More on Kelo v. New London

« The Waybacks (with guest Footloose) | Main | Knoxville Bloggers Beat Us 'noogans »

June 26, 2005

More on Kelo v. New London

I don't have the same intense level of outrage (about Kelo) as do a lot of my fellow bloggers; but that's not because I WANT to see more land grabs that end up as giveaways to the already rich and connected set. My lack of seething just has to do with how I sense the federal government's role.

Therefore, a state constitution amendment is a potentially valid approach (I haven't yet read it), but another tack we can and must take is to approach this at the local level as a critical mass of voting citizens. I firmly believe that it is the lack of electoral participation that has been of great aid to the whole Kelo scenario's coming about. When only about 17% of those eligible get out and vote, chances are great that a majority of those 17% are connected to the connected, and are merely ensuring a hold on power. Those elected officials who abet the developers' land grabs have very little concern over being voted out. In fact, we've seen in Chattanooga that there is (at least allegedly) a "revolving door" between the city government and powerful redevelopment firms.

I'm not much for amending constitutions when not absolutely necessary, so I hope Tennesseans will join me in a monumental effort to dramatically increase voter turnout -- especially in municipal, county, and state elections. That's where it matters. If the politicians know that their accountability factor is high, they will be much less likely to engage in backroom-deal property confiscations. Developers will then be forced to deal with those property owners directly, as it should be, and the 5th Amendment needn't be trampled upon -- and the Kelo v. New London ruling won't even apply.

The local print, tv and radio outlets also need to be convinced that coverage of this matter is paramount. (If I had tons o' money I would just convin$e them myself.) It would also be nice if, instead of covering elections with the angle "those voters, look what they came up with," they took the "public good" part of their licenses seriously, and portrayed the message "YOU: go vote, and here's all the info about who/what the choices are." Do we ever hear Bob Johnson (for example) using the same urgent tone about upcoming voter registration deadlines (and we'll talk about same-day registration another time) as Patrick Core (for example) uses when he says that a severe thunderstorm is headed our way?

I hate to break it to some of you, but low voter participation has far more damaging and lasting effects on a lot more people than does a bit of wind and hail.

I have the distinct impression that some people are politicizing the Supreme Court ruling, based on their apparent ideological alignment with three of the four dissenting Justices. That's their prerogative, but I would much rather see officials and non-officials alike focus their energy on what can actually be done to alleviate the problem (i.e., for starters anyway, the approach I have outlined above). Failure on their part to do so may amount to a lack of sincerity about the actual foundation of the issue.

A interesting, local, related question: is the Igou Gap Road widening project

a) a real road construction need that would both ethically and legally permit the City to exercise eminent domain;

b) an ex post facto favor to CBL to help increase traffic to the already-developed Gunbarrel Pointe shopping center;

c) a preparatory move for further development near the existing one (i.e., if Chattanooga gets the land, will she sell it to a developer)?

I'm going to go read up on the technology for doing voting/surveys on blogs, and turn the above question into one -- if I have time. Otherwise, use Comments.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.