Sunday, September 4, 2011

The Little Pink House, Kelo v. New London, stealing stuff, and government incompetence

In 2005, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Kelo v. New London, using the powers of eminent domain to seize property from one private owner and hand it over to another private owner -- a developer who promised more than 3,000 new jobs and $1.2 million in tax revenue.

In other words, someone's campaign contributor wanted some land, but didn't want to sell at the price the contributor wanted to pay.  Favors were called in.  Strings were pulled.  Stuff was stolen.  Nothing more to it than that. 
This is from the Gideon's Trumpet blog:

As regular readers of this blog know, the redevelopment project that gave rise to the wretched U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. New London, never came about. In spite of the city’s boasting about the quality of its plans, nothing was ever built on the Fort Trumbull site from which the city displaced an entire unoffending, well maintained lower middle-class neighborhood. Though the formal taking took place in 2000 and the U.S. Supreme Court gave its approval to it in 2005, the city’s project has been a failure, with 91 acres of waterfront property sitting there empty and overgrown by weeds.

Now, we learn from the local newspaper, The Day, that following the hurricane Irene, the city has designated the Fort Trumbull redevelopment site as a place to dump vegetation debris. For a video of locals dumping that stuff on the site, click here.

Connecticut taxpayers have thus been soaked tens of millions of dollars, not just for nothing, but for making things worse — for transforming a nice local neighborhood into a dump.

Here's a video of citizens hauling their post-storm crap to what was once a nice little neighborhood:



The best book on the Kelo vs. New London case is Little Pink House. 


Here's a summary, from Amazon.com:

Suzette Kelo was just trying to rebuild her life when she purchased a broken-down Victorian house perched on the waterfront in New London, CT. The house wasn't particularly fancy, but with lots of hard work Suzette was able to turn it into a home that was important to her, a home that represented her new found independence.



Little did she know that the City of New London, desperate to revive its flailing economy, wanted to raze her house and the others like it that sat along the waterfront in order to win a lucrative Pfizer pharmaceutical contract that would bring new business into the city. Kelo and fourteen neighbors flat out refused to sell, so the city decided to exercise its power of eminent domain to condemn their homes, launching one of the most extraordinary legal cases of our time, a case that ultimately reached the United States Supreme Court.


In Little Pink House, award-winning investigative journalist Jeff Benedict takes us behind the scenes of this case -- indeed, Suzette Kelo speaks for the first time about all the details of this inspirational true story as one woman led the charge to take on corporate America to save her home.

I'll never understand what makes voters believe that their city councils, governors, state reps, congressmen, or presidents have a clue about economic development.  Why?  Because they don't have a clue. 

And even if they did, it wouldn't justify theft.  Here's some John Mellencamp, on the joy of owning a Little Pink House, and not having to worry about Fascists stealing it. 

This means you, Jerry Jones



2 comments:

Nick said...

Kelo is exactly the reason conservatives and libertarians need to join together to defeat Obama. Kelo was one of many 5-4 decisions, but this time Kennedy went the wrong way - with the court liberals.

Obama has already appointed two young left-wing zealots to the court. With Ginsburg in her late 70s, she will most likely retire soon, giving Obama the chance to rejuvenate a third seat. God forbid that Kennedy or Scalia, who are also both in their 70s, pass away or retire. Obama will tip the balance of power to the left for the next quarter century.

There are many reasons not to re-elect Obama, but this one is paramount. People might fear electing a RINO or a big spending, big government Republicrat, but as long as he appoints a solid conservative or libertarian to the court, everything else is inconsequential. The social welfare state will collapse under it's own weight, but the SCOTUS will push us further and faster down the slippery slope.

Lord knows we dont need another Bush, but there are worse things that can happen if Obama is re-elected. Libertarians have to pick a side, and they must rally to defeat Obama at any cost. Im saying the same thing to Republicans who want to nominate a loser like Bachman, Palin, or Perry. We need to nominate and support whichever R has the best chance of dethroning Emperor Zero.

When we have a 6-3 or 7-2 balance on the Supreme Court, then we can afford to take some principled chances on dark horse candidates. Rubio, Ryan, and others will be ready to take the helm by the time the next Republican leaves office.

CenTexTim said...

I'm with Nick. Politicians come and go, and political winds blow different directions, but Supreme Court appointments are forever.

The thought of SCOTUS with a 'progressive' majority - that is, one that cannot or will not read the Constitution - spells doom for this country.