Don't Miss

Enter your photo in the Ultimate Fan contest by midnight to win a suite night at a Salem Red Sox game and a chance at a trip to Fenway Park.

Vote no on Question 1

An amendment on property rights pretends to solve a problem already addressed by state law.

Most Virginians who vote next month to amend the state constitution’s property rights protections will do so believing they are preventing governments from condemning land in order to give it to private businesses for economic development projects.

In reality, that practice has been illegal in Virginia for five years. The General Assembly banned takings for private development in response to the infamous U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. City of New London. Advocates of the constitutional amendment acknowledge that the law has accomplished its goal, yet they argue constitutional restrictions are necessary to discourage as yet unhatched plots to nullify the statute.

Continue reading this editorial.

Join the conversation [ADD A COMMENT]

6 COMMENTS

  1. Bob H | October 26, 2012 at 9:02 am

    A yes vote would prevent a judge from ruling the law you cite unconstitutional would it not? It pre-empts a judge from ruling something unconstitutional when it is in the constitution doesn’t it? (Unless it is California on Gay Marriage and even when made constitutional apparently a ludge has more power than millions of voters/citizens)

  2. Other John | October 26, 2012 at 12:06 pm

    That was my thought, Bob. It might seem duplicative, but I’d rather have it in the Constitution than simply as a law that could get overturned or repealed relatively easily.

  3. Sandi Saunders | October 26, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    After DOMA, I am not so trusting of anyone who wants something in a constitution. Even less so when there are partisan points involved.

    I do not like to see anyone’s property “taken” but I do not like anyone holding a community hostage either.

  4. 89Hoo | October 26, 2012 at 2:18 pm

    Vote YES on Question 1…private property and the protection of private property rights is a keystone of a free society.

  5. Jim Lucas | October 27, 2012 at 9:50 pm

    #4 Absolutely correct, ‘Hoo. The RTEB is consistent in their philosophy of government control versus individual freedom.

    The RT is consistent in ignoring F&F, WH security leaks, manipulation of economic data….and now the Libya bungle & cover-up (etc.).

  6. Sandi Saunders | October 27, 2012 at 10:27 pm

    So if we have to work under the assumption that news media get their orders from the administrations (only the ones they support, that is), where is it you get yours?

Error submitting comment

Name is required

A valid email is required (test@test.com)

Comment is required

Add a comment

Your email address will not be published.
All fields are required to comment.

processing

Friday, May 24, 2013

Weather Journal

Chilly holiday weekend AMs

Fri, 24 May 2013 04:12:55 +0000




.....Daily Deal.....


Recent Comments

  • Robert C.: I love when people use the cars vs. guns argument because it’s so easy to tear apart. The first...
  • Jim Lucas: Holder is lying again (gasp). He personally signed off on the DOJ action against Rosen…..then said...
  • Art Hill: “…she should go to jail for contempt of Congress.” If having contempt for this Congress...
  • Jim Lucas: #3 Mr. Hill….that is absurd.
  • Jim Lucas: #62 Will….it is of course an interesting & pertinent question as to the guidlines. But, once...

Categories

Archives