Having been a local government type myself (and having served on a JPA that struggled with the very real problem of condemnation actions) I can tell you that all interested parties need to take a deep breath and work together towards substantive reform. Why? Because much of the debate that has already occurred is based on misinformation and, to some degree, obfuscation of the real issue. Kelo is a perfect example: Many of the proposals to revamp eminent domain authorities in the state purport to be "Kelo fixes". The problem is, a Kelo decision could not be reached in California because our State Constitution precludes it from occurring. As such, no reform is necessary to "fix" Kelo in California.

To my mind, the real threat of Kelo was the Court’s determination that economic benefit, standing alone, was sufficient to establish a "public good". This line of reasoning opens the door for a host of horrendous determinations. To that end, a true reform proposal in California should seek to protect private property from the abuses of government by stating simply, that economic benefit does not constitute a finding of public good in… Read More

From today’s Political Diary E-mail:

Return of Sheehan

Liberals should be wary of some of the personalities they’ve pushed forward to secure temporary advantage in the debate over Iraq. Ned Lamont, the anti-war activist who defeated Joe Lieberman in a Democratic Senate primary last year but then lost to Mr. Lieberman’s independent candidacy, comes to mind. So too does movie director Michael Moore, whose "Fahrenheit 9/11" energized the left-wing base but whose extreme statements (the Cuban people have "artistic freedom") often repel moderate voters, is another.

Now comes Cindy Sheehan, the eccentric mother of a soldier who died in the Iraq… Read More

Democratic elitists, who know better how to live our lives than we do, are founders of the “Nanny State” in California. If I can be gender biased, King of the nanny Staters Mark Leno from San Francisco, is proposing an environmentalist/nanny bill that will endanger the lives of every family in California AB 706 seeks to ban two crucial flame retardants in California. These two flame retardants are found in 90 percent of our furniture–couches, beds and even baby cribs—which makes these pieces of furniture less flammable and safer for your family. Forget the science– ‘Nanny State’ legislators are now considering banning these flame retardants because burning flame retardants are “dangerous” to the environment. Forget the facts– … Read More

URGENT MEMO TO ASSEMBLY REPUBLICANS

Date: July 9, 2007 To: Assembly Republican Legislators From: Jon Fleischman, Publisher, The FlashReport RE: Your vote is urgently needed against ACA 8

There is a very dangerous measure making its way through the California legislature right now, Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8, authored by Democrat Hector De La Torre.

Why is this measure dangerous? As we all know, the tragic decision of the United States Supreme Court in Kelo vs. New London has allowed for significant abuse of eminent domain by government, allowing private property to be seized by local government on behalf of other private parties, if there is economic benefit to the local government. It’s a terrible decision, and one that rightly strikes fear into all advocates of the rights of private property owners.

Since the… Read More

URGENT MEMO TO ASSEMBLY REPUBLICANS Date: July 9, 2007 To: Assembly Republican Legislators From: Jon Fleischman, Publisher, The FlashReport RE: Your vote is urgently needed against ACA 8 There is a very dangerous measure making its way through the California legislature right now, Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8, authored by Democrat Hector De La Torre.

Why is this measure dangerous? As we all know, the tragic decision of the United States Supreme Court in Kelo vs. New London has allowed for significant abuse of eminent domain by government, allowing private property to be seized by local government on behalf of other private parties, if there is economic benefit to the local government. It’s a terrible decision, and one that rightly strikes fear… Read More

Reposted from Red County/San Diego…. Don’t You Love it when the Looney Left thinks the Left isn’t Looney Enough?

From the wire….

Sheehan Considers Challenge to Pelosi

CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) – Cindy Sheehan, the soldier’s mother who galvanized the anti-war movement, said Sunday that she plans to seek House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s congressional seat unless she introduces articles of impeachment against President Bush in the next two weeks.

Sheehan said she will run against the San Francisco Democrat in 2008 as an independent if Pelosi does not seek by July 23 to impeach Bush. That’s when Sheehan and her supporters are to arrive in Washington, D.C., after a 13-day caravan and walking tour starting next week from the group’s war protest site near Bush’s Crawford ranch.

"Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by the Democratic leadership," Sheehan told The… Read More

If you like the TV ads with thehucksters prodding you to "But wait there’s more, act now and we’ll send you double of our very valuable product", then you’ll love Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 8 of the 2007-2008 session, known in more normal English as ACA 8.

This is yet another Capitol Trojan Horse, this one to try to fool voters into voting for "protection" from eminent domain takingsfor, in the bill,an ever-narrowing group of property owners in California. Senator Battin eloquentlyopined on this earlier, see his post too.

Some background:

June 2005, the US Supreme Court hands down it’s Kelo vs. New London CT decision, allowing thateminent domain has morphed from what the Founders had intended for the narrow and reluctant use of EmDo only for true public works projects that must go through private land,a road, a dam, etc. to upholding the use of EmDo to take any land for the development of a higher property tax or use tax base than what had been generated on that land currently, conferring that land to another private… Read More

Like it or not, the debate of a couple of weeks ago regarding the employment practices of the California Republican Party will now continue — at least for a few more months — with the submission of the "Paule Amendment" (see post here).

As noted by Tom Hudson as a comment followingJon Fleischman’s post of yesterday, the language in the proposed bylaw amendment makes no mention of immigration. In fact, it makes no mention of requiring CRP employees to be citizens. It does, however, ensure employees are "legally registered to vote in California as members of the Republican Party."

The only reference toanything regarding citizenship is in the title, "Bylaw Amendment Concerning Employee Eligibility and Citizenship." That said, it seems odd that citizenship is referred to in the title, but not in the text of the amendment. I respectfully suggest that it be mentioned nowhere, leaving the title a simple,… Read More