Eminent Domain Abuse Skyrocketing

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 7:30 am

This is from The Liberator Online
======================================================
GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS, UNBELIEVABLE NEWS

by James W. Harris

One Year After Kelo: Eminent Domain Abuse Skyrocketing

Friday, June 23, marks the one-year anniversary of the Supreme Court's notorious Kelo v. City of New London decision. That decision, one of the most denounced in the Court's history, allows local governments to seize homes and businesses through eminent domain and give that property to private businesses.

In Kelo, the Supreme Court ruled that the *mere possibility* that a different use of the property might generate more taxes or jobs was sufficient reason for seizure.

One year later, has eminent domain abuse gotten worse, as some critics predicted?

Yes, says the libertarian Institute for Justice, which fought the Kelo case all the way to the Supreme Court. Much worse.

Last year more than 5,700 homes, businesses, churches, and other properties nationwide were threatened or seized with eminent domain for private development. And that may be only a fraction of the cases; statistics are very difficult to come by.

This number is an astonishing increase. It is more than half of the total number of known cases for fully *five years* prior to the Supreme Court ruling. Clearly, Kelo has been a green light for such seizures.

According to a new report from the Institute for Justice, \"The Kelo decision emboldened officials and developers, who started new projects, moved existing ones forward, and, especially, threatened and filed condemnation actions. ...[C]ities are pushing out motels for commercial development and replacing small businesses with upscale hotels. Homes are being replaced by shopping malls, but the stronger trend has been the replacement of middle-class residences for other, more upscale ones. Agricultural land has been taken for still more retail development.\"

One encouraging sign is that many states, responding to the demands of outraged citizens, have passed laws limiting or prohibiting Kelo-type eminent domain. Twenty-five states (out of the 45 that had legislative sessions this year) have enacted legislation curbing the abuse of eminent domain. Three more states passed bills now waiting signatures by governors.

Some of the bills offer less protection than others, and many are flawed in some ways, but this is a remarkable response in so short a time.

Still, that leaves huge numbers of Americans utterly unprotected from the evil alliance of greedy businesses and big government. Notes the Institute for Justice: \"That's all the more reason why Congress needs to pass legislation preventing the use of federal economic development funds to those state and local agencies that use eminent domain for private commercial development.\"

Currently, a bill that would do just that -- the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005 (HR 4128) -- is stalled in the U.S. Senate. It passed the House by a vote of 376-38 in November 2005.

The Institute for Justice has formed an organization, The Castle Coalition, to inform the public and fight for reform on this issue. The Castle Coalition defines itself as \"a nationwide network of home and small business owners that uses activism to fight the private-to-private transfer of property by the government through the use of its eminent domain power.\"

The Castle Coalition Web site has a wealth of information on what's going on, by state and nationally.

(Source: http://www.castlecoalition.org/index.html )

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:13 am

If I didn't know it was happening I would laugh at anyone who suggested the Supremes would allow private to private siezure of property simply so a city could create increased tax revenue off of the siezed property!!
It's like I woke up in Bizzaro World or something!

People like to whine about the rightwing feeding the military industrial complex etc. etc. where the hell is the outrage on this?!?! This is so much more outrageous than a no bid contract going to a campaign friendly contractor! This is government really gone bad and yet no one seems to care, probably becasue niether side of the two party system can seem to fix the blame on the other party so the sheeple just sit around unaware that they are supposed to be pissed off....so sad.
It's like americans don't really care that government is screwing them at all, they only care when their chosen party isn't in control of the rape!!!

Dedman · Post by **Dedman** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:06 am

Will Robinson wrote:It's like americans don't really care that government is screwing them at all, they only care when their chosen party isn't in control of the rape!!!

Will wins the cookie.

Anyone know what happened to the developer who tried to go after one of the Supremes houses right after that decision?

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:21 am

First attempt was turned down by the city. They are still active though:
http://www.freestarmedia.com/

I've sworn that if they ever get it to pass, I WILL take the family there for a vacation and spend money.

BUT, it really doesn't look likely to succeed. See wikipedia for more details.

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:39 am

Wow, the Wiki article on the Kelo decision makes for some fascinating reading. Especially since it seems it was the liberal wing of the court that voted in favor of the robber baron corporations to take over your property.

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:07 pm

Currently, a bill that would do just that -- the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005 (HR 4128)

Simply another way of suggesting the constitution is not sufficiant enough to protect us.
We already have \"property rights protection\", it's called the fifth- ammendment, which states: \"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.\"
Public use is very different than public benefit.

One day they're gonna take someone's land that isn't willing to play by the rules, why should they? The government doesn't.

Birdseye · Post by **Birdseye** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:37 pm

I can't think of anything worse as a citizen to happen to you -- you're happily owning the business or home, and someone takes the land from you even though you don't want to move. Ugh.

When that kelo case first happened, I knew it was the start of something bad and sad.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was a liberal judge or panel, those words don't mean much to me. Republicrats don't serve the interest of the people, just themselves.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:20 pm

dissent wrote:Wow, the Wiki article on the Kelo decision makes for some fascinating reading. Especially since it seems it was the liberal wing of the court that voted in favor of the robber baron corporations to take over your property.

thats what the left wants, socialism. ironically the only news agency I even heard report about this is Fox news, Hannity and Combs, they make regular reports on the imminent domain abuse

Genghis · Post by **Genghis** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:41 am

CUDA wrote:
dissent wrote:Wow, the Wiki article on the Kelo decision makes for some fascinating reading.
ironically the only news agency I even heard report about this is Fox news, Hannity and Combs, they make regular reports on the imminent domain abuse

Fox is the only place you heard about the Kelo decision?

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 12:27 pm

CUDA wrote:ironically the only news agency I even heard report about this is Fox news, Hannity and Combs, they make regular reports on the imminent domain abuse

Of course, since we all know that "Hannity and Colmes" is fair and balanced and that Colmes holds just as much weight on the show as Hannity, there's a 50% chance that it was Colmes' idea.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:14 pm

Genghis wrote:
CUDA wrote:
dissent wrote:Wow, the Wiki article on the Kelo decision makes for some fascinating reading.
ironically the only news agency I even heard report about this is Fox news, Hannity and Combs, they make regular reports on the imminent domain abuse
Fox is the only place you heard about the Kelo decision?

UHM try re-reading what I wrote

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:20 pm

Jeff250 wrote:
CUDA wrote:ironically the only news agency I even heard report about this is Fox news, Hannity and Combs, they make regular reports on the imminent domain abuse
Of course, since we all know that "Hannity and Colmes" is fair and balanced and that Colmes holds just as much weight on the show as Hannity, there's a 50% chance that it was Colmes' idea.

and you obviously dont comprehend what you read either.

it has nothing to do with "fair and Balanced" it has everything to do with making regular reports on the abuse. if there is another "major" news network that is doing that please show me and I will capitulate

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:18 pm

Cuda, I doubt we hear reports from the same stuff because people get bored with that. It's big news for a week then it goes away. America has ADD...we need the next scandal. Why do you think there are 20 magazines devoted to next Hollywood scandal?

What gets me is the fair market value. They give you whatever they want to give you...and that's that. Filthy people.

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:00 pm

Cuda, my only point is that it is unlikely that the liberals are behind this whole shananigan. After all, in order to air, this story had to somehow get past Colmes' desk, and being the manipulative, power-hungry dirtbag that he is, it didn't get past without his approval.

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:26 pm

Zuruck wrote:What gets me is the fair market value. They give you whatever they want to give you...and that's that.

Yep, I know I've told the story before, but it bears repeating.

My church owned some property on the highway outside of the city of Burleson. On both sides of the highway actually. They used one side to build an office building. They were saving the other side for expansion. The government decided to take the empty land on the other side of the highway. The church didn't want to sell (at the price they were offering), so the government took the land by force. They "condmened" this empty property and paid a fraction of what it was worth. So they could build, what? An important road? A necessary water treatment plant? Or perhaps a vital new power plant?

Nope.

Wait for it...

A municiple golf course.

Could have been worse I suppose, at least it IS a public golf course. Still, it really challenges my Christian Charity every time I drive by it.

Gotta go back and read Luke 6:29 again. and again, and again...

Shadowfury333 · Post by **Shadowfury333** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:40 pm

Kilarin wrote:
Zuruck wrote:What gets me is the fair market value. They give you whatever they want to give you...and that's that.
Gotta go back and read Luke 6:29 again. and again, and again...

Sod that. There's got to be a way for this sort of thing to be repealed. Don't forget, you guys can become your government.

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:20 pm

There's got to be a way for this sort of thing to be repealed. Don't forget, you guys can become your government.

I WILL fight this idiocy in every legal manner I can. But I should be able to do that with Charity in my heart. This topic gets me VERY riled up.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:29 pm

Looks like Dubyah just issued an executive order putting an end to this nonsense.
Sure beats issuing an order to pardon some sleazy rich dude for tax evasion!

Props to the Prez for this one.

Genghis · Post by **Genghis** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:26 pm

CUDA wrote:UHM try re-reading what I wrote

It's really hard to type anything here without insulting you, but I did read what you wrote, repeatedly. Although it doesn't really parse as a properly constructed English, the closest interpretation is "Fox are the only ones to report about the Kelo decision. Furthermore, Hannity and Combs make regular reports about eminent domain abuses."

If you truly don't understand that's how your post reads, I can suggest some helpful books to improve your writing and reading comprehension skills. And going on the offensive against me instead of responding to my question makes you sound even more like a politician instead of a reasoning person.

Now, I did suspect given your posting history that what you typed and what you meant were two different things. That's why I asked for clarification.

-------

Will, while I really like the sound of that executive order, I've got to say that overall I'm not thrilled with the idea of executive orders.

And, to make CUDA's (intended) point, why have I not seen anything about this executive order in the news today?

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Sat Jun 24, 2006 4:21 pm

I actually did hear about it earlier today, although I can't remember if it was on a news network or in my local paper. Even if it was the latter, that would suggest that the AP, at least, reported the story.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sat Jun 24, 2006 6:10 pm

Don't worry, as soon as they find a way for issuing the executive order to sound like Bush is stealing from the poor to line Haliburtons pockets you'll hear all about it.
Right now Dan Rather is outside a Kinko's offering a homeless dude $50 to go in and print some document showing that Cheney's house was about to be taken in an eminent domain action....

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Sat Jun 24, 2006 9:31 pm

Will Robinson wrote:Looks like Dubyah just issued an executive order putting an end to this nonsense.

You KNOW that I think George Bush is the Anti-Christ's personal assistant. But here I'm going to say GOOD ON YOU W! A most EXCELLENT executive order!

However, I note the following:

It is the policy of the United States to protect the rights of Americans to their private property, including by limiting the taking of private property by the Federal Government to situations in which the taking is for public use

It's a good start, but it won't have any effect at all upon City, County, and State goverment abuse of Eminent Domain. <sigh>

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 8:10 am

Kilarin wrote:...It's a good start, but it won't have any effect at all upon City, County, and State goverment abuse of Eminent Domain. <sigh>

i'm not sure about that. I don't know where each state draws it's authority to impliment eminent domain but I guess it's at the very least modeled after the federal guidlines.
It's solid leadership at the very least and possibly more because it may set some kind of precedent for future cases at the state and municiple level because if the wording in their laws reference the federal model for the details regulating eminent domain then their law just changed as well...

Also probably the most important effect this order will have will be the victim of municiple and/or state eminent domain abuse can appeal to the federal level courts where this executive order probably will have some legal authority causing the court to come to a different solution than it did in the New London case where the Supremes lost their minds and ruled tax revenue as common good.

Someone fire up the Bat Light and get Bold Deciever in here to give us an educated opinion

Shadowfury333 · Post by **Shadowfury333** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 10:20 am

Reading through that EO, I see several exclusions that would appear to eliminate any legal liability of your Federal Government. In other words, private property could still theoretically be expropriated for public use, even if private expropriation is stopped.

I wonder how this sort of thing works up here.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:00 pm

Shadowfury333 wrote:Reading through that EO, I see several exclusions that would appear to eliminate any legal liability of your Federal Government. In other words, private property could still theoretically be expropriated for public use, even if private expropriation is stopped.

I wonder how this sort of thing works up here.

Public use is always the way it had been. They took what they needed (with fair market compensation) to build roads and other infrastructure. What brought about our anger, and this order, was when cities started using eminent domain to condemn a persons property just so they could sell it to another private person and that person would build something on the land that created more tax revenue for the city!
For example, a man could be forced to sell his house to the city by way of eminent domain so they could sell it to another man who was going to build condominiums on the property, the condominium project would generate many times more tax dollars per square acre for the city than single house would.

That is the change in the way the interpretation of eminent domain law was affecting people. Bush's order was designed to return the use of eminent domain to its original intent. So yes, the government can still take your land, pay you for it, and build a county hospital or a highway...something that is clearly for the public good but they can't take it and sell it to another citizen just because he'll build something that creates more tax revenue than whatever you have on the land. And I'm still in shock that anyone ever got that practice to pass the Supreme Court in America!!!

Shadowfury333 · Post by **Shadowfury333** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:28 pm

Will Robinson wrote:That is the change in the way the interpretation of eminent domain law was affecting people. Bush's order was designed to return the use of eminent domain to its original intent. So yes, the government can still take your land, pay you for it, and build a county hospital or a highway...something that is clearly for the public good but they can't take it and sell it to another citizen just because he'll build something that creates more tax revenue than whatever you have on the land.

Thanks for clearing that up.

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:15 am

Well, even if this EO applied to state and local governments, which I don't think it does, I don't think it would stop the sort of trickery going on by companies such as Avalon, who receive a 99-year lease of public space (i.e. Mitchell Field on Long Island, which just happened to be in the news for this very reason today), and the land is re-zoned with a new, never-before-seen classification that permits denser housing than previously permitted, at the expense of the unit caps affecting the entire region. Who wrote that legislation? Avalon, of course!

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 8:53 am

DCrazy wrote:Well, even if this EO applied to state and local governments, which I don't think it does, I don't think it would stop the sort of trickery going on by companies such as Avalon...!

Well come on! No one ever said this order was a panacea!

It addresses the abuse of eminent domain as best one president can by way of executive order. If you want to wipe out corruption in congress then wipe out congress across the board!
I've been saying for quite awhile now, Vote Them Out, every last one of them in both parties and tell them why you're going to do it and when it's done remind them why you did it!!!
Vote for a third party, not because the third party is better but because we need to break the status quo. We need to send a clear message to the one-party-disguised-as-two. Only something as drastic as the Boston Tea Party will do.

In fact I think I just found the name of my new third party. I'm going to run as the first presidential nominee of The New Boston Tea Party!!!

Now if I can just find several hundred million dollars so I can compete with the one-party-disguised-as-two I'll be your next president and use the bully pulpit to coherce the congress to reform themselves and the system or suffer the wrath of my fellow citizens at the polls!!
I wonder if PayPal can handle a multi-million dollar national campaign donation operation....hmmm?

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 10:37 am

rofl!

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 8:17 am

Will, even if you had superb ideas and a way to actually implement them, you would never win. how many times do you hear people say \"Well I'm Republican\" or \"I'm Democrat\"...people don't even look at the issues anymore, they look at the initial after the person's name.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 10:28 am

Zuruck wrote:Will, even if you had superb ideas and a way to actually implement them, you would never win. how many times do you hear people say "Well I'm Republican" or "I'm Democrat"...people don't even look at the issues anymore, they look at the initial after the person's name.

It's true but really the current crop of representatives, both "R"s and "D"s, should be forced to change the initial after their name to "$"

In fact any candidate who takes any kind of funds or assistance from any entity that isn't a registered voter living in the district he seeks to represent should have to have a warning flashed across the screen everytime he appears on screen or in a photo. Something like:
WARNING, THIS CANDIDATE IS COMPROMISED AND LIKELY TO BE CORRUPT!!!

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 1:25 pm

In a defeatist sort of way, what is there to do? They write, change, and implement rules that only better their ability to stay in power. Voting for a third party doesn't work because the GOP / Dems don't allow them to be in the debates so nobody gets to hear a different voice. Get rid of them all, start over from scratch.

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:05 pm

The problem is the people.

Yeah, you heard me. The people.

I AGREE with Will Robinson completely that we need to vote third party just to break up the current mess. The politicians are corrupt and working in a corrupt system.

BUT, the problem isn't the politicians, it's the people of the US.

Why? Because we aren't being held at gunpoint. We CAN vote the guys out any time we want to. But we wont. The fact that the guy with the most money to campaign with is the guy most likely to win tells you something VERY sad about our system. Not only are the politicians bought and paid for. So are the voters.

Shadowfury333 · Post by **Shadowfury333** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:04 pm

That's the nice thing about Canada, even though many of our leaders are incompetent and corrupt(mostly in the Liberal party, recently voted out), we have 4 parties in parliament(though 1 shouldn't even be a federal party, as it is seperatist and restricted to one province), and the current Conservative government is a minority, and is coasting on the reversal of 13 years of Liberal incompetence, so by the laws of mutual self-interest(and of non-confidence votes), it works.