see "House Vote Counters Eminent Domain Measure" (AP via Yahoo, 11/3/05)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051103/ap_on_go_co/seizing_property_7

By a vote of 376-38, the House has approved a measure to restrict Federal funding from state or local governments.

I will be interested to see who the 38 "no" votes were, and will report who they were when I get the information.

According to the news story: Opponents argued that the federal government should not be interceding in what should be a local issue. "We should not change federal law every time members of Congress disagree with the judgment of a locality when it uses eminent domain for the purpose of economic development," said Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA).

As usual, Representative Scott has it wrong. Even in his concurring opinion in the Kelo case, Justice John Paul Stevens hinted that governments should legislate against the practice of using eminent domain power for "economic development".

Rarely has the Supreme Court been as obviously wrong as they were in Kelo, and it was Congress' responsibility to do at least what they have done today.

-------------------

This is a press release from the office of Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-CO) regarding today's House vote on H.R. 4128, the Private Property Rights Protection Act.

11/3/05 For Immediate Release, Contact: Jordan Stoick 202.225.6877

Beauprez Supports Private Property Owners; Votes for Private Property Rights Protection Act
Beauprez: "If the Founding Fathers could see what is happening today, not only do I think they would they turn over in their graves, I think they would try to run and hide"

WASHINGTON - Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-Colo.) today joined a bipartisan majority of the U.S. House of Representatives in voting for H.R. 4128, the Private Property Rights Protection Act. The legislation will help protect property owners from the use of eminent domain for economic development purposes by states and localities, as upheld in the recent Supreme Court ruling Kelo v. City of New London.

"Under the guise of economic development, state and local officials can now arbitrarily kick families out of their homes, farmers and ranchers off their land, and close small businesses that do not provide enough tax revenue for the city or state," said Rep. Beauprez. "I believe our Founding Fathers intended for government to protect life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness -- including the right to own property without the fear of government taking it from you."

Both the federal government and the states have the power of eminent domain, which is the right to take private property when necessary for government activities. However, government cannot take private property without just compensation and must do so for "public use."

In 1998, the City of New London, Conn., invoked eminent domain to take private land and give it to a private company, arguing it would help invigorate the economy. On June 23, 2005, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the City of New London, essentially endorsing the idea that government has the right to take personal property for economic development purposes, well beyond the original intent of public use.

H.R. 4128 enhances the penalty for states and localities that abuse their eminent domain power by denying states or localities that commit such abuse all federal economic development funds for a period of two years.

Beauprez added, "If the Founding Fathers could see what is happening today, not only do I think they would they turn over in their graves, I think they would try to run and hide."