This site will look much better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |

« The Hollywood Touch | Main | The Greatest Ever? »
I felt sure that my first article under the "Moco Loco" category - The People's Republic of Montgomery County, Maryland - would have been about the deplorable Department of Liquor Control, and, believe me, I will talk of them often and harshly. But an article came out in the July 12th Washington Post that deserved comment.
First, no news is newsworthy to the Post unless they have managed to capture the human element, which usually consists of The Man sticking it to the helpless masses. Katherine Shaver didn't disappoint in her "In Md. Community, It's Fight or Flight" article. This piece was an add-on to the larger story of the ultra-notorious Intercounty Connector (ICC) route being chosen, a 40-year effort to build an 18 mile stretch of outer beltway that connects I-270 in Gaithersburg to I-95 just north of the DC beltway.
The fanatical moonbats staunchly oppose this construction because of the potential impact to the fragile and "pristine wilderness" of the Greater Washington DC suburbs. Presumably the ICC would be built on the carcasses of spotted wood owls and whatever other Endangered Species Act flavor of the month. Its opponents believe that the ICC's one billion dollar price tag would be better spent on public transportation rather than the facilitation of private automobiles (i.e. people should be reliant on government, not themselves.)
While the AtlasBlogged community, the quixotic purveyors of libertopia that we are, tends to be chilly towards eminent domain, it is remarkable that the project will only lay claim to 58 homes in a swath of land so close to our Nation's Capital. And to be fair to the spirit of caveat emptor, these homeowners knew at purchase time that dangling above their abodes hung the sword of Damocles with the letters "ICC" etched into the hilt. (I will refrain from making the comparison to homebuyers who get a terrific discount on their property adjacent to an airport and then complain to the FAA about noise abatement, lest I launch into a rant).
The real reasons that opponents to the ICC exist spring from the same fountainhead as most other environmental issues. They are already here, and do not want more people coming in and mucking up whatever scenery we have left. It's the same old story that will be played out time and time again throughout America. But this story has a human element too, and Shaver was all over it. Some of the comments she solicited follow, seemingly taken directly from the Environmentalist Handbook for Fighting The Man:
"I saw the master plan, and my property was sitting in the way of the highway," Mahabare, 32 said." [The sinister words "master plan" are used throughout, check]
"My God, I almost started crying. It hurts so bad. It's really sad what they're doing. It affects all the children. They grow up here." [Mention the children, check.]
"We watch TV there," said Rina Claytor, 47, pointing to her family room, where the windows that now afford a view of the woods could soon face a highway. "We might as well live along a railroad track if that happens." [I guess this means that "Survivor: Maryland" is pretty much out of the question, now. Get in Joni Mitchell reference], check.]
Black said she loves the wooded view from her kitchen and dining room windows, especially in winter when the snow and ice cling to the trees. She wonders what will happen to the deer, rabbits, and foxes she sees scampering about. [Make reference to endangered creatures, such as deer, rabbits, foxes, and - thanks to global warming - snow, ice, and trees. Check.
And my favorite,
Gatti, who is on the waiting list for a kidney transplant, said she worries how the traffic pollution would affect her asthma and her 2 1/2-year-old son's breathing problems. [Get in another child reference, bonus points awarded for ill children. Check and check.]
I wonder which side of this issue the Washington Post falls? Certainly this human tragedy trumps any highway construction that has been in the works for four decades, despite any preordained knowledge. And what about the children?
For the record, the ICC is being built in my backyard in Derwood. And me and my asthma think it's great. Montgomery County has been anti-business, anti-development, anti-everything for far too long [compare Northern Virginia to Montgomery County, which had a 10+ year head start]. Aside from having an easier access to Baltimore, the ICC will mean more businesses, more homes, and more jobs. And with a little bit of luck, the new Wal-Marts will drive out the anti-progressive leftists.
The ICC opponents will have to relocate to areas of pristine, virgin, hinterland, like the backwoods of Boyds or the frontier of Frederick.
Addendum: At least it's nice to see the Washington Post remaining consistent in their inconsistency. Naturally they're in favor of eminent domain when it favors government expansionism: "[Regarding New London, CT] However, in a city badly needing economic revitalization, perhaps the city's action was defensible."
ATLAS:
How interesting this particular subject is to me since I sat in a discussion this morning in an Anne Arundel County business organization where we touched on the Eminent Domain issue.
First: Does our news service do us justice when they are only printing the "sensationalism" or emotional driven articles?
Why does everything out of the Washington Post have to be so "Paris Hilton" like?
How many people truly understood the recent Supreme Court decision? How many actually read the decision?
The court said, "The city's proposed disposition of petitioner's property qualifies as a "public use within the meaning of the Takings Clause"
In addition, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote. "Promoting economic development is a traditional and long-accepted function of government"
He also wrote, "States were free to impose greater limits on condemnation." The court was clear that there are standards and that the public-use requirement is a real requirement. New London HAD followed the detailed process before settling on the plan. If states want to change their plans, then they can do it. New London had followed the Conneticut plan.
So here we are in 2005, and the ICC which was on the drawing board since at least 1968 when my parents first bought their property in Montgomery County, is being considered a "taking" by some.
I believe that the government has done its due diligence by notifying the public about this project and that some people need to take responsibility for the decisions they made to buy the properties within this area. For god's sakes, it has been 40 years.
How many people have to die on the Washington DC beltway before these people "get it?"
Although Sandra Day O'Connor's dire warning "the specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing a Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory" is a bit melodramatic, perhaps this issue might incite the average citizen to actually get involved with some of these issues.
There is nothing like a good debate to get things really moving.
LASS,SM
Posted by: LASS at July 20, 2005 9:28 PM