Eminent Domain Essay

Eminent Domain Benefit

INTRODUCTION/THESIS
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

once privately owned, but through the course of judicial actions, were slated for federal use that would benefit the greater public. While the advantages of eminent domain are substantial, its practice remains a point of contention largely due to the question of its fairness to the individuals effected by it.
PROS - EMINENT DOMAIN BENEFITS TO WE IN U.S.:
The first U.S. eminent domain case took place in 1876 with a challenge to the federal government's authority to enact the policy of eminent domain in the case of Kohl versus the United States of America. The Kohl case challenged the government's authority pertaining to condemning a privately owned piece of land in Cinncinnatti, Ohio. The land was designated for construction of a post office and a custom house. The federal government won that case thus setting a precedent and establishing the governments authority to enact eminent domain when it deemed such an action in the benefit of the general public.
Another case that further cemented the federal government's power over such matters. This was a case were the United States government marked for preservation what we now know as the Gettysburg Battlefield located in Pennsylvania. The government sued Gettysburg Electric Railroad Company and won despite the power and prestige of the railroad company. This case once again showed that not only did the government have the power and the right to condemn private property, but this also showed that eminent domain was intended for good purposes to benefit the general public as it did when it fought to preserved that national landmark.
As a result of the good use of eminent domain, today, we in the U.S. enjoy many conveniences of modern living due to the invocation of it. The modern public transportation we routinely take for granted would not be possible without eminent domain. Much of the land upon which our public transportation systems reside, once was privately owned land that the federal government “condemned” to earmark it for federal programs and infrastructures. The federal government throughout the years has acquired those lands to construct various public transportation systems which have enabled America to quickly grow and prosper as a world power.
The action of eminent domain allowed the roadways to be built which in turn shortened commute times,and made the roadways safer and more efficient. These roadways have also allowed the trucking industry to become more effective in transporting goods from one end of the country to the other. This has had the effect of decreasing the cost of goods. It has also greatly helped to cut the bottom line of manufactures and distributors. This has resulted in a savings to the manufactures/distributors which in turn generally has benefited the consumer.
In addition to the roadways, we have benefited from the enactment of eminent domain through our public utility infrastructure. Without the ability to call upon eminent domain, America would currently not have a public utility system to afford us lifestyles of relative ease and comfort. In order for our society to have access to electricity and telecommunications, the government used this policy to legally obtains easement rights onto private properties throughout the U.S.A. installing power lines, and phone lines around the country. Though initially, there were many who objected to the appropriation of their property for this purpose, in time the benefits of these types of actions were evidenced in how they allowed Americans access to power, and various types of communications. Few would argue that these utilities are are not now a necessity of modern living in the United States. And for the exception of the antisocial hermits who live in the forests or the mountains without benefit of power or electrical communication, few would want to go back to a time prior to the enactment of eminent domain which allowed us to have these amenities.
I have only scratched the surface of the many advantages we have enjoyed from having a policy of eminent domain in America.

I touched on the fact that it has help build roadways, preserve historical landmarks, helped facilitate the trucking industry which delivers our goods coast to coast, and it even set precedents with condemning private property to build public buildings. The government's use of eminent domain in preserving large swaths of natural land as national parks is seen all over America today. Without this policy, what we know to day as America would not exist, even with the many advantages of eminent domain, the other effect of it is quite

negative.
CONS - EMINENT DOMAIN DETRIMENTS:
Recently, cases of eminent domain abuse have come to the public's attention. In 2003, Stockton's Marina Tower was condemned by the city government. The land grab was later ruled as wrongful, but by the time Stockton was cited for its misdoings, the owner(s) incurred costly legal expenses for an event that should have never occurred. The city of Stockton never declared for what specific use the land was being condemned. They essentially stated that they needed it because they needed it. No other reason was given. Though the Maria Tower was considered an eyesore, that was not enough reason to condemn the building, and certainly not without citing a specific land use.
Another downside to this policy is that it has become a tool whereby government can and does justify taking private land for just about any “justifiable” reason. An example of this found in Forbes Magazine where it conveys the story of a piece of property that that is targeted for a land grab. The party who decided to acquire the property was the New York Times who was determined to acquire the cite for its new headquarters. The property in question was being labeled as “blighted” by the Times, however one of the property owners, Stratford Wallace, brought suit hoping to prevent his home from being condemned. Wallace's family owned the property for over a century, and he was not willing to part with his family home. Knowing that this was going to be a point of contention, the Times partnered wit a highly influential and powerful developer. Together they colluded to persuade New York state to enact the eminent domain policy using “blight” as their rational to oust Wallace from his home. New York state took the word of the Times and the developer; they declared Wallace's property, along with the entire block “blighted”. Though it was not in fact a blighted area, it was wrongly declared as such.
Another negative effect of eminent domain is something that I personally experienced. It was a massive eviction of the tenants in a poorer part of San Francisco, CA. At the time, the condemnation stirred a huge controversy. Though the tenants fought the condemnation and subsequent eviction, the city got it ways and made way for stores and a massive luxury condominium project which non of us could afford. It no longer felt like we were American citizens. Many of the older residents said if felt like it did when they were forced into a mass relocation into the Japanese concentration camps. Of course the city offered monetary remuneration, however that was hardly a fair compensation for being uprooted and torn away from lifelong friends in a old Japanese neighborhood. It was our home. I was not blighted. It should have been preserved as a historical landmark, but instead, the city decided to increase its revenue by destroying our history, our homes, our neighborhood, and our micro society. We were poor in material goods, but we were rich in culture and the sense of familial security. Everyone knew each other. We all protected each other. The city destroyed an entire culture in making that devastating judgement. Some of my friends who lived in the South of Market district also experienced a similar happening years later, but it was nothing like what occurred in Japan-town because there, were a tightly knit family with the same language, the same background, the same culture. It has never been the same in J'town since the “renovation” took place. The two things that we had going against us were that we were both poor and a small, quiet minority group who was easily targeted by the bullies of city hall and greedy developers. It is still painful to recall the callousness of the authorities who we once trusted.
CONCLUSION
Despite my personal negative experience with eminent domain, it is still clear that the public policy of eminent domain has been advantageous and has helped shape our modern society into the country that I love today.

If it were if not for the government having the controlling power to "condemn" private property, we would not have many of the amenities we now expect as a right. Without it, innumerable improvements to our society's inner workings would simply not occur. If a person chose to not sell his property, but instead decided to bilk the government for an exorbitant amount of money, it would be not be in the country's best interest and could hinder the progress of infrastructure projects. Substandard housing and businesses would be allowed to proliferate our

country.
And while the use of eminent domain initially began with for good purposes: building infrastructures, the government preserving wilderness areas for future generations of American to enjoy, it has in recent years turned into a tool for abuse. Land developers who promise to build structures that bring in increased tax revenue have wielded their influence and were able to yank land away from owners reluctant to sell. This has caused an imbalance to what is supposed to be a democratic system. But hopefully, armed with the lawyers who are willing to file class action suits again abusive developers, and city counsels, perhaps we will begin to see balance being restored in this area.