Rational Grounds

The right of eminent domain is a sticky matter. It's there so that the government doesn't get hung up on a major public project (transportation infrastructure is the most common example) because Mrs. Beasley refuses to sell her empty lot out on the edge of town. Naturally, the fact that the government can force her to sell doesn't really sit well, but that's why we have elections. If officials are abusing this power, we vote them out.

And there are cases where they have been doing just that. Kelo v. The City of New London seems to be just such a case (warning: I'm going on reports of news reports for my information on the actual case). Considering the pressure that business groups routinely bring to bear on government organs to get them to act in their favor, I'm extremely suspicious when eminent domain is employed to build shopping malls or other private enterprise ventures.

I would have liked to see the Supreme Court decide the other way on this case. I really don't see how the retail industry needs government help to find new places to set up shop, and seizing people's land (however justly they are compensated for it) is a very dramatic step that should only be taken when absolutely necessary. Creating a larger tax base hardly rises to that level of urgency.

In any event, the court decided in favor of the city council. So we're back where we were last week, and elected officials are stepping in the reign this sort of thing in. The system works after all.

I'm just really really skeeved out to be nodding along to Tom Delay and Rick Santorum right now.