Eminent Domain (was) RE: Re[5]: [at-l] Keeping it a hiking discussion?

[nealb at midlandstech.edu (William Neal)]

"Eminent Domain" has been used in fact or de facto since the first human
moved from his or her home to the next valley over and it was inhabited by
other "homos" or even animals.  It is basically "I want what you have".

The original "owners" of North America and South America were
"Eminent-Domained" right out of their holdings.  Usually by trickery.

On the other hand, many good things have come from eminent domain.  Roads.
Schools.  Parks.  Etc.

It's a lousy deal.  But sometimes it is the only way that a "public good"
can be created or that a "public harm" can be gotten rid of.  

And what about the Smokies?  There would be no NP if not for eminent domain.

William The Turtle

PS	I heard of one place that got rid of a red-light house by "eminent
domaining" the house and land.

P2S	Since I've been over-replying due to work conditions, I am limiting
my reply on this thread to this reply.  UNLESS a reply to this reply
deserves an OFF LIST reply.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob C. [mailto:ellen@clinic.net]
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 11:36 AM
To: Jim and/or Ginny Owen
Cc: at-l@backcountry.net; KellyGoVols@aol.com
Subject: Re[5]: [at-l] Keeping it a hiking discussion?


>"...By the way, if you think eminent domain is so great, then why don't you
>explain why it's acceptable to take private homes and give the land to
>developers to build shopping centers," urges Jim.

I don't know as I ever said eminent domain is "great." It's simply a tool
available to governments for projects that benefit the public. I've said
several
times that I found it quite painful when Maine took my house and some of my
land
to widen a 10-mile long, dead end road. Most any tool can be misused. I
suggested in an earlier post that the power was probably misused in New
Jersey,
when private homes and businesses were condemned to allow the construction
of a
gambling casino.

 I still maintain that eminent domain would have been a better option than
 having the taxpayers give a failing Saddleback ski area $4 million for a
few
 hundred trail acres.

 Why do I think so? Well, the entire portion of the mountain used by the ski
 area has now been offered for sale for $2.5 million by it's owner, who says
 unless a buyer is found, the area won't  even open next year.

 Weary, who, like Kelley, says, GoDean



_______________________________________________
at-l mailing list
at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l