Key Vote YES on Private Property Rights Protection Act, No on Amendments

Dear Representative:

On behalf of more than 700,000 FreedomWorks members nation-wide, I write to urge the U.S. House to VOTE YES on the Private Property Rights Protection Act (H.R. 4128). This bill is a vital reform that would discourage the abuse of eminent domain, and has our full support.

However, a series of amendments will be proposed, and many of them attempt to weaken or eliminate the vital protections the bill provides home and business owners. We urge the U.S. House to VOTE NO on the Amendments listed below.

1. Moran #3: Adopting this amendment would weaken the bill’s protections. First, it confuses matters with its use of the term “public use,” which the Supreme Court in Kelo held can mean a private use — i.e., taking property from A and giving to B so that B can generate more money with the land. Second, the amendment says that a taking from A to B for economic development is perfectly fine so long as economic development is not a “primary purpose.” Owners should not have to inquire into the personal motivations of city officials in order to keep their homes and businesses.

2. Granger #4: This amendment weakens the bill because it provides a loophole for governments that take property for a stated reason that is proper — for example, a road — but then turn around and give the property to a private party for private commercial development.

3. Turner #6: This amendment would create an enormous loophole and would thus dramatically weaken the protections the bill provides. The amendment makes an exception for state and local governments that transfer property from A to B for B’s private gain if they can claim that doing so will eliminate things like “obsolescence” and “excessive land coverage.” Across the country, these terms and others in the amendment are regularly applied to normal and ordinary neighborhoods to justify the abuse of eminent domain. For example, “obsolescence” can mean that a home has less than two full bathrooms or three full bedrooms. “Excessive land coverage” can mean that a bureaucrat thinks that a yard is “too small.”

4. Watt #13: This amendment strikes every measure of the bill that provides protection to home and business owners; thus, it eviscerates the bill’s protections.

5. Nadler #15: The bill is only effective if governments that use eminent domain for private

FreedomWorks will count your vote on the both Private Property Rights Protection Act and the above Amendments as KEY VOTES when calculating the FreedomWorks Economic Scorecard. The FreedomWorks Economic Scorecard is used to determine eligibility for the Jefferson Award, which recognizes Representatives with voting records that support economic freedom.

Sincerely,

Matt Kibbe
President and CEO
FreedomWorks