Posted on 08/18/2006 2:22:36 PM PDT by WestVirginiaRebel
Washington, D.C.-Nearly one year after the U.S. Supreme Court's shocking Kelo v. New London decision touched off a firestorm of bipartisan support for stronger property rights protections, some anti-property rights groups are receiving support from a surprising source: Senator George Allen (R-VA).
Senator Allen is the chief sponsor of legislation that would create a massive federal "National Heritage Area" that would stretch from Charlottesville, VA, through Frederick County, MD, and end in Gettysburg, PA. Such areas are best described as heavily regulated corridors where property rights may be strictly curtailed.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalcenter.org ...
Do you have an email address for Allen?
If true and this comes to fruition, I'm rapidly losing faith in another potential top ticket candidate I'd have gladly supported in '08.
What purpose does it even claim to have or what political benefit, or even mythical benefit?
Its not even a piece of pork, it seems to have no redeeming value.
Yep, same here....was earlier enamored with both Allen and Pence but both have proven disappointing. Sadly none of the slate of candidates inspires much enthusiasm. It would be a very great and welcome change to vote FOR someone instead of just voting AGAINST someone. The whole thing is just macaca.
"Its not even a piece of pork, it seems to have no redeeming value."
It's a "Pataki" type of legislation, appearing to have no direct costs (except to unsuspecting owners of "heritage" property sites) and acquiring no direct costs to government (no tax revenue needed for it) while winning praise from the liberal elites who love this form of government taking of private property, without actually taking possession of it.
Allen should be told, and quickly, that his GOP primary chances will erode quickly with this type of "liberal" effort.
www.allen.senate.gov I've just dropped a note.
It is part of a UN program, Agenda 21, Wildlands Project.
Santa Cruz, California has written all their land use codes to this UN protocol, as freeper carry_okie, he was duped into being part of that committee.
as=ask
Wouldn't that strategy allow a person who would come up with a lame brained idea like this in the first place to get nearer the seat of power? Wouldn't it be better to hire someone who, when they're following their instincts, AUTOMATICALLY does the right thing? That way, you wouldn't have to watch them 24/7 after they get elected and take Rolaids worrying about them falling off the wagon.
Say it ain't so, Joe.
You are absolutely right.
I guess my initial post was looking at the issue more of how a "political analyst" ought to advise Allen and not how I now think about Allen myself. And yes, the new bill he is sponsoring does make me question my earlier support for him.
As well as we should have done with Bush's medicare drug plan and his "no child left" on their behind act.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c109:./temp/~c109wSR7lc
SEC. 9. REQUIREMENTS FOR INCLUSION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY.
(a) Notification and Consent of Property Owners Required- No privately owned property shall be preserved, conserved, or promoted under the management plan for the Heritage Area until the owner of that private property has been--
(1) notified in writing by the management entity; and
(2) given written consent for such preservation, conservation, or promotion to the management entity.
(b) Landowner Withdraw- Any owner of private property included within the boundary of the Heritage Area shall have their property immediately removed from the boundary by submitting a written request to the management entity.
(c) Change of Ownership- If private property included within the boundary of the Heritage Area has been excluded from the Heritage Area or has not been preserved, conserved, or promoted under the management plan for the Heritage Area because the owner has not given or has withdrawn consent, upon change of ownership of that private property, the management entity may request consent from the new owners.
SEC. 10. PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION.
(a) Access to Private Property- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to--
(1) require any private property owner to allow public access (including Federal, State, or local government access) to such private property; or
(2) modify any provision of Federal, State, or local law with regard to public access to or use of private property.
(b) Liability- Designation of the Heritage Area shall not be considered to create any liability, or to have any effect on any liability under any other law, of any private property owner with respect to any persons injured on such private property.
(c) Recognition of Authority to Control Land Use- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to modify the authority of Federal, State, or local governments to regulate land use.
(d) Participation of Private Property Owners in Heritage Area- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require the owner of any private property located within the boundaries of the Heritage Area to participate in or be associated with the Heritage Area.
(e) Effect of Establishment- The boundaries designated for the Heritage Area represent the area within which Federal funds appropriated for the purpose of this Act may be expended. The establishment of the Heritage Area and its boundaries shall not be construed to provide any nonexisting regulatory authority on land use within the Heritage Area or its viewshed by the Secretary, the National Park Service, or the management entity.
SEC. 11. USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS FROM OTHER SOURCES.
Nothing in this Act shall preclude the management entity from using Federal funds available under Acts other than this Act for the purposes for which those funds were authorized.
SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General- There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act the following funds, which shall remain available until expended:
(1) Not more than $1,000,000 for any fiscal year.
(2) Not more than a total of $10,000,000.
(b) 50 Percent Match- Financial assistance provided under this Act may not be used to pay more than 50 percent of the total cost of any activity carried out with that assistance.
you are not gonna like this one...ugh!
This is the pattern. Stick your foot in your mouth, make up for it by sopping the liberals.
Is there anyone in the GOP worth supporting?
I can't figure out who gave this ass a VA DL.
Hey, stop that. THe natives are on a good rant here, and you're going to mess it up if you start providing facts which contradict them.
In other words, hey guys, look at what the heritage thing IS before you start screaming about it.
I agree with the "it doesn't mean much so why bother" argument, but it's hardly the stuff of a land grab.
hmmmm, the same guy who gave you your dl about 7 yrs ago? ;)
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.