It is amazing that posters on a conservative website have decided to minimize the importance of private property rights in order to advance the political interests of a specific candidate in a Republican nominating process. The distinction between public and private is perhaps the most fundamental principle that distinguishes American conservatism, yet many now seem willing to set it aside in the short-term focus of the moment.
This distinction is why we have Freedom of Religion, why we believe in low tax rates, and even why we have the Second Amendment; all because public and private are two separate things.
The proper use of Eminent Domain requires that a compelling public interest be served by some alternate disposition of private property, and that public interest is greater than the property owner’s right to deny the public access to the property. This clearly is the case for the Keystone pipeline or for highways or other public projects such as hospitals. It clearly was not the case in the Kelo decision or for Vera Coking’s home.
If the Kelo decision and the attempted condemnation of Coking’s home are acceptable, what uses of Eminent Domain would not be acceptable? If I can’t be secure in my own property when a developer claims his ownership of it will increase tax revenue or when a real estate investor argues that his parking lot will look nicer than my small home, then when can I be secure in my own property? Is there any reason that government can’t force me to give up what I own?
Trump’s argument that Eminent Domain authority must be unlimited or else we can’t build Keystone is simply absurd. If the public interest truly justifies this kind of taking, then it also justifies arbitrarily high tax rates and even confiscation of guns, as soon as someone decides that the result is in the public interest. These are not ideas that conservatives have traditionally supported.
But now conservatives support this because Trump says so? Forced agreement with every detail of a philosophy or person is simply Political Correctness. You can agree with Trump on a majority of positions and support his candidacy without agreeing with him on everything. This is why many argue that Trump’s supporters have fallen into worship of an idol.
We would be quite wise to have anti-waste provisions and fair-impact compensation that includes why the person lives at that place (e.g. to make a job possible).
Real property itself ultimately is Caesar’s. We only get to invest in it and live there while in Caesar’s good graces. All we have to do is not pay the taxes on it to find this out.