Posted by Hank FL on June 25, 2006 at 18:14:42:
I agree.
On the bright side, many states are working to pass legislation that hopefully, will reign in “Kelo-type” situations.
Executive Order: Kibosh on Kelo? - Posted by Hank FL
Posted by Hank FL on June 23, 2006 at 17:12:44:
Executive Order: Protecting the Property Rights of the American People
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to strengthen the rights of the American people against the taking of their private property, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to protect the rights of Americans to their private property, including by limiting the taking of private property by the Federal Government to situations in which the taking is for public use, with just compensation, and for the purpose of benefiting the general public and not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken.
Sec. 2. Implementation. (a) The Attorney General shall:
(i) issue instructions to the heads of departments and agencies to implement the policy set forth in section 1 of this order; and
(ii) monitor takings by departments and agencies for compliance with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.
(b) Heads of departments and agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law:
(i) comply with instructions issued under subsection (a)(i); and
(ii) provide to the Attorney General such information as the Attorney General determines necessary to carry out subsection (a)(ii).
Sec. 3. Specific Exclusions. Nothing in this order shall be construed to prohibit a taking of private property by the Federal Government, that otherwise complies with applicable law, for the purpose of:
(a) public ownership or exclusive use of the property by the public, such as for a public medical facility, roadway, park, forest, governmental office building, or military reservation;
(b) projects designated for public, common carrier, public transportation, or public utility use, including those for which a fee is assessed, that serve the general public and are subject to regulation by a governmental entity;
c) conveying the property to a nongovernmental entity, such as a telecommunications or transportation common carrier, that makes the property available for use by the general public as of right;
(d) preventing or mitigating a harmful use of land that constitutes a threat to public health, safety, or the environment;
(e) acquiring abandoned property;
(f) quieting title to real property;
(g) acquiring ownership or use by a public utility;
(h) facilitating the disposal or exchange of Federal property; or
(i) meeting military, law enforcement, public safety, public transportation, or public health emergencies.
Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency or the head thereof; or
(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(c) This order shall be implemented in a manner consistent with Executive Order 12630 of March 15, 1988.
(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity against the United States, its departments, agencies, entities, officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
GEORGE W. BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE,
June 23, 2006.
Re: Executive Order: Kibosh on Kelo? - Posted by Jack
Posted by Jack on June 23, 2006 at 18:03:59:
I have printed this out, and will read it tonight. My first reactions are:
1.There are probably enough loopholes to make this meaningless. (this was probably written to preempt local and State action on the issue).
-
It probably only effects Federal government siezures, as opposed to State and Local government eminent domain issues which are 95%+ of all the ‘Kelo’ type cases.
-
The power of the government to seize property is in one of the constitutional ammendments (oh, I don’t know which one), so it would not be within the authority of the President to make such an order.
Re: Executive Order: Kibosh on Kelo? - Posted by Jack
Posted by Jack on June 24, 2006 at 09:49:12:
Ok, I have read it now. #3 of my prior comments probably does not apply here, since this soley effects the federal government. #2 is probably the most important of my prior comments. There has probably never been a property condemnation at the federal level soley for the purpose of benefiting a private (non utility or transportation) third party, so I feel this order is much to do about nothing.