 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« Ford Responds on Kelo Questions | Main | Corker Silent on Kelo » July 12, 2005Actions Speak Louder Than WordsU.S. Rep. Harold Ford Jr. says he supports private property ownership rights - but his votes and record as a congressman don't show it. The League of Private Property Voters, which monitors federal legislation affecting private property rights, consistently gives Ford very low marks. The LPPV reports that Ford supported the interests of the League of Private Property Voters 13 percent of the time in 2000, 17 percent of the time in 2001-2002, and 17 percent of the time in 2003. One of the biggest examples of Ford's anti-private property record is his co-sponsorship in 2001 of HR 701, the Conservation and Reinvestment Act. The LPPV dubbed HR 701 the "Condemnation and Relocation Act," because the legislation would hand out over $1 billion per year for a "massive, unprecedented land acquisition" by government, "with no restrictions on federal and state agents' power to condemn private property for nearly any reason." In November 2001, the LPPV called the legislation "the most extreme threat to private property rights since passage of the Endangered Species Act nearly thirty years ago." It was one of ten pieces of legislation in the House that the LPPV monitored that year. According to the LPPV, Ford's vote or co-sponsorship was against private property rights on eight of the ten. An analysis of the legislation said this about how it would impact private property rights: PROPERTY RIGHTS: CARA contains a number provisions (including notification of the public and government officials, willing seller requirements, and Congressional approval) to protect private property owners, HOWEVER, those provisions only apply to $450 million for the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund. There are no private property rights protections restricting the use of funds provided to state and local governments. In fact, the bill actually eliminates property protection provisions in current law related to acquisition of land. Under the Urban Parks and Recreation Program (passed by a Democrat Congress and signed into law by President Carter) none of the funds made available by the federal government could be used for land acquisition. CARA repeals that provision. Under the State Land and Water Conservation Fund, the bill eliminates the current prohibition on the use of funds for incidental costs related to state land acquisition.The legislation was introduced in the 106th Congress on Feb. 10, 1999, and Ford signed on as one of its earliest co-sponsors just a few weeks later. The Heritage Foundation called CARA "a threat to local land use decisions," and called it "inherently unfair because it empowers government at all levels and special interests to buy land, placing average Americans at a disadvantage." Heritage continued: Rather than support private property ownership, which the Founding Fathers understood was critical to maintaining liberty, CARA would fund the purchase of land by governments and special-interest groups. Government at any level - federal, state, or local - should own property only if a compelling natural resource need must be met that cannot be encouraged by private ownership or enterprise. At the same time, it is unfair to use tax dollars to give special interests more power and resources to purchase private property than average Americans have. Special-interest groups like environmental and conservation organizations should compete in the market with private citizens, businesses, or anyone else for property, and local communities should determine how land in their jurisdictions should be used.Ford co-sponsored that legislation which - thankfully - did not pass. Despite what he says now about the Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. New London, his record shows he is not a friend of private property rights. His record shows Ford's radio statement calling Kelo a "positive" decision - a statement he is now trying to backpedal and flip-flop away from - was actually closer to the truth of his anti-private property views. UPDATE: CARA was reintroduced as the "GO Act" in 2004, but the legislation remains virtually unchanged and remains a major threat to private property rights in America. And Ford is a co-sponsor. Posted in Property Rights/Kelo
| Linked By |
Please support HobbsOnline by doing your online shopping at Amazon.com Comments
So why isn't anyone asking Ford to explain his recent pro-property rights statements in light of his recent endorsement of Kelo and his congressional track record, instead of just asking him to clarify his Kelo remarks? Maybe you should send the congressman some follow up questions, Bill. Posted by: dave f at July 12, 2005 10:57 AMYou have to be delusional if you think the MSM, especially the Commie Appeal in Memphis (the official water carrier for JUNIOR) would acutally hold him or any other Democrat accountable for their actions or votes. Posted by: Gail at July 12, 2005 02:00 PMBill, the Congressman has already explained his position on this ruling--more than once. His op-ed fully clarified any confusion there might have been. He was even nice enough to field your questions yesterday. As I said before, if you wonder why the Congressman doesn't reply to any of your further inquires, look no further than your continuous attacks. Thanks, Chris D. Jackson Chris, I didn't pose any more questions. And Ford hasn't yet really answered the six I posed - he or some campaign staffer just emailed me a copy of his op-ed. As for my blog "attacking" him, I have not done so. I have reported facts - facts about his pro-Kelo statement on the radio, facts about his voting record on property rights issues, facts about his support of the CARA legislation and its successor the GO Act, both of which are considered major threats to private property rights. I am going to continue to dig and fully expose Ford's record on this issue. You're a nice young man who is, no doubt, espousing the Ford campaign party line on this, but to say he has fully explained his position on Kelo via that op-ed is rather silly. The op-ed shows Ford misses the central issue raised by Kelo - the redefinition of the constitution's limiting phrase "public use" to mean "whatver the legislative body wants it to mean," which renders the phrase essentially meaningless. The CORE problem with Kelo is not what Ford says it is - the taking of private property and giving it to another private owner. The CORE problem is that Kelo means government can do so arbitrarily. In the Kelo case, the city of New London is taking the property not because it is blighted, not because it wants to give it to another private owner, and not because there is a legitimate "public use" project planned for the city. New London is taking the well-kept, not blighted homes OUT OF SHEER GREED as the city's only reason for doing so is to grow city tax revenue. Ford's op-ed shows he either doesn't really understand that or see it as a problem. Posted by: Bill Hobbs at July 12, 2005 04:47 PMThanks for the nice comments Bill. You have a good thing going here for folks in Tennessee to keep up with politics and important issues in the state. The only problem I have with the way things go down here is that most of the material that is on Congressman Ford, is negative. From the day he announced, all I have saw is negative material here. All I am saying, if you wish the Congressman to participate in any further Q and A or survey, you could be a little bit more fair in your coverage of the candidates. In my honest opinion, I think the Congressman truthfully laid out his view on the SCOTUS case. He was nice enough to write the op-ed to clarify misconceptions that had been spread, then he even answered your questions. I don't know many politicians that give that much energy on a single issue. He has deep concerns about our state on numerous issues, including this one. As demonstrated by his strong involvement and numerous comments on this one issue, Congressman Ford has shown he is ready to discuss the issues that face Tennessee, seriously. That is what this election is going to be about--the issues. This opportunity is just to great to pass up. Again, thanks and take care. Chris D. Jackson If Harold Ford, Jr. can be "attacked" by simply pointing out facts regarding his position on the matter, you may want to consider the legitimacy of that position. The guy's a creep. He has to be the only legislator to publicly come out in favor of the Kelo decision (and, note, he did come out in favor until the heat became unbearable). Posted by: Michael Chaney at July 12, 2005 11:45 PMI don't think I have eever fisked a reader's comment before, but the last one above from Ford fan Chris Jackson deserves it. So here goes... Thanks for the nice comments Bill. You have a good thing going here for folks in Tennessee to keep up with politics and important issues in the state. The only problem I have with the way things go down here is that most of the material that is on Congressman Ford, is negative. Well, yeah. This online magazine looks at things from a conservative perspective. From the day he announced, all I have saw is negative material here. You expected positive coverage from a right-leaning online magazine? All I am saying, if you wish the Congressman to participate in any further Q and A or survey, you could be a little bit more fair in your coverage of the candidates. My coverage was perfectly fair. I reported Ford's endorsement of Kelo, his back-pedaling away from the endorsement, and reprinted his op-ed verbatim. I also accurately reported his lifetime private property rights voting record and accurately reported his support for CARA and the GO Act. I will continue to fairly report all of his anti-private property rights votes and bill support. In my honest opinion, I think the Congressman truthfully laid out his view on the SCOTUS case. His flip-flopping views, you mean He was nice enough to write the op-ed to clarify misconceptions that had been spread, then he even answered your questions. He didn't answer my questions. He sent me a copy of the op-ed instead. I don't know many politicians that give that much energy on a single issue. What did it take? 30 seconds to cut and paste the op-ed and hit the "send" button? You want to see a politician who devoted a lot of energy to the issue, look at the responses from Bryant and Hilleary, and even Kurita. He has deep concerns about our state on numerous issues, including this one. As demonstrated by his strong involvement and numerous comments on this one issue, Congressman Ford has shown he is ready to discuss the issues that face Tennessee, seriously. When is he going to discuss them without back-pedaling? When is his rhetoric going to match his record? That is what this election is going to be about--the issues. This opportunity is just to great to pass up. Again, thanks and take care. Chris D. Jackson Any time. Posted by: Bill Hobbs at July 13, 2005 07:30 AMPost a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||
