Sen. Mark Obenshain released the following statement regarding his ongoing efforts to stem the tide of government over-stretch in Virginia:
Earlier today, I went before a Privileges & Elections subcommittee to make the case for enshrining protections of private property in the Virginia Constitution. The Kelo v. New London case brought national attention to eminent domain abuse, but the abuse has a long history. Two years ago, I worked long and hard with Sen. Ken Cuccinelli (R-Fairfax) and others in a successful effort to pass statutory eminent domain reform, but we are not resting on our laurels. Opponents of these reforms are already trying to chip away at the gains we made, which is why I want to put these important property protections where they belong – in the Virginia Constitution.
You might think that after the post-Kelo backlash, legislators and planning officials would give it a rest. As I write, however, a battle is still raging about a takings case in Roanoke, and just yesterday a bill came before me in subcommittee that would have expanded the definition of blighted property to include a great many temporarily vacant residential and commercial buildings that pose no danger to the community. Virginia’s new statutory protections are good ones, and I’m proud of my role in bringing them about, but legislation can be eroded away by new laws, and there are plenty of people out there trying to do precisely that.
In subcommittee today, a lobbyist for the other side did me a great favor – he made my case for me. I only wish that all those who wonder if a constitutional amendment is really necessary could have been there. How can we do this during an economic downturn, he questioned, when localities would be most interested in taking properties for economic development purposes?
One understands, of course, why localities want to increase local employment and grow their tax base, but I think most Virginians would recoil at the idea that they could be out of a home because a box store wants to move in. That’s precisely what the 2007 legislation was intended to prevent, and it’s also precisely what opponents of eminent domain reform are so eager to start doing again. I say no, and that’s what enshrining these rights in Virginia’s Constitution is all about.
This amendment would narrow the definition of public use so that neither state nor local government can take property for economic development purposes.
The great British statesman William Pitt, a partisan of American independence and a champion of her values, put the case so eloquently that his words, though over two hundred years old, are still worth quoting today. “The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail—its roof may shake—the wind may blow through it—the storm may enter—the rain may enter—but the King of England cannot enter! All his forces dare not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!”
This country fought a war to throw off the crown and to embrace the belief in certain fundamental rights, chief among them life, liberty, and property. It is a pleasure to report to you that for now, we’re one step closer to bringing Virginia’s constitution in line with freedoms envisioned by the founding generation.
