That’s Elbert With An E

Hat tip to Delaware Venable for this YouTube video of a funny speech from the floor of the US House. I was surprised.

To update a story I posted earlier, the News Journal has an updated story on the Eminent Domain veto. They report:

Minner would not agree to be interviewed about her veto. But in a letter to state senators she released to the media, the governor wrote that the bill could restrict the state’s ability to get an easement on private property for beach preservation or other purposes and be more costly to taxpayers.

Hopefully the Legislature will see the light and override this veto. Call your representative Monday (that’s today) and let them know you’re not happy about this! And while you’re at it, don’t forget about the Planned Parenthood funding.

I guess mama knows best. From the News Journal:

Gov. Ruth Ann Minner announced today she is vetoing legislation that would have redefined “public use” in the eminent domain law and made it harder for government agencies to take private land. The Legislature passed Senate Bill 245 on June 12, after months of negotiations between parities involved in the issue.

This is just crazy.

Members of both chambers of the Legislature have said a new eminent domain law is a priority, and they suspect an 11th hour attempt to ensure a compromise is reached and signed by the governor before they adjourn Monday night.

It would be nice to see them just override her veto, but Delaware Watch reports:

Even though the measure passed both houses by overwhelming margins, it has been reported to Delaware Watch that Senate President Pro Tem Thurman… Adams has the policy that no veto by a Democratic Governor will be overturned while he dominates the state Senate.

And that’s a shame.

Once more from the News Journal:

Although SB 245 came partly as a response to the Riverfront squabble, it also was a reaction to the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of Kelo v. City of New London. In that case, the nation’s highest court ruled that the taking of private property as part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan was a permissible use of eminent domain because the public at large benefits from the redevelopment.

Funny thing is that the City of New London tore down the house and the development for which the house was removed has yet to happen:

…not much progress has been made in Fort Trumbull, leaving some wondering whether the homeowners were forced out for nothing.

Hit this link for SB 245. Hat tip to Delaware Liberal for the veto story. Hat tip to Newsbusters for the Kelo update.

I received an email from the Delaware Family Policy Council alerting their mailing list to some funding hidden in the Delaware’s budget for the new fiscal year:

…hidden in the Tobacco funding, is $132,600 of our money being given to Planned Parenthood, Delaware’s largest abortion provider!

They are urging residents opposed to this to “call your legislators and ask them to vote ‘NO’ on the budget, S.B. 300 (page 106 of the budget).”

I do wonder what Planned Parenthood provides in services that would be tobacco related. Maybe someone who knows can email me or comment.

Our representatives in southwestern Sussex County are Bob Venables and Biff Lee. Here is their contact information:

Senate District 21: Robert L. Venables, Sr.:
Office: (302)744-4298/Home:(302)875-9559/Robert.Venables@state.de.us
Representative District 40: Clifford G. “Biff” Lee:
Office:(302)744-4034/Home:(302)875-5119/biff.lee@state.de.us

While I am a technology guy, I would recommend calling as opposed to emailing, although one could choose to do both.

One additional note from this email:

Join us at Legislative Hall June 30th, this Monday at 5:30pm to show your opposition to Planned Parenthood! Please call Jordan Warfel at 302-***-**** when you arrive and he will meet you at the door with a DFPC “Say NO to Planned Parenthood” sticker and provide you with details of what to do next. (Be sure to bring your driver’s license or a form of identification if you do not have a license, no cameras permitted).

You can reach the Delaware Family Policy Council on the web at this link.

UPDATE: SB300 is at this link. Here’s what I found (numbers to the left are line numbers on that page):

1 This Act makes an appropriation to the Division of Community Health for Tobacco Fund Contractual
2 Services. Of that appropriation, funds are allocated as follows:
3 $3,374.2 Tobacco prevention through Community Based organizations
4 $370.4 E-Resources Program - Delaware Academy of Medicine
5 $222.2 Kent County/Sussex County Consumer Health Services - Delaware Academy of
6 Medicine
7 $331.0 Wesley College Nursing Program
8 $122.3 Polytech Adult Education Nursing Program
9 $144.0 Delaware Hospice
10 $132.6 Planned Parenthood of Delaware (emphasis mine)
11 $115.2 St. Francis Hospital
12 $75.0 Hepatitis B Vaccine
13 $60.3 American Lung Association - Asthma Project
14 $231.5 Child and Families First - Resource Mothers Program
15 $43.2 Kelly Heinz - Grundner Brain Tumor Foundation - Awareness Program
16 $27.8 Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Family Support Project - March of Dimes
17 $23.1 AIDS Delaware

That still doesn’t tell anyone what service they provide, outside of just saying they have be contracted for some services. If one were to guess that it is some tobacco education service or helping someone kick the habit, what guarantees do they have that the money is not being spent on something else?

There have been several posts on this site regarding our current gas prices. There has been a lot of hue and cry over the negative aspects of our dependence on foreign oil. The solutions proposed by the critics are simply develop alternate energies. Reality is that the alternative technologies are still futuristic at best. Why don’t we take advantage of the oil on our own real estate? 38 billion barrels of oil are in our own territory, but they are unaccessible because of restrictions put in place by our government. I’ve jumped on board the Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less campaign. Hit the link, sign the petition, and get involved. Let’s make this happen!

There is probably nothing to be added to the news about California’s Supreme Court overturning the will of the California people. What liberals can’t win in the ballot box they impose via the courts.

Californians passed Proposition 22 in March 2000, defining marriage as one man and one woman. This measure won with 61.4% of the vote. In real numbers, the spread between the yeas and nays was 1.7 million votes. That’s around two times the population of Delaware! The California Supreme Court said no to their decision.

Here are some widely varied stuff from around the internet.

James Dobson said in response to the decision:

“The will of the people has now arrogantly been declared null and void,” he said. “In so doing, the justices have undermined and endangered the basic building block of society, which has been honored and preserved in every nation on earth through most of human history.”

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins:

“The California Supreme Court assumed the powers of a legislative body by imposing same-sex ‘marriage.’

“This decision put marriage at risk all across the nation and again highlights the need for a Marriage Protection Amendment to the U.S. Constitution so that this divisive campaign for the oxymoron of ’same-sex marriage’ will be ended once and for all.”

From the decision:

…in contrast to earlier times, our state now recognizes that an individual’s capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual’s sexual orientation, and, more generally, that an individual’s sexual orientation — like a person’s race or gender — does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights.

and a reply from Outraged Richard:

Except for the fact that there are innumerable studies and psychological, philosophical, and religious writings to show that children not raised in a loving home of a married man and woman is detrimental to them.

More from the Outraged one:

The error of equating race and gender discrimination with sexual orientation discrimination is an exceptionally glaring one. Race and gender are genetically and biologically based standards that establish a human being, while sexual orientation, or more precisely, non-heterosexual sexual activity, is an extremely vague characteristic that has no immutable genetic or biological foundation.

An American Indian or a female can never stop being of that race or gender, and because those are integral unchanging human qualities there should be no discrimination against them because of it. In contrast, sexual activity, especially non-heterosexual activity, is an action that is performed, like hanging tinsel, and is subject to the same scrutiny that other acts are under—some of which have been declared unlawful.

Some pages of note: Hot Air | Prop 22 on Wikipedia | Citizen Link | Protect Marriage (CA)

I thought this news story was worth some comments. WBOC has a story on their site called “Delaware’s Political Landscape is Changing.” They point out recent shifts in voter registration:

Political observers say the landscape in Delaware is changing and elections officials say the number of democrats is growing in the first state.

It’s safe to say that most of those shifts come from some residents wanting to have an influence in the Democrat primary in September, where Markell and Carney are fighting it out for governor. Let’s see how many shift back to the Republicans in the fall after the primary. That might tell quite a bit.

Brad Bennett (D) is running against Rep. Donna Stone (R) in the fall. In the story it says:

[Bennett] said on the campaign trial he’s noticed people want a change in leadership.

“Basically a lot of them are upset about the direction Delaware has been heading the last few years. So yes they are looking for change,’ said Bennett.

If voters were looking for a change, they wouldn’t be voting for democrats, who have been running the state senate and governor’s mansion for quite a while. If you want change in the state, you’d toss out the moderates and liberals in both parties. They are the ones that have been driving us into the ground. You will never bring any change by putting more of them in power. They are the problem not the solution.

If the Republicans want to regain or at least maintain the level of leadership they have currently, here are some of my ideas.

• Republicans need to gather behind a unified platform, like a “Contract With Delaware”, and every candidate run with this in mind.
• They need to run away with fear the tendency to be simply The Other democrat Party. Be different. If you give voters a choice, they would probably vote for a real democrat instead of voting for a democrat in Republicans’ clothing, also known as a RINO. That issue is the one thing that would make Mike Castle vulnerable.

If voters really want change, they will never get it from the Dark Side… err, I mean the democrats. It will come from the Republicans, the Constitution Party, the Libertarians, or The Independent Party of Delaware.