Hear the audio version here (segments older than 3 weeks may be unavailable)
Remember the Kelo case? That was the outrageous 2005 decision of the Supreme Court that upheld the uprooting of people from their homes because the city wanted to use eminent domain to transfer ownership of the property to developers whom they thought would generate more tax revenue for the city.
It was a power grab by the city that surely made the Founders - big believers in private property rights - to spin in their graves. Arbitrary government action to evict a group of mostly low income Americans so that the government can make more money. Sounds much more like the kind of government that provoked the American Revolution, not the kind that resulted from it.
Nevertheless, the Court ruled in favor of the government and thus initiated a massive expansion of the government's power of eminent domain. So what does that area look like now? A vacant lot, actually. Kelo's home actually still stands (I guess you could consider it a memorial to corrupt, arbitrary big government).
And as if all that wasn't enough, how about the newest development (by the way, the area in question is called Fort Trumbull):
Would-be Fort Trumbull Developers Seek Tax Break
A developer hoping to build housing at Fort Trumbull said Thursday they will seek tax abatements from the city to move the project forward.
Robert and Irwin Stillman, the father and son owners of Westport-based River Bank Construction, said the abatements were necessary to make the project financially feasible.
"If abatements are not approved, we would have to reconsider,'' Robert Stillman said during a meeting Thursday afternoon with The Day's editorial board.
Uh...wait a minute. The developers who were given this land (who still haven't built anything) now want further tax breaks to build?! Where's the media on this one?! Beyond maddening, this reality absolutely undermines the entire rationale the liberals of the Supreme Court used in 2005. Tom Blumer explains:
In its opinion (scroll to Section IV), the Justices opined in 2005 that "The City has carefully formulated an economic development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including-but by no means limited to-new jobs and increased tax revenue." In 2011, a city which could have collected five more years of property taxes from established homeowners by now is instead contemplating and appears likely to approve tax breaks to a developer of rental units it hopes to convert to condos when the real estate market gets better.
This outcome makes a complete mockery of the Supreme Court majority's belief that a "carefully formulated ... economic development plan" was ever in place. The press's five-year lack of coverage makes a mockery of its claim to be interested in meaningful story follow-up.
Who would have ever predicted that government central planning would end so poorly for the people? Oh yeah, conservatives would have...and did.