> Dennis Claxton wrote:
>
>>THE California Democratic Party has quietly thrown its weight behind a
>>movement to stop the government from using eminent domain to buy people's
>>property against their will and then handing it over to another private
>>owner.
>
> Uh-oh, this should create a crisis in NathanLand! Guess they don't realize
> they're objectively promoting racism.
---------------------------------------------
It's not infrequently that you get competing interests rallying behind what
appears to be the same "reform" because they both agree the status quo needs
changing. But they have very different conceptions of what this will mean in
practice. This appears to me from a distance what is happening with the
post-Kelo movement to have state legislatures limit the expropriation power
of local authorities.
The left wants the states to curb the practice of eminent domain where it is used by muncipalities on behalf of powerful real estate, retail, and other private interests. Doug and others have been promoting this view on the list.The Democratic party is now evidently also "quietly" in favour, to what extent remains to be seen. Others like Nathan have, in effect, been warning that it's an illusion to believe the states - especially those controlled by Republicans - will ever pass a reform of this nature, and that they'll use the opening instead to weaken the power of governments to expropriate private property for "public use" - a longstanding objective of the right in the US and elsewhere.
My political inclinations lead me in this direction, and from what I've seen so far, the initiatives do seem to be mostly originating from the right. Some 30 states are said to be considering legislation, but the only ones I've seen mentioned are Georgia, Virginia, Indiana, Kentucky, Alabama, Texas, Ohio and Michigan. Except for Michigan, and possibly Ohio and Virginia, the other states are all Republican strongholds. Michigan seems to be contemplating very weak restraints on the practice, which would be consistent with the Democratic party's efforts to reconcile the conflicting pressures from its base and corporate sponsors. Let's recall also that the Surpreme Court decision upholding eminent domain was opposed by Scalia, Thomas, and the other right-wing justices.
Can anyone point to a state which is contemplating legislation with real teeth in it which would maintain the expropriation power but, crucially, limit it to purposes of public rather than private development? That would help persuade those like myself that this is campaign worth supporting.