Skip to comments.The Government is Eviscerating Private Property Rights. Again.
Posted on 09/08/2016 2:57:34 PM PDT by Kaslin
The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution reads, in part, as follows:
No person shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Meaning if you own property - government cant arbitrarily take it from you. In whole, or in part.
Sadly, taking private property is something at which the government is becoming expert:
Most property rights scholars would probably tell you that property is sort of the redheaded stepchild of constitutional law….(T)he (Supreme) Court says something like, The Government could hardly go on if to some extent the values incident to property couldnt be diminished without paying for it every time the law changed.
Get that? For nearly a century, the Supreme Court has for the most part pretended the Fifth Amendment doesnt exist - as per it being an impediment to government regulating without compensation property out of private existence.
Which, of course, the government has been exceedingly happy to do.
Government Pirates: The Assault on Private Property Rights
Protecting Private Property Rights from Regulatory TakingsNet Neutralitys Fifth Amendment Problem
The EPA's Assault on Private Property
Did someone say regulatory takings?
Regulatory taking is a situation in which a government regulation limits the uses of private property to such a degree that the regulation effectively deprives the property owners of economically reasonable use or value of their property to such an extent that it deprives them of utility or value of that property, even though the regulation does not formally divest them of title to it.
These regulatory takings are nigh always incremental. Government rarely extrudes rules that eviscerate private property all at once. They do it in frog boiling steps and stages. Nigh always a stride on the way to oblivion - is forcing property owners to let competitors use their property.
Like, say, government forcing McDonalds, in McDonalds stores, to sell Burger King Whoppers. Not at all anti-private property and authoritarian.
Which brings us to the federal Surface Transportation Board (STB). Which for our nations railroad companies is proposing:
(C)ertain captive shippers located in terminal areas would be granted access to a competing railroad if there is a working interchange within a reasonable distance (30 miles under NITLs proposal).
That sounds obnoxious. But to be sure - heres more:
The proposed regulations create an avenue for the Board to impose a reciprocal switching arrangement, STB said. Generally speaking, reciprocal switching refers to the situation in which a railroad that has physical access to a specific shipper facility switches rail traffic to the facility for another railroad that does not have physical access.
Sounds even more obnoxious. But to be really sure, lets translate from Government-ese:
(T)he Surface Transportation Board issued a proposed rule that would require (rail) companies like CSX Transportation or Norfolk Southern to open their privately owned and maintained lines to competitors.…
Confirmed: it is outrageously obnoxious. Whoppers sold at McDonalds--as mandated by government.
This is certainly not free market. And it is absolutely an assault on the Fifth Amendment.
Its not private property - if the government can force you to make it public.
The STB should dumpster as rapidly as possible this ridiculous proposal.
Obama can’t be gone fast enough.
Why can’t McDonald’s be forced to sell Whoppers at certain locations if there isn’t a Burger King within, say, 30 miles?
And while we’re at it our local John Deere dealer should have to sell Kubota and Mahindra and (gasp!) IH tractors, amiright?
Because it’s all about FAIRNESS.
Which occurs exactly no where in the Constitution.
Thank God the Republicans control BOTH Houses of Congress to Stop these Abuses.
Article II Section 1 says “no person except a natural born citizen” and yet all of the people who took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution refused to do so when a self-professed British subject was sworn in.
Who believes Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Jay, Monroe, Madison, etc. would have found him to be a natural born citizen?
Usurpation Day, January 20, 2009, happened with the complete cooperation of both parties.
They want the Constitution changed without the hassle of amending the Constitution.
Confuse people about the clear meaning of a three word phrase and voila, every anchor baby and Winston Churchill is eligible.
The bench was the reason the GOP went along with the fig leaf resolution for McCain that was used by the Democrats as cover for Obama.
Jindal, Rubio, Haley and Cruz were all up and comers and the future of the party and ineligible
They are all still in the closet jerking off while telling everyone else they can’t do anything about it.
Fact is they like it. They like all this occurring because they on their own wont stop it but just blame the other side and unelected bureaucrats.
I read a book about ridiculous regulations on railroads (and many other industries) and it did not turn out good. Let’s see, what was the name of that book?
I guess the Ayn Rand vision of the railroads falling apart when the bureaucrats meddle is finally going to happen when I though we dodged that bullet by allowing them to abandon trackage that was no longer in use.
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.