Donald Trump defends his vocal support for eminent domain: ‘I think it’s a wonderful thing’

Washington Post ^ | 10/06/2015 | By Jenna Johnson

[SeekAndFind]

Even though it's a stance not especially popular with some Republicans, Donald Trump continued to support eminent domain in an interview on Tuesday, calling it "a wonderful thing" that has unfairly received a bad rap.

Trump, a billionaire known for his major real estate development projects, described eminent domain as a useful tool that local governments can use to prevent greedy homeowners from derailing major projects that could create thousands of jobs or provide a public good. Trump said that some conservatives don't fully understand how eminent domain works and don't realize that homeowners are usually paid "four, five, six, ten times" what their property is actually worth.

"Eminent domain, when it comes to jobs, roads, the public good, I think it's a wonderful thing," Trump said during an interview with Fox News's Bret Baier that aired Tuesday evening. "And remember, you're not taking property… you're paying a fortune for that property."

Trump's support of eminent domain, along with his use of the practice professionally, has prompted some criticism from conservatives.Republican presidential rival Rand Paul has slammed Trump over his eminent domain views, calling the mogul “a big fan” of the practice who has “shown no consideration for small private property owners."

The super PAC for the Club for Growth, a fiscally conservative advocacy group, recently aired television advertisements in Iowa that accuse Trump of supporting "eminent domain abuse" that would allow him to "make millions while we lose our property rights." Trump said the Club for Growth's attacks have come only because he refused to donate $1 million to their cause. He added that the spots are "not right" and do not accurately explain eminent domain.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Private investment with the revenue it would raise was taken to be a public good. There could be arguments around the fact finding in Kelo, which took an empty promise as being tantamount to a public good (the facility never was built and it all went to waste).

[miss marmelstein]

I’m dead set against eminent domain for private developers. But he did offer the lady in Atlantic City 2 million bucks which is so much more generous than when I was involved in an eminent domain dispute in Long Branch, NJ. Private beach front homeowners there were offered peanuts (to use a Trumpean word).

[SeekAndFind]

RE: I will be interested in seeing the reaction to this from Trump’s supporters.

See post #2 above for the reasoning as to why this doesn’t matter.

[SoFloFreeper]

There is a difference between eminent domain and the New London case.

[FourPeas]

Sadly, the tide has turned.

[cripplecreek]

"Nothing is ours, which another may deprive us of."

-Thomas Jefferson

How easily people forget that property rights were a big part of what drove the American revolution. In the case of the 1772 pine tree rebellion the people fought back against the King's ownership of the trees.

The Dunmore proclamation during the revolution seized the property of patriot families in part for opposing the King and in part for debts owed for the ongoing war. The property was auctioned off to loyalist families or awarded to britishofficers.

[make no mistake]

dang, I wish he did not say that. I wish Cruz wasn’t for H1b’s. Well, being here in Calif. it does not matter who I want to vote for anyway.

[CatherineofAragon]

What are you complaining about? Yeah, you lost your property, but you got paid-—probably more than you deserved!-—so shut up.

That’s the refrain I’m seeing, over and over. It’s stunning.

[JoSixChip]

Trump’s stance on emanate domain is wrong, dead wrong. Strike one. But he is the only candidate left in the game.

[HiTech RedNeck]

And if he’s going to represent those who are forced to sell as making out like bandits, he’s going to have to stand for policies that make it true.

[proust]

“Ahhh but that doesn’t matter as long as we keep illegals away.”

No one said it doesn’t matter. Do you live on the border? I do. No one here, in American land, speaks English. I’m not worried about being paid to move, I’m worried about the destruction of this country. Keep chipping away at Trump and we’ll still have more illegals AND Eminent Domain.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

It is not about who benefits. Hello? It is about who bought it first and owns it currently. Do you really want to own your property only as long as someone else can’t prove that they would make more profit from it? What if you applied that to property that was not real estate? How about art? Hey, if we force collectors to sell their valuable art every so often then the value of the art will go up and the state can tax everybody on their profits. Maybe we can also manipulate stock ownership for the benefit of the state. Or business ownership beyond just real estate.

Just because it is real estate does not make it okay.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: There could be arguments around the fact finding in Kelo, which took an empty promise as being tantamount to a public good (the facility never was built and it all went to waste).

Yep, and all OPENLY supported then by none other then the now “untouchable” Donald Trump.

[joesbucks]

That’s what I seem to remember too.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Look at Kelo itself again and what it said. It said that increasing the tax base was a public good.

This is a first world problem. What can Trump do about it anyhow? He could swear up and down he hates it and what good would it do? Constitutional amendment is needed here to exclude increasing a tax base as a public good. Presidents don’t have any part in constitutional amendments.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: No one said it doesn’t matter.

YOU JUST ALL BUT DID.

You all but said confiscation of private property for private projects can be overlooked as long as the supporter of such confiscation will secure the border.

[driftless2]

It was not too many years ago on FR, that if you defended eminent domain, you were SATAN

Trump's defenders let him get away with many anti-conservative beliefs. So what if your house and property is taken away because The Donald wants to build a casino on it for his own profit.

[1010RD]

I don’t think conservativetreehouse is really that conservative. They’re working for Trump and giving him a total pass.

Property rights are basic rights. They’re what the Revolution was fought for. Trump’s a Democrat, a conservative Democrat.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Seems to me that people just want to catcall Trump down no matter if he could save America from self implosion.

[knarf]

The problem WE, in cyber world, have is that we imagine or fantasize using OUR home as a basis for our imagination/fantasy

I live in rural PA ... there is no way any eminent domain could or would apply to my 2.25 acres

West Side Story was filmed in a section of NYC that was to be destroyed in a few months .... the whole scenery of WSS no longer exists

The point I'm trying to make is;

A movie brought us into an era for a fantasy and some developer wants to use Doc's store for a high rise (or whatever)

What Trump is saying is ... Doc got a half a mil for turning over the deed of real estate that was condemned already (Batteries Not Included a fair example of a hold-out ... but I don't think it ever really worked out that way)

Eminent domain, IS a good thing IF it actually is for a betterment

I don't live in NYC .. I am not Doc

So any opinion I might have will be purely academic and ..... that's how public school teachers teach .... via the academics of what they've been told to say .... neither one of us really know what we're talking about

I remember Keough (sp?) and IMO, (from what I remember) the property was a prime piece of real estate and the reasoning for the ED was off the wall

I have a lousy memory but as I recall ... Keough was government theft