Posted on 06/28/2005 10:31:37 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Over the weekend, a good friend of mine left a message on my answering machine, which at first I didn’t recognize, because his voice was so shaken with rage and desperation. But after a brief moment, I realized that it was my buddy, Danny, from the firehouse.
At first I didn’t recognize him because Danny is as calm and collected a man as I have had the privilege of knowing. To hear the agitation in his voice was something that I could not associate with him.
Living on the south shore of New York’s Long Island, Danny was naturally drawn to the sea. Besides a love for the ocean, Danny also had a love of country, specifically the military services. So in 1976, citizen Danny became seaman recruit Danny, serving in the finest tradition in the United States Coast Guard, and in the footsteps of members of his own family.
Danny can trace his family’s lineage and military service back to the Civil War of 1861, in which his great-grandfather fought and bled at Gettysburg. Danny’s father and uncles fought in the wars that have involved the United States from time to time, including fighting alongside this country’s greatest general, George S. Patton. Danny has a family tree whose roots run deep with regard to patriotism and service to the country.
Danny went through ten weeks of rigorous boot camp upon joining the Coast Guard. The knowledge that better men had come before him aided his passage through those weeks of drill instructor-inflicted “torture,” and the belief that the sacrifice he was making was of little consequence when taken in the context of serving one’s country.
For those who think the Coast Guard is nothing more than DWI patrol for drunken boaters and wayward jet-skiers, think again. In times of war, as the United States is in now, the Coast Guard answers to the Department of the Navy. The Coast Guard patrols the shores of Long Beach, and from Long Island on the Atlantic Seaboard to Long Beach, California on the Pacific Coast, and is presently patrolling the shores of the Mina al Bakr oil terminal, 13 miles off the coast of Iraq.
Upon leaving the Coast Guard in 1986 as a boatswain mate first class, Danny then became a firefighter for the Fire Department of New York, and found a home among a brotherhood that is no less sacrificing then the servicemen and women of the U.S. armed forces. The world knows this to be true, as it and Danny--firsthand--witnessed the carnage of September 11 that brought down the twin towers upon thousands, including 343 of “the bravest” of the FDNY.
What could shake a man such as Danny, a man who has virtually served his country since adulthood, witnessed the attacks and the death of September 11, and presently braves the infernos of New York City?
I never would have thought that a mere court ruling could do this, but upon hearing the decision of the Supreme Court in the case, Kelo v. New London, a chill apparently crept through my friend. In its 5-4 rendering, the court ruled that local governments may use eminent domain (the Fifth Amendment) to take people’s homes and businesses and turn them over to private developers.
Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens said: “Clearly, there is no basis for exempting economic development from our traditionally broad understanding of public purpose.” The term “public use,” which Justice Stevens redefined as “public purpose,” has nearly always been used by state and federal governments as the need to build public highways, dams, water filtration plants and the like arose.
With the injection of the words “public purpose” as used by the court’s majority, local governments can now grab land under the economic primer of generating more tax revenue.
But as Justice Thomas, writing in the dissent said: “The court has erased the Public Use Clause from our Constitution.”
Perhaps the most poignant comments of the court’s dissent came from sometime-conservative, sometime-liberal Justice Sandra Day O’Connor: “The government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result.”
Setting aside the court’s legal gymnastics and artful prose in their ruling, people will understand the essence of the court’s far-reaching and home-owner rights-obliterating pronouncement:
The very concept of property ownership in America is in peril.
So fundamental has the right of private property and ownership been to America since its very founding that its first vice-president, and eventual second U.S. president, John Adams, said: “Property is surely a right of mankind as real as liberty.”
Some might think that I am naive in this, but it is my belief that this may be the issue that unites liberals and conservatives--Democrats and Republicans, greens and libertarians, and all the other political groups that vie for dominance. After all, everybody believes in the right, and millions experience the delight, of property ownership in America.
Now, because of the desire to create and legislate from the bench as the courts are wont to do these days, nobody need only fear the WalMart-type corporations taking over their towns and cities. The courts have now made it possible for a single individual with local political pull and a future-tax revenue projection to come in and usurp one of hearth and home.
In Ronald Reagan’s Farewell Address to the Nation on January 11, 1989, he said: “Back in the 1960’s, when I began, it seemed to me that we'd begun reversing the order of things--that through more and more rules and regulations and confiscatory taxes, the government was taking more of our money, more of our options, and more of our freedom. I went into politics in part to put up my hand and say, ‘Stop.’ I was a citizen politician, and it seemed the right thing for a citizen to do.”
Today, Danny holds his hand up to say “stop.” Having been politically deaf for most of his life, he has gone from being citizen Danny, to seamen-recruit Danny, to firefighter Danny, and now to possibly the biggest challenge of his life, citizen-politician Danny. He will advocate against the rulings of a misguided Supreme Court.
I believe that there are many more Dannys out there, and I further believe that within the homes of America, being a citizen politician will no longer be a luxury, but a necessity of liberty.
It is time to spill some tea all over again.
About the Writer: Vincent Fiore is a freelance writer who resides in New York City. Vincent receives e-mail at Anwar004@aol.com
I love his last line!
"It is time to spill some tea all over again."
Good article CHARLITE. This ruling will play right into the hands of Governor Perry for his 'super-duper' Trans Texas highway that will take and divide peoples property clear across the state!!
Char :)
Danny may be very vulnerable, depending on where he's living on Long Island. If he can see the ocean or the Sound from his modest property, he's probably already in the sights of a developer or high-roller with plenty of $$.
Check out the Weir, NH - proposed "taking" of Justice Souter's home to build a private resort hotel for the "public use/good"?
"Weir, NH "
Ain't no such animal in New Hampshire. There's Weirs Beach and there is Weare. The town in question is Weare, NH.
In a previous post on another thread I pleaded error and ignorance, never intentional misleading
Thanks for the Weir(d)/Weare(d) correction!
I used the spelling from my VRWC cousin's early email - guess she got it from talk radio - dunno...
FR has instant editing!
We are The Borg!
Republicans, NRA folks, etc. -- print this one out, xerox multiple copies, and have them available at your Fourth of July booths. Great stuff. We can indeed use the Kelo outrage to recruit new patriots.
The Kelo ruling along with the Ten Commandments kerfuffle have me seriously wondering if America exists anymore. Seriously.
If you want to see how Gov. works.
This is a email reply I got back from a person who works in this field when I forward him this post
In his email the person had the means and the abilty to fight back. And get whats due.
Santa Cruz considers eminent domain on long-empty downtown lot
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1292948/posts
It's sure better then the case I had awhile back in LA. The city took this guys property, which had a liquor store, deli, check cashing service & was Grossing $300K to $350K PER MONTH.
He had a big corner where all the trucks come off the docks unto Alameda St. & the semis could pull in & pick up a sandwich & a drink. The next closest liquor store was 3 mi. away, & this was the closest to the docks & a big marina for pleasure boats.
The city of L.A gave him a generous $79,000 Yes, that was it, they said since the land was zoned industrial that was all the land was worth.
The building would still be standing, but the new R/W line was 3 ft. from the front of the building & there was to be no access. They said he could do something with the building. It was a complex case since the Koreans who owned it just said give us our $500,000 relocation & loss of business amount & we go back to Korea.
The Koreans who had sold it, sold it for 2 million, $750K for the real estate, the rest for the business & inventory & the down payment had been $250,000, the rest only had the real estate as security. The buyers were just going to walk away with the relocation money & leave the sellers holding the bag. It took awhile to get the 2 Korean sellers into the case, but the atty did & they had to start a foreclosure against the buyers to be able to get to court..
We settled on the court house steps for $1,800,000 ,(Inc the business but no inventory) PLUS the $500,000 relocation fee, PLUS, the city had to buy two adjacent lots and pay for the construction of a new building on the two lots, AND provide access to the new property from Alameda St. The appraiser for the city was still saying., how can an industrially zoned property be worth that.
I asked the city Real Estate Dept. manager how they could justify using an appraiser like that. He said, "We love his work, we use him all the time" That is why cities using eminent domain get such a bad rap.
Now, here is the best part, 6 mo later I was at a legal seminar & had lunch with 4 attys, 3 from the City of L.A. I brought up that I had just been the appraiser on a big case against the city & they knew which one right away. One said she had been assigned the case but knew the case was really bad & got out of it. The city put a brand new atty on, (the city hired an outside law firm also), & the city attorneys office had a betting pool as to how big the city was going to take a hit when they found the case was going to court.
Also, think of all the other folks who's property was taken using this type of appraiser and who could not afford to go to court or who did not get a really good attorney (and of course that attorney hiring a really good appraiser on the case).
So that's what happens in many of these cases. Also, many cases in Redev. are not blighted at all, but they use that to cozy up to a particular developer.
This case does not seem like that however & in this case I agree with the city. I don't know what the lot is really worth, but $70/sq.ft. for an ugly looking hole in the ground does not seem out of line. PS The atty & the clients felt I did such a good job they gave me a $2000 bonus on top of the fee I billed-only the 2nd time in my career that has happened!)
"It is time to spill some tea all over again."
Danny isn’t alone! Last Friday I thought I was the only one who was actually physically shaken by the Supremes decision that we no longer actually own our land; why shouldn’t we be angry and physically shaken? How many thousands of times have we heard…”the American dream to own a home”, well it turns out, at least to you, Danny and me, that it was a dream!
The Supremes, in a thought process that defies logic have slapped us in the face and awakened us from this dream. We have been awakened from a dream only to be forced into a nightmare. In our nightmare we have learned that we are merely the folks who have been allowed, by the Government, to dream for over 200 years that we actually own land. In this nightmare we find that the Government really owns all the land and we are nothing more than Legal Squatters that the Local, State and Federal governments will put up with as long as we agree to pay the taxes that will be levied…until another potential squatter agrees, in advance, to pay more.
When we awake from most dreams we forget what it was that we dreamt; you, Danny and I didn’t. When we do remember our dreams the image often fades quickly. I don’t want to forget this dream. Never want to forget this dream!
I won’t quote from the Constitution or the Bill of Rights because, it seems, these are now only words that can be reinterpreted as the needs of the Government change. The original Contract, we were given, says that it is our God given Right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness…is this a dream too?
I think it’s now up to us to put the meaning back into the words. It is time to put up or shut up. I think it’s time that we take our dream back. Do you?
“It is time to spill some tea all over again” I’m ready, let’s go spill some.
bump
The Bill of Rights is the section of the Constitution that grants explicit power to the people. When Madison asked Jefferson what he thought of the Constitution, Jefferson felt it was a great design for a government but it offered nothing to the people. Jefferson felt that if the founders guaranteed rights to the people, that long term stability of the government was assured. Jefferson suggested they start with the things that had so infuriated the colonists against the British.
In short the first 10 Amendments are designed to limit the power of the government and to grant power to the people. It is a desecration that anything in the first 10 Amendments ever be used to expand the power of government. That is probably the most disturbing point in the eminent domain decision. The justices cited the amendments for the people to expand the power of the government.
What is so strange about this decision is that the "liberals" voted with big business, while the "conservatives' (except empty Souter) voted with the little guys.
Can't help but wonder if Pfizer set up a bank account for some of these justices somewhere.
Souter is a good place to start.
Needs to be understood by everyone and taught in grammar school.
The grammar schools are owned and operated by the government, increasingly (unfortunately) by the federal government.
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.