Charles Shiflett Column July 3, 2005

Your Home Is At Risk And I'm Ticked

My gr-gr-gr-gr-gr-grandfather Stephen Shiflett fought and died in the American Revolution. In a 5 to 4
decision last week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Stephen's death was in vain. In one fell swoop
five justices stripped us of one of our most important Constitutional rights… the right to own property.

You may recall an editorial I wrote in January warning about the possible outcome of the case of Kelo
vs. City of New London. This case pitted homeowners in Connecticut against a city government
attempting to take their homes through the power of eminent domain for purposes other than to build
roads, schools, or other public uses.

In the Kelo case, the city of New London, Connecticut argued that homeowners along the banks of the
Thames River should be forced to give up their homes so that private developers could build a luxury
hotel, high-end condos, offices, and commercial space.

Registered nurse Susette Kelo said, "What galls me is the developer is taking my land so someone
else can live here. That's what they want to do - build homes. I'm not good enough to live here, yet
someone else is." Kelo and her husband live in an old Victorian they bought and renovated in 1997.
Theirs is hardly a blighted neighborhood and the residents of the area do not wish to sell their homes.

Writing for the court's majority, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote, "The City has carefully formulated an
economic development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community,
including but by no means limited to new jobs and increased tax revenue."

There you have it! The city wants to bulldoze private homes and turn the property over to deep-
pocketed developers so that it can reap higher tax revenues! Public officials don't seem to understand
that what's at stake are people's homes and lifestyles. The never quenched desire by government for
more revenue is all that matters. Can you even imagine the outrage our founding fathers would express
over such a concept?

Siding with Stevens were justices Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and
Stephen G. Breyer. Those opposing the decision were justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia,
Clarence Thomas, and Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist.

In her dissenting opinion, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote, "The specter of condemnation [now]
hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton,
any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory."

"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this
decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate
influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. As for
the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to
those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result."

Justice Clarence Thomas stated, "If such 'economic development' takings are for a 'public use,' any
taking is, and the Court has erased the Public Use Clause from our Constitution..." "Something has
gone seriously awry with this Court's interpretation of the Constitution. Though citizens are safe from
the government in their homes, the homes themselves are not."

To me, the outcome of Kelo is the most damaging court decision in the last thirty years. Without
private property rights, the United States would never have grown into the world superpower it is today.
This decision means you will only own your home until some individual or business with more power
and influence comes along and decides they want it.

A temporary fix would be for our state legislature to craft a statewide eminent domain law preventing
state or local governments from taking private property for any purpose other than a narrowly defined
list that includes roads, schools, public buildings… and then only if there is no other viable alternative
site.

Georgia Power and other utilities should be stripped of their ability to use eminent domain law.
Instead, utilities should be encouraged to use existing right of ways and roadways for future projects.
A state oversight board should be created for handling utility requests when land is needed for
expansions.

Additionally all of the hundreds of development authorities in Georgia should be stripped of any
eminent domain rights. Only elected officials should have the ability to launch eminent domain
proceedings.

The long-term solution is to replace the five justices whose blatant disregard for the intentions of our
founding fathers led to this disastrous decision. Of course, Democrats have shown they will misuse
the filibuster to derail the judicial appointment of strict constitutionalists.

Tomorrow is the 4th of July, but I don't feel like celebrating. Our ancestors gave their lives to ensure
private property rights for us… I think I'll spend Independence Day writing letters to state legislators
and congressmen.