Categories
Fifth Amendment rights property rights

Property Rights for Competitors

Kelo, eminent domain, property rights, IJ, Institute for Justice

New Year’s Resolution for the U.S. Supreme Court: follow the Constitution.

That’s not what happened in 2005 when, by a 5-4 majority, the court determined that governments in this country could enjoy an almost unlimited power of eminent domain. The mere prospect of a more taxable commercial entity or mere desire to appease some constituency would suffice to legally justify violating the rights of innocent property owners.

This Kelo v. New London decision was applauded by abusers of power, derided by defenders of property rights. The latter leapt into action, fighting for legislation in 47 states to give property owners firmer protection.

One exception was New York State, where the town of Utica recently used the power of eminent domain against Bryan Bowers and Mike Licata.

These business partners had established a cardiology service to compete with that of CNY Cardiology group, right next door. CNY begged the city to let it turn the Bowers Development building into a parking lot. We need a parking lot there, said CNY; right where our lower-priced competitor is sitting.

The city said okay.

Enough, says Institute for Justice, which is representing Bowers Development and all of us by petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit Kelo.

IJ President Scott Bullock believes that it’s “high time for the Supreme Court itself to . . . remove this blot on its jurisprudence and restore constitutional guardrails to the use of eminent domain.”

Please resolve to give America a favorable outcome, justices.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Thought

Dorothy L. Sayers

What is repugnant to every human being is to be reckoned always as a member of a class and not as an individual person.

Dorothy L. Sayers, Are Women Human? (1938).
Categories
Today

Robots!

On January 2, 1921, in a theater in Hradec Králové, Czech writer Karel Čapek’s play R.U.R. received its world premiere. The initials stood for “Rossum’s Universal Robots,” a fictional company that created a line of intelligent workers, and from which the word “robot” was coined. In Czech, robota means forced labour of the kind that serfs were once required to perform on their masters’ lands; it is derived from rab, meaning “slave.”

Categories
Common Sense general freedom

Happy New Year — 2025

New Year, 2025, Thomas Paine, America

“We have it in our power to begin the world over again. A situation, similar to the present, hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of a new world is at hand, and a race of men, perhaps as numerous as all Europe contains, are to receive their portion of freedom from the events of a few months. The reflection is awful, and in this point of view, how trifling, how ridiculous, do the little paltry cavilings of a few weak or interested men appear, when weighed against the business of a world.”

—Thomas Paine

Categories
Thought

Oscar Levant

When I used to speak of the lunatic fringe, I didn’t know I was going to be head of it.

Oscar Levant, The Memoirs of an Amnesiac (1965).

Categories
Today

The Slave Trade Banned

On January 1, 1808, the importation of slaves into the United States was banned.

This was not a ban on the slave trade as such, of course, but of the buying of slaves from sources overseas.

Categories
government transparency

The August Workings!

“Congress has secretly paid out more than $17 million of your money,” Representative Thomas Massie tweeted last week, “to quietly settle charges of harassment (sexual and other forms) in Congressional offices.”

Sounds nasty when he states it like that. He could have said Congress has valiantly kept litigation from disturbing the august workings of the world’s greatest deliberative body!

But seriously, Massie tells the truth and offers a challenge: “Don’t you think we should release the names of the Representatives? I do.”

He refers to the names of the accused in Congress. The ones bailed out of criminal and civil action, along with public obloquy, to the tune that only two-digit millions can play.

Amusingly, Representative Massie compares and contrasts congressional hanky-panky and hush-money payments with those of former and future president of the United States, Donald Trump. “The allegation is that President Trump paid $130,000 of his own money but here in Congress we have . . . there may be some on this dais!” The “some” are the bailed-out accused harassers whom Massie works with every day.

Imagine the love Massie must feel from his fellow brothers and sisters in Congress Assembled, with his demand for complete transparency.

Years ago I quoted CNN on the hush-money issue. “The current system in place does not require the [Office of Compliance] to make public the number of sexual harassment complaints, number of settlements reached, the dollar figure of those settlements or which offices are being complained about. Congressional aides say this is giving unintentional cover to the worst offenders in Congress.” 

I questioned whether that was “unintentional.”

It’s not called “hush money” because it brings things out in the open!

Were I the twice-impeached Donald Trump, I’d bring up that $17 million every time I addressed Congress. After all, Trump paid for his own . . . alleged . . . indiscretions. 

Our representatives have made us pay for theirs.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Flux and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Thought

Dorothy L. Sayers

A human being must have occupation, if he or she is not to become a nuisance to the world.

Dorothy L. Sayers, Are Women Human? (1938).
Categories
Today

Bricked for the Taxman

On December 31, 1695, Englanders received a new tax, a window tax. One of the main responses to this was the bricking up of many British windows.

This last day of the year in 1991 marked the complete cessation of all institutions of the Soviet Union.

New Year’s Eve 1992 saw the peaceful dissolution of Czechoslovakia into the Czech Republic and Slovakia. This has been dubbed the “Velvet Divorce.”

Categories
ideological culture media and media people too much government

Musk’s Alternative for Germany

Germany, Democracy, far right, extremist, Elon Musk

“Tech entrepreneur Elon Musk caused uproar after backing Germany’s far-right party in a major newspaper ahead of key parliamentary elections in the Western European country,” ABC News tells us, “leading to the resignation of the paper’s opinion editor in protest.”

Germany’s three-party coalition government, led by “center-left” Chancellor Olof Scholz, fell apart when he fired the “pro-business” party’s biggest name in the government, Finance Minister Christian Lindner.

Musk wrote a piece for Welt am Sonntag in which he expressed his support for Alternative für Deutschland, which is considered “far-right” for opposing Die Grünen, the (“pro-business”) Freie Demokratische Partei, and Scholz’s own Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands. “The Alternative for Germany (AfD) is the last spark of hope for this country,” asserted Musk*.  

“The Tesla Motors CEO also wrote,” explains ABC, “that his investment in Germany gave him the right to comment on the country’s condition.”

Musk must mean “a right” as in manners, not in law. In a free country, anyone has a legal right to speak up and comment on government.

But what is the significance of the editor who quit? She has every right to work only with news outfits that marginalize the AfD as promoters of “anti-democratic” ideas. Hers is a matter of strategy: shunning, marginalization — no-debate/no-cooperate — are what she thinks journalists must marshal against the “far right.” 

This journalist’s political tactic mirrors Germany’s practiced politics. ABC News explains that the AfD’s polling strength doesn’t much help its candidate, Alice Weidel, to “becom[e] chancellor because other parties refuse to work with the far-right party.”

The non-cooperation strategy goes full anti-democratic when election results are suppressed. In Romania, for example, elections have basically been overturned because of how “far-right” they are.

All very anti-democratic, these “democrats.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* To be clear, his piece was published in German, of course, and above I’m quoting the English translation.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Flux and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts