Desertdog
Member
House Passes Private Property Protection Act
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200511\CUL20051104a.html
(CNSNews.com) - By an overwhelming margin, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a private property protection act on Thursday -- a direct response to the recent Supreme Court ruling involving homeowners in New London, Conn.
In Kelo v. City of New London, the court ruled 5-4 that the government may seize the home, small business or other private property of one citizen and transfer it to another private citizen -- if the transfer would boost the community's economic development and tax base.
The decision shocked many Americans, prompting some to demand action from Congress. "If the Supreme Court won't protect Americans' private property rights, then Congress must, and they ought to do so quickly, before more homes, businesses and farms are taken," said the Center for Individual Freedom said in September.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) said Congress has received an earful in the months since the Kelo ruling.
"In recent months, we have heard from thousands of constituents questioning the Kelo decision. Many of these landowners are families trying to raise their children or senior citizens who have lived in the same home most of their adult lives.
"Private property owners are angry and worried -- and rightly so. They don't deserve to live under a cloud of uncertainty. People own their property. Eminent domain should be rare," the Speaker said.
Hastert said the bill (H.R. 4128, the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005) restores homeowners' rights and protects landowners from the "whims" of city officials seeking more tax revenue.
Specifically, the bill would withhold federal funds for economic development from states and communities that seize property for purposes of economic development. And it bars the federal government from seizing private property for economic development.
The measure passed the House by a vote of 376-38. Similar legislation is pending in the Senate.
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200511\CUL20051104a.html
(CNSNews.com) - By an overwhelming margin, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a private property protection act on Thursday -- a direct response to the recent Supreme Court ruling involving homeowners in New London, Conn.
In Kelo v. City of New London, the court ruled 5-4 that the government may seize the home, small business or other private property of one citizen and transfer it to another private citizen -- if the transfer would boost the community's economic development and tax base.
The decision shocked many Americans, prompting some to demand action from Congress. "If the Supreme Court won't protect Americans' private property rights, then Congress must, and they ought to do so quickly, before more homes, businesses and farms are taken," said the Center for Individual Freedom said in September.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) said Congress has received an earful in the months since the Kelo ruling.
"In recent months, we have heard from thousands of constituents questioning the Kelo decision. Many of these landowners are families trying to raise their children or senior citizens who have lived in the same home most of their adult lives.
"Private property owners are angry and worried -- and rightly so. They don't deserve to live under a cloud of uncertainty. People own their property. Eminent domain should be rare," the Speaker said.
Hastert said the bill (H.R. 4128, the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005) restores homeowners' rights and protects landowners from the "whims" of city officials seeking more tax revenue.
Specifically, the bill would withhold federal funds for economic development from states and communities that seize property for purposes of economic development. And it bars the federal government from seizing private property for economic development.
The measure passed the House by a vote of 376-38. Similar legislation is pending in the Senate.
