Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Eminent Domain/ Legalized Theft

Eminent is synonymous with important, well known, famous, prominent. Domain is synonymous with area, region, vicinity, and realm. So Eminent Domain means an important area. In order for the government to seize property in this “important area” they have to blight it. Blighted is defined as anything that has an adverse effect, injures, or destroys. It is synonymous with destroyed, shattered, wrecked, ruined, and devastated.

So I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. When that comes to some government officials it means whatever property can get them the most revenue. Never mind that the people kept up their homes and businesses and paid their taxes. The Government through Eminent Domain takes private property from one individual and gives it to another for monetary gain, because the Government can get more tax revenue from the new entity, which is an assault on private property rights.

Embodied in the Fourth Amendment it states the people have the right to be secure in their houses against unreasonable seizures. In the Fifth Amendment, it states nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. I guess these government officials justify taking private property from one individual and giving it to another (developer) because they will be getting more tax revenue from the new entity.

What I would like to know is what is the Government (taxpayers) paying or giving to the developer to do the project? How much additional taxes will be added on to the purchases in the new development? Have any of these developers given campaign contributions to the government officials? If so, how much money did they give? Ultimately, it’s the taxpayers who are giving money to the developer to do the project, and they will pay more for purchases made in the new development.

I believe there is an injustice being done with government’s abuse of power through the use of eminent domain, which amounts to legalized theft. Again the Fifth Amendment states the government can take private property for Public use after paying just compensation for the property. I would define public use as a road, bridge, or possibly a hospital, not a shopping mall. Laws need to be changed to address this problem concerning private property rights.

Greg Zotta


No comments:

Post a Comment