Election stuff

[tenaya]

Nationally, I'm very pleased with the results. And I'm extremely pleased that the Democrats are stating their plans for the future and they are sensible things, like letting the military have more of a say in what happens in Iraq, and no, they won't be cutting the funding to the troops as that would endanger them--exactly opposite of what the Republicans shouted they would do. The Democrats are coming across as sensible which is very important as they have a big history of shooting themselves in the foot. They also want to increase the minimum wage, institute the recs of the 9/11 commission and remove the subsidies to the oil companies.

It's also quite nice the news isn't pooh-poohing Bush's little 'fib' that Rumsfeld will be there for the next two years--even while he was interviewing Gates for the job. I had thought Bush would drag his feet on getting rid of Rumsfeld, but I remember a conversation from last weekend, where B, from the local fan meeting said the Military Times, which is the mouthpiece of the Armed Forces' brass, had leaked that in their next issue was going to state Rumsfeld must go. Bush is the commander in chief of the military and as such, active troops can not by law state criticism of him. The fact that they felt pushed enough to go this far for the first time ever, demostrates a critical lack of confidence in their leadership. I just bet Daddy Bush heard this and gave junior a nanny whack hard enough to knock his eyes to one side of his face and make him look like a Picasso painting.

Locally, I'm disappointed that some creative, far-sighted propositions didn't go through, but at least 90 was stopped. And we still have the Governator. Well, at least he's quit calling the Democrats 'girly men' and telling them to sit down and shut up.

It's cooler today, 85, so I must go do some yard work.

Comments

[aizjanika.livejournal.com]

That happened to me all the time in AK. Even though I'm in NC now, my county has more Democrats than Republicans and I think the whole state is more divided than one would think (though I don't know this *g*) because the middle part of the state is a lot more progressive than around here--big cities, lots of colleges & universities, etc.

What was proposition 90? Or...I could go look it up. *g*

[tenaya.livejournal.com]

90 was an anti-eminent domain proposition. Supposedly one like it passed in Oregon and spawned billions of dollars of lawsuits. I think we need an anti-eminent domain law, but not this one. The paper said this:

"Organizers behind the failed property rights proposal also may have overreached. Landmark measures that passed in Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oregon and South Carolina focused exclusively on barring governments from taking property for private projects. The measures were a reaction to a 2005 Supreme Court decision that specifically permits local and state governments to remove people from their homes and to give the property to developers.

The process has been used to build shopping malls, auto dealerships and big-box stores.

But in addition to banning such seizures, the California proposal included provisions requiring that state and local governments compensate property owners if they adopt any zoning provision, law or regulations that lowers the value of homes or businesses.

That alarmed business groups, government agencies and urban planners, who warned that the proposal could paralyze city planning and hamper the state's ability to move forward with the road building, levee repairs and school construction projects in the $37-billion public works borrowing package approved Tuesday.

A broad bipartisan coalition sprang up against the measure and grew to include Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and such groups as the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Business Roundtable and the League of California Cities. Unions and environmentalists also joined the fight. The coalition spent millions fighting the measure.

Proponents, meanwhile, had almost no money in the bank as the election neared. They spent the bulk of their funding, which came from Manhattan real estate entrepreneur Howard S. Rich, getting the measure approved. Rich, a crusader for smaller government, also helped bankroll the property rights measures in other states."

[aizjanika.livejournal.com]

Thanks! I did hear about this not long ago, but had forgotten what it was called.