U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-10-2014, 04:47 PM
 
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
5,793 posts, read 10,627,597 times
Reputation: 3751

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now View Post
Agreed. (Should have been done back in 1930, when this was originally considered.) s[/url]
Grand projects are usually stymied by myopic, small minds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-10-2014, 05:33 PM
 
Location: LBC
4,155 posts, read 4,296,985 times
Reputation: 3528
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter View Post
Good presidents don't exercise power just because they can or have the authority. Good presidents seek feedback and counsel before making decisions. Good presidents let the process work before they exercise power.
Yeah, I'm sure Congress was going to take swift action on this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2014, 10:19 PM
 
1,714 posts, read 2,978,665 times
Reputation: 1125

President Obama Designates the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2014, 10:07 AM
 
Location: Corona del Mar & Coronado, CA
1,573 posts, read 1,120,859 times
Reputation: 1961
Quote:
Originally Posted by genjy View Post
Plenty of presidents have done it. One main purpose of the Antiquities Act is to quickly protect a landmark without grinding through the various levels of the government. I think your beef is with the Antiquities Act itself, not Obama...

List of National Monuments of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Have you actually read the Antiquities Act? Let me quote in part"

"[SIZE=2]to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States to be national monuments, and may reserve as a part thereof parcels of land, the limits of which in all cases shall be confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected: Provided, That when such objects are situated upon a tract covered by a bona fied unperfected claim or held in private ownership, the tract, or so much thereof as may be necessary for the proper care and management of the object, may be relinquished to the Government..."[/SIZE]

What are the historic landmarks, structures or historic or scientific objects being protected and then explain how 346,000 acres is the "smallest area compatible" with protecting the objects you name that meet the criteria of the law?

Please further explain what the imminent threat was necessitated the designation and why were there no public hearings in the area to solicit feedback?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2014, 10:09 AM
 
Location: Corona del Mar & Coronado, CA
1,573 posts, read 1,120,859 times
Reputation: 1961
Quote:
Originally Posted by nslander View Post
Yeah, I'm sure Congress was going to take swift action on this.
Where does it say action has to be swift on any bill or legislation? I prefer a slow, deliberate process where everyone has sufficient time to study the issue.

What was the urgency for the action?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2014, 12:21 PM
 
Location: LBC
4,155 posts, read 4,296,985 times
Reputation: 3528
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter View Post
Where does it say action has to be swift on any bill or legislation? I prefer a slow, deliberate process where everyone has sufficient time to study the issue.

What was the urgency for the action?
This action extended National Monument status to land that has been declared National Forrest since 1908. Is that slow and deliberate enough for you?

The Antiquities Act had enabled monument status be given to Devil's Tower and initially, the Grand Canyon. Take that up with Teddy Roosevelt. And the US Supreme Court: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed.../450/case.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2014, 05:07 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,567,366 times
Reputation: 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter View Post
What does the white house propaganda have to do with the price of tea in China? They also told us Benghazi was about a video, we could keep our doctors, Al-quaeda was dead and ISIS was the "JV team."

The bill was put before Congress four months ago and there was zero input from the public on this.
Mr. Hannity, is that you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2014, 05:28 PM
 
Location: Corona del Mar & Coronado, CA
1,573 posts, read 1,120,859 times
Reputation: 1961
Quote:
Originally Posted by nslander View Post
This action extended National Monument status to land that has been declared National Forrest since 1908. Is that slow and deliberate enough for you?

The Antiquities Act had enabled monument status be given to Devil's Tower and initially, the Grand Canyon. Take that up with Teddy Roosevelt. And the US Supreme Court: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed.../450/case.html
Have you read the Cameron v U.S. decision and do you understand it? The court specifically held that the AA of 1906 applied because of the Grand Canyon "is an object of unusual scientific interest" as noted in the proclamation. The court went on to explain the "unusual scientific interest" because of the GC being the "greatest eroded canyon in the United States."

So again, what historic landmark, historic and prehistoric structure, and other objects of historic or scientific interest exist in the San Gabriel Mountains as is required by the AA if 1906 to justify the presidential ukase to remove it from local control?

And what threat was there to the area that was so great and imminent that it required immediate, unilateral action?

Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
Mr. Hannity, is that you?
What that means is you can not deny that they lied when they told us Benghazi was about a video, that we could keep our doctors, that Al-quaeda was dead and ISIS was the "JV team."

It nice to try and misdirect away from the complete lack of credibility of this administration that can't keep their own stories straight day by day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2014, 07:44 PM
 
Location: LBC
4,155 posts, read 4,296,985 times
Reputation: 3528
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter View Post
Have you read the Cameron v U.S. decision and do you understand it? The court specifically held that the AA of 1906 applied because of the Grand Canyon "is an object of unusual scientific interest" as noted in the proclamation. The court went on to explain the "unusual scientific interest" because of the GC being the "greatest eroded canyon in the United States."

So again, what historic landmark, historic and prehistoric structure, and other objects of historic or scientific interest exist in the San Gabriel Mountains as is required by the AA if 1906 to justify the presidential ukase to remove it from local control?

And what threat was there to the area that was so great and imminent that it required immediate, unilateral action?

You are conveniently reading too much into that decision. This is what the Court held:

The defendants insist that the monument reserve should be disregarded on the ground that there was no authority for its creation. To this we cannot assent. The act under which the President proceeded empowered him to establish reserves embracing "objects of historic or scientific interest.”

The Court did NOT then proceed to establish objective criteria as to what is sufficiently historic or of sufficient scientific interest; it held the Grand Canyon clearly fell into the category of "scientific interest" that is subject that broad discretion. That case and subsequent decisions have refused to limit that discretion. The end.

While you're at it, you might as well go ahead and posthumously impeach Harry Truman for declaring Death Valley a National Monument because most folks at the time considered it a godforsaken wasteland.

Even though there is no judicial precedent limiting the President's authority here, I'll throw you a bone: the San Gabriels have provided the necessary locale for the confirmation of the existence of galaxies other than our own and the first accurate calculation of the speed of light, both of which are undeniably historic and of scientific interest. And there are others:

The San Gabriels: A Historical Guide to America's Newest National Monument | San Gabriel River | Departures | KCET

I thought Obamajam was going to stir enough bile to sustain y’all through the weekend, but I guess not. I’ve got problems with this President but so many of the complaints from certain of his most rabid critics are just beyond ridiculous. Conservative blogs and AM radio do not reflect critical mass of specific dissent; the reality is everybody else has just tuned them out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2014, 08:04 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
100 posts, read 95,594 times
Reputation: 190
Has this new plan made any provision for accessing these great outdoors that the president and Judy are opening up?

I lived for almost 30 years next to those mountains and they are hard to get to what with the lack of money to keep the roads in and out clear. San Dimas Canyon Road, Azusa Canyon, Glendora Mountain Road, and a half dozen smaller roads and truck trails have all been closed for years because the County of Los Angeles didn't have the dough to keep them up. Matter of fact, last time I looked, the only way in and out was Angeles Crest Highway on the back side running between La Canada and Phelan.


Hard to get to for all of those children of color the president wants to see up there running around, breathing clean air. Does he have a plan for that?

Probably just gonna give Judy the money and leave it to her. She'll know what to do with it.

Last edited by TheOldBear; 10-11-2014 at 08:17 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top