| GOPUSA Bringing the Conservative Message to America No Guns: Only a Pen and a Robe to Take Your Property By Gina Parker August 22, 2005 |
"The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence:
Abolition of private property." -- Karl Marx
"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as
the laws of God, and there is not a force
of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence." -- John
Adams
These two quotes, from the father of Communism and a Founding Father, summarize
the conflict between competing ideologies. Private property rights are the cornerstone
of liberty and freedom, and the forces of socialism and collectivism seek to crack that
foundation.
Stealing property used to be exclusively done by thieves in the night, masked in black
and toting guns. Apparently, the modern swindler needs only a black robe and a
ball-point pen. In June, the Supreme Court ruled that New London, Connecticut could
take the homes of Jeannette Kelo and her neighbors and turn them over to another
private enterprise, intending to increase tax revenues to the city. This ruling was made
despite the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment,
which states that private property can be taken only for "Public Use", and with just
compensation.
In order to circumvent that language Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority of the
court, played Scrabble with the Constitution. Kennedy used the phrase "Public Purpose"
instead of "Public Use", and concluded that this property transfer served the public
purpose of revitalizing New London and increasing the tax base. A dissenting Justice
Thomas correctly noted that by replacing the Public Use Clause with a Public Purpose
Clause, the court had established a vague, meaningless standard that effectively erased
the Public Use Clause from the Constitution.
Pundits have since proclaimed that the ruling was a legal error, or worse, a textbook
example of judicial activism. But there has been little discussion about why private
property rights deserve special protection from government.
Much of President Bush's agenda, including social security reform, centers on the power
of self-ownership upon our economic and political foundations. Conservatives believe
that ownership of property is an essential element of our freedoms. This philosophy is
born of the beliefs of the Founding Fathers, like John Adams, and expressed in the
quote that preceded this article.
When the colonists left England, they escaped a feudal property system where all land
was owned by the king, and citizens enjoyed the use of such land only with the
benevolence of the ruler. In fact, the term "eminent domain" is a throwback to the days
when all land was the domain of his eminence, the king. This system left the people
politically powerless, and when the colonists arrived in the New World, they constructed
a new order, where the people owned the land, and
thus controlled their own destinies.
The Founders like based their political philosophy on the idea that rights, including
private property rights, were not derived from the king, or the government, but were gifts
bestowed by God. In fact, many early American leaders wrote of the three essential
rights: Life, Liberty and Property. William Howard Taft would later echo that sentiment,
writing emphatically: "Next to the right of liberty, the right of property is the most
important individual right guaranteed by the Constitution and the one which, united with
that of personal liberty, has contributed more to the growth of civilization than any other
institution established by the human race."
As the nation's legal system developed, our finest legal minds always respected property
rights as among the most sacred. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart wrote: "In fact, a
fundamental interdependence exists between the personal right to liberty and the
personal right to property." The legal philosopher William Blackstone, upon whom
many of our legal doctrines and traditions are based, stated: "So great moreover is the
regard of the law for private property, that it will not authorize the least violation of it; no,
not even for the general good of the whole community." It is only in recent history that
our judiciary has strayed from this school of thought.
Not only does private property ownership benefit our country politically, but it is a central
tenet of economic conservatism as well. Economist Milton Friedman summarized this
idea by stating: "Nobody spends somebody else's money as carefully as he spends his
own. Nobody uses somebody else's resources as carefully as he uses his own.
So if you want efficiency and effectiveness, if you want knowledge to be properly utilized,
you have to do it through the means of private property." An assault on private property
by the Court not only threatens our essential liberties in principle, but also attacks the
foundations of American capitalism as well.
In the last 30 years, the Court has expressed less and less deference to the property
rights of its citizens. What began with a more relaxed interpretation of the term "Public
Use" has insidiously evolved into the fiction that the Fifth Amendment actually says
"Public Purpose". James Madison warned of this type of incrementalism, noting that
"There
are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent
encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpation." This is a path
that conservatives can combat, by supporting President Bush's Court nominees who will
follow a more literal reading of the Constitution, not rewrite the text to fit their desired
policy result.
The fight over private property rights has been waged since the revolt against feudal
England and through the assaults of collectivists and communists. If we are to win this
battle, we should first ensure that our own justices are fighting for the right side.
------------
Gina Parker is the CEO of Dental Creations, a dental manufacturing company, and is
also a successful attorney. Ms. Parker serves as a Bush and Perry appointee to the
Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. She serves on the American Family
Radio Advisory Board. Ms. Parker has served in a number of Republican Party state
leadership
positions in Texas and speaks on issues of national importance, including the need for
judicial reform.
Abolition of private property." -- Karl Marx
"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as
the laws of God, and there is not a force
of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence." -- John
Adams
These two quotes, from the father of Communism and a Founding Father, summarize
the conflict between competing ideologies. Private property rights are the cornerstone
of liberty and freedom, and the forces of socialism and collectivism seek to crack that
foundation.
Stealing property used to be exclusively done by thieves in the night, masked in black
and toting guns. Apparently, the modern swindler needs only a black robe and a
ball-point pen. In June, the Supreme Court ruled that New London, Connecticut could
take the homes of Jeannette Kelo and her neighbors and turn them over to another
private enterprise, intending to increase tax revenues to the city. This ruling was made
despite the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment,
which states that private property can be taken only for "Public Use", and with just
compensation.
In order to circumvent that language Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority of the
court, played Scrabble with the Constitution. Kennedy used the phrase "Public Purpose"
instead of "Public Use", and concluded that this property transfer served the public
purpose of revitalizing New London and increasing the tax base. A dissenting Justice
Thomas correctly noted that by replacing the Public Use Clause with a Public Purpose
Clause, the court had established a vague, meaningless standard that effectively erased
the Public Use Clause from the Constitution.
Pundits have since proclaimed that the ruling was a legal error, or worse, a textbook
example of judicial activism. But there has been little discussion about why private
property rights deserve special protection from government.
Much of President Bush's agenda, including social security reform, centers on the power
of self-ownership upon our economic and political foundations. Conservatives believe
that ownership of property is an essential element of our freedoms. This philosophy is
born of the beliefs of the Founding Fathers, like John Adams, and expressed in the
quote that preceded this article.
When the colonists left England, they escaped a feudal property system where all land
was owned by the king, and citizens enjoyed the use of such land only with the
benevolence of the ruler. In fact, the term "eminent domain" is a throwback to the days
when all land was the domain of his eminence, the king. This system left the people
politically powerless, and when the colonists arrived in the New World, they constructed
a new order, where the people owned the land, and
thus controlled their own destinies.
The Founders like based their political philosophy on the idea that rights, including
private property rights, were not derived from the king, or the government, but were gifts
bestowed by God. In fact, many early American leaders wrote of the three essential
rights: Life, Liberty and Property. William Howard Taft would later echo that sentiment,
writing emphatically: "Next to the right of liberty, the right of property is the most
important individual right guaranteed by the Constitution and the one which, united with
that of personal liberty, has contributed more to the growth of civilization than any other
institution established by the human race."
As the nation's legal system developed, our finest legal minds always respected property
rights as among the most sacred. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart wrote: "In fact, a
fundamental interdependence exists between the personal right to liberty and the
personal right to property." The legal philosopher William Blackstone, upon whom
many of our legal doctrines and traditions are based, stated: "So great moreover is the
regard of the law for private property, that it will not authorize the least violation of it; no,
not even for the general good of the whole community." It is only in recent history that
our judiciary has strayed from this school of thought.
Not only does private property ownership benefit our country politically, but it is a central
tenet of economic conservatism as well. Economist Milton Friedman summarized this
idea by stating: "Nobody spends somebody else's money as carefully as he spends his
own. Nobody uses somebody else's resources as carefully as he uses his own.
So if you want efficiency and effectiveness, if you want knowledge to be properly utilized,
you have to do it through the means of private property." An assault on private property
by the Court not only threatens our essential liberties in principle, but also attacks the
foundations of American capitalism as well.
In the last 30 years, the Court has expressed less and less deference to the property
rights of its citizens. What began with a more relaxed interpretation of the term "Public
Use" has insidiously evolved into the fiction that the Fifth Amendment actually says
"Public Purpose". James Madison warned of this type of incrementalism, noting that
"There
are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent
encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpation." This is a path
that conservatives can combat, by supporting President Bush's Court nominees who will
follow a more literal reading of the Constitution, not rewrite the text to fit their desired
policy result.
The fight over private property rights has been waged since the revolt against feudal
England and through the assaults of collectivists and communists. If we are to win this
battle, we should first ensure that our own justices are fighting for the right side.
------------
Gina Parker is the CEO of Dental Creations, a dental manufacturing company, and is
also a successful attorney. Ms. Parker serves as a Bush and Perry appointee to the
Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. She serves on the American Family
Radio Advisory Board. Ms. Parker has served in a number of Republican Party state
leadership
positions in Texas and speaks on issues of national importance, including the need for
judicial reform.
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |