Executive Order: Protecting the Property Rights of the American People

The White House ^ | June 23, 2006 | Office of the press secretary

[DaveTesla]

Executive Order: Protecting the Property Rights of the American People

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to strengthen the rights of the American people against the taking of their private property, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to protect the rights of Americans to their private property, including by limiting the taking of private property by the Federal Government to situations in which the taking is for public use, with just compensation, and for the purpose of benefiting the general public and not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken.

Sec. 2. Implementation. (a) The Attorney General shall:

(i) issue instructions to the heads of departments and agencies to implement the policy set forth in section 1 of this order; and

(ii) monitor takings by departments and agencies for compliance with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

(b) Heads of departments and agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law:

(i) comply with instructions issued under subsection (a)(i); and

(ii) provide to the Attorney General such information as the Attorney General determines necessary to carry out subsection (a)(ii).

Sec. 3. Specific Exclusions. Nothing in this order shall be construed to prohibit a taking of private property by the Federal Government, that otherwise complies with applicable law, for the purpose of:

(a) public ownership or exclusive use of the property by the public, such as for a public medical facility, roadway, park, forest, governmental office building, or military reservation;

(b) projects designated for public, common carrier, public transportation, or public utility use, including those for which a fee is assessed, that serve the general public and are subject to regulation by a governmental entity;

c) conveying the property to a nongovernmental entity, such as a telecommunications or transportation common carrier, that makes the property available for use by the general public as of right;

(d) preventing or mitigating a harmful use of land that constitutes a threat to public health, safety, or the environment;

(e) acquiring abandoned property;

(f) quieting title to real property;

(g) acquiring ownership or use by a public utility;

(h) facilitating the disposal or exchange of Federal property; or

(i) meeting military, law enforcement, public safety, public transportation, or public health emergencies.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency or the head thereof; or

(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(c) This order shall be implemented in a manner consistent with Executive Order 12630 of March 15, 1988.

(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity against the United States, its departments, agencies, entities, officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

June 23, 2006.

[AmericaUnited]

Um, that was a joke.

I know it was a joke from you.

[sinkspur]

Cue the spooky music.

[hedgetrimmer]

Bush used his power for something FOR AMERICANS!!! FOR NGOS. Where is the word CITIZEN used in the EO? You know, the actual people whose rights he MUST protect under the US Constitution?

The fact that he gives NGOS rights over US citizens clearly shows how far along we have come to a corporatist fascist government.

[hedgetrimmer]

My opinion is that this executive order does nothing except to say "we're for private property."

You would be wrong.

[MarcusTulliusCicero]

This is definitely toothless. What you propose, i.e. cutting off funds for cities that confiscate property wouldn't fall under the purview of this amendment. That would have to be done by Congress since that reflect appropriations. This order covers executive departments and makes it policy that these department will only exercise eminent domain for public use instead of public benefit, which was the Kelo SCOTUS decision standard. However, the final section makes this order subservient to existing law, and, like it or not, existing law permits seizure for public benefit. So, the bottom line is that as long as executive departments adhere to this guideline the standard returns to pre-Kelo....but, and this is a big but, if, let's say, the Secretary of the Interior decides to ignore it and seize your land based on public benefit, you can't use this executive order as a defense in court to challenge that decision. Ergo, my characterization of it being toothless. It is symbolism over substance.

[mylife]

Its a good start

[AmericaUnited]

I'm sure the usual suspects will be along shortly to explain why all of this is merely business as usual and poses no real sovereignty threats to the United States.

Don't look now but a black helicopter is hovering over your house. And another thing, type slower since the ECHELON main server is slow right now and is dropping some of your packets....

[nicmarlo]

You were addressing federal takings for federal highways. Nothing has changed.

And that's exactly what I noted.

[nicmarlo]

Our FR pretend-conservatives are even now going into the spin mode.

But of course.

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

Is there a link to the proposed corridor? I heard about a page dedicated to it but dont remember it and would not know what to keyword to find it. Any help?

[AmericaUnited]

Where is the word CITIZEN used in the EO? You know, the actual people whose rights he MUST protect under the US Constitution?

Down skippy! "the rights of the American people" is generally understood to be a euphemism for American citizens (except by conspiracy moonbats).

[jazusamo]

Well I wish you a Happy Birthday and think this is better news than was a year ago. I knew the decision was last year but didn't realize it was a full year ago. Hopefully by this time next year it will have been overturned by SCOTUS but I'm not holding my breath.

[Congressman Billybob]

Excellent article. I agree with this Executive Order. It seems that the White House is finally starting to recognize the public outrage when judges attempt to take over legislative functions by rewriting laws and even the Constitution to suit their personal preferences.

P.S. Interested in a Freeper in Congress? Keep in touch with me.

Congressman Billybob

Latest article: "Tribal Loyalties and Public Lies"

[hedgetrimmer]

Why do you think that the federal government conveying land to an NGO, is constitutional or even good?

The corruption is beginning to be palpable. Everyone knows of the corrupt relationship the Nature Conservancy has with the federal government through unconstutional public/private partnerships. It will be much worse, with NGOs like the NASCO superhighway coalition and the Kansas City Smartport run by international conglomerates.

[pollyannaish]

RFLOL. Big desert? That plays into the NWO how exactly?

About three or four weeks ago, I started finding all of this conspiracy-theory-Bush-is-evil-how-can-you-sleep-at-night talk hilarious. Falling down laughing hilarious. I think it's been good for my health actually, since laughter is indeed the best medicine. They are so doggone earnest that it just makes me laugh.

So if there was a point to be made by the over-the-top-anti-illegal-immigration people, or the Bilderburgers-are-giving-away-our-sovreignty cabal...I am immune to it.

And I am perfectly content to let them think that it's because I am too dumb.

[sinkspur]

The fact that he gives NGOS rights over US citizens clearly shows how far along we have come to a corporatist fascist government.

Cue the really spooky music!

[hedgetrimmer]

You agree that the white house should be able to condemn private property and convey it to an NGO like the NASCO supercorridor?

[Indy Pendance]

Gotcha ya.

[lewislynn]

In Texas, compensation for takings for the Trans-Texas Corridor will be paid by a private corporation.

LOL! SO WHAT?

The problem isn't who pays, the problem is who takes for what reason.

How is it that it's so beneficial to a private corporation that they are willing to pay for the State to take YOUR property?

[Mobile Vulgus]

This is a good order as far as it goes.

Unfortunately, the problem is NOT with the Feds, but with the states! This order doesn't and can't stop the states froms tealing property!