You could be next -- Lafcadio T. Lion and Strawberry Sage and Friends Fun Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 23:38:44 02/22/05 Tue
Author: Sage
Author Host/IP: cpe-69-202-25-105.nycap.res.rr.com / 69.202.25.105
Subject: You could be next

EMINENT DOMAIN CASE BEFORE HIGH COURT

Nealz Nuze ^ | Tuesday -- February 22, 2005 | Neal Boortz

I know you've grown tired of hearing me hammer this point home ... but in the history of civilization no culture based on freedom and economic liberty has survived without recognizing the individual's right to property and zealously protecting those rights. For many years now property rights have been under a clear assault from politicians seeking to solidify their positions of privilege and power through the misuse of eminent domain. Unfortunately, as has been documented numerous times in this space and on the air, a new national epidemic has emerged. Politicians, hungry for tax revenues at all costs, have started to see private property rights as a small inconvenience. So if you're a farmer who doesn't want to sell his land to build a new Wal-Mart: look out. Government agents could confiscate your land under eminent domain, give it to Wal-Mart and oh by the way- they get to decide how much to pay you for it. It's happening all to often across this country.

We're going to learn a lot in the next few months about the freedom of economic liberty in America. One of these hideous eminent domain cases is now in the U.S. Supreme Court. A New London, Connecticut case of eminent domain abuse goes before the Supreme Court today, finally bringing national attention to the growing problem of government land grabs in the name of private developers. It's about time.

Eminent domain is a holdout from the old English common law. The purpose of eminent domain was to acquire property for public uses like schools, highways, police or fire stations and the like. We've gone far beyond that now.

Which brings us to today's case before the United States Supreme Court. On one side, you have the government of New London, Connecticut. They argue that confiscating land and selling it to a private developer under eminent domain serves the public good because it provides much-needed government revenue. Don't you think that you should read that again? This city is saying that a person's right to their property ends when the government figures out that that property in the hands of another private owner would generate more tax revenue. When does this concept arrive at the doorstep of your local city council or county commission? How do you like the idea that your home is yours only so long as some developer doesn't convince a politician that if he could get his hands on that property he would build something that would be so much more valuable and pay many more dollars in taxes? What country do we live in again?

The basic facts of the case are that pharmaceutical giant Pfizer agreed to build a $270 million global research facility in New London in 1998. The developers wanted to build a conference center, hotel complex, offices, condos, etc. adjacent to the facility. Some of the homeowners didn't want to move. No problem, the government posted notices on their doors telling them they had four months to get out or police would remove them and their belongings.

It went all the way to the Connecticut Supreme Court, which sided with New London. Now in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, the case is called Kelo v. City of New London, Case Number 04-0108. A decision is expected in June. Keep an eye on this one. The decision made in this case will determine whether or not we truly live in a free society that respects property rights.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: You could be next -- Sage, 23:41:09 02/22/05 Tue