Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Government’s Domestic Big Stick

The issue of the abuse of eminent domain has remained a hot-button topic in central Indiana. Recently, the company of N.K. Hurst has found itself center stage as the newly-minted Stadium Authority seeks to claim its land by force.

The N.K. Hurst Company, a long-time downtown Indianapolis resident, has weathered the urban blight and decay of the 70’s and stayed downtown in good times and bad when most other businesses fled for the suburbs. Now that its site rests partially on the land the Stadium Authority covets for VIP parking, the old axioms of “Hoosier Hospitality” and Hoosier Tradition” get thrown out the window. The Stadium Authority has made it clear that it has no desire to negotiate further in an attempt to reach a reasonable and just compromise. Its filing of a petition of eminent domain indicates it has chosen to bully the little company to get what it wants.

According to the company’s representatives, they have been pushing for a “land swap” deal to maintain their current location and still provide the necessary land, approximately 4 acres, in exchange for a comparable piece of land elsewhere. This is not an unusual or abnormal request in such negotiations. It is usually seen as a cheaper and less legally messy alternative.

The Stadium Authority has seen fit to ignore or drag its feet on such offers and has made it clear that if N.K. Hurst will take their offer, reported to be around $3.7 million and get off their land. No “or else”. No negotiation to it. When eminent domain is exercised, it is the equivalent of sticking a gun in the property owner’s face. Although legally the courts have declared this action acceptable, such an action is morally criminal and reprehensible.

The Indianapolis Star has made its position clear on this issue. Weighing in with its heavy editorial page, it sees a company who is using the press to help it “negotiate” and believes that because the courts have argued in favor of the taking of such property for stadiums, it is legitimate. Way to tow the party line there, Star. Like many papers, the Star usually trumpets the right of the state to take private property for some socialist endeavor.

Make no mistake. That’s exactly what this is. The ultimate example of corporate welfare, building a multi-million dollar arena at taxpayer expense so that other millionaires can will have a new place to play football is perhaps one of the more audacious socialist abuses any state undertakes. If the state can give money to such a cause, why shouldn’t it be able to give it to the other “robber barons” of modern society? If it is reprehensible to provide corporate welfare to oil companies, banks, investment houses, and pharmaceutical concerns, why is it ok to give it to sports figures? There is no difference and this is not an issue where you can cherry-pick the beneficiary. For an excellent coverage and additional commentary on this, head on over to Mike Kole’s “Kole Hard Facts”.

This is not just a corporate welfare issue, though. If the state protests that it wishes eminent domain to be used only sparingly and not abused, then it must practice what it preaches. We need examples, not just empty rhetoric. Otherwise, by action after action, it condones the tyrannical conquest of the property and rights of the individual by an unresponsive and despotic government.

Eminent domain compensation must also be fair and JUST. Legislator David Wolkins, in chairing a committee on this issue late last year, continually emphasized that, while he thought such takings typically offered a fair value for the land, often the “just” part of the equation was lost. I agree. Too often in fact the government is a schoolyard bully, a petulant child. The only way it seems to notice when it’s defying the will and rights of the people is when you smack it across the face.

To the Star, I challenge you to show how such a taking or its prior “negotiations” have been just. To the Stadium Authority, I know you cannot provide such, but I invite you to try all the same. You had a chance to show that the Legislature’s words mattered and that you could be reasonable and just. Instead, you would smash those that get in your way and blacken the eye of justice in our state. I would say “May you reap all the shame and just desserts you so richly deserve” from this, but you won’t. Even if you do, it will be We the People who suffer. We suffer the indignity of your socialist existence and Stalinist tactics carried out in our name and we suffer financially should you ever fail.

How did we end up so poorly represented?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home