News & Press |
. . . And the Government Taketh Away: Undermining A Fundamental Cornerstone of American Freedom
The Republican Party of Orange County regularly solicits the views and news of the state and federal delegation. Please read this week's Op-Ed by California State Senator Tom Harman
John Locke’s Second Treatise on government established the philosophical foundation for much of the American system of government – and brought forth the idea of "natural rights," such as life, liberty and the right to own property. The wording of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution can be traced directly to the teachings of Locke.
While many Americans are familiar with the Fifth Amendment for granting them protections against self-incrimination, the Fifth Amendment contains an even more important statement of individual rights.
In addition to protecting citizens against self-incrimination, the Fifth Amendment continues, "…nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation." This part of the Fifth Amendment is known as the Takings Clause.
Traditionally, private property in America could not be seized by the government except for "public use." In the past, this meant that if the government seized your property using its power of eminent domain, the property seized must be used for the public good. Classic examples of the proper use of eminent domain would include taking private property for projects like highways, bridges, schools or fire stations. Naturally, these takings of private property must be accompanied with "just compensation" as required by the Fifth Amendment.
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Kelo v. City of New London, Connecticut, reinterpreted the Fifth Amendment in a broad and socialistic manner.
The city of New London purchased a large swath of land for redevelopment. However, some of the owners of the remaining property refused to sell. In response, the city started condemnation proceedings for the property. The owners fought back, filing a lawsuit claiming that the condemnation of their private property was a direct violation of the Takings Clause.
The United States Supreme Court, in an absolutely outrageous 5-4 decision, stated that private property can be confiscated from a private citizen and given to another private citizen if that citizen’s plans for the property will be of greater public good, -- i.e. the new owner will pay more property taxes to the city.
This terrible decision by the Supreme Court needs to be reversed in order to protect the property rights of citizens. We cannot idly sit by and allow private developers with large bank accounts and disproportionate influence over city and county officials to literally steal private property belonging to citizens like you and me. It is unacceptable to allow this type of activity to proceed based on nothing more that than a governmental assurance that it’s for a greater "public good."
Two years have now passed since the Kelo decision was handed down by the Supreme Court. The Institute for Justice, who represented Susan Kelo in her case against the city, recently released a report card that ranked the various states on their efforts to enact substantive eminent domain reform. Sadly, California received a D- on this report card for its failure to enact any type of legislation to prevent the unfair-taking of a citizen’s property.
It is for this reason that I have supported and will continue to support efforts to reinforce the original intent of our founding fathers. I have recently signed the "Hands Off My Home Pledge" sponsored by the California Alliance to Protect Property Rights, and I have committed to only support those legislative and initiative proposals which contain meaningful reforms that provide real protection from the abuses of eminent domain.
Until eminent domain reform is adopted in California, every person who owns property in the state runs the risk of having the government seize their property under the guise that it is for the "public good." That’s why the "Hands Off My Home Pledge" is so important to each and every one of us.
Any essays, opinion-editorials, press-releases or news item contained herein is the expressed view of the author and not necessarily of The Republican Party of Orange County (also known as OCGOP.org). OCGOP.org should not be held accountable or responsible for the content associated with these writings. The literature that is provided to you, the user, is for your convenience, entertainment and education and are not to be seen as endorsed by OCGOP.org for any products, services or views promoted by said author.
» Back to News and Press
