tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926635.post348600094493095090..comments2023-03-26T01:08:25.366-07:00Comments on Coyote Squirrel's Random Musings: Arizona Ballot PropositionsR.A. Porterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14851961356321735388noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926635.post-66428605772534490102006-10-26T15:47:00.000-07:002006-10-26T15:47:00.000-07:00Just like "Sophie", anonymous is coming to us LIVE...Just like "Sophie", anonymous is coming to us LIVE from Milford, CT. Now, I love my fellow Nutmeggers, since I grew up in the beautiful Constitution State...but I wonder why they insist on pimping for prop 207 here in AZ? Actually, I don't wonder why, I just wonder who's paying the bills. <br /><br />Why exactly is it so important to someone in CT how I vote on this prop?R.A. Porterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14851961356321735388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926635.post-78230779480795981862006-10-26T15:34:00.000-07:002006-10-26T15:34:00.000-07:00Take back your control and Vote yes on Proposition...Take back your control and Vote yes on Proposition 207! This is a matter of protecting the rights of property & homeowners!! Check this out: <a href="http://hopeforarizona.com">HopeForArizona.com</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926635.post-39456863692226788882006-10-19T16:53:00.000-07:002006-10-19T16:53:00.000-07:00I should clarify that jolly old England didn't so ...I should clarify that jolly old England didn't so much have compulsory purchase as "the divine right of the king" until the 19th century, but the legal evolution in the UK followed a similar, parallel path to ours. In our case, the states hold the sovereign rights to the land.R.A. Porterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14851961356321735388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926635.post-13814423738529541702006-10-19T14:21:00.000-07:002006-10-19T14:21:00.000-07:00Actually, Kelo doesn't sound much at all like that...Actually, Kelo doesn't sound much at all like that "oppressive government we liberated ourselves from 230 years ago". Eminent domain, while long established in English common law, and of course adopted in the States, was applied (and should be applied) to government takings. Things like roads and dams and canals and levees sometimes require individuals to be inconvenienced for the good of society. Kelo changes the dynamic to allow government to take <i>for corporations</i>. The Supremes tried to argue that in New London it still served the public interest, but that's a slippery slope argument.<br /><br />While it's nice that 207 seeks to prevent goverment takings for corporate gain, it goes too far. It would make fairly basic zoning changes a risky proposition, requiring tax dollars to be spent either paying landowners for "diminution in value" or paying lawyers to determine there was none. Strip 12-1134 from the proposition, and this would become a much more attractive ballot measure.R.A. Porterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14851961356321735388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926635.post-41976048061256397472006-10-13T22:21:00.000-07:002006-10-13T22:21:00.000-07:00Sure. You and my wife can eat junk food and I'll e...Sure. You and my wife can eat junk food and I'll eat everything else. :)R.A. Porterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14851961356321735388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926635.post-30657767178621724182006-10-13T17:41:00.000-07:002006-10-13T17:41:00.000-07:00Wow, you are really against marriage, eh?
So I g...Wow, you are really against marriage, eh? <br /><br />So I guess that means that you and I will just have to live in blogger sin.<br /><br />Glad you don't smoke, it's unhealthy. I'm into eating junkfood instead. Work for you?Angie Panseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15400989632012284550noreply@blogger.com