I can understand why libertarians would get upset; real liberals should be as well.

And I am simply thankful that the founding fathers of my state -- Washington -- made it very difficult for government to use its powers of eminent domain to force one property owner to sell so that a City can then resell to another private enterprise under the guise of "public welfare." It is truly a grievous and unfair use of governmental powers but here it is in Charleston where

...urban renewal commissioners on Monday voted to forcibly buy East End property needed for a grocery store from a landowner who has said the commissioners "should be ashamed" of their offer.

I think that they should be ashamed as well to believe that being able to sit behind a public dais gives them some extra wisdom about which private business should have the benefit of a particular location.

Comments

[Ian]

I don't think this is something you could get away with in the UK. Eminent domain - we call it compulsory purchase - does exist, but I have never seen it used in such limited circumstances. It would be possible to assemble a series of small sites to enable redevelopment to take place for example to build a new retail centre but it would be unheard of to do it for a single store. British local government just doesn't have that sort of resources.

[Laurence Aurbach]

The situation is at least a little more hopeful in Cincinnati where a trial began yesterday on the legality of condemning homes for a mixed-use development. Dana Berliner of the Institute for Justice has taken on the case, using the argument that the eminent domain process was driven by a private developer. But even if the condemnation was initiated by the city, it appears to be an abuse of the process, equating working-class to blight.

I do agree with the defense on one point, however. Running interstate freeways through neighborhoods does cause an ensuing spiral of decline.