Monday, May 12, 2008

He's baaaaaack!

Of course I'm talking about Hering. How could I not comment on this?

Among the few people in Oregon who care about justice in land use matters, there had been an argument before the last general election about the effect of Measure 49. The proponents said the measure would “modify” Measure 37, the previous law on land use restrictions after someone had acquired a property. The opponents said that Measure 49 in effect canceled Measure 37.

Oh. Wait. He's mostly right, except for that part where he confuses "justice" with his (and only his) point of view on the issue. Never mind.

On the other hand, this part pretty much negates the fact that he took the high road in the rest of the editorial:

Neither the courts nor the lawyers in state government, including candidates now running for office, told voters ahead of time that with that measure, a bunch of people’s rights to divide or build a house on their own rural property were going to go up in smoke.

As the first commenter notes, this is total bullshit. Measure 49 does not completely eliminate that right, and Hering should know better than to confuse restricting and completely removing one's ability to build houses on agricultural land. In fact, he does know better, which means this is intentionally deceptive and dishonest, and better suited to a Heritage Foundation memo than a newspaper.

The other thing Hering's stance on this indicates is that he prioritizes individual choice over the collective good to a dangerous degree. I'd ask whether or not he's heard of the Tragedy of the Commons, but that's probably a little too highbrow for his taste.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.