[ back ]
Property rights are tough issue
(by Dave Lange - August 18, 2010)
COUNTY LINE, BY DAVE LANGE
Property rights are tough issue
"What is it that people in this country don't understand about the Constitution of the United States of America?"
It was my old pal, Mush Limburger, on the line. It's nice to hear from you, Mush. You must be talking about the Preamble, which is the very essence of the traditions upon which our great nation was founded. It says, "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare ..."
"Not that liberal drivel, you socialist."
Well, Mush, I have to admit that the "domestic tranquility" part hasn't been working out so well lately, especially since "general welfare" specifically refers to the health of all citizens, not just the ones who can afford medical insurance.
"Forget about that meaningless trivia, you tax-and-spend leftist. I'm talking about something important, the part of the Constitution that says, if you want to dictate how property can be used, you gotta buy it."
I don't think the Constitution actually says that, Mush. But the 14th Amendment does say that the government cannot deprive citizens of their property without due process of the law.
"That's the one, meathead."
Then you probably know, Mush, the 14th Amendment, which was adopted after the Civil War, also ensures that everybody who's born in the United States is automatically entitled to citizenship. Some politicians want to get it repealed because of a few babies being born here to undocumented workers.
"Obviously, it doesn't apply to illegal aliens who have illegal babies that don't even speak English, so quit changing the subject, distorter.
"I'm talking about the developers in Solon who had to go to court to overturn the city's restrictive zoning, so they can build duplexes on their land along busy SOM Center Road. But now the neighbors are whining that the city didn't do enough to protect them from the big, bad developer."
Those residents are just like you, Mush. They bought nice homes in an area that's zoned for single-family residential, and they believe the developers, who knew how the land was zoned when they bought it, should follow the same rules. Isn't that fair?
"No, you simpleton. It's not fair, and they're not just like me. I follow the Constitution, which says, if you want to control somebody else's land, you better buy it. That's what I did. And that's what's fair."
So, by the same token, Mush, you wouldn't have any sympathy for the 200 people who attended a meeting in Munson last week to protest the proposal for the township to buy Fowler's Mill Golf Course and convert it to a nature preserve along the Chagrin River.
"What are you talking about, duffer? I shoot birdies on that golf course, and it's a completely different situation. Some of those people in Solon think the city should spend taxpayers' money to buy the developers' land. The patriots who showed up in Munson don't want tax dollars from the Environmental Protection Agency being used to close down the golf course."
Actually, Mush, much like the dispute in Solon, the Fowler's Mill land happens to have been bought by a developer. When the economy improves, it could be a lot more profitable for the developer to build a big housing subdivision there, or maybe even a shopping center, than continue to run it as a golf course.
"What are you trying to say, numskull?"
It's not what I'm saying, Mush. It's what you're telling me that the Constitution says. Maybe the golfers should buy that land for $5 million.
[ back ]
