I'm not quite sure how so many people can actually be for the current incarnation of eminent domain. The general concept is not terrible; the government can take land from an individual or group to satisfy the legitimate needs of the state provided those who are displaced are fairly compensated.
In the "old days" this meant your government might be so brash as to ask to purchase your home for a freeway expansion, or possibly to build a waste-water treatment plant. But in today's greedy little world, politicians and city councils everywhere are using eminent domain for the bizzarest of things.
In New London, Conn. over a dozen homes have come "under the knife" to build an office park to complement a new Pfizer facility.
In Kansas a car dealership was condemned to make way for the expansion of a neighboring BMW dealer that generated greater tax revenues.
In Riveira Beach, Florida over 1,700 homes and apartments were "condemned" (displacing over 5,100) to sell the land to commercial yachting and tourism companies that would provide "substantial benefit to the community."
All in all, governments are seizing land for reasons that have strayed far from what could be construed as beneficial to the general public and I am bothered by the fact that too many individuals find this abuse of eminent domain acceptable.
Government has no business taking that which doesn't belong to them simply to transfer the land or assets to a more "favored" party. Eminent domain can be a useful tool for governments, but only when its force is applied sparingly.
JM
Recent OC Register article: http://www.ocregister.com/local/cottonwood00529cci4.shtml
Organization fighting Eminent Domain abuse: CastleCoalition.org
posted by JM at 9:19 AM
