Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

96695-Thumbnail Image.jpg

Horizon - 1988 (July 26)

ContributorsPalacio, Phyllis (Host) / Bommersbach, Jana (Commentator) / McCain, John, 1936-2018 (Interviewee) / Public Broadcasting Service (Broadcaster)
Created1988-07-26
Description
Grand Canyon #2 Package (Bloom); Bommersbach's Byline #105 Package (Wong); Lottery Sales Package, Bill Henry In-Studio (Bloom). Segments on "The Grand Canyon: Clashing With Man, Part 2" - a special report on issues concerning the Grand Canyon (aircraft noise and safety), Bommersbach's Byline (will-call hunting), and how Arizona Lottery money…

Grand Canyon #2 Package (Bloom); Bommersbach's Byline #105 Package (Wong); Lottery Sales Package, Bill Henry In-Studio (Bloom). Segments on "The Grand Canyon: Clashing With Man, Part 2" - a special report on issues concerning the Grand Canyon (aircraft noise and safety), Bommersbach's Byline (will-call hunting), and how Arizona Lottery money is used by the state.
96307-Thumbnail Image.jpg

Horizon - 1986 (November 18)

ContributorsGrant, Michael, 1951- (Host) / Bommersbach, Jana (Commentator) / Lemen, Richard (Interviewee) / Witten, Mark L. (Mark Lee), 1953- (Interviewee) / Public Broadcasting Service (Broadcaster)
Created1986-11-18
DescriptionRuss Butcher In-Studio Interview (Taylor); Grand Canyon Package (Taylor); Bommersbach Byline #32: Arizona Weather Package (Durrenberger); Smokeout Package (D'Alli). Segments on issues with sightseeing flights over the Grand Canyon, Bommersbach's Byline (meteorology), and research on the connection between smoking and lung cancer.
42699-Thumbnail Image.jpg

Endangered Species Act and the Constitution

ContributorsBosselman, Fred P. (Author) / Pima County (Ariz.). County Administrator's Office (Publisher)
Created1999
Description
When we talk about Constitutional issues in relation to the Act, we are really asking is there a likelihood that it is unconstitutional in part or as applied to particular situations? The first risk is that some parts of it will be held to have been beyond the power of…

When we talk about Constitutional issues in relation to the Act, we are really asking is there a likelihood that it is unconstitutional in part or as applied to particular situations? The first risk is that some parts of it will be held to have been beyond the power of Congress to enact because they are not permissible exercises of the Interstate Commerce power. The second issue is the application of the Act to certain tracts of private property in a manner that would deprive that property of all beneficial use and constitute a taking of property. The third is that the mitigation demanded by the government as a condition for being allowed to take endangered species will exceed the power of government to demand because of a lack of a nexus in rough proportionality-- two tests that the Supreme Court has come up with in recent years.