Posts Tagged ‘california government’

Bob Ewing

Why are California Republicans Permitting Eminent Domain Abuse?

by Bob Ewing
Partisan politics shouldn’t stand in the way of protecting private property rights.   Unfortunately in California, Republicans are siding with bureaucracy, Big Government and eminent domain abuse.
In an effort to close the state’s budget gap, Governor Brown has proposed eliminating California’s 400+ redevelopment agencies.  Redevelopment in California is a $1.7 billion, state-subsidized boondoggle.

Sadly, only one Republican voted to eliminate redevelopment:  Chris Norby.  Every other Republican sided with Big Government, and so the bill to protect private property rights came up one vote short.

California is desperately in need of closing its $25 billion budget deficit as well as providing greater protection to property owners.  Brown’s proposal addresses both.  As the Institute for Justice explains in its report, California Scheming:

In a state where thousands of properties have been threatened and continue to be threatened, California is in desperate need of meaningful eminent domain reform that will respect the rights and property of its residents. The preceding legal overview in California demonstrates just how difficult it is for private property owners to defend themselves against California’s redevelopment machine, which siphons billions and billions of dollars into a closed economic system that benefits private parties and hurts not only property owners, but all taxpayers as well.
IJ has catalogued nearly 200 projects across the state that have threatened or used eminent domain for private gain; within each of those projects, hundreds, if not thousands of homes, businesses, churches and farms have been impacted.
Chuck DeVore

Rise of the Nanny State: Is There a Political Answer to Every Problem?

by Chuck DeVore

Is there a political answer to every problem? Most of my colleagues feel this is the case. I disagree.

In the past day, there was a spate of news articles about California’s trans-fat ban due to go into effect on New Year’s Day. I voted against this new law.

Trans-Fat-free-Construction

California has the 4th-highest unemployment rate, a $21 billion budget deficit, and a severe water shortage, so, what do lawmakers do?  Pass a law that will fine restaurants $1,000 for using margarine in their foods.

One of the articles said:

Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, R-Irvine, criticized the new law as an example of nanny government with little beneficial impact.
“Not every human problem deserves a political solution,” he said. “That’s the fallacy my colleagues engage in.”

I’ve been criticized for voting against all sorts of nanny state bills that expand the police power of government in the name of making us safe from ourselves. I’ve often argued that we might as well pass a blanket bill outlawing stupidity and rudeness in California.

(more…)

Ron Nehring

Californians Prepare Initiative to Make Politics Voluntary, Even for Union Members

by Ron Nehring

Government employee union officials have enjoyed a big advantage over their political competitors: the power to compel members to contribute funds to their causes.

102084-07.14.strike.YAN-02

Such political power has served as a massive force in favor of the unsustainable spending that has forced cities like Vallejo, California into bankruptcy with unrealistic salaries and pension benefits for their unionized employees.

Normally only a tiny fraction of Americans choose to donate to candidates or political causes. Yet many government employee unions enjoy the power to compel virtually all of their members into supporting the unions’ advocacy, regardless of how the individual worker feels about that agenda.

That’s one heck of an advantage on the political battlefield, but it comes at the price of forcing, for example, Republican union members to fund Democrat campaigns. Or, conversely, Democrats in Pennsylvania funding then-Republican Arlen Specter’s re-election.  It’s wrong, and abuse of the practice has led states like Utah and Idaho to ban the practice.

(more…)