Proposition 90 - Yes


Restrain the government's ability to steal from us

This is part of my ongoing series of posts on each of the Propositions we'll be voting on. Here is the original post, with my ground rules for evaluating propositions, my scorecard and links to each of my arguments.

Proposition 90 - Yes

Summary - This measure is aimed at stemming the power given to States in the infamous Kelo Supreme Court decision. It would limit the state and local government's ability to condemn and seize property through imminent domain. It would also define what just compensation is, and place some penalties on government for placing undue restrictions on business and home owners.

Commentary - The Kelo decision overturned one of the most sacred rights in American history - the right of private property. In fact, I have heard it said that a common chant amongst the colonists was Life, Liberty, Property and that was almost the phrase used in the Declaration of Independence because it was such a part of the common vernacular. Ultimately it was left out because property is not directly God-given - although it is definitely morally wrong for a government to take from someone.

Private property rights undergird every part of a free society. If a government is able to take away your land for no reason, there is no telling how corrupt it can become. What is the point of title insurance and property deeds if someone can simply go bribe a friend in high places and take your property? Or how can a person stand up to a government if they know they will lose everything they own?

The other main target for this legislation is something that has grown out of control here in CA. We have several undue restrictions put on homeowners and builders that are unreasonable and punitive. The zealots in governments that require these things pay nothing for them, but the people the inflict on their whim can suffer huge costs. Thomas Sowell writes about some of the unintended consequences these restrictions can have.

This measure would put some penalties and restrictions in place so that if government wants to make these restrictions, it will only be for public health and safety. This goes hand in hand with the above considerations. If government can make your life miserable, or your house so expensive you can't afford it, then they have almost the same power of simply taking it from you. The government does have an interest in public health and safety, but we need to make sure they are wielding that power carefully and responsibly.

Posted: Mon - November 6, 2006 at 07:24 PM | | | | | | |

©