Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why haven't the Dems made this a major campaign issue?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-04-06 02:36 PM
Original message
Why haven't the Dems made this a major campaign issue?
The abuse of minent domain is an issue that goes straight to people's hearts. And, more and more, it pits wealthy commercial developers against people who have worked hard to maintain their homes and neighborhoods.

Are we waiting for the Republicans to make this issue their own?

The victims of eminent domain abuse need a champion. Why can't the Democrats take this on?

http://www.ij.org/private_property/longbranch/8_30_06pr.html

Arlington, Va.—May courts summarily permit local governments to hand over your home to someone else for private development without even allowing you to first present evidence in your home’s defense?

That is exactly what a New Jersey judge did early this year, and that is the decision homeowners from Long Branch, N.J., who are fighting eminent domain abuse, will appeal today with the help of the Institute for Justice, the nation’s leading opponents of eminent domain for private gain. The Institute for Justice argued last year’s U.S. Supreme Court case, Kelo v. City of New London and in July won a unanimous Ohio Supreme Court ruling striking down eminent domain abuse in that state. In the 1990s, the organization successfully defended the home of Atlantic City, N.J., homeowner Vera Coking when Donald Trump had convinced a State agency to take her land for his private use.

Like thousands of ordinary neighborhoods across the nation, Long Branch’s MTOTSA neighborhood (an acronym for the streets Marine Terrace, Ocean Terrace and Seaview Avenue) is being condemned because a tax-hungry City government arbitrarily labeled the perfectly fine homes “blighted” to justify transferring them to powerful private developers. The City seeks to kick out longtime residents—many of whom are families with small children and retirees in their eighties and nineties—to make way for wealthier people. If the condemnations are allowed, private developers will make windfall profits building oceanfront condos that will sell for between $500,000 and over one million dollars.

Earlier this summer, the Monmouth County Superior Court in Freehold ruled that the City of Long Branch could invoke a bogus “blight” designation as an excuse for using its power of eminent domain to seize the neighborhood for “redevelopment.” This outrageous decision, which breaks sharply from traditional American notions of property ownership, has given Long Branch the green light to replace modest homes with fancier ones, and working-class families and retirees with rich and trendy professionals.

SNIP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FloridaPat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-04-06 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. I guess the plan is to get rid of the middle class. That would leave
most of the country blighted. Private corps take over and give jobs for minium wage.

This is totally outrageous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-04-06 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It does seem as if that's the direction we're heading.
Doesn't this issue seem tailor made for the Democrats? Why aren't they grabbing it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-04-06 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. Why aren't the Democrats talking about this?
Could it be that they are in the same pockets as the re:puke:s on this issue, that they benefit from this vile, pernicious, practice that enriches their "donors" in this system of legalized bribery?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doc03 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-04-06 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
4. It was the more liberal justices in the Supreme
Court that supported the eminent domain issue I believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-04-06 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I know Souter was on the wrong side.
Quite a disappointment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC