[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 32 (Tuesday, March 21, 2000)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E355-E356]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS IMPLEMENTATION ACT OF 2000

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. DOC HASTINGS

                             of washington

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 16, 2000

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2372) to 
     simplify and expedite access to the Federal courts for

[[Page E356]]

     injured parties whose rights and privileges, secured by the 
     United States Constitution, have been deprived by final 
     actions of Federal agencies, or other government officials or 
     entities acting under color of State law; to prevent Federal 
     courts from abstaining from exercising Federal jurisdiction 
     in actions where no State law claim is alleged; to permit 
     certification of unsettled State law questions that are 
     essential to resolving Federal claims arising under the 
     Constitution; and to clarify when government action is 
     sufficiently final to ripen certain Federal claims arising 
     under the Constitution:

  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong 
support of H.R. 2372, the ``Private Property Rights Implementation Act 
of 2000.'' This commonsense legislation makes it easier for landowners 
that have had the use of their property taken by the Federal Government 
to get their day in court.
  While the fifth amendment requires the Government to compensate 
citizens for the taking of their private property, these property 
owners have found it almost impossible to gain access to the Federal 
courts to pursue their claims. Quite simply, H.R. 2372 would provide a 
way out of the regulatory limbo that requires property owners to seek a 
``final'' answer at the local level before pursuing this constitutional 
issue in Federal court. Contrary to claims that the bill would 
circumvent local authority, it outlines specific requirements that 
claimants must pursue before receiving action from the Federal courts. 
These include an appeal to the local planning commission, an 
application from the local zoning board, and an appeal to the local 
board of elected officials. Thus, the bill protects local authority 
while ensuring that justice is done in a timely manner.
  Mr. Chairman, we in the Pacific Northwest are being inundated with 
new Federal requirements and restrictions relating to salmon and other 
species protected under the Endangered Species Act. The impacts of 
these new Federal actions on private property owners are only beginning 
to be felt, but promise to be significant. This legislation will ensure 
that the victims of Federal takings do not have to wait 10 years--the 
current average time it takes to get access to a Federal court--to seek 
just compensation. Private property owners in my district need to know 
that there is a clear and fair process in place for them to defend 
their fifth amendment rights. That is exactly what H.R. 2372 provides.
  I commend the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Canady, for bringing this 
legislation before the House and I urge my colleagues to support it.

                          ____________________