January 2006     

Eminent Disaster

By Ken Freeman

Recently, the issue of eminent domain has come to the forefront of national attention because of the Kelo vs. the City of New London case. This brutal excess of governmental power outraged people all over our nation. Americans everywhere were shocked that government could actually take homes from ordinary citizens, and give them to wealthy business interests, just to increase tax revenues for a greedy local government. I, on the other hand, thought Kelo was a gift from God!

Governments have been stealing our land for years, and no one noticed, except the poor fellow who lost his land. Finally, there was a theft of property by government so audacious that not even the liberal media could ignore it. There was a public outcry. People demanded that their state legislatures pass laws to defend them from such abuse of power. Alabama was the first state to act.

When the Kelo decision came down, Alabama was already scheduled to have a special legislative session. Citizens groups in our state decided that it was imperative that we address the eminent domain issue.

All the professional lobbyists at the state capital told us that we were wasting our time. There were only two weeks before the session started, and then, only five legislative days within the session to accomplish our mission. We had to write an amendment, find sponsors in both the Senate and House, get the word out to the voters to press for passage, and then get the legislature to pass it, and the Governor to sign it.

The pros told us it couldn't be done. We thought otherwise.

I remember once reading an article in an aviation magazine on the principles of flight. In this article, scientists proved conclusively that - considering its body weight and wing surface area - it is impossible for a bumblebee to fly. Lucky for that bumblee bee - He don't know! My group is just a bunch of ordinary people. Our opponents have all the money, and the expertise. But we, like that bumblee bee, are blessed with great ignorance. We don't know that we can't win and so we just keep coming back.

True, we don't always win. But we always win something.

We found our sponsors, and we got our amendment out of the Senate Committee with a unanimous vote, but due to technical reasons, we ran out of time to pass it as a Constitutional amendment, so we changed it into a statutory law, and it was ready for passage. By the last day of the session, it looked like we had won a great victory. Even opposing lobbyists said that this bill was a piece of righteous legislation, meaning that it was untainted by political corruption.

It contained some great words:

"Neither the State, nor any county, city or town, or any political subdivision thereof shall use eminent domain to condemn or confiscate property or property rights for the purpose of a commercial enterprise, industrial development, revenue enhancement, perceived public good, or any other purpose other than actual use by the public."

I won't quote it all here, because of its length, but its language also defined what property ownership entails, and states that the taking of any portion of rights to property, no matter how small, deserves just compensation, as stipulated by the Constitution. It further defines how "just compensation" is to be calculated, and that compensation is to be paid to the owner of affected property, before any such taking can occur.

It was an excellent bill, and would have truly provided protection from eminent domain abuses. We were elated. We thought that this bill could serve as model legislation for other states to follow.

The Predators Arrive

Remember the classic movie, "The Old Man and the Sea?" The old man had suffered greatly, but he had won a great victory. His prize fish was tied to the side of his boat, and all he had to do was to take it safely to port.

By the last day of the legislative session, we were in that same situation. We had our legislation ready for passage; all we needed was to get it to a vote. And then - the lawyers came - and they gutted our bill.

The League of Municipalities struck first. Their teeth were sharp. Their bite surgically removed only five words, "or any political subdivisions thereof." But removing those words exempted all Urban Development Projects, all Housing Authorities, all Redevelopment Boards, and all those other un-elected appointed boards, which by the way, have their own eminent domain authority, and which are responsible for the vast majority of urban property stolen through the misuse of eminent domain. Their lawyers seized this righteous legislation, and ripped those protections from the body of the document, as deftly as any shark.

Once blood was in the water, other lobby groups moved in. Words were added exempting everything under the heading of "blight." (So far, we have found twelve pages of language describing blight in the Alabama Code. A short summation of these definitions is: blight means whatever the city or county government says it means, and they can take whatever they want, by calling it blighted!)

This disfigured version of our bill passed quickly, and our Governor, and other state politicians, ran around for weeks telling everyone how "they" had protected property rights in Alabama.

George Orwell once said, "Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful... and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." To a trusting and uninformed public, this bill looks like a solution to the misuse of eminent domain; but it is a hollow shell. There is absolutely nothing in this bill to prevent what happened in the Kelo case from happening in Alabama. This same type of blight language is imbedded in the laws of every state in our nation. Not one of us is safe, as long as it exists.

But, "Let not your heart be troubled." Our efforts were not in vain. We have framed the issues, and we have set the stage for future battles. 2006 is an election year in Alabama. We intend to see to it that property rights become "the" main campaign issue in our state.

We are taking your land for your own good.

A recent article in a major Alabama newspaper announced that environmental groups intend to take 100,000 acres of privately-owned land in the Alabama Black Belt region. They intend to bulldoze down all the houses, clear it of most trees, and then burn it over at least once every three years, in order to establish a "National Grassland." This, they tell us, will be for the good of all. It will especially benefit the rural, mostly poor, and mostly black property owners it will dispossess, by bringing in tourist dollars from "bird watchers" and "eco-tourists" who will want to see the bison herd they wish to establish.

The article failed to mention that this 100,000 acres is only the beginning, it will only form the "core area," and will require millions of acres of highly-regulated buffer zones surrounding this core, in order to protect it from the evils of man.

Where will the money come from to "take" this land? Probably from our tax dollars, and from mitigation fees (extortion money) from the U.S. and Alabama Departments of Transportation. Here's the "con." Construction will shortly begin on Interstate 85 heading west out of Montgomery. Rumors and articles emanating from inside the environmental community indicate that environmental groups are in the process of purchasing several thousand acres of land, which I-85 will have to cross on its way west. They intend to declare this property endangered species habitat, tie up the project in federal court, and extort tens of millions of dollars in mitigation fees (fines) in order for this vital highway project to proceed. This money will furnish funds for land confiscations, a propaganda campaign to sell the idea to voters, and also to buy political influence through campaign contributions to key legislators.

Even as you read this article, we are tracking millions of dollars, which are flowing, into Alabama from outside environmental groups and liberal foundations. We believe this money is being used in an effort to guide the highway route, to rewrite our state Constitution and to pass legislation allowing widespread theft of private property.

Our Founding Fathers understood that the protection of property is the most important responsibility designated to government. They wisely perceived that it is the right to use one's property that overshadows all other considerations, because the term property embodies all we are, and all we own, including life and liberty.

Under Feudalism, Fascism, Communism, Socialism, and Environmentalism, in fact, under anything but freedom and individual ownership of property, a powerful few control all property, and the many are at their mercy.

Karl Marx wrote, "Communism can be summarized in one sentence: The abolition of private property."

In January, when the legislature returns, we will attack this blight and other eminent domain language in our state Constitution, and try to get our original amendment passed intact. To do this, we will have to educate the voters, as to what property really means.

Ladies and gentlemen, our country is drifting on the wind. Unless we wake up and defend our rights, our freedom, and our property, will surely slip away. But that is redundant, is it not, since liberty and property are one and the same?

Ken Freeman is the Chairman of the Alliance for Citizens Rights.
www.alabamapropertyrights.org