Many in the Wisconsin Senate want to relax the "restrictive regulations" on permits for iron mining. Others claim that those restrictions will ensure protection for the water and land near the proposed mine. "Updated:(Gogebic Abandons Mine Plans!) Wisconsin Mining Bill Sent Back To Committee", Eric Bau, Daily Kos.
A few years ago there was a big hullabaloo about a high-voltage line in Wisconsin. Many who lived in the area of the right-of-way were opposed. I don't remember what setback was required for the line, but many residents felt that it was too little. There were also strong complaints about property rights. The project went through and the line was built.
Now a company is trying to put wind turbines in several areas of Wisconsin. Some landowners object to the size of the setbacks and the amount of access to be granted the wind companies. Suddenly, the Wisconsin legislature is falling all over itself to increase the setbacks and other regulations on the wind companies.
What is so different about the third case that doesn't apply in the first two cases? That is, why do large companies' interests trump the rights of individual property owners in the first two cases, but the rights of individual property owners should be paramount in the third case.
I have my suspicions, but I would need a lot more documentation than I care to look for now.
