Trust not enough for eminent domain

Editorials

Discussion

COMMENTING ON STORIES:

Welcome to our story comments feature. We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including the unpopular ones. We only ask that you keep your conversations clean, civil and on the topic of the story you are commenting on.

Coinciding with our websites redesign, we launched our new story comments feature through Disqus.

Disqus gives users the ability to log into our story comments feature so that they may be able to track their conversations, receive emails when their comments get a reply or to even have your comments update onto your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

For the time being, our story comments feature will continue to have the ability to post comments anonymously. We reserve the right to require registration in the future using your name and verified email address.

Not all comments are deemed printable. Some are disqualified at the newspaper’s discretion for a number of different reasons. Please follow our Online Rules of Conduct at all times.

RULES OF CONDUCT:

We reserve the right to remove comments that are unacceptable, to wit:

1. False and inacurate statements.
2. Personal attacks. Explicit name-calling.
3. Harassing, harmful, vulgar, obscene and defamatory language.
4. Threatening statements or statements that suggest violence.
5. Hate speech of any kind.
6. Intolerant comments on religion, race, age, gender, sexual preference or disabilities.
7. Accusations of criminal activity.
8. Content that is harmful to children and minors in any way.
9. References to any type of sexual activity and other private matters.
10. Random and inflammatory statements that are off topic.
11. Advertising of any kind.
12. Typing in all caps.

WE ENCOURAGE REASONABLE AND COURTEOUS COMMENTS THAT:

1. Create conversation on issues of interest and concern to fellow readers and local community members.
2. Express opinions and contrarian views.
3. Stimulate debate with respectful language.
4. Stay within the boundaries of these rules.

WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SUSPEND OR TERMINATE ACCESS FOR:

1. Violating any of these Online Rules of Conduct.
2. Deliberately disrupting discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or spam.
3. Misrepresentation of identity or impersonating another user.

WE WELCOME:

1. Flagging violations of these rules that you observe to our attention.

MONITORING:

We monitor comments regularly Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Approval of comments outside of this time (including weekends) will be sporadic.

comments powered by Disqus

August 16, 2012

Trust not enough for eminent domain

Anonymous Daily Star The Daily Star Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:31 PM EDT

The back-and-forth arguments involving the proposed Constitutional Pipeline could confuse anyone.

Especially anyone paying close attention.

Contradictory statements from the project's developers and opponents make it hard to determine who are the good guys and who are the bad guys.

Williams Partners, which holds a 75 percent stake in the $750 million enterprise, says that not one wisp of the natural gas the pipeline would carry would ever find its way anywhere overseas.

Critics, however, say that's a lot of _ well _ hot air, and that there will be ways in which the gas will wind up in places outside the United States.

Why this is all so important is that in order to build the pipeline, the developers would require the power of eminent domain.

Simply put, if your house happens to lie in the path of the project, they want to be able to make you accommodate it, even if you don't want to, citing in this case the routing of natural gas being in the national interest.

However, if the gas isn't going to heat American homes and is mainly for the financial benefit of the developers, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is going to have a big problem with approving the project.

Opponents say that if the pipeline has to be built, it would be best if it were to roughly follow the Interstate 88 corridor so as to avoid most populated areas.

The company, however, wants a more-direct route from drilling sites in Susquehanna County, Pa., to the town of Wright in Schoharie County that would affect about 1,000 property owners.

The company says it will file for FERC's approval of the project in January.

Williams Partners sent FERC a letter recently stating that it would never, ever feed liquefied natural gas (LNG) to any production facilities that would export the stuff.

Pipeline opponent Anne Marie Garti of East Meredith subsequently sent FERC a letter saying not to believe Williams Partners and that gas from the Constitution Pipeline could be mingled with that of other pipelines and then be exported.

"The developers) do not mention the eight pending applications to build LNG export facilities, or to convert existing import facilities to export. Once such facilities are built, or converted, the gas that would flow through the proposed Constitution Pipeline could be sent overseas."

So, if you're keeping score at home, folks, it basically comes down to whom FERC believes.

We remain skeptical that the proposed pipeline is more in the national interest than in the company's. The developers will have to do better than just say "trust us" before eminent domain can come close to being justified.