[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 95 (Tuesday, June 10, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1183]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 THE PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS PROTECTION AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY 
                                  ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. JOHN SULLIVAN

                              of oklahoma

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 10, 2008

  Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce H.R. 6219, the 
Private Property Rights Protection and Government Accountability Act of 
2008.
  Previously, the U.S. Constitution specifically limited government 
taking of private property through a relatively narrow exception for 
``public use.'' Public use has historically referred to roads, schools, 
firehouses, etc. You may remember the infamous 2005 Supreme Court 
decision, Kelo v. City of New London, where the court broadened the 
government's ability to take your home, farm, business or place of 
worship. The negative affects of this far reaching Supreme Court 
decision places millions of private property owners nationwide at risk.
  Some States are trying to correct this injustice and have enacted 
restrictions on the use of eminent domain (in this case, is when the 
government seizes private property), with varied effectiveness. 
However, Congress has not taken action to restore private property 
rights and the abusive use of eminent domain has continued.
  That is why I am introducing the Private Property Rights Protection 
and Government Accountability Act of 2008, along with the House Energy 
and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Joe Barton. This legislation will 
restrict certain federal economic development funds for 10 years to any 
state or locality in which eminent domain is used to take private 
property for a private purpose. It will also allow private property 
owners the legal recourse they deserve to fight baseless private 
property takings by State and local governments.
  Examples of eminent domain abuse can be seen across Oklahoma, from 
Oklahoma City to Muskogee, and across this country.
  No family, business operator or place of worship is safe if the 
government decides that their property does not measure up, and that 
``public purpose'' would be better served if it were torn down and 
replaced by something bigger, glitzier and more taxable. I encourage 
all my colleagues to support this important legislation.

                          ____________________