Kelo & Obamacare

Discussion in 'Congress' started by Flanders, Mar 1, 2012.

  1. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    6,541
    Thanks Received:
    631
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,575
    The House of Representatives took on eminent domain abuses:

    House passes bill to fight unfair seizure of private property
    by Audrey Hudson
    02/29/2012

    House passes bill to fight unfair takings of private property - HUMAN EVENTS

    That’s not the same as permanent legislation protecting private property from eminent domain sharpshooters. It is a start. Should conservatives get enough seats in the Senate there is a chance permanent legislation, signed into law by the president, will come next. Hussein would veto such a bill. Add that to the reasons he has to go.

    Remember, it was the Supreme Court that gave us Kelo? So there is every chance the SCOTUS would overturn any law that limits the government’s power to tax. Keep that in mind if you think the Supreme Court is going to overturn Hillarycare II. The High Court is an instrument of government. When taxation verses average Americans private sector Americans always lose:


    ObamaCare: Supreme Court may postpone ruling till 2016
    By Dean Clancy on February 21, 2012

    ObamaCare: Supreme Court may postpone ruling till 2016 | FreedomWorks

    It is logical to assume that postponing any ruling until 2016 will soften resistence. That is why it is imperative that Congress repeal the Affordable Care now even if it takes a veto-proof majority in both houses.
     
  2. Polk
    Offline

    Polk Classic

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,752
    Thanks Received:
    569
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Republic of Pequod
    Ratings:
    +569
    I find it odd that Kelo is so controversial, because it really only restated a previous ruling that had been unanimous (Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff).
     
  3. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    6,541
    Thanks Received:
    631
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,575
    To Polk: The case you cite was about taking land from the few and redistributing it among the larger population. Kelo was about taking land from anybody at anytime in order to enrich the few under the pretext of increasing a community’s tax revenues. The SCOTUS was wrong in both decisions.
     

Share This Page