CACR 30 editorial in the Union Leader:
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Protecting+property%3a+Amendment+needed&articleId=f6cca83e-934a-41b5-b7f8-b9c91f45f14fProtecting property: Amendment neededSINCE LAST year's U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. New London, a person's property has lost the protection once provided by the Fifth Amendment. It is up to the states to restore that protection, and a mere statute is not enough. A constitutional amendment is needed.
On Wednesday the New Hampshire House of Representatives will vote on CACR 30, which would amend the state constitution to prevent the taking of private property "for private use or economic development." The House ought to pass it unanimously.
The Founding Fathers did not trust elected officials to keep their hands off of citizens' property. They thought it so important to shield property from the greedy hand of government that they amended the Constitution to do it. In their wisdom, they wrote that private property could be taken only for "public use." The Kelo decision cracked that shield by changing "public use" to "public purpose," a very different and much weaker standard.
New Hampshire legislators can begin righting the wrong done by the Supreme Court by passing CACR 30, which states unequivocally, "The power of eminent domain shall not be used to transfer ownership of real property for private use or economic development."
Some say that Kelo can be fought with a statute. But private property is a fundamental building block of our society. It deserves to be hidden behind stronger defenses. It deserves constitutional protection.