A Message from Congressman Harold FordAs a Member of Congress, I recently voted for a resolution expressing the Congress' disapproval of the Supreme Court's recent decision in the Kelo v. New London case and our firm support of the rights of property owners. Our nation was founded in part on the fundamental right to own property and government cannot take that right away arbitrarily. I support the rights of homeowners and business owners.
The Court's decision dangerously opens the door to the erosion of the sanctity of private property in our nation. I do not want my home, business or farm - or that of my neighbors' - to be confiscated by the government simply to put in a new venue for corporate profit.
However, the importance of economic rehabilitation in many of our urban and rural communities cannot and should not be ignored. It is critical for the democratically elected officials in our communities to have the ability to seek, with support of property owners, the revitalization of local economies, the creation of much-needed jobs and the reversal of blight, crime or poverty in that community.
And that is where the Supreme Court's decision goes too far. It does not denote the critical difference between rehabilitation with the consent of property owners versus development and redevelopment simply for corporate profit.
At least eight states - Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, South Carolina and Washington - already forbid the use of eminent domain for economic development unless it is to eliminate blight. Thankfully, though, the Court's decision defers in the end to state law, leaving the fate of Tennessee communities in the right place -- Tennessee, not Washington.
Every state should be able to protect private property to ensure that the government is not facilitating the transfer of private property from one person to another.
Recently, an amendment came before Congress intended to counteract the effect of the Kelo decision. However, that amendment had dangerous side effects. The Garrett Amendment, like the Supreme Court decision, went too far. I voted against the Garrett Amendment because if were it to become law, any initiative of the Department of Housing and Urban Development that involves private development or investment, like Hope VI, could be put in jeopardy.
Just in Tennessee's four largest cities, Hope VI provided more than $230 million between 1993 and 2004 -- $5.2 million in Chattanooga, $23.7 million in Knoxville, $113.7 million in Memphis and $88.9 million in Nashville. I understand and support the need to clarify the Kelo decision. But, I believe this can be done without putting critical funds for our local communities in jeopardy. Without that federal support, we will find ourselves left paying the $230 million difference in the form of property tax increases.
I am committed to working with my colleagues in Congress to develop a policy that makes sense. I am going to work with my colleagues in Congress to pass a law that clarifies the Supreme Court ruling on eminent domain so that private property cannot be taken by the government for the purpose of giving to another private owner to create profit for the latter.
From: Press release
