Trump: Bush family used eminent domain to build a baseball park

[mystery-ak]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/268562-trump-bush-family-used-eminent-domain-to-build-a-baseball

February 07, 2016, 11:40 am
Trump: Bush family used eminent domain to build a baseball park

By Bradford Richardson

Following attacks from primary rival Jeb Bush about his past use of eminent domain, Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump on Sunday accused the Bush family of using the practice to build a baseball stadium in Texas.

“Eminent domain is a very important thing,” Trump said on ABC’s “This Week.” “Jeb Bush doesn’t understand what it means, and if you look into the Bush family – I found this five minutes ago – they used eminent domain for the stadium in Texas, where they own, I guess, a piece of the Texas Rangers.”

When host George Stephanopoulos said that was Jeb’s brother, former President George W. Bush, Trump said his point still stands.

“That doesn’t matter,” he said. “It was the Bush family. They used private eminent domain. He didn’t tell anybody this. So, I mean, he should have told people.”

“Maybe – he probably doesn’t know because I don’t think he even knows what eminent domain is,” he added. “But I just found that out five minutes ago.”

The billionaire businessman also refused to recant his support for governmental seizures of private property.

“Eminent domain is important,” he said. “You wouldn’t have highways, you wouldn’t have roadways, you wouldn’t have bridges, you wouldn’t have hospitals. You wouldn’t have anything without it."

He also said the crowd at Saturday night’s GOP primary debate was firmly in his corner on the issue.

“The crowd was on my side, except that they were all friends of mine that were donors and special interests and lobbyists, some of whom worked for me in the past,” he said.

[HAPPY2BME]

True story.

[NavyCanDo]

Pointing at others that did it justifies, it?

[ABX]

So now he admits it is wrong if he is using it to criticize? Not too many Conservatives or Libertarians would defend using eminent domain for a baseball park. It is supposed to be used rarely and only of vital interest (example, the highway system often cited is both of vital interest and is constitutional (postal roads- Article I, Section 8, Clause 7). The 'postal clause' is generally used to justify the same use for communications and power as the intent of the clause was to 'foster interstate communication) and those are part of a modern equivalent. (See Federalist 44).

Eminent domain is abused if it is used to promote private business over the rights of personal, private property such as baseball parks, casinos, and golf courses.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Trump's grandfather owned and operated brothels and his father was a member of the KKK.

What does that say about Donald?

[mystery-ak]

Trump's grandfather owned and operated brothels and his father was a member of the KKK.

What does that say about Donald?

..it says you can't choose your family

[240B]

So now he admits it is wrong if he is using it to criticize? Not too many Conservatives or Libertarians would defend using eminent domain for a baseball park. It is supposed to be used rarely and only of vital interest (example, the highway system often cited is both of vital interest and is constitutional (postal roads- Article I, Section 8, Clause 7). The 'postal clause' is generally used to justify the same use for communications and power as the intent of the clause was to 'foster interstate communication) and those are part of a modern equivalent. (See Federalist 44).

Eminent domain is abused if it is used to promote private business over the rights of personal, private property such as baseball parks, casinos, and golf courses.

The justification for private eminent domain is that it benefits the community, the city, and the State. In this example, the tearing down of a private home to build a baseball stadium would be a boon in revenue to that community, and it would increase the economy and the tax revenue of the State. Ergo, even though it is 'private', it is in the public interest.

I am only presenting the rational behind it, not arguing whether it is right or wrong.

[sinkspur]

“That doesn’t matter,” he said. “It was the Bush family. They used private eminent domain. He didn’t tell anybody this. So, I mean, he should have told people.”

The City of Arlington, Texas exercised eminent domain for the Rangers, just as they did for the Cowboys.  The city figured the economic value would be worth it, and it has been, in spades.

[ABX]

The justification for private eminent domain is that it benefits the community, the city, and the State. In this example, the tearing down of a private home to build a baseball stadium would be a boon in revenue to that community, and it would increase the economy and the tax revenue of the State. Ergo, even though it is 'private', it is in the public interest.

I am only presenting the rational behind it, not arguing whether it is right or wrong.

That type of justification is used for almost all liberal policies, from the ACA to gun control. It is to benefit the community, it is for the children, from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

[ABX]

“That doesn’t matter,” he said. “It was the Bush family. They used private eminent domain. He didn’t tell anybody this. So, I mean, he should have told people.”

The City of Arlington, Texas exercised eminent domain for the Rangers, just as they did for the Cowboys.  The city figured the economic value would be worth it, and it has been, in spades.

It may have been financially beneficial, but it screwed the property owners. The government got to determine what they determined as 'fair' and wouldn't even cover all the moving expenses incurred by the home owners. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/eminent_domain_ruling_affects_dallas_cowboys_stadium/ 

In a free market, Jerry Jones would have had to make offers through negotiations with the home owners that both came to agree to as fair versus having the government step in and compensate pittance to the private property owners.

[Luis Gonzalez]

..it says you can't choose your family

Neither Jeb nor Trump could choose their family. Neither should be attacked based on the actions of family members.

[truth_seeker]

It may have been financially beneficial, but it screwed the property owners. The government got to determine what they determined as 'fair' and wouldn't even cover all the moving expenses incurred by the home owners. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/eminent_domain_ruling_affects_dallas_cowboys_stadium/ 

In a free market, Jerry Jones would have had to make offers through negotiations with the home owners that both came to agree to as fair versus having the government step in and compensate pittance to the private property owners.

The government is "buyer" and the owner is "seller." An appraiser determines his estimate of value, and the seller can appeal.

The final value is often a much higher prices for the seller, than he could have obtained for the property before the redevelopment started.

I once represented an investor, trying to buy up low priced properties, in an are he predicted would become a redevelopment area.

Redevelopment and use of eminent domain are legal, have been for decades. It appears the Trump and the Bush families have made use of them.

[Luis Gonzalez]

“That doesn’t matter,” he said. “It was the Bush family. They used private eminent domain. He didn’t tell anybody this. So, I mean, he should have told people.”

The City of Arlington, Texas exercised eminent domain for the Rangers, just as they did for the Cowboys.  The city figured the economic value would be worth it, and it has been, in spades.

Arlington is a prosperous city these days.

[mystery-ak]

Neither Jeb nor Trump could choose their family. Neither should be attacked based on the actions of family members.

I agree and I wasn't doing the attacking

[Luis Gonzalez]

I agree and I wasn't doing the attacking

You weren't. You helped me make my point.

Trump is trying to defend his own inexcusable actions by attacking Jeb for something he didn't do.

[Wingnut]

Neither here nor there in this here bashathon.... but if I remember correctly that part of Arlington was kind of a shit hole back then

[truth_seeker]

Neither here nor there in this here bashathon.... but if I remember correctly that part of Arlington was kind of a shit hole back then

A major use of eminent domain has been to aid in turning shit holes, into not-so-shit holes.

Redevelopment. There are also certain tax benefits which true conservatives should also discuss.

Some true conservatives will oppose the redevelopment, the tax benefits and the eminent domain, preferring instead the retention of said shit holes.

[ABX]

The government is "buyer" and the owner is "seller." An appraiser determines his estimate of value, and the seller can appeal.

The final value is often a much higher prices for the seller, than he could have obtained for the property before the redevelopment started.

I once represented an investor, trying to buy up low priced properties, in an are he predicted would become a redevelopment area.

Redevelopment and use of eminent domain are legal, have been for decades. It appears the Trump and the Bush families have made use of them.

Except the government is the appraiser, not an independent third party. Legal doesn't make it right. If Jerry Jones (using the prior example) was able to negotiate directly with the property owners, they may have come to an agreed upon price without a government appraiser telling them what it is worth. Maybe the property owners had the foresight to invest in an area they knew would grow and instead they were told they would be forced to sell at pre-growth prices?

I have a friend who had similar foresight in our small town, buying up a lot of property that was undeveloped. A few years later, Wal Mart wanted to come in. If the government used eminent domain, they would have offered only want the current appraised value was (as appraised by the government) and he would have gotten a couple thousand per acre, about what he paid for it. Instead, luckily in this case, the government didn't step in and he sold directly to developers (who later sold to Wal Mart and other businesses) and made millions in the process. He then turned around and used that money to develop more and is one of the leading developers in our town in under a decade. That's what happens when government keeps its nose out of private industry.

It may be legal, but it is a slap in the face of one of our founding principals- private property rights and the right of an individual over the State. It is even one of the key principals in our Declaration of Independence (pursuit of happiness was referred to by Jefferson as the right of an individual to own his own property and thus his own destiny) and is repeated often in the Constitution in various restrictions on the government (from quartering to the 5th Amendment).

Abortion is also legal that many people 'take advantage of' and some economists will say benefits society economically by reducing strain on social programs and those who are poor; that doesn't make it right either.

[ABX]

A major use of eminent domain has been to aid in turning shit holes, into not-so-shit holes.

Redevelopment. There are also certain tax benefits which true conservatives should also discuss.

Some true conservatives will oppose the redevelopment, the tax benefits and the eminent domain, preferring instead the retention of said shit holes.

False dichotomy. The choice is not government intervention or shit hole. As is the case for Cowboy's Stadium, the government could have stayed out of it (why is the government in the NFL business anyway?) and Jerry Jones could have negotiated directly with the home owners and property owners directly in what would have most likely been a far more beneficial outcome to the property owners (especially after the complaints of paltry appraisals during that whole ordeal)  and the net result would have been the same booming area and tax benefit.
(albeit, as Conservatives, I think we should be far more focused on reducing government so we don't have to be obsessed with the tax benefit of something as the end goal).

[truth_seeker]

Except the government is the appraiser, not an independent third party.

You are absolutely wrong on that. As a licensed real estate broker in California for over 25 years, I have had to actually study laws pertaining to real estate, etc.

http://www.condemnation-law.com/articles/eminent-domain-cases-selecting-an-appraiser/

I am NOT defending every use of eminent domain. I AM dispelling false claims about it.

Some key words. "redevelopment" "blight" "Kelo"

[ABX]

You are absolutely wrong on that. As a licensed real estate broker in California for over 25 years, I have had to actually study laws pertaining to real estate, etc.

http://www.condemnation-law.com/articles/eminent-domain-cases-selecting-an-appraiser/

I am NOT defending every use of eminent domain. I AM dispelling false claims about it.

Some key words. "redevelopment" "blight" "Kelo"

In Texas, it is an office under the State Comptroller and is part of the local tax assessor's role. Banks and insurance companies do hire separate appraisers here, but their job is to dispute what the county tax appraiser determines, not make the determination. 

[truth_seeker]

False dichotomy. The choice is not government intervention or shit hole. As is the case for Cowboy's Stadium, the government could have stayed out of it (why is the government in the NFL business anyway?) and Jerry Jones could have negotiated directly with the home owners and property owners directly in what would have most likely been a far more beneficial outcome to the property owners (especially after the complaints of paltry appraisals during that whole ordeal)  and the net result would have been the same booming area and tax benefit.
(albeit, as Conservatives, I think we should be far more focused on reducing government so we don't have to be obsessed with the tax benefit of something as the end goal).

There are TWO SEPARATE SUBJECTS:

1. Redevelopment, which can but does not rely on eminent domain.

2. Eminent domain, which has many widely accepted has historic uses including roads, railways,  bridges, public facilities, military installations, etc.

If "redevelopment is your complain, the attack that. Tell your state, county, local city governments to avoid use. Do NOT build sports stadiums, if it entails public subsidies or taking of private property.

The Kelo case in the Supreme Court would be the particular case law precedent, that must be overcome now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London

[Luis Gonzalez]

In Texas, it is an office under the State Comptroller and is part of the local tax assessor's role. Banks and insurance companies do hire separate appraisers here, but their job is to dispute what the county tax appraiser determines, not make the determination.

What's one thing in California is another in Texas.

Federalism!

[truth_seeker]

What's one thing in California is another in Texas.

Federalism!

Quite an informative illustration. People on these so called conservative forums are quick to stereotype California as "bad" and Texas as "good" in terms of "conservatism."

Yet it appears California has better laws for private property rights.

At least two big stadiums are under discussion in the LA metro area. I have no idea if any, involve redevelopment, eminent domain, all or none.

[Fishrrman]

Trump:
“Eminent domain is important,” he said. “You wouldn’t have highways, you wouldn’t have roadways, you wouldn’t have bridges, you wouldn’t have hospitals. You wouldn’t have anything without it."

He's right, of course. The Founders recognized that sometimes private property would have to be "taken" -- and thus the Fifth Amendment clause regarding the taking of private property for public usage.

However, I'm not sure if Mr. Trump has considered the Constitutional subtleties that come into play when the lines between "public use" and "private use" become blurry.

And in an erstwhile attempt to remove the blurriness, the Kelo decision* made matters worse, a grave misjudgment by our Supreme Court.

Fortunately, a number of the states took matters into their own hands, and passed legislation or amended their state constitutions to shore up ordinary property owners' rights insofar as eminent domain is concerned.

* I worked with someone from New London with a relative who was one of the plaintiffs in Kelo...