"
Posted on 07/08/2005 2:15:42 PM PDT by Moiraine
Lawmakers at Federal and State Levels Working Feverishly on Private Property Protections
The United States Supreme Court decision in the case of Kelo v. The City of New London has sparked public outrage, and set lawmakers at both the state and federal level to work in an effort to protect private property rights.The case, which began when the City of New London, Connecticut condemned several private residences to allow for a redevelopment plan in conjunction with the construction of a major pharmaceutical research facility, resulted in a landmark decision that has endangered the rights of private property owners across the nation.
In response to the widespread demand for justice in the face of judicial tyranny, Texas legislators from both sides of the aisle are bridging the gap to protect property owners from eminent domain acquisitions by government entities for purposes that border on ‘public use.’In the past two weeks, Texas legislators have spearheaded a veritable plethora of legislation aimed at protecting property rights at the state capitol as well as in Washington D.C.This afternoon, Governor Perry even expanded the call of the special session to include a call for legislators to protect private property rights.
“Today I am expanding the call of the special legislative session and asking lawmakers to take swift action to protect the private property rights of every Texan,” Perry said. “The Supreme Court’s ruling would allow government to condemn your family’s home, bulldoze it and build a new shopping mall or some other kind of economic development project simply to generate more tax revenue. I stand with an overwhelming majority of lawmakers and citizens who believe that this starts us down a slippery slope that will lead to the erosion of Texans’ rights.”
On the federal front, last week United States Senator, John Cornyn (R-TX) introduced an aggressive property rights protection measure, dubbed the Protection of Homes, Small Businesses, and Private Property Act of 2005.If adopted into law, the measure would qualify eminent domain powers to include land procurement only for ‘public use’, and would clarify that ‘public use’ shall not be construed to include economic development. Cornyn’s legislation would apply to (1) all exercises of eminent domain power by the federal government, and (2) all exercises of eminent domain power by state and local government through the use of federal funds.
Congressman F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) has filed a similar bill in the uisi House.Sensenbrenner’s bill, titled the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005, prohibits eminent domain abuse by either the Federal Government or by State Governments using Federal funds.90 United States Representatives, including Texas’ own Rep. Tom Delay, Rep. Lamar Smith, Rep. Louis Gohmert, Rep. Henry Bonilla, Rep. Michael McCaul, Rep. Randy Neugebauer, Rep. Michael Burgess, Rep. Ted Poe, and Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, have coauthored the House bill.Support of Representatives Gohmert, Jackson-Lee and Smith are particularly important, since they are the Texas Representatives who serve on the House Judiciary Committee, which will hold hearings on the legislation before it is passed to the House floor.
To contact your United States Representative about private property rights, click here.
In the floor speech introducing his bill, which is cosponsored by Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Cornyn asserted, “It is appropriate for Congress to take action, consistent with its limited powers under the Constitution, to restore the vital protections of the Fifth Amendment and to protect homes, small businesses, and other private property rights against unreasonable government use of the power of eminent domain.It would likewise be appropriate for states to take action to voluntarily limit their own power of eminent domain. As the Court in Kelo noted, “nothing in our opinion precludes any State from placing further restrictions on its exercise of the takings power,” he added.
Texas state legislators have taken steps to do exactly as Cornyn suggested, and place further restrictions on the state’s takings power.Senator Kyle Janek (R-Houston) and Representative Frank Corte, Jr. (R-San Antonio) have each authored legislation to place a constitutional amendment promoting property rights before voters in November.If passed by Texas voters, the proposed constitutional amendment would limit a local government entity’s power of eminent domain to prevent them form using it for primarily economic development projects.
Sen. Kyle Janek reiterated the gravity of the situation last week, saying, “The property rights travesty that is taking place in New London, Connecticut, can never be allowed to take place in Texas.I am confident that the proposed constitutional amendment I filed today (June 28, 2005) will have solid bipartisan support in the Legislature and the overwhelming support of Texas voters.”
"The power of eminent domain was never intended to be used to line the pockets of private companies. When a government decides they know how to use private property better than the individual, private property rights cease to exist," Corte remarked of the Supreme Court ruling.
While Janek’s legislation is still pending in the Senate Committee on State Affairs, Corte’s measure passed unanimously from the House Committee on Land and Resource Management earlier this week.Now that the Governor has expanded the call of the special session to include property rights protections, Corte’s initiative will head to the House floor.Because the legislation would provide for a constitutional amendment, it will require a 2/3 vote to pass the Texas House and Senate; with over 116 authors and coauthors, should be a slam-dunk.
To contact your state Representative and Senator, click here.
“I support an amendment to the Texas Constitution because, by definition, the constitution is intended to protect the people from arbitrary acts by government that infringe on their basic rights,” Governor Perry explained this morning, adding, “One of the most basic rights in Texas is the right to own property, and government shouldn’t be able to take that away to pad its tax coffers.”
I'm liking this guy.
Could another Texas governor be Presidential material??
Thank God....
Was very glad to hear this.
Golly , The Supreme Court isn't gonna like that Yogi!!!
No! This is a case of a blind squirrel occasionally finding a nut. Perry has been on the wrong side of almost every issue.
Why didn't he come out for this when families were thrown out of their homes for the mid cities (Bedford I believe) mall project.
Could another Texas governor be Presidential material??
Perry's about as big a RINO you can get. Don't let the sheep's clothing fool you.
This is the probably the best we can do right now, and I'm really glad to hear this news. I'm sure I wasn't the only one calling the Gov's office for him to take this needed action.
None of this would be necessary but for those 5 boneheads on the Supreme Court gutting the 5th Amendment instead of upholding it.
Anyway, I'm going to make a second call and tell them to thank Gov. Perry for me for doing the right thing.
"
Bravo!
Once the women get a look at him, he will.
I wasn't quoting the letter. I was telling B4 my opinion :O)
Rick Perry is a slug, waiting for something to happen, then claiming it as his idea.
If anyone deserves an attaboy, it is Rep. Corte of San Antonio.
Thank Rep. Corte of Sazn Antonio, Perry had nothing to do with it, but try and take credit for it. He sat on the bill for quite a while, until pressure from the public finally got him to act.
True, we do need to override the recent SCOTUS ruling. Texans are believers in strong property rights. Strong people like Rep. Corte will help us keep those rights.
Nonsense.
Why didn't he come out for this when families were thrown out of their homes for the mid cities (Bedford I believe) mall project.
Because he wasn't governor then?
Let's see: hate crimes legislation, useless emissions testing, insurance reform, school finance...
Why didn't he come out for this when families were thrown out of their homes for the mid cities (Bedford I believe) mall project. Because he wasn't governor then?
No, He was lieutenant governor then.. (you know the position with more power to influence legislation than governor in Texas)
Cut spending instead of raising taxes 2 years ago, tort reform, redistricting. Those 3 alone cancel out those negatives, and more positives could be added.
As to the stupid land grab for the mall in North Richland Hills, I'm pretty sure he was Ag Commissioner at the time. Not exactly that agency's turf.
He is far from perfect, but he also isn't a RINO and has done a decent job. Not presidential material, though.
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.