more valuable than $1.09 million.

The two cases dragged on for years. The Arlington stadium authority agreed to pay Fanning an additional $4 million just before the case went to trial in 1998. Fanning settled with the IRS in 1999 for $1.2 million. "