Eminent domain has long been a controversial power that both the federal and state governments possess. This power gives the right to the government bodies to expropriate private property or land, that it sees as being blighted, and put it to better use for the greater good of the public. For eminent domain to be exercised the seizing of the properties must meet the requirement that they will be for public purpose or public necessity. As long as this requirement is met the federal government cannot be stopped from acquiring private property. Because of this, the eminent domain power has come under tremendous scrutiny for being unfair and unconstitutional. Moreover, people that have fell victim to this law are protesting that they were not adequately compensated for the property that was taken. The law of eminent domain continues to be a point of debate as it has been continuously proven that this law has negative consequences on not only the residents directly affected by the ramifications of the law, but also the communities that are made up of these residences. For the federal government to condemn property as blighted and then transfer it to private developers or corporations for the obvious purpose of increasing tax revenue is seen as being unfair and unconstitutional. The Constitution designates to Congress a list of specific enumerated powers. These powers can be found in Article I of the Constitution, which contains some important items. These powers range from things like declaring war, raising armies and collecting taxes. It also includes powers that are of secondary importance such as regulating the value of foreign coin and establishing post roads.(Baude, p1746) However, the power of taking private property is not c... ... middle of paper ... ...ations of this are predominantly felt across lower income families that find themselves powerless because they are in the crosshairs of large corporations that seek to take their property through the use of eminent domain. Moreover, the unconstitutional aspect of this takings method has also created friction among the effected citizens and the federal government. Besides the social effects that eminent domain has had it is all too clear the negative outcomes that it’s caused on the fragile economies. By forcing people into poorer neighborhoods the government is condemning the lower class to a life of poverty. It is unmistakable that the power of eminent domain has caused the public to despise the government while increasing the gap between the lower and upper class and also further increasing the possibility of corruption between corporations and the government.
Iceland recognizes the issue of eminent domain, as they have had trouble with this in regards to geothermal deposits. However, they agree with the ECHR regarding rights to fair compensation. Governments should only take property if it will benefit the public as a whole.
The Land Reform Act of 1967 permitted the state of Hawaii to redistribute land by condemning and acquiring private property from landlords (the lessors) in order to sell it to another private owner, in this case, their tenants (the lessees). The Hawaii State Legislature passed the Land Reform Act after discovering that nearly forty-seven percent (47%) of the state was owned by only seventy-two (72) private land owners. That meant that only forty-nine percent of Hawaii was owned by the State and Federal Govermnet.The contested statute gave lessees of single family homes the right to invoke the government's power of eminent domain to purchase the property that they leased, even if the landowner objected. The challengers of the statue (the land owners) claimed that such a condemnation was not a taking for public use because the property, once condemned by the state, was promptly turned over to the lessee (a private ...
In the year of 1862, Abraham Lincoln signed the Morrill Land Grant Act providing funds for the creation of land-grant schools in each state in the United States of America. Specifically, this act gave each state “30,000 acres…to establish a college that would promote education in agriculture, mechanics, classical studies and military tactics” (Morrill Act). The act provided each state with government funds to purchase the land, but the state itself was required to find the capital to erect the buildings. The Morrill Act was initially introduced to President Buchanan, but he vetoed it based on his belief that it was “financially draining for the Treasury, a threat to existing colleges, and unconstitutional” (Morrill, J.). On the second occasion
The Sherman Antitrust Act was passed in 1890 and abolished monopolies and trusts. Jacob Riis helped to expose the horrid living conditions in the slums through his photographs. This helped move people to work toward better conditions for the masses. Because of efforts like these, significantly better conditions exist in the U.S. now for the masses. For the most part, the Populist idea, “wealth belongs to him who creates it, and every dollar taken from industry without an equivalent is robbery,” (Reading 2) has been followed. American society is not completely there, but there are movements still occurring and politicians still use
It is surprising to think that the poor had not been oppressed in 1791. Someone would think the poor have always had a heavy burden. The majority of America’s population is poor and they are ignored and portrayed as aliens whom we should have no contact with. Finally, the rich are extremely privileged in countless ways.
In the early 1900s, “restrictive covenants” more specifically racially restrictive covenants were legally enforceable agreements that prohibited landowners from leasing or selling property to minority groups, at that time namely African Americans. The practice of the covenants, private, racially restrictive covenants, originated as a reaction to a court ruling in 1917 “which declared municipally mandated racial zoning unconstitutional . . . leaving the door open for private agreements, such as restrictive covenants, to continue to perpetuate residential segregation” (Boston, n.d.). It was more of a symbolic act than attacking the “discriminatory nature” (Schaefer, 2012, p. 184) of the restrictive covenants, when the Supreme Court found in the 1948 case of Shelley v Kraemer that racially restrictive covenants were unconstitutional. In this particular case, a white couple, the Kraemers lived in a neighborhood in Missouri that was governed by a restrictive covenant. When a black couple moved into their neighborhood, the Kraemers went to the court asking that the covenant be enforced. In a unanimous decision, it was decided, “state courts could not constitutionally prevent the sale of real property to blacks even if that property is covered by a racially restrictive covenant. Standing alone, racially restrictive covenants violate no rights. However, their enforcement by state court injunctions constitutes state action in violation of the 14th Amendment” (Shelley v. Kraemer, 1948). Even though the Supreme Court ruled that the covenants were unenforceable, it was not until 1968 when the Fair Housing Act was passed that it become illegal (Latshaw, 2010). Even though today it is illegal, it might appear that we still have an unspoken...
Since poverty affects a wide array of people, poverty has evolved into a very complex issue. And even though the government has passed legislature to try to ameliorate the situation, many of these means-tested measures like food stamps, have only been able to help the surface of poverty and fails to rip out the long roots poverty has grown throughout history. Poverty’s deep effects are seen especially in minorities as they struggle much more to leave a current situation that has been created by historical process. Even though government assistance like food stamps do help alleviate some of poverty’s burden, these measures fail to recognize the reality that many of the impoverished minority have undervalued homes or no homes at all and even if they can rent, that rent can be high enough to take up more than fifty-percent of their paychecks. Overall, poverty in America is a vastly complicated issue rooted throughout history. And even though the government has attempted to pass legislature to help provide relief from poverty, America still has yet to provide measures that target the roots of poverty and until then, the government assistance it does provide will only be superficial and fail to provide long-term solutions to a complicated
Although I don’t think that it will be effortless and uncomplicated, I do think that the land owned by the federal government should be devolved back to the individual states so they can customize their care for the environment that is specifically catered to their specific terrain’s needs. I believe the best alternative is for the United States to give back the federal land to the individual states, and then the individual states consol...
Despite the fact that America’s economy was heavily influenced by government interference and favoritism under John Quincy Adams and the American System, by 1832 Andrew Jackson, the Champion of the Common Man, jeopardized his political security in the interest of both preserving every man’s right to opportunity and upholding a nonpartisan economy. We can draw insight from Jackson’s disgust for banks, or rather for any act of government that gives a special advantage to one group over another. In Jackson’s letter to Congress justifying his Bank Veto Message, he argues, “when the laws undertake to add to these natural and just advantages... make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society… have a right to complain of the injustices of their government.” In the preceding months, Jackson was in the midst of his presidential campaign for reelection when his opponents put political pressure on him by fast tracking the Bank Bill. Jackson, however, remained steadfast in his belief that the proposed bank was unconstitutional and thus he vetoed the bill. Not surprisingly, Jackson became the object of political slander. In his reply to Jackson’s veto, Daniel Webster complains, “[This message] raises a cry that liberty is in danger, at the very moment when it puts forth claims to powers heretofore unknown and unheard of. It effects alarm for public freedom, when nothing endangers that freedom so much as its own unparalleled pretenses.” In other words, Webster proposed that through Jackson’s overuse of the veto, he was not only holding congress hostage, but also subverting democracy. On the contrary, the establishment of Jacksonian Democracy expanded the liberties of the common
In his 1791 publication, Rights of Man, Thomas Paine, an American revolutionary and pamphleteer, characterized America as a just nation where “the principles of society and the rights of man” unite all Americans together. Paine painted an ideal image of America, one founded on unity, equality, and freedom that appears ludicrous to some and visionary to others; however, by combining certain elements of Paine’s America and casting out others we can paint a more vivid picture of contemporary America as only some aspects of Paine’s America remain true. In today’s America, as Paine stated, “the poor are not oppressed” as we see many politicians and citizens dedicate time and effort toward assisting the poor and developing plans to help them out
...ith a clear distinction in wealthy and property between the rich and poor. Finally, the new nation changed with an increased responsive towards the underrepresented when the Bill of Rights was drafted to protect the individual liberties of the people. The situation the people in the new nation faced can extend to today’s problems in the United States. Big name corporations with a lot of money can lobby to protect their economic interests just like the elites writing the Constitution and making laws in order to protect their wealth. The hierarchical society in the late 1700s is still alive today with a small number of fabulously wealthy elite that pass down their wealth to their children, and then the people facing poverty and are living off of minimum wage. There are attempts to respond to the people needs just like in late 1700s because welfare to those who need it.
...elp the working middle class from falling into poverty or to help the working poor rise out of poverty. Furthermore the working poor themselves lack the knowledge and power to demand reform. David Shipler says it best when he writes, “Relief will come, if at all, in an amalgam that recognizes both the society’s obligation through government and business, and the individual’s obligation through labor and family —and the commitment of both society and individual.” (Shipler 5786-5788) It is time for America to open its eyes and see the invisible working poor.
...th what little they have, however; why is it left to the poor to have to suffer the consequences of these political choices. The persistence of extreme poverty and social ills speak to a situation that bears for a different approach. It is clear that capitalism and free market solutions cannot spread wealth as advocated. American governments have shown their reluctance to admit this discrepancy through the strategic creations of welfare policies and welfare reform coupled with placing blame upon the citizens who possess little power to change market decisions that govern and effect their lives.
The expansion of the United States is such a vital part of American history, yet some often forget how it all happened. Many thriving settlers were given an extraordinary opportunity starting on January 1, 1863 that would end up laying the floor work for many Midwestern and Western citizens today. The rights and responsibilities to live on and maintain 160 acres of land may seem like a lot to take in for a student learning about an Act about land from the 1860s. However, think about all the people the Homestead Act of 1862 affected. There was a lot of pressure on the original homesteaders to make good use of their newfound land, the government was giving out land that wasn’t exactly theirs, and the Native American would have some their rights stolen.
...top positions in the governmental and business hierarchy from communal principles and beliefs. Majority come from the upper third of the salary and professional pyramids, their upbringings were from the same upper class, some attended the same preparatory school and Ivy League universities. Also, they belong to the same organizations. The power elite have the power to control programs and actions of important governmental, financial, legal, educational, national, scientific, and public institutions. The ones in power influence half of the nation’s manufacturing, infrastructures, transportation, banking possessions, and two thirds of all insurance possessions. The occupants take essential actions that could affect everyone’s’ life in American society. Rulings made in meetings of significant corporations and banks can influence the rates of inflation and unemployment.