Skip to main content

Home/ 1023collaborative/ Group items tagged ed

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
jennya024

Eminent Domain Reform To Be Introduced in U.S. House of Representatives Property Owners... - 0 views

www.freedom.org/...castle.phtml

ed reform

shared by jennya024 on 08 Mar 08 - Cached
  • Today's News Today's News This Issue Letters to the Editor Writers Eminent Domain Reform To Be Introduced in U.S.House of Representatives Property Owners Still Left Unprotected from Federally Funded Abuses Two Years After Kelo By The Castle Coalition Arlington, Va. - July 12, Representatives Maxine Waters (D-CA) and F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) introduced the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2007 to stop taxpayer funding of eminent domain abuse. This bipartisan bill would counter the effects of the U.S. Supreme Court's infamous decision in Kelo v. City of New London, which allows governments to use eminent domain to seize private property on behalf of private developers in hopes of increasing tax revenue. The Act would deny for two fiscal years economic development funds to state and local governments that use eminent domain for private development. In 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed H.R. 4128, the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005, by a vote of 376 to 38. The bill was co-sponsored by representatives from across the political and ideological spectrum, including Representatives Waters, Sensenbrenner, John Conyers Jr. (D-MI), and Henry Bonilla (R-TX). Despite unprecedented bipartisan political and public support, the bill languished in the Senate Judiciary Committee and ultimately died. "Federal protections from eminent domain abuse are long overdue," said Bert Gall, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice, which argued the Kelo case on behalf of the homeowners. IJ and the Castle Coalition - a nationwide grassroots organization of property owners and activists dedicated to stopping eminent domain abuse - have led the fight to reform state and federal eminent domain laws. "Even though the vast majority of Americans oppose the abuse of eminent domain for private development, the federal government still funds that abuse." June 23 marked the two-year anniversary of the Kelo decision. In every poll since that ruling, the public is overwhelmingly against eminent domain for private use. Forty-two states have passed eminent domain reforms reining in the Kelo decision, including 10 states where voters passed ballot measures by wide margins in last year's elections. But many of those reforms
    • jennya024
      jennya024 on 08 Mar 08
       
      This talks about the eminent domain reform, Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005.
jennya024

Institute for Justice: Property Rights Cases: New London, CT - 0 views

www.ij.org/...con_property_backgrounder.html

ed kelo london new v.

shared by jennya024 on 14 Mar 08 - Cached
  • After all, richer people could be living there and paying more taxes
    • jennya024
      jennya024 on 14 Mar 08
       
      The author's tone is informative because it gives a complete background on the Kelo v. New London case starting with how it started and ending with how eminent domain has changed over the years. The tone of the author is also hostile because they are in favor of Kelo and make comments through out the article such as, " Allowing condemnation for "economic development" just allows cities and developers to pick whatever land they want, without regard to the people who live or work there" or "This ruling is an invitation to disaster because every business generates more taxes than a home and every big business generates more taxes than a small one." The Institute for Justice claims that state and local governments are abusing the power of eminent domain all over the country by taking private homes and businesses for developers who promise more jobs and taxes. The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that "public use" translated to benefiting the economy. The city council of New London allowed the New London Development Corporation, a private organization, to begin to craft their existing development plan for the neighborhood of Fort Trumbull in New London, Connecticut. The Institute of Justice filed a lawsuit against the city of New London in Superior Court on behalf of seven of the property owners who refused to move. The Superior Court ruled in favor of four out of the seven home owners, but the Supreme Court ruled against the home owners two years later. Their reasoning was that as long as the city felt it was in a "financial hardship" and that a private development would benefit them in ways of jobs and taxes, then this use of eminent domain for justifiable. I believe this article is very useful because it does provide a good background on Susette Kelo and the Kelo v. New London case. It also supports my side of the argument. I wil use it to demonstrate how eminent domain is being abused.It will help my readers get a better understanding of the abuse issue of eminent
1 - 4 of 4
Showing 20▼ items per page