Posted on 08/09/2015 7:15:46 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
In a free market, there’s a pretty simple process for dealing with the situation that arises when one person covets another’s belongings: The coveter makes an offer to purchase them. If the offer is rebuffed, the coveter can make a new proposal, but he cannot simply take what he wants. It’s an effective way of recognizing the impracticality of the Tenth Commandment while enforcing the Eighth.
Donald Trump’s covetous nature is not in dispute, but what many may forget is that he’s no great respecter of the admonition not to steal, either: The man has a track record of using the government as a hired thug to take other people’s property. This is called, of course, “eminent domain.”
The Constitution’s Fifth Amendment allows the government to take private property for “public use,” so long as “just compensation” is paid. In the infamous 2005 Kelo decision, the Supreme Court held that “public use” could include, well, private use, so long as the new property owner paid more in taxes than the previous one. In other words, it allowed developers and the government to gang up on homeowners. The developer gets more land, the government gets more tax money. The only losers are the original owner and his property rights.
A decade and a half ago, it was fresh on everyone’s mind that Donald Trump is one of the leading users of this form of state-sanctioned thievery. It was all over the news. In perhaps the most-remembered example, John Stossel got the toupéed one to sputter about how, if he wasn’t allowed to steal an elderly widow’s house to expand an Atlantic City casino, the government would get less tax money, and seniors like her would get less “this and that.” Today, however, it takes a push from the Club for Growth to remind us of Trump’s lack of respect for property rights. The problem dates back to at least 1994.
That year, Trump promised to turn Bridgeport, Conn., into“a national tourist destination by building a $350 million combined amusement park, shipping terminal and seaport village and office complex on the east side of the harbor,” reported the Hartford Courant. “At a press conference during which almost every statement contained the term ‘world class,’ Trump and Mayor Joseph Ganim lavished praise on one another and the development project and spoke of restoring Bridgeport to its glory days.”
The wrinkle? “Five businesses and the city-owned Pleasure Beach now occupy the land,” as the Courant put it. The solution? “The city would become a partner with Trump Connecticut Inc. and obtain the land through its powers of condemnation. Trump would in turn buy the land from the city.” Here’s how the story concluded: “The entire development would cost the city nothing, Trump said, and no private homeowners would be affected because there are no dwellings on the land. Trump would own everything.”
That brings us to the story of the aforementioned elderly widow in Atlantic City, which starts at about the same time. The woman, Vera Coking, had owned property near the Trump Plaza Hotel for three decades, and didn’t want to move. Trump thought the land was better suited for use as a park, a parking lot, and a waiting area for limousines. He tried to negotiate, at one point offering Coking $1 million for the land. But she wasn’t budging. So New Jersey’s Casino Reinvestment Development Authority filed a lawsuit, instructing Coking to leave within 90 days and offering compensation of only $251,000. Perhaps the only upside to this story is that in neither case did Trump succeed.
The Bridgeport plan fizzled. Coking fought in court, and — in part because these were the days before Kelo was decided, no doubt — she was lucky enough to win. In 1998, a judge threw out the case. In 2005, however, Trump was delighted to find that the Supreme Court had okayed the brand of government-abetted theft that he’d twice attempted. “I happen to agree with it 100 percent,” he told Fox News’s Neil Cavuto of the Kelo decision.
Can Republicans support someone with so little regard for the property of others? Let’s hope not.
— Robert VerBruggen is an associate editor of National Review.
Back off....I am AGREEING with you buddy.
She demanded $4 million “clear” (after taxes) for that wedge of property.
As recently as 2011 she was still asking $5 million.
> The Coking home (left) sits alone in the center of casino property. The home Vera Coking refused to sell to Donald Trump adjacent from the Trump Plaza in Atlantic City is up for sale at a drastic reduction from its $5 million asking price in 2011. Now it’s $995,000.
And she sold it for $530K.
And you’re an obvious troll!
_____________________________
Nope, just pointing out that you folks suffering from TDS have a double standard in your criticisms. One standard for Trump...another standard for Cruz.
Sad you folks are joining the lies of the MSM and GOPe in your hatred of Trump. Top bad you won’t go after the Dems with the same vigor.
Also interesting you won’t answer my question, but simply call me a troll. Very telling indeed.
.
>> “We need to get our foot in the door. and Trump’s the guy to do it.” <<
.
You marxist socialists have had your whole body in the door for 50 years, and we need Ted Cruz to throw you out.
.
Pragmatism means the end justifies the means.
Expected ...however eminent domain is being effected against the entire nation state in service to corporate donors and their bought candidates.
Oh. I’m sorry. I’ve probably been doing this for too many hours and my humor radar is malfunctioning. I apologize.
Sad you folks are joining the lies of the MSM and GOPe in your hatred of Trump. Top bad you won’t go after the Dems with the same vigor.
_________________________________
lies = likes
While Cruz initially voted for Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), a bill that gives Obama fast-track trade authority when it came up for a vote in May 2015, he voted against the final passage in the Senate in June citing his disapproval with the “corruption” and “back room dealings” involved with the legislation. - See more at:
https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates/candidates/ted-cruz#article-14
A-frickin-men. Trump is Romney sewed up in a Godzilla suit. No coherent platform and a long record of liberal positions he now runs away from, all disguised by crash and bluster on the scale of a Toho Production.
Ted Cruz will make a superb VP. Ever play chess?
A troll or an idiot, which I’m not quite sure.
Ted Cruz has a solid record in defending our rights in the supreme court while he was Solicitor General.
Were you not a troll you might have found that fact out.
.
Ah, so Cruz can change positions on an issue, but Trump cannot? got it.
LOL....no problem.
.
Have you ever played an intelligent Human Being? (or did central casting use you as a janitor?)
Michelle Malkin (also a target of Trump’s bad behavior) has been very quiet but today she did post one cryptic comment about What to do if someone self immolates....Make Smores.
Perhaps you might want to have a chat with Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin; they do not agree with you.
FYI, the period is placed at the end of the sentence, not on the next line. Makes you look kind of stupid.
It amazes me how many on FR have bought into the Trump mania without thinking about what they are doing. A certain President of ours talked all pretty-like too...
Anyway, it also amazed me how many Trump supporters will NOT dispute or disprove things like this eminent domain issue..but rather, will call it a “it piece” or call the author names.
Mitt Romney didn’t have a dozen+ highly respected business/advice books under his belt either. Mitt was the ultimate hold-your-nose vote. Mr Trump is different.
Another troll journalist making up news again...
Trump is a businessman, and businessmen do what businessmen do. If there is a law that the government can ‘loop hole’ why not other people...
If the government doesn’t like the type of laws they are made to pass because they took money from lobbists and PAC people, oil people, and others, then they shouldn’t have taken the money....
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander....
So why did Cruz vote for the Corker bill which makes it much harder to stop the Iran nuke treaty. Sen. Tom Cotton was the only one to vote against it.
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.