Eminent Domain.....So What Else Is New?

Isn't Eminent Domain the foundation of Imperialism and Colonialism?

Interestingly enough, the Supreme Court just ruled in favor of corporate 'land grabs'.



High court OKs personal property seizures

Friday, June 24, 2005; Posted: 12:32 a.m. EDT (04:32 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses -- even against their will -- for private economic development.

The 5-4 ruling represented a defeat for some Connecticut residents whose homes are slated for destruction to make room for an office complex. They argued that cities have no right to take their land except for projects with a clear public use, such as roads or schools, or to revitalize blighted areas.

At issue was the scope of the Fifth Amendment, which allows governments to take private property through eminent domain if the land is for "public use."

"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random," O'Connor wrote. "The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/23/scotus.property.ap/


Coincidence? I Think Not.

Rossie: Bush team was involved in 'eminent' land grab
This is not the first time that a group of well-connected entrepreneurs has persuaded a municipality to seize private property in order to facilitate their planned development project. It happened in Arlington -- Arlington, Texas, that is, and one of the entrepreneurs, albeit a small bore one, was our nominal president, G.W. Bush, at the time a failed, would-be oil man, but one with a magic -- in Texas anyway -- last name.

Kevin Phillips, a long-time Republican strategist turned apostate, describes the deal in his book, American Dynasty.

"In 1988, George W. also began angling for a role in the acquisition of the Texas Rangers baseball team, which was being sold by oil man Eddie Chiles, an old friend of his father's. The deal did not go through easily, despite Bush's love of the sport, but it finally concluded in 1989 on three pivots of cronyism. The first was the help in arranging meetings and financing given to Bush by baseball commissioner Peter Ueberroth, a family friend. Number two was the investment participation of Texas billionaire Richard Rainwater, a major Reagan-Bush contributor.

"Last but not least was the arrangement by which the city of Arlington agreed to finance a new $191 million stadium for the Rangers with a bond issue paid for by a small sales tax increase. The stadium was to be deeded over to the baseball consortium in 12 years, after the Rangers group had paid $60 million in annual payments of $5 million.

http://www.pressconnects.com/today/opinion/stories/op070605s176341.shtml

The Land Rush
Do you get it now, middle-class America? Do you now understand what was done to the Indians? Do you now understand what is now being done to you? Do you understand, also, what else the corporate interests will be willing to do to Americans, if need be? Do you understand what the policy is going to become in future years? Do you understand that the color of your skin may not protect you any longer?

Do not think you will move south or west to a better place, where you can be free and live in your traditional hard-working American ways. They will follow you wherever you go. Wanting what you’ve got, for themselves and the Manifest Destiny of Wall Street.

It gives a new, fresh, in-your-face perspective on how Indian removal happened over an entire continent. It happened gradually. The government looked the other way while tacitly allowing land speculators to keep up the pressure on the local (Indian) populations as they decided on which rich pickings they wanted. The equivalent of this Supreme Court decision, where the judiciary has chosen to look the other way.

Every year, every decade, another band or tribe was nudged off. Other bands or tribes either did not notice, or never thought it would happen to them.

And those among the whites who noticed it did not care; after all, it was for the common good of the Manifest Destiny. Those Indians weren’t using the land properly anyway, the way mankind should be subduing the land! The land would infinitely increase in value and utility for the common good if only the whites could get their hands on it. Oh, and the Indians would benefit too! Must… go away and move over there.

http://liberalstreetfighter.com/ee/index.php?/trifecta/comments/the_land_rush/


yorick.infinitejest.org:81/ 1/cards.html

Property seizure backlash
State and federal lawmakers consider new limits on takings in the wake of court decision.
By Adam Karlin Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor BOSTON –

In Lodi, N.J., hundreds of trailer park residents may soon be squatters if the city decides their homes are hurting land values.

In East Baltimore, the Baltimore Development Corp. wants to turn 2,000 largely vacant properties into a biotech park.

In New London, Conn., a cluster of homes will be bulldozed to make way for hotels and health clubs.

Such seizures of private property, while not new, are drawing new controversy.
The June 23 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Kelo v. City of New London has emboldened those who support the taking of private land for public use - even when local governments are doing so to foster private development. But the same decision is fueling a nationwide backlash - rippling into homeowner outrage and legislative action.

The ruling resonates for millions of Americans because the issue hits - literally - close to their homes. During the Fourth of July weekend, anti-Kelo activists accused the courts of betraying one of the founding principles of the republic, citizens' right to their property. A Houston Chronicle editorial went so far as to compare the decision to communist Chinese land-use policy.
Now state lawmakers from New York to Alaska are urging limits on when a "public use" justifies the seizure of land. Congress is also moving on the issue - starting with a House vote last week to bar federal transportation funds from being used to make improvements on lands seized for private development.

At least eight states - Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, South Carolina and Washington - already forbid the use of eminent domain for economic development unless it is to eliminate blight. Other states either expressly allow private property to be taken for private economic purposes or have not spoken clearly to the question.

In the wake of the Kelo ruling, property-rights crusaders have responded through grass-roots activism and elected officials. Bills and amendments that would limit use of eminent domain were generated in state legislatures and Congress within days of the Supreme Court decision.

With the increasing recruitment on the part of big city mayors; like Kwame Kilpatrick in Detroit and Dennis Archer before him, homeowners in Detroit can tell you that eminent domain has always been ENCOURAGED if it meant DEVELOPMENT. Psssssssssssssssh!!! (for Sesa)

"The power of eminent domain should not be used simply to further private economic development," said Mr. Cornyn in a statement. The bill would bar federal funds for state and local governments that seize land for private development.

Does Cornyn (one of the senators who opposed the anti-lynching apology) want us to believe that there aren't enough wealthy developers skilled in money laundering to conduct land grabs without the APPEARANCE of federal funds? Double Pssssssssssssssssh!!!

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0706/p01s03-uspo.html

Like the Blogger suggests...........Remember what they did to the Native Americans.
Like I said Eminent Domain lies at the foundation of this Nation.

I wonder where these people live. I suspect no where near proposed future development.


By the way, who will be the next Chief Justice?