Almost, sort of right
Harold Ford, Jr. kinda, sorta almost gets it right:
I support periodic review of any restrictions on the freedoms and rights of Tennesseans and Americans alike. It is unnecessarily intrusive to ask Americans to forfeit rights and freedoms indefinitely. I took the conservative approach and voted against this indefinite and liberal overreach by the federal government into our private lives.
Actually, it is unconstitutional to suspend our rights in general, forget intrusive. He notes he did not support permanently expanding the PATRIOT Act.
Update: Too bad he gets one completely wrong:
The community-rights-trump-individual-rights crowd cheered the [Kelo] decision. “We have a lot of properties in my city [Memphis],” said Rep. Harold Ford, D-Tenn., ” . . . that are crying out for development. . . . I’ve always been one to believe that individual rights is a big thing [but] there is some real value to this
July 26th, 2005 at 11:15 am
A day after the Kelo decision was delivered, Freestar Media LLC submitted a proposal in the town of Weare, New Hampshire where majority opinion writer, Justice Souter, owns a farm house. They requested that the town board condemn the land and give it to them, as private developers, who promise to construct the Lost Liberty Hotel in its place. Their tax revenue would no doubt be higher than the reported $2,500 that Justice Souter paid in property taxes last year. It would create employment and attract tourism. The town has a website, and an economic development committee, which has identified its two main goals: 1) Encourage the formation of new businesses, and 2) Promote tourism. However, contrary to its stated goals and the legally sanctioned purpose of economic development, the town’s board turned down the proposal.
So much for poetic justice. Justice Souter’s influence in his community shielded him from his own ruling. No other rational justification can be found.
Thankfully, the legislative branch is now busy at work attempting to shield private property rights from the Supreme Court ruling. It seems that the two may have switched roles, with the House defending the Constitution, and the Supreme Court writing new laws.
I thought I saw Alice the other day! Or maybe it was Justice Souter –skipping in Wonderland, immune to and above the laws he passes.
July 26th, 2005 at 12:02 pm
I believe that the quote about Harold Ford is totally out of context as evidenced by the large amount of “…”‘s used. If I’m not mistaken, Ford was opposed to Kelo but does support takings in the case of “blight” which the Supreme Court ruled a long time ago could be taken and given to a private developer. For the record, I don’t think that “blight” is a good reason to transfer ownership from one private party to the other.
July 26th, 2005 at 12:18 pm
You may be right, Manish. However, I did a quick google for news and websites and every mention lists the quote with the dreaded “…”. Not sure if he’s been Dowdified or not.
July 26th, 2005 at 1:04 pm
I actually heard Ford on the radio the morning he endorsed Kelo. He said nothing negative about the decision. Later Ford voted AGAINST an amendment to block any federal funding for any city to carry out an eminent domain taking for the purpose of economic development. However, Ford did vote for a toothless congressional resolution opposing Kelo.
Anyone who thinks Ford was taken out of context can go here and listen: http://billhobbs.com/hobbsonline/006592.html
Bill Hobbs clipped the audio snippets from the broadcast on Teddy Bart’s Roundtable. Don’t trust Hobbs? Go to http://www.thepublicforum.org and check the archives. Ford appeared during the first hour of the 6/27 broadcast.
July 26th, 2005 at 10:32 pm
JB..the clip doesn’t specifically mention Kelo as the questioner was cut off. Ford for the duration of what he’s said mentions “blight” specifically several times. Hobbes also has stuff on his site that suggests that Ford was against Kelo and in favour of the “blight” decision.
Later Ford voted AGAINST an amendment to block any federal funding for any city to carry out an eminent domain taking for the purpose of economic development
AFAIK, the amendment in question would have affected cases where it was for “blight”. Not defending takings in the case of blight, but just setting the record straight.
July 26th, 2005 at 11:06 pm
Manish, listen to the full audio at http://www.thepublicforum.org then. It will be apparent Ford is being asked about Kelo.
Ford’s statements show that he either originally supported the Kelo decision or he lacked understanding about what Kelo actually did when making his statements.
You seem like you’re in denial about this. Face it, Harold Ford Jr. is no friend of property owners.
July 27th, 2005 at 1:28 am
Hobbs also has this statement of Ford’s on his site
Perhaps he’s backpedaled since, I don’t know but everything else I’ve read is that he’s in favour of the “blight” thing, but not the “more profitable use” angle.