This is not an endangered species debate. Instead, it is about the core differences here between those who seek to protect the rights of private property owners, including some longtime ranch families, and those who have little concern about government regulatory takings of property without compensation. So that is what this debate is about. Let us put an end to the taking. Let us keep our promises. Let us not betray rural America. If you were one of the 277 Members of this body who back on March 3, 1995, voted for the Private Property Protection Act, I urge you, I implore you, to reject the Dicks amendment, his motion to strike, and to stand firm for private property rights, stand firm for the small ranch families and rural America.
Frank Riggs: “This is not an endangered species debate. Instead, it is about the core differences here between those who seek to…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the importance of private property rights and opposing an amendment related to property protection.
Share
More from Frank Riggs
Martin Luther King, I think we can agree on this, he dreamed of the day, he spoke of the day, he preached of the day when all Americans would participate freely in the American dream. I cannot see how continuing institutionalized…
I just want to say, let us not get too hysterical about this debate. I want to quote Judson King, provost of the University of California, who acknowledged that the passage and the implementation of Proposition 209 has evened out diversity…
I believe affirmative action is outdated. Affirmative action, contrary to what several speakers have suggested, is no longer a black and white issue, certainly not in California, the largest, most diverse State in our Union. Because the…
The ruling effectively ended racial preferences in admissions to the University of Texas. So, what do university leaders do now, according to two articles, the San Antonio Express News and another Texas newspaper furnished to me by our…





