To the left, right and center. Your opinions please.

I did read the article. There is more then one issue to address. I have positive feelings for eminent domain (ED)if in fact ED does benefit the whole but only after adequate compensation. Private companies should have a whole extra level of inspection for the reason and amount of pay.

Very strict standards must exist for ED.

What is adequate compensation? I do not know but we know it when we see it.

The article suggests that we do not know the whole story. 80% accepted company offer? hmmm, need more information there and 20% want to fight. Government should not get involved with a private company buying land for their business. Energy MIGHT be a different category... not certain of this but just a thought.???

what are your thoughts?

Two thoughts really. First, the company claims 80% acceptance, then turns around and files ED on 50% of the parcels it wants. Someone needs to brush up on their math skills.

Second, as an AMERICAN CITIZEN I AM OUTRAGED!!!!

I understand completely. would not disagree with you on any issue. The math is a problem. I assumed it was 20% but could be wrong and we will never know? Those kinds of math problems indicate poorly written story and facts might not be right. again, lots more to the story then we know from the article.

I always thought like you about ED but recently have changed my mind (position) trying to get the 144,000 acres of Idaho state land that is not accessible because it is landlocked. As Idaho citizens there are 144,000 acres that we are not allowed to set foot on because it is landlocked. My position is to sell this land and get it on the tax roles or use ED to open access. This issue has changed my mind.

I did a little math on my own (40 years of engineering related work) and if I read the article right, the permanent easment that they are talking about is 36 miles long and 50 feet wide. (36 miles times 5280 feet per mile times 50 feet in width divided by 43,560 square feet per acre) or about 218 Acres of ground.

Half of that is what the article says that the company has filed ED actions for, so lets say 120 acres just for the sake of discussion.

By now, this project has made it through all of the 1000s of environmental restrictions, historical restrictions, and countelss other RESTRICTIONS in order to get approval from FERC. And FERC is one of the toughest regulatory agencies in the entire WORLD.

To engineer a 36 mile project that uses only 220 acres of property and not one single person has to move out of their home is well, ONLY in America.

Me and this new computer are NOT getting along.

I touched something that removed the opinion Roy asked for, so here goes again.

Since the proposed pipeline is solely on American soil and will serve to deliver AMERICAN natural gas to EXISTING (at least as I understand it) natural gas distribution facitlities that provide energy to electrical generation facilities, public schools and homes in a tri-state area, the use of Emminent Domain in this case IS in the BEST interest of our nation.

IF the volume of gas in this deposit is as large as estimated, it should also curb our dependency on foriegn energy producers, reduce the atmospheric pollutants belched out by many coal-fired plants in the region and maybe even save the lives of a few miners that work inside the earth.

Buckshot, I'm not sure if your asking for a response, so I will hold my tongue for now.

Off topic, sorry but help to wh67. you are probably on a laptop. a little button near finger pad will disable your pad untill you are done typing... then enable it again when you are finished . A pain but better then loosing everything all the time.

Roy: The way I see it is these private land owners are putting a huge roadblock in our quest to become energy independent. It's a private company, trying create new jobs and they offered these folks a fair price for the use of the land. I trust this company to do the right thing by protecting the land they need to get the job done. If it was the US Government, that would be a whole different issue.

Bazookman: So, what ever happened to private industry policing themselves? No government regulation is a good regulation? The free market rules? Unless...well it perceived to be an act of corporate communism as in this case.

Basically I threw out my comment to point out that blanket statements like "the free market works and government shouldn't interfere or regulate" can sometimes come back to haunt some people. Obviously in the related story, there is some government involvement and isn't quite apples to apples.

IMO...this company is doing some/most of the land owners wrong, wrong, wrong.

And there are people out there that think the XL Pipeline won't run into these types of abuses? Really, what could go wrong with a series of 1,000 mile pipelines as it crosses this country from north to south?

Thanks Bob, but the little computer is a tablet (smart phone minus the phone part)and is not American made .... a present from Mrs. Claus, so I can't complain, right? :-{

And the hard truth is that it might work better if I had followed the instructions and tried their way first.....

Gotta love technology I guess

Hey Warren, when all else fails read the instructions if they are in English that can be understood.

Lockheed Martin Corp.

Northrop Grumman

Boeing Co.

Raytheon Co.

General Dynamics Corp.

Science Applications International Corp.

Hewlett-Packard Co.

Dell Inc.

Verizon Communications Inc.

IBM Corp.

Honeywell International Inc.

Rockwell Collins Inc.

Sprint Corp.

General Electric Co.

AT&T Corp.

Xerox Corp.

Cubic Corp.

Oracle Corp.

Teledyne Technologies Inc.

Guess what the above list is? Just some companies that are in bed with the US Government.

Buckshot, I'm not trying to start an argument, but I feel it's only fair if one is going to use a quote, use the whole thing.

"Once the government becomes involved, this is what happens. Because you lose that leverage,"

How does our government continue to function without having any connection to the private sector. Interesting scenario if you ask me. Privatize the military, our education system, roads and bridges, border protection, police, the intelligence community, the space program and many more industries?

Now I speak. Buckshot, we are in complete agreement in regards to companies that ave undue influence over our government.

Buckshot sir, I feel I owe you an apology. Wen speaking of the private sector, I have taken a blunderbuss approach. I lumped the small, the medium, and the super large into one group, and that was wrong. Very wrong. For most of my life I have worked for companies that would fall into the small category, 100 employees or less. For the most part I have been treated fairly. I worked for one medium sized company, 100-500 employees. There again I was treated very fairly. However, after that company was acquired by Tyco International, my opinion of that company changed drastically. We were promised that there would be no structural changes to the company. Two years later my job disappeared to India. Two years later, the entire manufacturing aspect of that company disappeared to Asia. It wasn't that they weren't making money, it was the fact that they weren't making what they considered enough money. Then when the excess of Dennis Kozlowski came to light, well let's put it this way. When I thought of that company it felt like I had a turd in my mouth.

I more than understand that small and medium sized businesses are the economic growth engine of this economy. I also understand that a healthy manufacturing sector is vital to the economy. All that being said, that manufacturing sector must also treat and pay it's employees fairly.

I hope this gets us off to a better new start.

I can see your point quite well. And as I said on Mikes blog, for the sins of the few, the many pay.

You have a good night also.

Roy

Buckshot, sir, where do you stand on the government and the environment? I think I understand Mike's stand, not that I agree though. Oh, by the way, I'm not talking about the things that I'm sure you and I would agree are frivolous, but just the basics. Clean air and clean water.

Fair enough both Buckshot and CJW, but still the situation still needs to be addressed. Who should be in charge of protecting the environment? OUR AIR AND WATER.

Morning CJW. :)

So now we have people who state as fact, there is a large group of US companies that have too much power over or exert undue influence over the US Government. And these same people also seem to indicate the US government needs to curtail business dealings with these companies except when it comes to certain projects? I am confused. Are these people saying corruption is just fine when it comes to national defense, border patrol, the CIA, and our nation roads and bridges?

The US Space Program is another one of those things that confuse me. Tea Party harden conservatives want to reign in government spending but "only with some programs". I'm told by these same conservatives that private enterprise can and will do a much better job in almost every program this country can dream up. But when President Obama says "the people" can no longer fund the entire space program and proposes partial privatization, he's labeled as the Space Program killer. So again we have some people who speak out of both sides of their mouth. Is encouraging private enterprise to enter the US Space Program at a $1 billion level for 5 years bad or good even if these companies are exerting undue influence over this country?

The US and/or State sponsored Education System? There are some who say the privatization of our education system is the best way to go. I say, heck yeah. This is the only way to proceed. But to truly privative this system we need to abolish the US and all State Departments of Education. Smaller government is always better, right? Without these departments, our governments should also cut all education related taxes. Private enterprise will no doubt be more efficient, create more jobs and add to the tax base. Then parents and students could go out and buy the best education they could afford. If only Congress understood how this would put the US on the fast track to the best educated country in the world.

I CANNOT GO ALONG WITH COMPLETE PRIVITIZATION OF OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM.THAT WILL LEAD BACK TO SEGREGATED SCHOOLS.,to include the poor remaining poor because of education and that includes all the poor. NO way.THAT WILL CREATE A STRANGULHOLD ON EXCLUSION.

BUCKSHOT ....THE PROOF IS IN THE PAST AND THE WAY THE SYSTEM WAS ADMINISTERED IN ANY STATE THAT PUSHED PRIVATIZING EDUCATION....iT happens right here in idaho the districts that have plenty of funds through property taxes have much better schools than do the one with a lower tax base so the realty is....If you can afford a rich education that is what you get if you have no money tell me how you pay for education of ANY SORT FOR the children.....I AM LISTENING ......AND IF YOU NOTICED I STATED ALL POOR .SEGREGATED SCHOOLS ARE NOT A THING OF THE PAST AS DEMONStRATED IN MISSOURI.I dont care wether you like me bringing it up you are the one that reacted.DO you have a problem with the fact that money IS a means of exsclusion?????? Money is the difference between HARVARD AND BOISE STATE...no matter what your grades. ....if you havnt graduated from this school or that then you are not the same as.THAT IS RIGHT NOW, TODAY!!!!!.MY ELDEST SON COULD ATTEST TO THAT.AND HE HOLDS ONE OF THOSE PRESTIGES DEGREES........COST ......A BUNCH.

MAYBE YOU SHOULD CHECK THE DATA BUCKSHOT....SOMWHERE ALONG THE LINE I BELIEVE YOU THINK THIS IS A PERFECT NATION. IT IS NOT, AND NEITHER IS IT COLOR BLIND. I WISH IT WERE AND WE DO DISCIMINATE AGAINST THE POOR AND YOU KNOW IT.If you want to control or keep people down keep them uneducated you know that also.

I dont bring up race every single issue but I will bring it up were it appliesd and it does here like it or not.YOU HAVE NO PROOF IT WONT,WE DO HAVE PLENTY OF EVIDENCE TO SAY IT IS LIKELY MORE THAN I CARE TO THINK ABOUT.I AM BLACK AND IF YOU DONT WANT TO HEAR IT FROM A BLACK PERSPECTIVE DONT LISTEN.I AM BUT ONE PERSON YOU WANT SOMEBODY TO SAY SOMETHING DIFFERENT GO FIND THEM,IT PROBALLY WONT CHANGE MY MIND.

I am not talking about college I am talking about primary education that prepares you for college....please stop trying to twist what I am saying....PRIMARY EDUCATION THAT PREPARES YOU TO BE A PRODUCTIVE CITIZEN,K1-K12....THAT IS THE FOUNDATION OF OUR CHILDREN.....THEY DONT GET IT THERE THEY ARE DOOMED AND YOU KNOW THAT AND SO DO I.

I NEVER SAID COLLEGE WAS A RIGHT WERE DID YOU GET THAT FROM????????That scenario of schools even goes to k-1 thru k-12....my son attended Brooklyn Technical Institute H.S. entrance exam is REQUIRED.WITHOUT A FIRM BASE HE COULDNT HAVE GOT THERE .....THAT IS THE POINT.Maybe some dont realize were learning starts but I know were it starts AND it does require parental involvment no question but it also requires a foundation,fundamentals per se.Put it this way the best athletes in the world have the best basic athletic skills,that is what they built on.WE can cheat them young but we as a society pay for it later........

BUCKSHOTT.....I AM GOING TO ASK THIS........ARE YOU IMPLYING THAT I AM SITTING HOME WAITING ON A WELFARE CHECK?????? Is that what you are saying???

ZOOK HOME SCHOOLING HAS MERIT...I think the problem is, one income housholds dont cut it in the enviroment we live in.I FEEL THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAN WORK AND DO. THE ADMINISTRATORS DONT.The goals of the public school can be met and should be,but it also requires parental involvement.The schools are not there to be a glorified day care.

Money is and exclusionary factor,if you think it's not try and do without it.

BUCKSHOT I am getting real tired of your implications of"YOU HAVE TO TRULY FIGHT FOR WHAT YOU WANT IN THIS LIFE" JUST WHO IN THE HECK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE TALKING TO AND "stop asking people to do for you and do for yourself'" have I miscommunicated my background here or do you just figure you can imply that I come from a welfare background and it will be ok???????THAT I AM SITTING SOMWHERE WAITING ON A WELFARE CHECK. I GET THE IMPRESSION THAT IS WHAT YOU THINK....AM I WRONG?????????let me know before I go any farther.I AM GETTING REAL TIRED OF YOUR IMPLIED INSULTS...MY FAMILY BACKGROUND IS WELL DOCUMENTED AND IT WILL PROBALLY BASED ON YOUR INSINUATIONS KNOCK YOUR SOCKS OFF.....

Well Buckshot61 I'm glad you asked why I'm confused by your stand on some issues.

So first I make a few assumptions so as not to put words in your mouth:

1. You believe there is a large group of companies that exert undue influence on the US indicating there is widespread corporate corruption.

2. You believe new rules, laws and/or regulations are not needed as the present ones are more than sufficient. It's just our government doesn't enforce the laws already in effect.

3. You state as fact "The less our gov't. had to do with the private sector, the less corruption, influence, and outright bribery we'd have."

So why am I confused?

1. You seem to indicate the same companies that exert undue influence on our government should continue get military and other very large contacts even though, as you state, the less our gov't. had to do with the private sector, the less corruption, influence, and outright bribery we'd have.". So the choice is all yours.

- Do you want the US to enforce the law (bribery?) or do you want to just look the other way?

- Do you want less government/private enterprise involvement or not?

Seems to me you cannot have it both ways. Explain your stance on this for me so I'm no longer confused.

2. You state as fact that President Obama abandoned the space program. But isn't abandoning and eliminating government programs a basis philosophy of you and the tea party? Wouldn't this save a few dollars? And did President Obama really abandon the space program as you stated?

- I have absolutely no problem with the tea party and you wanting the government to spend less. I agree that it needs to be done. I also believe no program should be safe other than Social Security (for selfish reasons). But apparently you would take the military, roads and bridges, border protection, police, the intelligence community off the cutting table.

I just see too many contradictions in your stand on issues. And these contradictions as you wrote them tend to confuse me.

Morning Buckshot. I do have one point that I think needs to be made here as far as the proper role of government. This also touches on your comments on companies bribing our elected officials, although these bribes are considered campaign donations.

The Glass-Steagall act was passed as a result of the Great Depression and worked quite well. Sen. Phil Gram R. Tx. received 4.6 million from the Finance, Insurance and Real Estate sector prior to him slipping a 266 page amendment into an omnibus pending bill that needed to be passed. Many consider this repeal to be at the heart of the meltdown we recently went through.

The government let Lehman Bros. fail and we saw the effect on the world markets. Had Glass-Steagall not been repealed, there may not have been banks too big to fail.

I write this as an indictment of those who have actively sought to buy our government.

According to the article I read, Enron also had it's fingers in this calamity, The repeal that is.

BUCKSHOT.....When you use the word YOU that is the 1st person is it not???? WHEN YOU SAY THERE ARE PEOPLE OR SPEAK IN THE 3RD PERSON IT IS NOT PERSONAL. I do know the difference and so do you.I am the only person on here you do that to.....MAYBE THIS WILL HELP US GET ON EVEN KEEL.FIRST PERSON IS PERSONAL.......YES?

GLASS/STEAGAL....NOW THERE IS A FIASCO NOBODY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT.....we have been there on the blog......one act tears the house down,all for the love of money amazing aint it.????? LATTER

Now that things have seemingly run amuck, but that's OK,here are my thoughts on the subject.

My, my. Where do I start? Eminent domain by an elected vs appointed government agency, this I can possibly see since the government can be unelected. (Like that would ever happen) Eminent domain by an appointed government agency? The claim can be made that it is for the greater good and usually is made by the government for road projects. The needs of the many vs the wants of the few. Socialist and communistic sounding without a doubt, I think. The argument can always be made that it would fall under the preamble of the Constitution. Promote the General Welfare. Was eminent domain meant to be included? It sounds like a valid argument.

Eminent domain by something like a redevelopment agency to provide property to private companies in order to increase the tax rolls has been done and has been ruled legal. This in my not so humble opinion is flat out theft!

Eminent domain given to the private sector? There are words for that, but I don't want this blog killed. Even if you buy the greater good, ie; energy independence, there is no guarantee that the gas moved through this pipeline will not end up being sold overseas. So much for the greater good argument. Dictating that not one cubic foot of gas moved through that pipeline be solid overseas will draw cries of Foul from the private sector.

That the pipeline has to go through someones property is a given, although transit through public lands must be the first choice. I for one would fight to my dying breath to stop it from going through my property given what I know of pipelines like this one, and what the property owners have to endure when such a pipeline transits their land. You may hold title, but you have lost almost all control of your land. Want to cultivate and plant over that pipeline, call and ask permission. Pipelines need to be checked for corrosion.

When they feel the need, they will come and dig it up to check it. Pipelines heave, they need to be re-buried. They will come in and dig it up and re-bury it. Got something planted over it? Tough.

One last thought, how many of you would enjoy having a 1200PSI BOMB anywhere near you? Anyone remember San Bruno, Ca.?

Buckshot, I'm not picking on the whole private sector, just the crooked ones.

That's for another blog.