in the interest of talking something besides bush/kerry, i thought i'd bring this up: eminent domain.

here's the situation: there's a neighborhood in CT where folks have lived for generations. nothing wrong with the area -- it's just not paying as much taxes as,oh, say a luxury condo community would.

tuff nuts, right? wrong. the city of new london (i believe it is) is sucking up all the properties in this neighborhood in order to tear it down and sell it to developers to build luxury condos and i believe a business as well will be going in there (as in a big corporation).

now what's the law of the land say? "...nor shall private property be taken for PUBLIC USE, without just compensation."

the city claims that the luxury condos and this big corp coming in are "public use" because they will generate more taxes than the previous tenants -- middle class home owners -- were generating, and therefore it's justified in saying, "too bad, so sad, get out."

surely the court will stop this, though, right? wrong. the court is agreeing with the city, and the people who have lived there for decades are getting booted off their own property and out of their own homes.

so what say you on this issue? who's property is it anyway? what would you think if your gubmint told you to get out and make way for luxury condos or a big company to move in?

personally, I think it blows. I don't have a lot of problem with the government claiming emminent domain to build highways and other public infrastructure but I think it's an abuse to do it to support a purely commercial enterprise. I've seen it done in areas where they want to build shopping malls and even a couple of those big box stores. I consider it stealiing if if the government pays for the land. If a developer wants it bad enough, let them pay top dollar and if the owner refuses he shouldn't be forced to sell.

Eminent Domain sucks at times, but I have seen it work for the betterment of all like it is suppose to.

Just last week here in Dallas the Dallas school district won in court against a church. The school wanted the excess acerage to build a school, the church wanted the property for a cemetary. The school won.

The following link takes you to a July 2004 article in the National Law Journal and it covers in detail the uses and abuses of just this kind of taking:

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1089315053237 

After the publication of that article, the landmark Michigan case (Poletown) that they discuss was overturned by the Mich Supreme Court.

That continues the recent trend of courts back to affirming private property rights over the dubious public good of Wal-Mart, Costco, etc.

what sucks about it is the Beurocratic red tape and courts systems... people who cannot afford legal fee's will be overwhelmed by the "System" and eventually a settlement far less then what the owners values were in the first place... my sister-in-law owned a coupld lots in an Illinois Town.. the State wanted to add an additional parking lot to this area and asked her if they would want to sell one of these lots.. she refused because she knew the area was expanding and soon this land would be worth more... the State who had purchased adjacent lots then put in motion a court injunction to have the county force her to give up part of this land... at the time she worked for the phone company in a well off job.. she fought them for 2 yrs.. she won.. but it cost her... 6 months later the developer on the parking lot for the state came in and started laying down this parking lot... they had taken up over 2 ft of ground in her lot... their heavy equipment left ruts and trashed her property... she sued... she recovered her loss on the 2 yrs damages before... she also recovered her lawyer fee's and although she gave away the extra 2 ft of the lot (rezoned) she also walked away with both lots paid for...

the thing is... people have to be in a financial situation to be able to have to battle this crap... it's the Power of the Government!!!!

Hog

read all you can about ranger stadium in texas.

sorry tony, it is about bush.

Yo Cav:

now what's the law of the land say? "...nor shall private property be taken for PUBLIC USE, without just compensation."

You answered your own question.

How about when the goevernment buys homes from people who live in flood areas or areas where it is no longer safe to live, is that fair to all taxpayers?

JonR

Ps: Don't pay no mind to Rick, if he doesn't try to put GW down at least three times a day he gets constipated. LOL

NO, Jon, he STAYS constipated!

CWFoster

i remember when you had things to say that had merit and required some thinking on my part. what happened.

Cav,

It's called "gentrification" and it really screws people out of their communities. Yeah, in a few years it'll be all artsy fartsy, but look who paid dearly for it - common folks like us.

E4A