Re: Renters Getting Screwed - or Why Eminent DomainisaDistraction
Nathan Newman wrote:
So fine, you are blocking politically with the rightwing on their legislation. You want white state legislators to tell many minority-led city council people that they are too incompetent to resist real estate interests, so they “shouldn’t have” such powers.
Your position is reactionary just from the pure racial dynamics of most states. In the name of stopping some abuse, you want to gut democratic rights of local cities.
With all your rhetoric around corrupt unions, corrupt cities, and so forth, you are just sounding like the worst of the goo-goo conservative “Progressives” of the early twentieth century who undermined working class politics in this country. Precisely because you don’t want to engage in the muck of real politics, you want to strangle democratic decision-making and gut local home rule powers. That is truly one of the most reactionary positions I’ve seen you take.
Wow. Tell this to the NAACP & the National Council of Churches.
http://www.ij.org/private_property/connecticut/2_21_06pr.html
Historic Coalition Aligned Against Abuse An historic coalition that cuts across the philosophical spectrum has united in calling to reform the nation’s eminent domain laws. Along with the Institute for Justice, the NAACP, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the Farm Bureau, National Federation of Independent Business, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the National Council of Churches as well as other non-traditionally aligned groups have joined in the legal and legislative fight against eminent domain abuse. “This unprecedented coalition makes it clear that, when it comes to eminent domain abuse, it is the people versus the profiteers,” said Chip Mellor, IJ’s president and general counsel.