Posted on 06/24/2005 12:19:15 PM PDT by snowsislander
WASHINGTON D.C., June 23, 2005 – “The American Farm Bureau Federation is outraged that the Supreme Court ruled government bodies can use eminent domain authority to take private property for economic development by private businesses. The ruling in favor of the city in Kelo v. City of New London could have serious negative consequences to farmers and ranchers.
“Apparently no one’s home, or farm and ranch land, is safe from government seizure because of this ruling.
“The American Farm Bureau Federation has preservation of private property rights as a major policy position. Farm Bureau members and staff will assess the full impact of this ruling to local communities and work in the legislative arena to determine what can be done to limit the effect of the ruling.
“Farmers and ranchers are having problems maintaining their fields and pastures for food and fiber production. They are contending with urban sprawl and need protection against government bodies having free reign to take land. That is why AFBF, 18 state Farm Bureaus and a county Farm Bureau filed a friend-of-the-court brief in this case at the end of 2004.”
-30-
Contacts:
Tracy Taylor Grondine
(202) 406-3642
tracyg@fb.org
Richard Keller
(202) 406-3640
keller@fb.org
This decision is no different than Bob Mugabe's Zimbabwe land grab.
*Numbers are only a guess, but the revenue displacement would be close.
This is the type of historic decision that results in historic events...like revolutions. Private property rights are the cornerstone of western civilization and democracy. Take those away and all bets are off.
Petition to impeach justices
http://www.petitiononline.com/lp001/petition.html
My thoughts on the matter:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1429877/posts
And everyone else in this country. And it's not "could", it's "will."
Keep your powder dry!
Be Ever Vigilant!
What? Mugabe stole the land. Here local governments force you to sell and then pay fair value for the property. May not be right but there's certainly a difference.
There will be family farms, some held for generations and cherished by their families, that will be taken by force in direct consequence of this disgusting decision by the liberals on the Supreme Court.
The Highlands bill here is NW New Jersey is destroying our property values. The folks who don't live in northern NJ just don't give a damm! We were warned of a major land grab when the Highlands bill passed. We ALL must get motivated ASAP!
"Fair value??" Haahahahahahahahaaa! I go to a store, hold up the owner at gunpoint, and take his property. BUT, I leave the amount of money I want to pay on the counter (which happens to be significantly less than the price he set) -- so it's not stealing.
Fair value is the appraised value of the property. Correct. It is not stealing.
Eventually some town or government entity will use eminent domain on someone who will go down fighting.
Uh, if they try that with my propery, that person would be me!
Not exactly. This allows the government to appropriate your land for another individual's benefit, without a "public use" but rather for the "public welfare". This makes government the arbiter of fairness of price, rather than the market.
It's really not much different from Mugabe. He doesn't pay, but the principle is the same - GOVERNMENT DECIDES WHO SHOULD OWN WHAT PROPERTY!
"Property" has been defined broadly as a bundle of legal rights, and that definition necessarily involves the right not to sell, if you do not wish to sell.
If you force me to sell, then what do you call it?
Rationalization produces such terms as "public benefit", "fair market value", "greater good", and so forth and so one, but that sounds like Clinton trying to describe new taxes as "payroll premiums", doesn't it?
I say it's spinach, and to ding dang diddly heck with it, Maude.
http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry?id=33355
Or at least that's what the men who founded our republic thought, although they expressed themselves in Locke's terms.
Stealing is stealing even if the goverment is the one doing the taking.
Violence is no way to solve problems. Bribery and posion however, are perfectly acceptable.
Around here the Tobacco buyout has all the farmers selling their land piecemeal for houses anyway. If you cant grow a crop that pays decent money what good is being a farmer. Oh yeah they put in beans and corn to keep down the weeds , but that hardly pays for the fertiliser.
In other words, it's like Real Estate Priceline.com --The buyer gets to name their own price, except the seller HAS to say yes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.