Posted on 06/04/2002 6:23:39 AM PDT by calvin sun
When someone holds the loaded gun of eminent domain to your head, some turn into 'willing' sellers.
Everybody has a price.
And it is the Owners right to accept or reject the offer -- even if it is 'reasonable', excepting only those things mentioned in the Constitution. I don't believe a golf course, or a museum, merit such use by government.
Article I, Section 8.
The Congress shall have power to...
To establish post offices and post roads;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;Amendment V
...nor shall any person...
...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Well, "other needful buildings" provides a loophole big enough to drive a Mack Truck through, as far as the federal Constitution is concerned. But in the Saha's situation, we're discussing the State's right (and local government's) of eminent domain.
Show me where the Federal Constitution prohibits the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from exercising its power of eminent domain for lawful purposes defined by Pennsylvania's Constitution.
Look at this thread....that arrogant man calls those who oppose the plan and happen to live elsewhere essential gadflies that like conflict. Perhaps he would be interested in knowing that there have been times I have wanted to write letters to the editor of my town paper, but have decided against it just to try to not start a big controversy. I am the "Roy Waggoner" listed in the article and I am a little angry he would accuse me of just opposing his little plan for the sake of opposing something.
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.