Pedophilia, cancer and eminent domain

A lot of people who read this column will feel more ashamed of what I write than usual.

Some things in life seem indefensible. Take pedophilia, for example. I can’t think of a single redeeming quality from this psychiatric disorder. Another indefensible thing in this life is cancer, not just one form of it—all of it.

To many people throughout Mississippi and other parts of the country, I support something worse than pedophilia and cancer. I support government’s limited ability to use eminent domain for private projects.

There, I said it.

I hold this position because unlike testicular cancer and serial rapists, eminent domain for purposes of private development has redeeming value.

           Citizens across the state and in neighboring places can look at Nissan in Canton and Toyota in Blue Springs as types of projects that may have not happened in Mississippi without eminent domain as an option.

While government secured properties for the purpose of securing land for our state’s two automotive plants, few can argue that the thousands of jobs created didn’t benefit the entire state.

I oppose Initiative 31, one of the three initiatives appearing on the Nov. 8 ballot as part of statewide election, and believe it passing will handicap the state while trying to court new businesses and industry during an on-going sluggish economic time.

This effort will prohibit government from using eminent domain as a mechanism for economic development. It prohibits government from using eminent domain for a period of 10 years for purposes of transferring property for non-government use.

While I know the populist position on this initiative should have me holding up a pitchfork in the middle of rural farmland and shouting to the top of my lungs, “Government, stay off my property,” but concern for unintended consequences of this law persuades me toward restraint and reason.

Gov. Barbour

Before you scratch my name from your Christmas card lists, you may want to scratch a few other folks off, too. Another socialist liberal who opposes this ballot initiative, Republican Gov. Haley Barbour sees this necessary tool of government as a way to help create desperately needed economic development projects. Another flaming liberal and anti-business activist, Leland Speed, executive director of the Mississippi Development Authority, has urged voters to oppose this emotion-driving ballot initiative.

Unable to run for reelection due to term limits, Barbour has gone on record opposing this ballot initiative, saying limiting the bargaining tools used by Mississippi Development Authority and economic development organizations throughout the state could affect recruitment of major projects that can bring literally thousands of jobs.

People who fear government taking their property for purposes of building a mall or other retail space will help to pass this misguided initiative. Political pundits in the state expect this to pass by the highest of margins among the three on the ballot.

No one champions government taking individuals’ property, especially for private interests. However, sometimes this process can be the only roadblock between a major industry locating in a Mississippi community or it going to another state.

DuPree

Bryant

Both candidates for governor—Republican Phil Bryant and Democrat Johnny DuPree—support this initiative. As in many instances, we have politicians missing the boat on what’s good for the state in exchange for what will gain them the most votes.

Nov. 8 won’t be the first time Mississippians have supported legislation that hurts their own self-interests, and it likely won’t be the last.