Kelo: Revelations

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

The Supreme Court's 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of New London stands as one of the worst in recent years, handing local governments carte blanche to seize private property in the name of economic development. Now, four years after that decision gave Susette Kelo's land to private developers for a project including a hotel and offices intended to enhance Pfizer Inc.'s nearby corporate facility, the pharmaceutical giant has announced it will close its research and development headquarters in New London, Connecticut.

The aftermath of Kelo is the latest example of the futility of using eminent domain as corporate welfare. While Ms. Kelo and her neighbors lost their homes, the city and the state spent some $78 million to bulldoze private property for high-end condos and other "desirable" elements. Instead, the wrecked and condemned neighborhood still stands vacant, without any of the touted tax benefits or job creation.

That's especially galling because the five Supreme Court Justices cited the development plan as a major factor in rationalizing their Kelo decision. Justice Anthony Kennedy called the plan "comprehensive," while Justice John Paul Stevens insisted that "The city has carefully formulated a development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including, but not limited to, new jobs and increased tax revenue." So much for that.

Kelo's silver lining has been that it transformed eminent domain from an arcane government power into a major concern of voters who suddenly wonder if their own homes are at risk. According to the Institute for Justice, which represented Susette Kelo, 43 states have since passed laws that place limits and safeguards on eminent domain, giving property owners greater security in their homes. State courts have also held local development projects to a higher standard than what prevailed against the condemned neighborhood in New London.

If there is a lesson from Connecticut's misfortune, it is that economic development that relies on the strong arm of government will never be the kind to create sustainable growth.

Wall Street Journal

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

The single Republican to vote for Speaker Pelosi's version of ObamaCare was Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao, who replaced William "Cold Cash" Jefferson in Louisiana's 2nd Congressional District. Rep. Cao's engagement in bi-partisanship immediately raised the obvious question as to what was offered in return, and Michelle Malkin provides an answer:

Cao wrote he obtained commitment from President Obama that he would work together to address...issues related to Charity and Methodist Hospitals.

Charity Hospital got brief media mention last month when President Obama took questions at a Town Hall meeting in NOLA. The NY Times reported that a man specifically addressing Charity Hospital asked why NOLA was being "nickel and dimed in our recovery", something he says he expected from the Bush administration but not under President Obama. The man also stated:

...we've been without a full-service public hospital for the last four years because FEMA is offering $350 million less than the true damage costs incurred, why?

We have entered the age of trillion dollar deficits wherein a third of a billion taxpayer dollars perhaps can be rightly seen as nickels and dimes! I looked into the story of Charity Hospital, and it is another depressing and cautionary tale of government in action that should greatly concern anyone about the prospect of the state controlling the nation's healthcare systems. It is also another reminder that the "R" by a politician's name does not mean fiscally responsible with our tax monies.

... [read story at link below, a real shocker to any self-proclaimed social liberal/fiscal conservative] ...

This story is not an oddity. It is how government operates and why its powers and reach into our lives should be limited. The Stafford Act was passed under the rubric of a compassionate nation helping fellow citizens who have suffered from disaster. Yet no matter how noble the claim, appearance or even genuine intent of the statute, there will be those in and out of politics who will manipulate the process for the political benefit of themselves and their chosen constituents. The federal taxpayer is not expected to die a death of a thousand cuts, but to merely bleed through a thousand or ten thousand or a hundred thousand cuts to benefit those who know how to game the system to benefit themselves and their allies. If the federal government does take control of the health care industry, forget the lofty claims and compassionate rhetoric as the political connections become more important than the medical conditions in the allocation of resources. Then too, with all the promises of lowering and controlling health care costs with greater government control of the industry, note that a federal agency actually trying to protect the taxpayer's funds has already agreed to pay six times its original professionally prepared estimate!

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...en_honore.html

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

In 2007, to great fanfare and amid ever-greater expectations, a large-scale demonstration project was initiated to turn switchgrass into biofuel. For an investment of $70 million, the taxpayers of the state of Tennessee were promised a lucrative new industry that would benefit farmers while creating thousands of other "green jobs." The project, which was expected to produce five million gallons of biofuel from switchgrass within two years, would soon be fiscally self-sustaining and afford a "significant return" on investment. As the largest switchgrass demonstration project in the country, it was to have been the foundation for a whole new industry.

Sounds great, and it is just what the Tennessee legislature approved in 2007. When it began, "the University of Tennessee Biofuels Initiative," as it is called, excited favorable comment in newspapers and media across the country. Finally, there would be a practical alternative to those nasty fossil fuels, and the great thing was that it would be produced from a hearty plant that could be grown on marginal land almost anywhere. Switchgrass was the answer to America's dependence on foreign oil. It would restore the trade balance, boost the economy, and save the earth all at the same time.

Now, according to the Knoxville News Sentinel, the Biofuels Initiative has reported that it is not yet producing 5 million gallons of switchgrass fuel. In fact, according to published reports, it would seem that it is not producing any fuel at all. The 250,000 gallons of ethanol that it is producing have been distilled from corn cobs -- a process akin to one already quite common, if not notorious, in the state of Tennessee.

According to figures from the U. S. Department of Energy, a biofuels facility of the sort envisioned would not be feasible unless it produced five million gallons per year. But, according to a report by the executive director of the Fiscal Review Committee of the Tennessee state legislature, it appears certain that the Biofuels Initiative will not be "self-sufficient," as promised, within five years. Having initially promised that the plant would produce five million gallons with the goal of demonstrating the feasibility of switchgrass, the project director now seems to regard the initiative as a "research project." The feasibility issue will have to wait until sometime in the future.

The project has cost the state $55 million, not counting additional federal funding and state subsidies to farmers growing switchgrass. Now members of the legislature are quoted as saying that the project is "not good stewardship of taxpayer dollars" and that continued funding "may need re-evaluation." The director of the project insists that the State Building Commission approved changes, but it appears that the legislature at large was not aware of them. Whether the legislature will continue funding the Biofuels Initiative, and at what level, will be determined after November 15.

Altogether, more than $90 million has been spent on the University of Tennessee Biofuels Initiative with no end in sight. On the national scale, tens of billions of dollars are being spent on similar alternative energy subsidies and research with little to show for it.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...from_tenn.html

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

I KNOW!!!




Let's shoot the messenger and then go dump on stupid Sarah Palin!




__________________
"Don't get stuck on stupid!"
Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré

[RobDownSouth]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

I KNOW!!!

Let's shoot the messenger and then go dump on stupid Sarah Palin!


__________________
"AJ's stuck on stupid!"
Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré

Gee, let's endlessly debate cut-n-paste editorials from partisan far-right websites.

On second thought, let's not.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

The Wall Street Journal might indeed be far right compared to the places you cut'n paste from and who would never, EVER think to run an article critical of government as long as Democrats are in charge of it.




Because they are "Fair and Balanced."




Real News!
*ispit*

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

The chicanery and deception that led up to the vote underscores the myth of the moderate Democrat. The entire Democratic caucus -- with pitifully few exceptions -- was committed to passing the health care bill. Had it needed all 258 Democrats to vote yes, the bill would have come awfully close.

But the Democratic margin in the House meant that the leaders did not need 258 Democrats, they only needed 219. So they let the most marginal among them off the hook, allowed them to vote against the bill, preserving their chances at re-election.

The real question facing the voters is whether they will be deceived by this sleight of hand in which moderate Democrats pretend that the bill was passed over their objections. Will the voters buy their claims that it became law despite their best efforts?

Once, the voters might have fallen for this trickery. But not now. The electorate is far too well informed to believe that any Democratic congressman really opposed this bill.

Dick Morris and Eileen McGann
Townhall.com

Saying what the Huffington Post won't.

[JohnnySavage]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

Wall Street Journal

Karma, baby!

[JohnnySavage]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

The Wall Street Journal might indeed be far right compared to the places you cut'n paste from and who would never, EVER think to run an article critical of government as long as Democrats are in charge of it.




Because they are "Fair and Balanced."




Real News!
*ispit*

Yea, can't you find something from Crooks and Liars?

[off2bed]

Or Al Jazeera?

[JohnnySavage]

I have several little... "quirks," shall we say. (But I also have a certificate from the State attesting to my overall sanity) One of them is reading Supreme Court decisions. I've read every decision since Cornell began posting them on the innerwebs about 15 years ago.

Kelo is perhaps the most bizarre one in all that time. There was another one from South Carolina.... Lucas v. S.C.? That was similar, but different - about 10 years ago. If you want to see how the law evolves, read Lucas and then Kelo.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Alluha Akbar!




Pay me infidels!



Don't make me spell out the alternative!

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Originally Posted by JohnnySavage

I have several little... "quirks," shall we say. (But I also have a certificate from the State attesting to my overall sanity) One of them is reading Supreme Court decisions. I've read every decision since Cornell began posting them on the innerwebs about 15 years ago.

Kelo is perhaps the most bizarre one in all that time. There was another one from South Carolina.... Lucas v. S.C.? That was similar, but different - about 10 years ago. If you want to see how the law evolves, read Lucas and then Kelo.

Oh, we know, the right-wing circle jerk discussed the issue in depth and survived the charges...



__________________
Liberals would prefer no opposition. Behind the force field of political correctness, there should never be any disagreement once the liberal mind has decided that something is good for society. There can be no opposition to the "correct" way of thinking, and if you don't think "correctly," you are attacked.*
Reverend Kenneth L. Hutcherson

[JohnnySavage]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

Oh, we know, the right-wing circle jerk discussed the issue in depth and survived the charges...



__________________
Liberals would prefer no opposition. Behind the force field of political correctness, there should never be any disagreement once the liberal mind has decided that something is good for society. There can be no opposition to the "correct" way of thinking, and if you don't think "correctly," you are attacked.*
Reverend Kenneth L. Hutcherson

Bottom line: You never really own the land.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Originally Posted by JohnnySavage

Bottom line: You never really own the land.

Which is why I am remaining in opposition to property taxes.

[JohnnySavage]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

Which is why I am remaining in opposition to property taxes.

Take it up with the King of England

[off2bed]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

Which is why I am remaining in opposition to property taxes.

Brilliant!

And if income taxes merely return wealth to its rightful owner, then we shouldn't be taxed on the wealth that isn't ours.

[vetteman]

Originally Posted by RobDownSouth

Gee, let's endlessly debate cut-n-paste editorials from partisan far-right websites.

On second thought, let's not.

Here's some cut and paste for ya sweetpea:

Republicans Edge Ahead of Democrats in 2010 Vote
Registered voters prefer Republicans for the House, 48% to 44%
by Jeffrey M. Jones

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124226/Re...2010-Vote.aspx

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Originally Posted by JohnnySavage

Take it up with the King of England

I thought we kicked his royal ass?






Oh, I'm against income taxes too!

Fairtax.org
__________________
"Don't get stuck on stupid!"
Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré

[JohnnySavage]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

I thought we kicked his royal ass?






Oh, I'm against income taxes too!

Fairtax.org
__________________
"Don't get stuck on stupid!"
Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré

Traded one King for 13.

When the colonies became states, they kept the "power of the crown." Eminent Domain is a direct descendant whereby the States have the right to determine how land will be used, and who owns it, just as the King did. That power was transfered obliquely to the Federal government via the Takings Clause.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Of this, I am aware...




I recently re-read DeTocqueville.

[JohnnySavage]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

Of this, I am aware...




I recently re-read DeTocqueville.

I'm more of a Clive Cussler guy.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

I'm more Jive Talkin'...





So misunderstood.

Time for a strike!