Do you own property? Are you happy where you live? What if the government said they were taking your property, but they were going to pay you fairly and possibly help you relocate? Eminent domain is the power for the government to take private property from the owner for public use. Doesn’t seem like a great deal for the land owner, especially if it were you. While eminent domain needs no constitutional recognition for governments to use, the US Constitution states: “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation” (US Department of Justice). Governments have been using the power of eminent domain for ages, and when they use this power, it is usually to preserve, improve, or provide something for the public. Over …show more content…
the years in the USA, the use of eminent domain has lead to many controversial court cases, where most, if not all cases have gone in favor of the government. With this topic and almost every controversial topic in politics there are two sides: the morally correct side, and the side for the benefit and greater good of the country and its people. Eminent domain is a unique topic that can be very well qualified from both sides and it would be reasonable to understand an opinion for and and against it. Many think that the government having the ability and power to take your property is right-out and oppressive, almost tyrannical. On the other hand, an individual or group of people being relocated or sacrificing land for economic improval, providing water or other needs, or preserving nature or history; all for a fair compensation to the owner. The interest of eminent domain is in the productiveness and benefit that the US and its people will gain, but the morality of its use is what is in question. The government's use of eminent domain over the years has varied in overall outcomes, but for the most part the property is improved, protected or providing the community.
The purpose of eminent domain is for the government to look at the opportunity costs of using the power of eminent domain or not. In some cases it may seem useless to use eminent domain because the cost of compensating the land owner for the land outweighs the potential revenue of the new use of the land or importance of providing or protecting. In one case, a town in Ohio used eminent domain to take a strip of his property to make a bike path through part of the town. They were not taking all of his land, a mere 1 mile long strip of his 80 acre property, and they were going to compensate him with a little more than $9,000, a price at which the strip of land was appraised at. After going to court like many eminent domain cases do, it was determined that the land not only was worth quadruple its appraised value, and because the strip of land devalued his property because it cut off the backside, he was owed almost $560,000 dollars on top of the property value (Narciso). This is the case where the use of eminent domain backfired on the town, and the landowner was sitting pretty good. The town does get the land and its bike path, but at a much heftier price than anticipated, and the property owner sacrifices a small amount of his land for an outrageous compensation, with a little help from the US court
system. While that case was more of an anomaly in terms of the amazing compensation, but other uses of eminent domain have left no one on the winning side over time. Corporatism, as it is stated in Timothy Carney’s Washington Examiner article, is when governments and businesses work together. In this mutually beneficial relationship between state and corporation, eminent domain can be a key contributor in bringing profit to the company and boosting the economy. In the early 2000’s a government body acquired a large amount of land in New London, Connecticut, in hopes of working with companies to reboot the town. One of these companies was Pfizer, the pharmaceutical company, who was promised a new plant, which also included tax breaks and other benefits. Pfizer did not only want land for a new plant, but they also did not want the plant surrounded by homes. Magically, corporatism came in and the power of eminent domain wiped out, but compensated, or course, a number of landowners. The reason was to attract more jobs and increase tax revenue, but ironically the 90 acre field of land around the plant was abandoned and the plant too, in disrepair. Success would not be the right word for the use of eminent domain in this case. In a plan that was suppose to improve a town, the use of eminent domain seemed to have only slowed down the development and betterment of the city. The words “eminent” and “domain” probably scare you at this point, but fear not, there is and always has been hope for its purpose. Another example of an attempt to revitalize a town was in Freetown, a neighborhood in Greenville, South Carolina, that had been run down over the years. The city gained abandoned buildings to build new homes. Eminent domain was used to acquire these buildings along with displacing some people from their homes with fair compensation. After reconstructing most of the town, making it a very nice place to live, more than one-third of the families that were displaced had returned to live in Freetown, a now thriving neighborhood, saved by eminent domain. Is eminent domain beneficial and productive? Yes... And no... Sometimes... Eminent domain is as beneficial and productive as the government makes it. The use of eminent domain to reboot townships and cities is wonderful, as well as working with corporations to help boost tax revenue and create jobs. This is all great and wonderful when it happens, but it has to be done right, otherwise towns end up in a more deteriorated state than they were before, or governments begin to owe massive amounts of money for small portions of land, all because the planning they had done was poor. Looking at the success stories and failures to push or pull one way or the other to argue eminent domain is not effective, but looking at both and finding the true underlying reason there is so much evidence to support both sides brings up the real question: Eminent domain can be incredibly beneficial to the country and its people as a whole, but how does the government or the people prevent it from failing and costing people’s homes, money, and happiness?
Iceland recognizes the issue of eminent domain, as they have had trouble with this in regards to geothermal deposits. However, they agree with the ECHR regarding rights to fair compensation. Governments should only take property if it will benefit the public as a whole.
The Land Reform Act of 1967 permitted the state of Hawaii to redistribute land by condemning and acquiring private property from landlords (the lessors) in order to sell it to another private owner, in this case, their tenants (the lessees). The Hawaii State Legislature passed the Land Reform Act after discovering that nearly forty-seven percent (47%) of the state was owned by only seventy-two (72) private land owners. That meant that only forty-nine percent of Hawaii was owned by the State and Federal Govermnet.The contested statute gave lessees of single family homes the right to invoke the government's power of eminent domain to purchase the property that they leased, even if the landowner objected. The challengers of the statue (the land owners) claimed that such a condemnation was not a taking for public use because the property, once condemned by the state, was promptly turned over to the lessee (a private ...
Sixteenth Amendment- Authorization of an Income Tax – Progressives thought this would slow down the rising wealth of the richest Americans by using a sliding or progressive scale where the wealthier would pay more into the system. In 1907, Roosevelt supported the tax but it took two years until his Successor, Taft endorsed the constitutional amendment for the tax. The Sixteenth Amendment was finally ratified by the states in 1913. The origin of the income tax came William J Bryan in 1894 to help redistribute wealth and then from Roosevelt and his dedication to reform of corporations. I agree with an income tax to pay for all of our government systems and departments, but I believe there was a misfire with “redistributing wealth.” The redistribution is seen in welfare systems whereby individuals receive money to live. This is meant to be a temporary assistance, but sadly, most that are in the system are stuck due to lack of assistance in learning how to escape poverty. There are a lot of government funded programs, but there is no general help system to help lift people up and stay up, so there continues a cycle of
The 19th century set the stage for different policies that lead to the extending of America’s power, which is defined as imperialism. Imperialism started for different reasons like the Americans wanting the U.S. to expand or explore the unknown land, or even some feared existing resources in U.S. might eventually dry up. The reason imperialism started doesn’t really matter, but more of what it caused. Imperialism lead to Cuban assistance, the addition of Hawaii and Alaska to America, and Yellow Journalism.
The Homestead Steel Strike occurred in June of 1892. The strike took place in Homestead Pennsylvania and involved the Carnegie Steel Company and the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steen Workers (the AA). The Leader of Carnegie Steel Company was Mr. Andrew Carnegie. His company produced such cheep materials that creations like bridges and skyscrapers were not only feasible but affordable. He was creating a revolutionary period for steel and iron factories. The Amalgamated Association was an American labor union formed in 1876 to represent iron and steel workers. They were a new type of union for the time period and they planned on making great movements to help their workers. While in the beginning, the relationship
There have been many controversial laws passed throughout American history that have been a source of outrage across the nation, but one of the arguably most controversial acts made into law is known as the Dawes Act. During the time that this Act was considered by the American government, racial tensions were high against the American people and the Native Americans due to the hunger for land preoccupied by the Natives. Senator Henry Dawes proposed a bill that he and his supporters believed would help reduce tensions and assimilate the supposed savages into what was believed to be a more civilized way of life. The proposed solution was to dissolve the Indian reservations and divide the land among the Indians to give them a way to provide
On May 20th of 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed, and put into effect, the Homestead Act of 1862. The Homestead Act opened up more than half a million square miles in the Western half the the United States during the Civil War. The Homestead Act was a major turning point in American History. It was a huge milestone for American history because its consequences included implications during the Civil War, but also paved the way for westward expansion within the United States.
The Anti-Federalists were not in favor of ratifying the new Constitution. Some Anti-Federalists wanted to keep the Articles of Confederation, others wanted to add some things and change some things in the new Constitution before they agreed to ratify it. Some very important Anti-Federalist’s were Patrick Henry, George Mason, and Richard Henry Lee. Anti-Federalists tended to be poorer and in lower classes than the Federalists. These people feared a central government and were afraid that the government proposed by the new Constitution could easily turn into a tyranny. The Federalists argued that the United States needed a strong central government in order to stand a chance against foreign powers, amongst other reasons that were all beneficial
The Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson (with the help of Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, as well as many others), was signed on July 1st, 1776 in Philadelphia. Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence to appeal to the British Parliament and King and explain why the American Colonies wanted independence from England. Thomas Jefferson and the other delegates from the Second Continental Congress agreed that, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator certain unalienable rights” (p. 112) which became the base for nearly all of the points made in the document. Logical and emotional statements were used throughout the document to make impactful statements that would convince the audience of the seriousness of the matters they were presenting.
In order to understand why the war between the US and Mexico happened, it’s important to understand what each side was fighting for. I found “Manifest Destiny: An Introduction” to be very informative and provided thorough explanations of each side’s struggle. America was in search of manifest destiny and Mexico was coping with becoming a newly independent country.
The 1800's were a renowned era in European history. With the rise of imperialism came the ruthless desire to seek new land through the use of authoritative implications. Whether it be the discovery of the Americas, where Christopher Columbus discovered various islands, which were clustered with indigenous people that were eventually completely wiped out for the pure desire of Spaniard power. This craving to "assimilate" indigenous people and to convert them to Christianity was an element, which rooted 19th century Europe. Although the actual question to whether these actions were good or evil are up for debate. Imperialism has been viewed as an expansion that serves only ones "object" and that it has no purpose beyond the benefit of the "self". This paper will explain Imperialism through a sociological perspective, while blending in notions of capitalism and modern day Imperialism that may now be viewed as Globalism.
In our modern democratic society, many Americans have come to enjoy the freedom of traveling to various parts of the U.S. to visit our national parks and historic landmark. To get to these destinations, we travel by land, sea, and sky. Though our destinations may take us to the middle of a forest, such as in the the cases of Yosemite or Yellowstone National Parks, we are able to acquire clean water, and have access to modern sanitation. Our enjoyment of these national treasures is greatly enhanced by the relative ease of access these these places, and by the modern sanitation amenities which most Americans have grown to expect. The land upon which many of our national landmarks and roads reside were
The American civil war, the fight between the Confederacy and the Union. Lincoln said that “The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here”(Avalon Project). The Civil War which had the most casualties of any war in history, Lincoln here said that the nation and the world will remember this war and the people who were involved in this war were not in vain and this nation will have a new birth of freedom. The Civil War was caused by the expansion of the west and manifest destiny, the election of eighteen sixty-two, and (needs one more claim for the thesis statement). These topic were able to push the war into action and start four years of mass bloodshed.
What is so special about the year 1906? Well, this was the year that Theodore Roosevelt established what we call the Antiquities Act. The Antiquities Act must be reformed in this day due to many reasons. The Antiquities Act was originally created in order to act quickly to save parts of the land including archeological sites and/or Native American Land and Structures that were vulnerable to destruction, vandalism, and development. Recently President Obama designated a large portion of Utah as a National Monument, called Bear’s Ears. According to Nicolas Loris, “Since 1906, 16 Presidents have designated more than 140 monuments covering in excess of 285 million acres of land and marine areas.” In any case, the state and the people deserve the
A contract is an agreement between two parties in which one party agrees to perform some actions in return of some consideration. These promises are legally binding. The contract can be for exchange of goods, services, property and so on. A contract can be oral as well as written and also it can be part oral and part written but it is useful to have written contract otherwise issues can be created in future. But both the written as well as oral contract is legally enforceable. Also if there is a breach of contract, there are certain remedies for that which are discussed later in the assignment. There are certain elements which need to be present in a contract. These elements are discussed in the detail in the assignment. (Clarke,