On June 9, 2007 Todd Epp says this about the TransCanda pipeline:
The Fed also notes the potential economic impact such a crude line could have for the region.
Yesterday Todd Epp slams me as he says this about the TransCanda pipeline:
And never mind that this law pre-dates the U.S. Supreme Court’s Kelo decision about the use of eminent domain for purely economic reasons by about 84 years.
Todd Epp needs to clarify his position, is big oil a purely capitalist enterprise, or is the industry a "public use" that is good for the common good of our Nation?
Epp also said this about the law that allows TransCanda to use eminent domain:
The law has been on the books since 1921 and recodified in 1939. Obviously at this time, South Dakota and its legislature were dominanted by godless, Communist, property-taking secular humanists who dreamed of taking (but paying fair market value for) the property of stout yeoman farmers like the Sibson clan for silly projects like telegraph and telephone lines and oh, yes, by the way, petroleum pipelines.
And of course, there’s never been any opportunity to amend the law once the Right thinking Republicans who have run this state for the last forty years have been in power.
Epp must have been asleep. The legislature did react. Because of the uproar over Kelo, the South Dakota legislature passed HB1080 in 2006. It is now South Dakota Codified laws, 11-7-22.1:
11-7-22.1. Acquisition of private property by eminent domain for certain uses prohibited. No county, municipality, or housing and redevelopment commission, as provided for in this chapter, may acquire private property by use of eminent domain:
(1) For transfer to any private person, nongovernmental entity, or other public-private business entity; or
(2) Primarily for enhancement of tax revenue.
Source: SL 2006, ch 66, § 1.
Note that the law was limited to "county, municipality, or housing and redevelopment commission". Nothing there that would stop the "State" to acquire private property and hand it over to "public-private business entity" for economic development reasons.
And Todd Epp should also take interest in what Bob Mercer reported yesterday in the Mitchell Daily Republic (not online):
When Mike Rounds ran for governor in 2002, about the only connections we noticed between the successful insurance businessman and energy policy was that his dad, Don, was a long-time lobbyist for the petroleum industry and Mike’s record as a legislator wasn’t exactly pro-ethanol.
Since his election, Gov. Rounds has used the power of his state agencies to raise South Dakota’s profile in the energy sector. The recent revelation that there could be built a Hyperion oil refinery in southeastern South Dakota is the biggest news yet.
So Todd Epp better rethink his position. I can't beleive his is defending Mike Rounds and the interests of big oil.
This so-called hard-cored Republican blogger does not agree with the Country Club Republicans using the "power of the State" to take money and property from the common folk and hand it over to business interests purely for economic development reasons because it increases the amount of taxes the government collects. This marriage of big government Democrat socialism and GOP capitalism is not what I consider "free-market" limited government. This is not what I consider traditional American principles.
