Printed letters, September 16, 2012

Thanks for visiting The Daily Sentinel

Subscribers and registered users, log in to continue reading for free*


Forgot your password?    

Register to read for free! Become a subscriber

* 7-day subscribers have unlimited access to online content.
Registered users may read 12 articles per month.

COMMENTS

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Gregg Palmer says, “The issue is not about the landowner, but rather the land use.” Having absolutely no connection to Brady Trucking whatsoever, I beg to differ. From all the stories I’ve read in the Sentinel on the subject, the issue is that the pro-park contingent simply wants to change the zoning (which Brady relied on in good faith when purchasing the property) while leaving Brady to absorb the attendant huge financial loss. Relatively “free” riverfront park while Brady gets financially screwed, right?
Surely everyone has heard of “eminent domain” and of the 5th Amendment’s crystal clear “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation” language. If a majority of the community sincerely wants Brady’s land for a park, then quit shilly-shallying around hiding behind misleading and manipulative political language and compensate Brady fairly and IN FULL for his property. That compensation would need to include replacement costs for the buildings, which would presumably be demolished to build the park and couldn’t be sold for replacement value.
Mr. Palmer’s opinion notwithstanding, it seems to me the real issue is the U.S. Constitution, the principle of private property, and a bunch of wannabe-clever political manipulators (including a conveniently pro-bono lawyer) trying to get out of paying Brady just (fair and full) compensation for his property while disregarding the law of contracts and changing the zoning to suit their otherwise obviously worthwhile agenda.
If the community can’t afford to compensate Brady, then let him keep his property and forget the park, at least until the money is available. If the community can afford to compensate Brady, then shut up, pay the just compensation forthwith, build the park, and get on with life.

Larry Ingram may have forgotten that Republican obstructionism began well before the Tea Party “Monkey Wrench Gang” arrived in 2011. (In Edward Abbey’s 1975 novel “The Monkey Wrench Gang” fictional eco-terrorists’ sabotaged equipment.)

After President Obama took office in 2009, Senate Republicans began invoking the “cloture rule” – i.e., the filibuster – to stymie his recovery initiatives and/or extract “compromises” contrived to deliberately render his “stimulus” less effective.  Since then, Republicans have filibustered more often than in the preceding 90 years since that rule was adopted.

While economists urged that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 should inject at least $1.3 trillion into our economy over two years, President Obama – under threat of filibuster – reluctantly agreed to substitute more tax cuts for more-needed infrastructure investments, even though the latter are far more effective “job creators”.  Consequently, only some $800 billion went into the economy – and gleeful Republicans now disingenuously claim that “Obama’s stimulus” failed to fulfill “his promises”.

The Tea Party House threatened the entire international financial system by irresponsibly manufacturing the “debt ceiling” crisis in Augist 2011—resulting in our lowered credit rating and interrupting ongoing employment expansion by purposely introducing pervasive uncertainty into the business and investor communities.

On September 8, 2011, President Obama proposed the American Jobs Act to a joint session of Congress.  This second phase of the original stimulus called for injecting $447 billion – primarily for infrastructure and re-hiring 300,000 public sector employees (i.e., teachers, etc.).  That bill has never been brought to a House vote – lest some Republicans responsibly support it and President Obama earn credit for bipartisan success.

Economists estimate that – but for Republican obstructionism – from 1.3 to 2.1 million more Americans would have jobs today, the economy would be expanding more robustly, and unemployment would be below 7%—likely assuring President Obama’s re-election.

Thus, Romney-Ryan are but the fraudulent frontmen for cynically unpatriotic Republican domestic “econo-terrorists”.

                Bill Hugenberg



TOP JOBS
Search More Jobs





THE DAILY SENTINEL
734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
970-242-5050
Editions
Subscribe to print edition
E-edition
Advertisers
Sign in to your account
Information

© 2014 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy