Posted on 06/19/2007 5:08:18 AM PDT by Jarhead1957
June 18, 2007 Texas Governor Vetoes Eminent Domain Reform All Texans Remain Vulnerable to Abuse Arlington, Va.-On Friday, June 15, 2007, Texas Governor Rick Perry vetoed HB 2006, an eminent domain reform measure that overwhelmingly passed both chambers of the Texas Legislature. The bill was designed to close a loophole that remained from an earlier bill Perry signed two years ago in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s infamous Kelo v. City of New London decision. Perry becomes only the fourth governor to veto an eminent domain bill since Kelo. In the three other states, however, reform still passed when the Iowa Legislature overrode one veto, New Mexico’s executive signed other reform legislation this year and Arizona reformed its laws by citizen initiative. “With this veto, Governor Perry has left every home, farm, ranch and small business owner vulnerable to the abuse of eminent domain,” said Steven Anderson, director of the Institute for Justice’s Castle Coalition, a national grassroots advocacy group committed to ending the private-to-private transfer of property using eminent domain. The bill would have closed the large loophole that remained after the enactment of SB 7, the 2005 legislation that allows local authorities to forcibly acquire private property for the purpose of so-called “slum” or “blight” removal. Under Texas law, the terms “slum” and “blight” are defined so broadly that they can be applied to any property, meaning no one’s property is safe. HB 2006 required, with certain limited exceptions, that all takings be made for a “public use,” which would have stopped eminent domain abuse throughout the state. HB 2006 also included procedural and compensation changes, and it was the latter that Perry cited as the reason for his veto. “Compensation concerns were totally overblown by government agencies,” Anderson said. “Comprehensive protection against eminent domain abuse for all Texans was scuttled because of unfounded fears that property acquisitions would cost substantially more. Dollars drive the abuse, and now dollars drive this veto. In both cases, the property owners are the ones who end up getting hurt.”
Sorry...I no speak "southern"...what is “Stri`pi`dassBogBug”
:0)
Well,,,they rank rite up there with spotted Hoot-Owls
Least-Bell Viros and all the “Stop-Work” critters that we must protect,,,and not eat...;0)
Another traitor.
The NWO/Globalist/CFR/NAU agenda needs eminent domain as a tool for forcing an integrated North America on the citizens of the United States. If the transnationalists need your property, they will just take it.
fofl!!
I know! : (
Given the magnitude of condemnation that occurs everyday at the local, state, & federal levels, and around the world, the fact that there is very, very little discontent with the process indicates that it is being done in fair and equitable way. While there may be a few unjust circumstances, for the most part, most landowners get a better than market deal and some of them make out like bandits.
OTOH, there are always going to be malcontents who complain that they have been screwed or think that they are entitled to more.
Anyone who has followed the issue in Texas knows that the bill that Perry vetoed was nothing more than a feel-good, get-me-re-elected bill that the legislature passed knowing that it would be vetoed.
Hmmmm! I follow Texas politics pretty closely and I didn't know that. Thanks for filling me in.
What I do know is that a great many Texans are getting d*mned tired of their local governments using their tax money to fund lobbiest who work against their interest in Austin.
I support eminent domain taking of land if: it is for truly necesseary public works, not to give to a Costco or other tax cow et al, B) if all other alternatives have been invistigated and found unduely prohibitive, C) if the owner is given market value plus a hardship fee similar to what a well-heeled company might pay someone in moving expenses.
Do you disagree with any of these?
I can’t answer that til you answer my questions (rinse, repeat)
You are like many-most here posting on this and other threads. You say that you are a big supporter of property rights but you have no obection to stealing the land and water rights of those along the border because that makes the cost of the fence cheaper.
You need a “jump to conclusions” mat (or you are just trying to pick fights - I suspect the latter).
Thanks for the enlightening discourse.
While the fence may slow them down, it won't stop the illegals.
And if there is to be a fence, I have supported the fence that the Border Patrol wants, as opposed to the fence that the borderbots want or the fence that border mayors want.
And the fence, however it finally gets built, will have a significant, negative effect on the Texas border economy. And, since I am objective, I will acknowledge that this negative effect is not attributable only to the fence. It is due to the requirement for laser visas already in place, the increased border scrutiny already in place, the fence, and the future requirement on casual border crossers to have a passport.
And the fence, however it finally gets built, will have a significant, negative effect on republicans. First, it will further depict the GOP as extremists. Second, it will affect GOP canditates, including those in statewide races, which is why the GOP's only Mexican lost his seat in the US House last November and why Cornyn and Hutchinson are scrambling to limit the fence.
There is a much broader subject here. And that subject deals with how the GOP would traditionally deal with property rights, water rights, land rights, privatization, socializing costs, and many other related issues. The broadness and complexity of the subject goes beyond casual posting at Free Republic.
Suffice it to say that the subject is like many other subjects in that it is a symbol of the trancendent problem that the GOP faces. These self-annointed "true conservatives"/"cultural populists" are not conservatives at all and are joining with the democrats-liberals-socialists to defeat the conservative agenda.
LOOKS like OKLAHOMA is holding its ground as a constitutional republic while TEXAS is a constant struggle to be a republic. HOW about it TEXANS? ARE you gonna let the PERYS and HUTCISONS destroy our country and liberties?
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.