New London agency agrees to moratorium on eminent domain

Associated Press Published July 26 2005 NEW LONDON, Conn. -- Fresh off a victory in the U.S. Supreme Court that allowed the seizing of property for private development, a New London agency has agreed to hold off on construction plans while state lawmakers consider limiting eminent domain powers. Michael Joplin, president of the New London Development Corp., told The Day of New London that his agency will allow houses in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood to stand while the legislature takes up the eminent domain issue. State lawmakers have asked all local governments in Connecticut to refrain from seizing property for private development until they decide whether such action should be allowed. Although the Supreme Court, in its 5-4 decision last month, ruled that New London could take homes in Fort Trumbull to build a privately owned hotel and office space, the court also said states are free to ban the taking of property for such projects. States across the country are now considering such bans. Because the state had previously sanctioned the city's use of eminent domain for Fort Trumbull, it was unclear whether lawmakers could make New London delay its plans. "We are going to abide by the moratorium," Joplin said.

Posted 7/19/05

Connecticut Tea Party - The Kelo Effect

7/19/05 Wall Street Journal Editorial (Full Text):

Homeowners in New London, Connecticut got a temporary reprieve last week when state legislators declared a moratorium on takings of private property while they consider how to revise the law on eminent domain. The state assembly could meet in special session as early as this month.

Call it the Kelo effect. A few weeks after the Supreme Court's ruling in Kelo v. New London that local governments have more or less unlimited power to seize private property, Connecticuters aren't the only citizens who want to make sure they can't be evicted from homes and businesses in order to make way for private economic development. A grassroots movement has sprung up across the country.

It's instructive to watch how quickly politicians can react when they want to. In Connecticut, where Democrats control both houses of the state assembly, a Republican-sponsored bill to forbid the taking of private homes for private economic development failed as recently as three weeks ago. Yet last week Speaker of the House James Amann was quoted on the need for a law that "offers homeowners some peace of mind." Mr. Amann represents Milford, whose aldermen recently voted unanimously to prevent the city from using eminent domain to take property for private development.

As for Governor Jodi Rell, a Republican, when we called her office a few days after the Kelo ruling, a spokesman talked about the need "to strike a right balance between property rights and economic development." Last week, Ms. Rell issued a press release calling eminent domain "the 21st century equivalent of the Boston Tea Party." This time, she said, "it is not a monarch wearing robes in England we are fighting; it is five robed justices at the Supreme Court in Washington."

What a great way to illustrate the hypocrisy of our slime covered political leaders. The disconnect between the people and politicians encompasses much more than just the Kelo case. However, it does show that politicians are, after all, somewhat accountable to the people, even if we have to cause a racket to get their attention. If people got this fired up and involved every time government tried to plunder, regulate, and restrict us, then they wouldn't be able to do it anymore. Liberty hangs on by a small thread, a small group of activist citizens keep it safe for the rest of the apathetic and uncaring/ignorant populace.

Regardless of ideology, people who see wrongs being done and are aware of the blatant criminality of those in government, often believe that the best course to bring about change is by running for office themselves, volunteering for a political candidate(s), or donating to a political candidate. While all of this may be important, discussing, educating, thinking, and writing about these issues individually may actually accomplish more. Because any given politician will bend to the will of the people, the politician it is that happens to be doing so at any given time, is more or less irrelevant. The will of the people is what is important. This is why the bias of the media has been the focus of sharp and persistent attack from Conservative/Libertarian bloggers, in contrast to the Liberal bloggers. We are sick of the media distortions influencing the will of the people.

Most importantly, the will of the people must recognize the danger of runaway democracy, the country cannot be run by the will of the people. The country needs to be returned to its roots, where the will of the people and the will of the spineless politicians doesn't really matter. For example, as I state in 'The Founding of the United States and the Constitutionality of Charity': All of the citizens cannot vote to take the property of the richest citizen because that rich citizen is King of his own property under the Constitution.

The power of government needs to be again restricted, either by judicial fiat, by our elected officials, or by constitutional amendment. This can only be accomplished by changing the will of the people. (This was added to 'Supreme Tyranny'.)

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.