[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 3]
[House]
[Page 4248]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     THE PIRATES OF EMINENT DOMAIN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, a couple of weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme 
Court heard oral arguments in the case of Kelo v. City of New London, a 
Connecticut eminent domain case which I think is one of the most 
important cases it will hear certainly during this term of court and 
for the future of this Nation.
  Nationally syndicated columnist Jeff Jacoby wrote a column about this 
on February 28, and he quoted Scott Bullock of the Institute for 
Justice. Listen to what Scott Bullock said, ``Every home, church or 
corner store would produce more jobs and tax revenue if it were a 
Costco or a shopping mall. If State and local governments can force a 
property owner to surrender his land so it can be given to a new owner 
who will put it to a more lucrative use, no home or shop in America 
will ever be safe again.''
  Jeff Jacoby asks, ``But can government kick people out of their homes 
or businesses simply to make way for new development?''
  No one gets concerned about the taking of property unless it is their 
property being taken. But this is getting to a very dangerous point in 
this country today. The whole history of eminent domain has been in 
large part taking land from the poor for the use and benefit of the 
rich and our government bureaucrats.
  Government at all levels in this country now owns or controls half 
the land and continuously wants more. You can never satisfy 
government's appetite for money or land. On top of this, government at 
all levels is continually putting more and more restrictions on the 
land that remains in private ownership. If this trend continues, Mr. 
Speaker, housing prices will continue to skyrocket. New homes will be 
built on much smaller pieces of land, and more young families will be 
crowded into high-rise apartments or townhouses. A very important part 
of the American dream, home ownership, will slowly fade away for many 
young people.
  Huge parts of East Tennessee, my home area, have been taken over the 
years from poor or lower-income families who would be rich today if 
they still had their land.
  Columnist Thomas Sowell recently wrote about what he called the 
``misuse of the power of eminent domain'' and how government was taking 
property from working class people. Columnist Sowell said this, ``Those 
who are constantly denouncing greed almost never apply that term to 
what the government does, no matter how unconscionable it may be, as 
the routine misuse of eminent domain has become with its Robin-Hood-in-
reverse redistribution of wealth.''
  Many people do not realize how important private property is to our 
freedom and our prosperity. As I said a few minutes ago, the Federal 
Government now owns or controls over 30 percent of the land and State, 
and local governments and quasi-governmental entities now own another 
20 percent. Half the land is in some type of public ownership, and 
government at all levels keeps taking more and more and putting more 
and more restrictions on the land that is still private.
  Richard W. Rahn, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, wrote 
recently, ``Government-owned land is removed from the tax base, so it 
not only costs everyone to maintain it, but the government also loses 
tax revenue. When land is removed from private use by government 
ownership or unreasonable use restrictions, it reduces the supply of 
land, thus driving up housing prices.''
  Because of government taking or restricting use of land, more and 
more people are being forced on to smaller and smaller areas or 
developments. You can never satisfy government's appetite for land or 
money, and we desperately need to elect more people at all levels who 
will pledge to stop taking private property.
  As I have said, it is just impossible to satisfy government's 
appetite for land, and over the last 40 years or so, governments at all 
levels have been taking private property at a very alarming rate.
  Private property is an extremely important element for both our 
freedom and our prosperity. It used to be that eminent domain was used 
mainly to take private property for public use. Now, according to a 
column in the nonpartisan National Journal, condemning private property 
for private use is a booming national business. The magazine gave 
several examples, including the taking of Randy Bailey's 27-year-old 
brake shop in Mesa, Arizona, for a new chain store.
  This is happening in thousands of places all over the Nation. 
Jonathan Rauch wrote in the National Journal, ``In the last decade, it 
has become common for city leaders to define blighted as not developed 
as nicely as we would prefer or not developed by the people we would 
prefer. But property is held sacrosanct in America not to protect the 
rich and powerful, who always make out all right, but to protect the 
poor from the predations of the rich and powerful.''
  He quoted in his column an official of the Institute for Justice, a 
law firm trying to protect private property owners, as saying ``this is 
now a major nationwide problem.''
  Once again, I will say, I hope we elect more people to Federal, State 
and local offices who will stop taking so much private property. It 
sounds good for a politician to create a park, but then when that land 
is taken off the tax rolls, the taxes for everybody else have to keep 
going up. We are doing this at a very, very alarming rate, and we need 
to at least cut back on this.
  We cannot take care of all the national parks and State parks and 
local parks that we have in this country today, and we need to stop 
taking more, or we are going to ruin our economy, and we are going to 
take away an important part of the freedom that we have in this Nation.

                          ____________________