Damon W. Root | May 1, 2008
reason contributors David Beito and Ilya Somin had a great op-ed in last Sunday's Kansas City Star explaining why eminent domain abuse should matter to civil rights activists:
Few policies have done more to destroy community and opportunity for minorities than eminent domain. Some 3 to 4 million Americans, most of them ethnic minorities, have been forcibly displaced from their homes as a result of urban renewal takings since World War II.
The fact is that eminent-domain abuse is a crucial constitutional rights issue.
Whole thing here.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Charlottesville, VA, where I used to live, has a wonderful
history of deciding a project needs to get built and then picking
out a black neighborhood to bulldoze. I'm sure this has happened
all over the place.
Also, check out the legacy of Robert Moses in the Bronx, where the
Cross Bronx Expressway cut a never-repaired gash through a formerly
vibrant neighborhood. He wanted to do the same thing in Greenwich
Village, but it is (was?) harder to accomplish the razing of
white(r) neighborhoods.
Few policies have done more to destroy community and
opportunity for minorities than eminent domain.
The WOD would be one of those few. And by at least an order of
magnitude. Yet for the most part Civil Rights activists don't even
pay lip service to ending prohibition.
*sigh*
On June 3, 2008 California voters will have a chance to limit
Eminent Domain. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association has
qualified Proposition 98 to prohibit the use of eminent domain for
the benefit of private developers and redevelopment programs.
More info @ http://yesprop98.com/
This will a primary election for Congress and state legislature,
and Proposition 98 will be one of only two statewide questions.
Prop. 99 is a decoy put up by the League of Cities, and provides
minimal protection against seizures. Vote Yes on Prop. 98
Few protested the Kelo ruling more ardently than the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. In an
amicus brief filed in the case, it argued that "[t]he burden of
eminent domain has and will continue to fall disproportionately
upon racial and ethnic minorities, the elderly, and economically
disadvantaged." Unfettered eminent domain authority, the NAACP
concluded, is a "license for government to coerce individuals on
behalf of society's strongest interests."
Wow, that argument sounds so familiar. I wonder, which political
party has been making it?
The GOP, advocates of smaller government and staunch protectors of
economic liberty and laissez faire? Nope. Developers are big
campaign contributors to the GOP.
The Democratic party, defenders of the little guy, vigilant
guardians of the rights of the powerless? Nope. Urban renewal and
government planning is needed to help the downtrodden. You can't
make an omelet ...
The Libertarian party, those selfish, racist uncaring assholes who
arrogantly believe that property ownership grants you the right to
do what the fuck you want with your own property? Yep.
The reason minorities aren't up-in-arms is because, as Rev. Wright informed us, they don't think logically. Therefore, they are unable to comprehend logic's associate priciple. To them, there simply is no connection between takings and civil rights.
Civil Rights activists don't even pay lip service to ending
prohibition.
Because we aren't free if we're not healthy. Prohibition makes us
healthy.
Paul, A lot of us could use less freedom. I need mine cut in half. I'm confident we'll get there some day...
Developers are big campaign contributors to the GOP.
"Developer" is a mostly meaningless word Democrats throw around to
malign Republicans. It's a big bogeyman they use to scare voters,
just as Republicans use the omg-unions scare.
A developer was probably involved getting your residential
development developed. No really! That's why they're called
"developers"! Some developers are unscrupulous and will use city
hall connections to their own benefit, but that's hardly unique to
the profession. The only reason developers tend to contribute to
Republican campaigns slightly more than they do to Democratic
campaigns, is that as bad as Republicans are, at least they can
spell "property rights".
A newspaper in Minneapolis ran an editorial about the urban
highways projects back in the 60s or early 70s:
"There aren't very many black people in Minneapolis, but the
Highway Department managed to find them."
(I guess "Women and minorities hardest hit" logic actually is
acceptable to libertarians under the right circumstances.)
(I guess "Women and minorities hardest hit" logic actually
is acceptable to libertarians under the right
circumstances.)
Like when it's true.
What a bunch of horseshit. How many of you actually know someone
who has had property taken through the eminent domain process? The
State has hundreds of policies and programs far more destructive
towards the poor and minorities.
Eminent doman is a trope. It is a little morality play where the
big evil government forces some little wonderful guy off of his
ancestral home. In reality, it's just as likely the guy who owns
the property needed for the interstate is treating his shack like a
winning lottery ticket demanding ten or 100 times its value.
Eminent domain for "economic development" is horseshit. Eminent
domain to build an interstate is just the cost of doing
business.
Developers are big campaign contributors to the
GOP.
And to the Dems. Big-time developers need access at city hall, and
they tend to be completely non-ideological about who they buy
access from. They'd be fools to be partisan, because it will bite
them in the wallet someday if they are.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245