Eminent domain an eminent threat.

Where are the liberals on this? I listen to Babs Boxer and Chuckie Schumer talk about the Democratic party standing up for the little guy against corporate America, why then, did the liberal members of the Supreme Court not stop the City of New London Connecticut from seizing the home of Susette Kelo and give it to a private company for 'Economic Development'?
Who stood up for the little guy? The conservatives.

I hope you don't own a home, farm or attend a church near a freeway off-ramp, transit center, or downtown, because your property could be more valuable to your City, County or State if they tear it down and build condos, stripmalls or a Casino. They get your property, they get more tax revenue, the community gets more jobs, no one is hurt. Except you, the person who used to own a nice little house, or farm that you wanted to give to your children, you get a check based on whatever the government says your property was worth.

Sound great, where do I sign up?

Lets tear down the Capital Christian Center and give it to Costco. The location is great, Highway 50 frontage and just think of the tax revenue the county would get. It's just those ignorant Bible thumping Bush voters that go there, why should they keep the County from getting our hands on such a fine piece of real estate? File the paperwork and make them build a church out in the stick where they belong. You think that is not going through the minds of City and County planners around the country?

There is hope. My local Congressman, Doug La Malfa with his partner in the California Senator Tom McClintock have proposed new legislation to limit the circumstances where the government can seize private property.

As a farmer, I hold the value of property ownership and enjoyment as a paramount right and with the recent Supreme Court decision occurring in such close proximity to the celebration of our independence 229 years ago, I wonder if those farmers, colonists and settlers that rose up then would not expect the same of us now, especially those of us elected and sworn to protect these and our other constitutional rights.

The notion that government can place a higher value on one person's activity and use of their own assets over someone else's is an elitist and dangerous enterprise that connotes the totalitarian thinking of a few making value judgments over the masses. I believe this is contrary to our most fundamental constitutional rights.

Doug La Malfa

You should get behind this legislation, the home you save may be your own.