Why do "conservatives" support individuals being able to take/use YOUR land?

[uscitizen]

Just a curious point to me since they claim to support private rights and resent the govt taking and regulating land.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why do liberals?

One word, power.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why is the OP totally wrong?

 

[uscitizen]

The XL pipeline goes to court to get any passage on land that the Landowner refuses or wants too much.
A corporation is an individual right?
A non US corporation no less.

 

[Dr.House]

Why is the OP totally wrong?

Massive amounts of drugs...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is the one and only legitimate use of the Commerce Clause.

Are you even vaguely familiar with Kelo decision?

 

[uscitizen]

This is the one and only legitimate use of the Commerce Clause.

Are you even vaguely familiar with Kelo decision?

for a private corporation to take your land for private profit?

 

[Erand7899]

Just a curious point to me since they claim to support private rights and resent the govt taking and regulating land.

I am a conservative, and I do not support government taking any land except for the purpose of necessary public use.

A bigger worry, is government taking the use of your land, and doing so without any compensation for that taking. The EPA is doing a lot of that. They just declare your land a wetland, and prohibit you from doing anything with it. However, you are still obligated to pay the taxes on that land.

 

[uscitizen]

So you do not support the XL pipeline taking land?
Same difference they have eternal access accross your land anytime they want and you cannot build on/use that land and you still pay taxes on it.

 

[g5000]

This is the one and only legitimate use of the Commerce Clause.

Are you even vaguely familiar with Kelo decision?

Kelo was a travesty. Right up there with Roe v. Wade. Why are you using that piece of shit decision to justify your position?


.

 

[hortysir]

This is the one and only legitimate use of the Commerce Clause.

Are you even vaguely familiar with Kelo decision?

for a private corporation to take your land for private profit?

Railroads, interstates, water, electric, cable, and YES, even pipelines

 

[Erand7899]

So you do not support the XL pipeline taking land?
Same difference they have eternal access accross your land anytime they want and you cannot build on/use that land and you still pay taxes on it.

That is a close call. Is the XL pipeline a public use? Is there a reasonable alternative option for the pipeline? Are they asking for the land, or a right of way across the land?

I would accept that the XL pipeline is a public service, no different that any other public utility. States commonly designate right of ways for electric transmission lines, sewer lines, water lines, gas lines, etc.

I oppose the government taking property because another owner will contribute more taxes to the government. But, the supreme court, in their superior wisdom, disagrees.

 

[AmyNation]

I'm torn. I detest the notion of the government confiscating privately held land. however do you as an individual have the right to cut off your neighbors from power or water etc etc, simply because you own adjacent land?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Just a curious point to me since they claim to support private rights and resent the govt taking and regulating land.

What on Earth are you talking about? Could you be any more vague?

 

[JakeStarkey]

No public utility should have such a power.

It should be done by government, period.

I'm torn. I detest the notion of the government confiscating privately held land. however do you as an individual have the right to cut off your neighbors from power or water etc etc, simply because you own adjacent land?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Eminent domain is theft. If you say you support private property rights then you can't support eminent domain.

 

[martybegan]

So you do not support the XL pipeline taking land?
Same difference they have eternal access accross your land anytime they want and you cannot build on/use that land and you still pay taxes on it.

That is a close call. Is the XL pipeline a public use? Is there a reasonable alternative option for the pipeline? Are they asking for the land, or a right of way across the land?

I would accept that the XL pipeline is a public service, no different that any other public utility. States commonly designate right of ways for electric transmission lines, sewer lines, water lines, gas lines, etc.

I oppose the government taking property because another owner will contribute more taxes to the government. But, the supreme court, in their superior wisdom, disagrees.

The key is that the original landholder must be fairly compensated, and every effort must be made to avoid the condemnation of the land.

However this is one of the allowed powers under the US consitution, and most state constitutions.

"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"

 

[8537]

This is the one and only legitimate use of the Commerce Clause.

Are you even vaguely familiar with Kelo decision?

Wait what? You think it's a legitimate use of the commerce clause for a private foreign company to obtain common carrier status in Texas and thus take private property by government decree in order to route a pipeline shipping Canadian tar sands to Houston to export around the world?

Can you explain how that benefits the common good?

 

[Sinjorri]

I'm torn. I detest the notion of the government confiscating privately held land. however do you as an individual have the right to cut off your neighbors from power or water etc etc, simply because you own adjacent land?

at least shes honest.

 

[martybegan]

This is the one and only legitimate use of the Commerce Clause.

Are you even vaguely familiar with Kelo decision?

Wait what? You think it's a legitimate use of the commerce clause for a private foreign company to obtain common carrier status in Texas and thus take private property by government decree in order to route a pipeline shipping Canadian tar sands to Houston to export around the world?

Can you explain how that benefits the common good?

its actually that combined with the 5th amendment. And better access to energy supplies is something that benefits us all. Again it would only be used in cases where someone refused to sell the underground right of way. Most of the time the federal or state agency doing the condemnation tries to avoid condemnation, and would rather buy the person out.