Nussle changes position on local control

[Debi]

wonder who got to him?


For it:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060121/NEWS09/601210335&SearchID=73233540160374

Candidate Nussle mentions local input on Iowa hog lots
But the Republican says the state should have the final word.

U.S. Rep. Jim Nussle, a Manchester Republican, spoke Friday in favor of local communities having a say in where hog lots are located, although he said the state should continue to have ultimate control.

"The standard has to be there for everyone so it's predictable," Nussle said. "But I do think local siting has been much more successful because I think there is a nuance to that that the state doesn't recognize as easily as the locals do about where the siting should actually occur."

<snip>


Against it:

http://www.wcfcourier.com/articles/2006/01/23/news/regional/doc43d513eca7e42816888665.txt

Nussle clarifies factory farms stance

OELWEIN (AP) — Rep. Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, has clarified his position on factory farms and input from local governments.

The candidate for governor surprised many people on Friday when he said during a taping of the Iowa Public Television program “Iowa Press” that local governments should have a say in where factory farms are located.

<snip>

“Local supervisors should have input,” he said, “but not veto power on siting decisions because they know the territory.”

[Critters2]

1. This is good

not good enough, but good. Having lived in Wright County, I feel strongly that county boards should make these decisions. Everyone (and I do mean EVERYONE)I know in Wright County would shut down all the CAFOs tomorrow, if they had the right to govern their own county!

[rurallib]

2. Sounds like he leaves himself an opening

with that 'not veto power' statement. Besides, as with all republicans, what he says now has nothing to do with what he really means to do. These speeches and promises are only meant for one thing: to get votes. They have no value once a republican is elected.

[Broke Dad]

3. One of two things happened

One of two things happened.

Either Nussle was not adequately briefed on the issue of "local control" from Republican Senate co-leader Stew Iverson and went with what sounded logical on Iowa Press, or . . .

the Iowa Select and other big corporate hog owners had not kicked enough $$$ into the Nussle campaign and he was letting them know that they had to raise their bid if they wanted another friend in Terrace Hill after January 2007.

I see the same deal with the ethanol mandate. Nussle either isn't fully aware of the history in the Legislature, or needs to shake down the petroleum marketers for more dollars than the Iowa Corn Growers. For all I know, Nussle's playing both sides for money and will line up with the high bidder if he is elected Governor. Who best to bring the Washington professional level of sleaze to state politics than the best Iowa sleaze money player in Washington????? (Okay, maybe he is second to Grassley, but Grassley pretends his vote is not for sale. He just does what the White House tells him - Sit boy, sit, or Bark boy, bark!!)

[CornField]

4. Why is it that...

When a Republican changes a position the media calls it "clarifying," but when a Democratic politician does it they call it a switch or flip?

[Wapsie B]

5. For one thing Democrats have been way too polite to call the repugs on it.

It's the same type of hypocritical spin that says when a Dem says something they're whining but when a repug starts frothing at the mouth they're having a deep political discussion.