Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: muawiyah

“If the government already OWNS the land, it simply cannot be “taken”. That’s because the government does the taking, and the federal government can take state/municipal owned land only with the permission of the state affected.”

I think many, or most ports are owned by states or cities, and those entities would be the ones to expand existing ports or construct new ones, not the feds.

And the need for new ports in this discussion is primarily on the west coast, not New Jersey.


26 posted on 10/08/2007 6:04:11 PM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: Will88
West Coast port facilities are needed.

California's Coastal Zone Management Act, plus the Coastal Range and its impact on potential locations for railheads and quays, pretty much wipes out that state as a place where serious expansion can be made.

Then, of course, there are the crazoids in Oregon, and I'm sure they'd rather plough Mexico under than allow a single linear foot of their precious shoreline be used to do anything (/sarc).

This doesn't mean East Coast facilities are not needed ~ they will be ~ but no one is going to build them.

38 posted on 10/10/2007 7:20:38 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson