Subscribe to the Tea Party RSS feed
Archive
Happy New Year from the Sam Adams Alliance & Foundation!
We'll be out of the office until next Wednesday, but in the meantime, send me your suggestions for New Year's resolutions the government should make to be more responsible in 2008. The five best resolutions will get posted on our blog in January, and you'll get a bobblehead!
And by “Merry Christmas,” they meant, “Have fun paying billions for all of our pet projects.”
While most Americans were celebrating the holidays with their family and friends, Congress was pushing through a last-minute, end-of-the-year, 3,417-page, 34-pound spending bill full of corruption and waste.
More than 300 of the 9,170 pork-barrel projects included in the bill had never been made public—nor passed by either house.
We have a lot of work to do in 2008—won’t you join us?
First thing I like to do when visiting my folks in the 'burbs is pick up the local paper, the Northwest Herald, and see what's going on around the old stomping grounds.
Ah yes,
Monday's headline of the Northwest Herald proudly celebrates: 'More than a grand slam': federal budget includes $1.71 million for county projects.
That's right. Pork. A big fat 2008 federal earmark for
A Christmas miracle!!
Or, as Jacob Sullum states in his article, Entitlement Mentality, "the habit of staying popular by pretending your constituents can get something for nothing."
Congressmen Manzullo and Bean -- along with Senators Obama and Durbin -- helped secure the funding. But, the paper reminds us, the real props go to the county and its new lobbying firm, the Ferguson Group LLC. Yes, that's right. Taxpayer-funded lobbying. Institutionalized. Get on the bandwagon man. Apparently, it's the road to prosperity.
Fortunately, as the article's reader-comments reveal, some constituents aren't so short-sighted:
What is most disturbing about this article is the self congratulatory tone of our neophyte politicians...[County Board Chairman] Koehler and [Finance and Audit Committee Chairman] Munaretto...mixed with the irony that we (McHenry County Taxpayers) have OUR money recycled through some lobby firm so that we (McHenry County Taxpayers) can get OUR money back from the federal government. And what does this convoluted and inefficient (money draining) process yield??? New gadgets for the sheriff, more money for the already stifling public education system and money to "study" groundwater protection...
Nicely put.
The article closes by saying that the county will start working on its wish-list for 2009 federal funds next month.
I was checking out some YouTube videos on the Lincoln Square eminent domain issue today and found one that demonstrates clearly how many politicians think of their their bosses.
At the rally at Chicago Alderman Schulter's office a few weeks ago--which we documented in this SamTV report--business owners chanted for him to come out and explain his plan to take away 36 businesses. He didn't, and this video explains why and a whole lot more.
Check back tomorrow for a new Common Sense episode in which Paul talks about how the businesses in Lincoln Square are safe...for now.
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
Paul Jacob sits down to discuss what's happened in the past two months since OK AG Edmondson's two sets of criminal indictments against the "Oklahoma 3" for helping Oklahoma citizens to petition their government.
Check out this brand-new SamTV report, and be sure to visit FreePaulJacob.com for up-to-the-minute updates on this case.
And be sure to watch our original interview with Paul to get a bit more background on the case.
Well, it's official. Our inaugural Sammie Awards presentation was a hit!
Last night at Chicago landmark restaurant the Berghoff, we gathered together with friends and allies to celebrate the holidays and our one-year anniversary—and to honor citizen activists doing important work for liberty across the country. (Read our press release to learn about the winners—and stay tuned for features on each of these citizens, beginning the first week of January.)
In addition to recognizing the six Sammie winners, we played a short video recapping our first year, our chairman and CEO Eric O'Keefe spoke about what we've been doing, and our Senior Advisor Paul Jacob gave a rousing speech about his political persecution in Oklahoma—and about the need to keep fighting for freedom. (Richard will be posting video footage of the event sometime next week—check back to see it.)
It was good to be re-energized—reading story after story about government abuse day after day can be discouraging. But last night's festivities were proof that people are doing something about this abuse, and that their efforts are working.
So, today, in the spirit of the holidays, I wanted to share that (instead of posting on one of the many stories of government fraud, waste, and abuse). Plus, today is my dad's birthday, so I didn't want to bum him out.
Be encouraged: citizens across the country are fighting for freedom—here's to another year of doing just that!
Happy Holidays from all of us here at the Sam Adams Alliance!
Those on the right should resist the temptation to eagerly applaud yesterday's EPA decision on California greenhouse gas emissions. In that decision, EPA denied California's application to regulate such emissions at a level more stringent than that of the rest of the nation.
Although some may be anxious to approve of an outcome that offers less constricting environmental regulations, the reasoning behind EPA's denial is pure poison, and should be a source of great concern for those interested in state's rights. In articulating the reasoning for his position, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson told reporters "The Bush Administration is moving forward with a clear and national solution-- not a confusing patchwork of state rules."
Well Mr. Johnson, one man's "confusing patchwork of state rules" was once known as the laboratory for social and economic experimentation that we like to call "federalism."
One could further contrast Mr. Johnson's statement, which presumably represents the Bush Administration's position, with the position of founding father James Madison on the issue: "But ambitious encroachments of the federal government, on the authority of state governments, would not excite the opposition of a single state, or of a few states only. They would be signals of general alarm...but what degree of madness could ever drive the government to such an extremity?"
California officials have vowed to fight the decision, and although none of us want to see more nebulous regulation, we might prefer that the state emerge victorious on this issue, so as to avoid the unwarranted encroachments of the federal government upon issues that we support (see Gonzales v. Raich, and Roper v. Simmons, for starters).
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
Over the past few days I've been seeing buses driving around Chicago marked with the logo for a tour company called the Free Enterprise System. It looks like something straight out of the 1970s, but I still think it's pretty cool.
On the buses' rears there's even a picture of the Declaration of Independence and the Liberty Bell, with the statement, "Let freedom ring." I like political statements like this, even if their choice of typeface is cheesy.
The company says that it offers "a world of choices to get where you're going in style and comfort."
I like choices, and like being free to choose them.
Celebrate America's free enterprise system this holiday season by taking Mike's "Pork Tour" (mentioned below) on one of these babies!
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
From CNSnews.com comes a unique way to spend the holiday, touring some of your government’s more ludicrous ways to spend your money.
I got better ways to spend my winter break. But I guess that’s the point.
To help you plan your tour, The Heritage Foundation sent out an email listing some of the 11,300 "exciting pork barrel projects tucked away in the House and Senate spending bills."
My personal favorite on the list is the $500,000 being spent on “longer streets in Champaign, Ill,” because I happen to go to school at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
I’ve been there three and a half years now, never having a problem with the streets being too short. What does “longer streets” even mean? Have streets been ending at random points in the middle of no where? Wouldn’t I have found out about this sooner?
I stumbled across the column of a former colleague today, and wanted to pass it along because it brings a great message.
Our friend Heather Wilhelm writes for Real Clear Politics, and in this particular column, she writes about how politicians across America are making promise after promise about how the government can solve any problem, provide any desire, and generally make life better for every man, woman, and child.
Sigh.
That’s the bad news—but the good news is that meanwhile, a free market revolution is sweeping across
Read the whole thing here.
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
When it comes to the federal deficit, not many people, it appears. But Sheila Weinberg at the Institute for Truth in Accounting endeavors to educate people about just how much we're in debt.
I was flabergasted when Sheila told me a few weeks ago that the deficit is over $54 trillion, quite a bit above the "official" government estimate of somewhere around $9 trillion.
Sheila and the Institute just set up a new website that provides a single source for information on the "two sets of books" that they find the government keeps, as well as the challenge that they've given to the presidential candidates: to address the problem of our national debt.
Check out truthin2008.org and stay tuned for more from Sheila and her group.
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
I can't say I've ever been a part of a really meaningful protest. You know, one that actually makes a difference.
That all changed a couple weeks ago at the "
As Richard mentioned last week, it's not a complete victory. But hey, I'm pumped! We're pumped! Let's recognize the power of grassroots activism. By calling out Alderman Schulter and the powers-that-be, by revealing the unjust government seizure for what it was, by causing a big ruckus and drawing the attention of local media and bloggers, a community overcame authoritarian compulsion and defended what the government had no right to offend -- their property.
It's empowering. And we're not going to stop. We're not going to back down. Because, let's face it, that's what they want us to do. To sit back and passively take it without question, without making a stir.
A similar situation plays out in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, which -- if you weren't aware -- celebrated its 50th anniversary in October. At the risk of losing your attention span, I've quoted it below:
"Mr. Rearden," said the man, "the government needs your Metal. You have to sell it to us, because surely you realize that the government's plans cannot be held up by the matter of your consent."
"A sale," said Rearden, slowly, "requires the seller's consent." He got up and walked to the window. "I'll tell you what you can do." He pointed to the siding where ingots of Rearden Metal were being loaded onto freight cars. "There's Rearden Metal. Drive down there with your trucks -- like any other looter, but without his risk, because I won't shoot you, as you know I can't -- take as much of the Metal as you wish and go. Don't try to send me payment -- I won't accept it. Don't print out a check to me. It won't be cashed. If you want that Metal, you have the guns to seize it. Go ahead."
"Good God, Mr. Rearden, what would the public think!"
It was an instinctive, involuntary cry. The muscles of Rearden's face moved briefly in a soundless laughter. Both of them had understood the implications of that cry. Rearden said evenly, in the grave, unrestrained tone of finality, "You need my help to make it look like a sale -- like a safe, just, moral transaction. I will not help you."
The man did not argue. He rose to leave. He said only, "You will regret the stand you've taken, Mr. Rearden."
"I don't think so," said Rearden.
He knew that the incident was not ended. He knew also that the secrecy of Project X was not the main reason why these people feared to make the issue public. He knew that he felt an odd, joyous, light-hearted self-confidence. He knew that these were the right steps down the trail he had glimpsed.
The City of Chicago will continue its attempt to acquire the remaining
In the words of my hero Andrew WK, "Never let down".
Speaking of government overreach, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom (sounds a lot like nuisance, huh?) is proposing a tax on beverages with high quantities of fructose corn syrup because “nearly a quarter of the city's 5th, 7th and 9th graders were overweight and that high sugar drinks make up a tenth of a kid's daily calorie count.”
Next up in
I’ve never been big on New Year's resolutions. Either I can’t think of a good one—or if I do, it usually only lasts a couple weeks before I forget it or give it up.
The government is pretty lousy at keeping resolutions, too. You know, like their vow to uphold the Constitution and protect citizens’ fundamental rights.
The fact that elected officials have done an absolutely deplorable job of keeping this promise should come as a surprise to no one, but if you don’t believe me, read it for yourself: Radley Balko, a senior editor for Reason magazine, has written his annual year-end column outlining the government overreach that has happened during the year. (To stay up-to-date on this kind of news all year, read Radley’s blog, The Agitator.)
My favorite? The bill that bans playing an instrument or interacting with pets while driving. This is the stuff that belongs in The Onion—but sadly, it is reality.
Our governments—of all levels—need a New Year's resolution to rein them in and bring them back to their original purpose. Of course, we need a lasting change—not just a New Year's resolution—but hey, we've got to start somewhere.
What New Year's resolution do you think your government (local, state, or federal) should make in order to start getting back on track this year? Email me your suggestions, and I’ll post the five best submissions in early January—and I’ll send one of our famous Sam Adams bobbleheads to each of these lucky five.
In Seaside, California, citizens are taking action against a local government’s proposed extension of eminent domain over their land. For nearly 12 years, the city has had the authority to declare eminent domain in certain areas of their city, but that privilege may end soon—the state of California put a 12-year limit on eminent domain authority in 2006, meaning that this privilege will end in April 2008 unless the redevelopment plan is renewed.
However, citizens like Tim Cunha, a property owner in the area, have decided to take a stand against government aggression and let their leaders know how they feel. On Saturday, Cunha organized a petition drive. He and other citizens of Seaside canvassed the town gathering signatures from their neighbors who do not wish to see their rights trampled. The petitions will be delivered to the city before the City Council votes to renew the eminent domain authority.
Eugene Lee, chairman of the Seaside Taxpayer Association, supports the citizens of Seaside in their fight against tyranny. He says, “I’m not against redevelopment, I’m against eminent domain. This is private property and they are robbing the poor to give to the rich. I thought it was supposed to be the other way around.”
It is this type of community mobilization that flourished during the American Revolution, and it is great to see that the ideals of our Founding Fathers are still alive in the minds of the citizens of this country, even if they are dead in the minds of some of our leaders.
It turns out that the Ron Paul blimp project is much more than just an amusing anomaly: it is a welcome end-run around the McCain-Feingold campaign finance regulations that have thus far stifled political speech.
Up until this point, the perception has been that an individual or group seeking to support a candidate form a Political Action Committee (PAC). The problem with that course of action is that any contributions to such a PAC count against one's $2,300 cap in contributions per election-cycle set up by McCain-Feingold.
Although these spending limitations can be exceeded by forming a Section 527 non-profit organization, such as John Kerry's friends at Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, such organizations cannot explicitly support or oppose a campaign.
Enter the blimp. Here's how it works: the blimp is a for-profit endeavor, where "donors" are actually more like customers, who buy add space just like one would by space from a traditional bill-board: on a time-share basis. In other words, the blimp charges $250 for each 27 minutes that it stays afloat. Thus anyone can purchase 27 minutes of add time just as they would pay daily or monthly rent for a commercial billboard ad to advertise his or her business. It just so happens that they have all chosen to purchase the same message in advance.
Former FEC Chairman Bradley Smith, who is advising the project has indicated that the project is analogous to Michael Moore's releases of Fahrenheit 911 to coincide with the 2004 presidential elections, and is entirely legitimate.
If proven correct, grass-roots activists for liberty should take careful note, as this mechanism may provide a unique way to speak out in support of important causes without risking the wrath of federal prosecutors.
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
Well, if you're a Ron Paul fan, you know, but if not, permit me to remind you of one of the most successful political stunts in American history: the Boston Tea Party.
On December 16, 1773 a group of individuals called the Sons of Liberty--led by one Sam Adams--boarded ships in Boston Harbor--spelled "Harbour" at the time, mind you--and dumped their cargo (tea from the East India Company) into the water. The colonists resented the favorable tax treatment of the East India company (one of the biggest corporations around), and staged the protest to air their grievances on taxation without representation.
Ours is a history of peaceful and effective protest. Here's to the Sons of Liberty, their Boston Tea Party, and Sam Adams!
It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds. -Sam Adams
There are a plenty of reasons to be worried about the younger generations growing up in America right now—but none so scary as the one that Melanie Scarborough lays out in a Washington Examiner column today.
The title alone is enough to make me angry: “Kids can’t recall freedom they never knew.”
But it gets worse:
She writes, “Politicians need to stop worrying whether children might grow up to be fat and start worrying whether they will grow up to be free.”
I couldn’t agree more.
Concerned about the national debt? The Onion reports on a way to solve it!
Mike Demkovich, a student at the University of Illinois and a former intern with Sam Adams, designed this ad for his senior portfolio. 500 are going up around the country today.
Just kidding, but they should. Happy Friday!
Total Comment(s): 3 comments | Permalink
The City Council of Greenly, Colorado has decided it is best for its citizens to not chew tobacco. And to enforce this, the Council has passed an ordinance banning handouts of free chewing tobacco samples (to citizens of legal age) at the local rodeo.
This is quite hypocritical since the same Council previously allowed liquor stores to give out free samples of wine. And Mike Peters of the Greenly Tribune points out that alcohol endangers those who plan to drive--whereas chewing tobacco does not.
In his article, Peters is concerned that the city council will pass more laws dictating what its citizens can and cannot do to their own bodies. I echo Mr. Peters’s concern and am outraged, yet not surprised, at the Council’s action.
Every day we see more and more local governments passing unnecessary laws that legislate taste and invade our privacy. Our Founding Fathers fought and died so that America could be free from an oppressive government; yet as we see here even at the local level, elected officials seem more and more determined to stick their noses where they don’t belong, and therefore interfere with the liberty of the citizens they govern.
It will only be through exposure of these Orwellian activities—like what Mr. Peters has done, and the public outrage that will follow—that government officials will be stopped from making ridiculous laws that interfere with our everyday lives.
I wrote earlier today about the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, sponsored in part by Tom Coburn. This is great work—but it’s only one part of Coburn’s efforts to make the government more accountable and transparent.
In a Politico piece about Coburn published earlier this week, I learned about how he’s crusading against wasteful government spending and rampant use of earmarks—and if he has a problem with a bill, he’ll kill it. He currently has holds on 95 Congressional bills for a number of different reasons.
Of course, many Senators have less-than-friendly feelings about this “fly-in-the-soup” persona Coburn has taken on, but Coburn is more concerned with changing the culture of the Senate than a popularity contest. Even so, he has gained at least 25 allies in his pursuit of a more responsible government. At any rate, it’s nice to know there are a lonely few legislators we can trust to act in the best interest of American taxpayers.
That’s the title of today’s Washington Examiner editorial, and the news it brings is just as good as it sounds.
Today at 11:30 a.m., USASpending.gov will officially launch. This is the website mandated by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, and it is a searchable online database of federal spending, making it easier for American citizens to keep track of how the government is spending their money.
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) were co-sponsors of this important bill—but as you can imagine, many other lawmakers were not as pleased with the thought of taxpayers actually knowing how they blow tax dollars on their pet projects. Despite their efforts to block this important measure, however, President Bush signed FFATA into law—and today is the beginning of a new era of government accountability and transparency.
Read the editorial here, and be sure to take advantage of this important website. It’s your money—you deserve to know where it’s going.
Besides tackling the Lincoln Square eminent domain issue today, the Chicago City Council may today ban the ownership of chickens.
Some people are worried that the chickens might attract rodents, but chicken-owners cite the benefits to hen ownership:
Those who have eaten eggs from their own chickens say they are far fresher and tastier than store-bought eggs.
"And they're so productive for the garden," said Owen Taylor, training and livestock coordinator of Just Food, a New York-based nonprofit group. "They aerate the soil, eat bugs and they look like little tractors, tilling the soil."
Taylor said he was surprised that Chicago — a city that banned foie gras in restaurants over concerns about cruelty to geese and embraced rooftop gardening — isn't more welcoming of chickens.
I don't know if they're "like little tractors," but Wendy sure does know how to cook them well.
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
Weren’t Democrats supposed to be nobly restoring fiscal responsibility to the halls of Congress or something?
Riiight. It’s interesting, then, that Nancy Pelosi thought $16,000 of taxpayer funds were being well-spent on flowers. And excessive traveling. And a bloated payroll.
(Don’t get me wrong, Republicans aren’t any better—we all know we can’t trust most politicians on either side of the aisle on this issue.) Read more about your tax dollars at work on Capitol Hill in today’s issue of The Hill.
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
The for-now victory in Lincoln Square is wonderful news—now I just hope this eminent domain case in Sacramento has the same fate. There, landowner Moe Mohanna is fighting the Sacramento City Council’s plans to take eight of his buildings to “revitalize part of downtown.”
The Council was set to vote on the matter today, but postponed it to allow more time for discussion and testimony (the agenda was already full), which could be good news.
Read more here—and if you live in the area, go speak up for private property rights.
Lincoln Square is safe...at least for now.
Word came mid-day today that members of the Lincoln Square community here in Chicago have won their first victory against government planners who were strongly considering taking over their neighborhood.
From the Institute for Justice press release:
Several successful Lincoln Square businesses have defeated the threat of eminent domain for private development—for now. Yesterday afternoon, Alderman Gene Schulter (47th Ward) told business owners from Chicago Soccer, Decorium Furniture, The Dental Corner, and others that he will introduce a new ordinance that will not allow the acquisition of their properties through eminent domain. There is no guarantee that the city will not condemn these businesses through a future ordinance, and five properties that are home to a Walgreens and over a dozen small offices would remain on the city’s “involuntary” acquisition list and subject to eminent domain abuse.
They're still planning to hold a rally tomorrow morning outside of the City Council chambers.
Total Comment(s): 1 comment | Permalink
Upset about out-of-control spending, Michigan voters plan to bring a truckload of coal to the naughty politicians in Lansing.
Here's the scoop from today's e-mail from Leon Drolet and the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance:
Members of the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance (you and your family and friends) are invited to join a coal-ition of business and citizen associations who will present gifts of coal to the naughty politicians, and a "thank you" Christmas card to good politicians. The event will take place this Thursday, December 13 at 11:30 AM to 1:00 PM on the Capitol Building steps in Lansing.
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
Coming from the CTA Tattler: "Funding woes got you down? Ride the Santa Train!".
Really?
Riding the Santa Train will help alleviate my CTA-related worries? Supporting a completely unnecessary expenditure -- cited in 2004 to cost about $200,000 by then-president Frank Kruesi -- will extinguish my concerns of the endless doomsday-bailout-doomsday-bailout cycle?
Or, maybe just inflate them...
Call me crazy, but I think the CTA needs a heavy dose of internal reform, a sort that -- yes -- goes beyond getting rid of the Santa Train. Something like what our friends at the Illinois Policy Institute having been touting for some time now. A couple weeks ago, the Chicago Tribune cited their work in an article by Dennis Byrne entitled, "No guts in Springfield, no transit fix".
Great stuff. Like I said, it talks about internal reform. Not simply relying on external revenue sources as Illinois lawmakers have been proposing -- most recently Mike Madigan via casinos. No, these are meaningful, sustainable solutions. The cessation of expansion projects. Using competitive contracting and independent audits. Yes, even increasing fares and cutting some buses.
So how about it Springfield? Give free markets a chance! Hey, once that happens, for all I care every train can be a Santa Train.
In regard to property rights, we're not that far off.
I know, I know, you've heard the comparison before, but the Chinese student in me just couldn't pass up the opportunity to post this little cartoon that I found this weekend. It fits so well into the "Save Lincoln Square" story that we've been covering over the past few weeks.
(Did you know that there's going to be a rally in support of the business owners this Wednesday? Sweet!)
Just when I thought Edmondson had gotten a lick of sense, he re-indicts Paul Jacob and the OK 3...this time without a grand jury to hide behind.
Kathleen at FreePaulJacob.com writes:
In the press thus far, Attorney General Edmondson has been hiding behind the multi-county grand jury’s indictment of the Oklahoma 3 to duck the recurrent charges that this is a politically motivated prosecution. Edmondson has sought to pretend that it wasn’t his decision to prosecute, but rather that of the grand jury. He even continued this dodge after the grand jury indictment was dismissed.
Now that Edmondson has re-indicted these three innocent citizens directly from his office, the charade is over. This is a political assault, under cover of law, plain and simple. An assault that, as Paul has stated, we will stand up to fight.
This should never happen in America. Let’s work together to make certain it doesn’t.
Visit FreePaulJacob.com for Paul's statement and the latest updates.
On Saturday, Michigan legislators repealed the new service tax and replaced it with a 21.99 percent surcharge on the state’s new business tax. It seems that Michigan lawmakers were so desperate to raise taxes that even lobbyists for businesses felt a compromise was the only solution.
However, many citizens—including Leon Drolet of the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance—are outraged by the new tax. Drolet estimates this compromise may end up costing Michigan businesses $700 million. (This is after the Mackinac Center for Public Policy has suggested $1.4 billion in government spending cuts.)
The MTA is fighting back, however, and launching recall efforts against several state legislators who have voted for tax increases. In fact, two of the recall petitions have been approved and in the coming weeks, the MTA will be gathering signatures for the recalls of Robert Dean and Marie Donigan. If you live in Michigan, join the fight! Visit the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance website for more details.
Repeal Day? A day celebrating the freedom to drink? Well, alright then!
Yesterday marked the 74th anniversary of the end of Prohibition. Yes, 74 years ago, the 21st Amendment was signed into law (effectively repealing the 18th) bringing joy and merry into the bloodstreams of early 20th-century boozers everywhere. Ah, the freedom to drink alcohol openly and honestly, without fear, without guilt, without repercussions from a paternalistic government.
So, how did I celebrate Repeal Day? One would expect with a few drinks, right? Well, not before first taking care of business. TCB!
That's right. Last night, Richard and I and hundreds of other activists met up at Chicago Soccer (4839 N. Western Ave) for a community meeting-turned-rally to oppose the city's use of eminent domain in the Lincoln Square neighborhood. Affected parties spoke, sharing how their lives were being destroyed. Community members reinforced their message, bursting forth with related facts and anecdotes. Christina Walsh, Castle Coalition Coordinator for the Institute for Justice, reminded us of the most costless, most effective way out the tragic situation: "apply pressure to the city".
The crowd responded. Immediately. Passionately. And, most of all, spontaneously. Out of anger, out of concern, out of an overwhelming sense of injustice, 100 or so attendees marched the nine blocks to Alderman Gene Schulter's office (4287 N. Lincoln Ave).
When they got there, they demanded answers.
Protesting. Chanting. Networking. Clapping. A passion and dedication impervious to the most bone-chilling weather of the season. Hell, I even saw some fist pumping! Crazy, I know!
Curious onlookers stopped and witnessed the phenomenon: a community making its voice heard, emboldened, strengthened, ready for the next fight and confident in its ability to win.
The message to the powers-that-be was loud and clear last night: Hey City of Chicago! Make like prohibition and repeal your plans for eminent domain. NOW!
Now that would warrant a drink.
Those were some the chants last night at an impromptu protest outside of Chicago Alderman Gene Schulter's office following a community meeting, where residents supported business owners in their fight to keep their property.
Nic should have pictures online later today, but let me say that the turnout was amazing. In my estimation, there were about 300 people at the meeting, 100 of whom marched in the freezing weather to make their voices heard.
Check out our latest SamTV report below, and visit SaveLincolnSquare.com for the latest information on the fight for the right to own property. You can also view our previous SamTV report on this issue.
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
So, it is with great joy that I present to y'all a little composition of mine from "Elf Yourself".
Let Ted Kennedy, Al Franken, Hillary Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi brighten your day!
http://www.elfyourself.com/?id=1189469487
Sorry it's been a while since I've posted, but I've been dealing with some health issues - look forward to being back fighting for our citizen rights!!!
I wrote about veteran eminent domain activist Jim Roos a while back—and now, he’s in the news again.
He’s still fighting eminent domain abuse, of course, but now he’s got another battle on his hands: free speech.
If you read my previous piece (linked above), you may remember the mural Roos commissioned for the twenty-fifth property the city attempted to snatch from him, using eminent domain.
Well, as you can imagine, the city hasn’t been too pleased with this—they say it’s “too big, a nuisance that must be removed,” all under the pretense of a zoning violation.
Oh, please. It’s pretty obvious the city doesn’t like the message of the sign. Jim Roos agrees:
“I think if it said, ‘Go Cardinals,’ we wouldn't have any problems,” Roos told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
I think you’re right, Mr. Roos. Read more here.
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts can be a dirty thing, and no one knows that better than business owners in Lincoln Square, Chicago. So join me and the business owners whose property may soon be seized at an event tonight at Chicago Soccer.
Details are here. And check back here later this week for a follow-up SamTV report on the potential eminent domain abuse that could happen if city politicians approve the Lincoln Square TIF.
Ben Joravsky's written a lot about TIFs and their abuse. Read more here.
Total Comment(s): 0 comment | Permalink
It’s bad enough that elected officials are out of touch with citizens—it’s even worse that, in Pennsylvania, they’re using taxpayer funds to conduct partisan polling to find out what the public thinks.
Read about it here.
Law enforcement and health/safely enforcement officers in Indiana don't.
Check out this video of a property owner/citizen in Indiana who--egad!--doesn't want government agents onto his property without a court order. He cites the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reads:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
No warrant=not legal.
Total Comment(s): 10 comments | Permalink
Amid attempts by property rights foes/government planning advocates to put their own "property rights" measures in front of the people of California, supporters for the genuine article have gathered 1.1 million signatures.
Californians for Property Rights Protection submitted the signatures to California's secretary of state in order to qualify the initiative to appear on the ballot in 2008.
Some of the key provisions are:
- Private property may not be taken by eminent domain for private use under any circumstances (i.e. to build a shopping center, auto mall or industrial park).
- Property may be taken by eminent domain only for public use (i.e. freeway construction, parks, schools).
- If farmers or business owners are evicted by eminent domain, they would be entitled to compensation for temporary business losses, relocation expenses, business reestablishment costs and other reasonable expenses.
- Government may not set the price at which property owners sell or lease their property.
Here’s the latest from the “Pull up your pants! It’s the law” file: constitutional scholars say that bans on sagging pants “may not be lawful.”
Really. If it takes constitutional scholars to determine that the government dictating how people wear their clothes isn’t constitutional—this is common sense, folks—we are in big trouble.
Read more here.
