|
| |
For Immediate
Release
Answering Questions
Vice Chair for
Kansas Libertarian Party Asks Important Questions
02/20/06
As we move closer to the November
Elections I find myself answering more and more questions from different
sources. I always welcome these questions and strive to answer them in a concise
manner. I keep my answers brief due to my time constraints but I urge anyone
that wishes me to expound on any topic to please email me and ask.
On 02/19/06 I received the
following email from Patrick Wilbur the Vice Chair of the Kansas Libertarian
Party:
I know that you will be receiving
many questionnaires over the next few months, but if you could take a few
minutes to respond to the quations below it would be much appreciated. Feel free
to offer any comments you feel appropriate. Thanks for your participation.
1. Would you support a constitutional amendment (such as the current HCR 5025)
that guarantees Kansans protection from eminent domain abuse? This amendment
would help restrict abuse by prohibiting private-to-private transfer of property
(unless the seller agrees to terms).
2. Would you support a Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR)? This legislation would
limit state spending to the rate of inflation and population growth. It would
allow for exceptions with the approval of Kansas voters.
3. In Rhode Island the House and Senate overrode the Governor's veto to become
the 11th state to legalize marijuana for medical purposes. Would you support,
block, or be neutral toward similar legislation in Kansas to allow persons with
serious and terminal illnesses to possess marijuana and marijuana extracts with
their physician's supervision?
Patrick Wilbur
Vice Chair - Kansas Libertarian Party
(785) 841-8801
wilbur45@sunflower.com
www.lpks.org
The following is my response to
his questions:
-
I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT ANY PRIVATE
PARTY SHOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE FROM ANOTHER PRIVATE PARTY THEIR PROPERTY UNDER
THE GUISE OF EMINENT DOMAIN. I DO HAVE SEVERAL PROBLEMS WITH THE WAY HCR
5025 IS WORDED IN ESSENCE SS1A: A fee simple title to private real
property may be taken only when necessary for the possession, occupation or
enjoyment of the land by the public at large, or by public agencies, or to
acquire real property to eliminate an immediate threat to public health or
safety. WHICH I FIND TOO BROAD IN IT'S TRANSLATION AND WOULD ALLOW A
LOOP HOLE FOR PRIVATE TRANSFER. ALSO SECTION C WHICH SETS A COMPENSATION FEE
OF NOT LESS THAN 150%. THIS PROVISION EFFECTIVELY LIMITS THE PRICE AND THE
BARGAINING POWER THAT A PROPERTY OWNER CAN ASK FOR THEIR PROPERTY. EXAMPLE:
IF THE OWNER REFUSES TO SELL FOR LESS THAN 5 TIMES THE PROPERTY VALUE THE
GOVERNING BODY CAN REJECT THE OFFER AND SETTLES AT ONE AND A HALF TIMES THE
VALUE. WE NEED TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF PROPERTY OWNERS BUT THIS BILL IS
BEING RUSHED THROUGH WITHOUT ENOUGH THOUGHT OR PROTECTIONS.
-
I DO NOT SUPPORT TABOR. IT DROVE
THE STATE OF COLORADO INTO A 3 BILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT! COLORADO HAS LOST
OVER 600,000 JOBS OVER THE PAST 11 YEARS UNDER TABOR AND HAS THE HIGHEST
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE OF ANY OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN STATES. TABOR WOULD HURT
KANSAS IN MORE WAYS THAN COULD POSSIBLY BE IMAGINED. THE REPRESENTATIVE HAS
THE TOUGH JOB OF DECIDING IF A TAX INCREASE IS NECESSARY. IT IS VERY
DIFFICULT TO GET THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WHY AN INCREASE MIGHT BE
NECESSARY NOT TO MENTION THE COST OF A SPECIAL VOTE. THAT IS WHY THE VOTERS
ELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO MAKE THOSE TOUGH DECISIONS. TABOR REMOVES THE JOB
OF THE REPRESENTATIVE AND I CAN PROMISE YOU THAT IF YOU ASK THE AVERAGE
VOTER TO CAST A BALLOT FOR A TAX INCREASE, NO MATTER WHAT THE CASE, THEY
WILL VOTE NO! WE NEED BETTER CONTROLS ON STATE SPENDING BUT TABOR IS NOT THE
WAY TO DO IT. THE STATE OF KANSAS IS A BUSINESS AND AS A BUSINESS WE NEED TO
DIVERSIFY AND FIND BETTER WAYS TO CREATE FUNDING FOR THE STATE
RATHER THAN TAX INCREASES.
-
I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AMAZED THAT
WHEN THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES TO DEALING WITH PAIN AND SUFFERING THERE ARE
ALWAYS THOSE WHO WANT TO BLOCK OR IGNORE THEM. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH
MEDICALLY SUPERVISED TREATMENTS UP TO AND INCLUDING USE OF MEDICALLY
PROCESSED AND PRESCRIBED HEMP TREATMENTS. SOMEONE RECENTLY ASKED ME ABOUT
AIDS AND THE TREATMENTS THAT THE FDA WILL NOT RELEASE AND MY ANSWER FOR THAT
WAS THE SAME ONE I JUST GAVE YOU. I FEEL IT IS REALLY QUITE SIMPLE; IF I AM
DYING WHAT HARM CAN A POSSIBLE EXPERIMENTAL TREATMENT DO ME. WHO KNOWS, IT
MIGHT BE THE CURE THAT SAVES MY LIFE.
-Jim George-
Democratic Candidate Kansas House
District 12
|
![[Company Logo Image]](images/pluribuslogo.jpg)
