November 4, 2005

Pryce Votes to Protect Property Rights

WASHINGTON, DC —Last night, Congresswoman Deborah Pryce (R-Upper Arlington) issued the following statement after the House overwhelmingly approved H.R. 4128, the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005:

“This important legislation will help defend the private property rights of every American,” said Pryce. “This summer, the Supreme Court’s narrow decision in Kelo v. New London called into question over two centuries of legal precedent and the individual property rights essential to both our freedom and prosperity. Today’s vote responded emphatically to those questions by reaffirming the freedoms of private ownership that are essential to our American way of life.

“States or localities that abuse their eminent domain power under the guise of ‘economic development’ should not be trusted with federal economic development funding. Congress has sent a strong message to local governments that it will not sit idly by and watch an abrogation of individual property rights in the pursuit of tax revenue,” said Pryce.

Highlights of H.R. 4128, the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005:

  • The Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005 provides for the protection of the principles of private property. Specifically, the bill:
    • Enhances the penalty for states and localities that abuse their eminent domain power by denying states or localities that commit such abuse all federal economic development funds for a period of two years;
    • o Under this legislation, there is a clear connection between the federal funds that would be denied and the abuse Congress is seeking to prevent;
    • o States and localities will have the clear opportunity to cure any violation before they lose any federal economic development funds;
    • o An express private right of action to make certain that those suffering injuries from a violation of the bill will be allowed access to state or federal court to enforce its provisions; and
  • The Private Property Rights Protection Act includes carefully crafted refinements of the definition of “economic development” that specifically allow the types of takings that, prior to Kelo decision, had achieved a consensus as to their appropriateness.
  Back