Well okay, she didn’t really say that, but what she did say was almost as stupid.
Q Later this morning, many Members of the House Republican leadership, along with John Cornyn from the Senate, are holding a news conference on eminent domain, the decision of the Supreme Court the other day, and they are going to offer legislation that would restrict it, prohibiting federal funds from being used in such a manner.
Two questions: What was your reaction to the Supreme Court decision on this topic, and what do you think about legislation to, in the minds of opponents at least, remedy or changing it?
Ms. Pelosi. As a Member of Congress, and actually all of us and anyone who holds a public office in our country, we take an oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Very central to that in that Constitution is the separation of powers. I believe that whatever you think about a particular decision of the Supreme Court, and I certainly have been in disagreement with them on many occasions, it is not appropriate for the Congress to say we’re going to withhold funds for the Court because we don’t like a decision.
Q Not on the Court, withhold funds from the eminent domain purchases that wouldn’t involve public use. I apologize if I framed the question poorly. It wouldn’t be withholding federal funds from the Court, but withhold Federal funds from eminent domain type purchases that are not just involved in public good.
Ms. Pelosi. Again, without focusing on the actual decision, just to say that when you withhold funds from enforcing a decision of the Supreme Court you are, in fact, nullifying a decision of the Supreme Court. This is in violation of the respect for separation of church — powers in our Constitution, church and state as well. Sometimes the Republicans have a problem with that as well. But forgive my digression.
So the answer to your question is, I would oppose any legislation that says we would withhold funds for the enforcement of any decision of the Supreme Court no matter how opposed I am to that decision. And I’m not saying that I’m opposed to this decision, I’m just saying in general.–bold added to make reading a bit easier
So that load of incoherent blabbering holds that if you don’t fund something you don’t support it. So if a Democrat doesn’t vote to fund the troops in Iraq they really don’t support the troops. Gotcha Rep. Pelosi, thanks for clearing this up for us.
It is also nice to see that Pelosi thinks that government taking private property and giving to other private concerns is not worth fighting. Guess she really doesn’t think much of property rights. And some people wonder why the Democrats are viewed as economic boneheads.FN1
But this uppity reporter was persistent and kept asking questions of Rep. Pelosi about Kelo,
Q Could you talk about this decision? What you think of it?
Ms. Pelosi. It is a decision of the Supreme Court. If Congress wants to change it, it will require legislation of a level of a constitutional amendment. So this is almost as if God has spoken. It’s an elementary discussion now. They have made the decision.
Q Do you think it is appropriate for municipalities to be able to use eminent domain to take land for economic development?
Ms. Pelosi. The Supreme Court has decided, knowing the particulars of this case, that that was appropriate, and so I would support that.
In other words, Pelosi thinks it is just fine for a city to evict homeowners and give the land to another private concern so that they can do something else with the land. Sure, the homeowners might get a fair market price, but if the developer was going to improve the land so that the value of the land also increased the homeowner loses out on that benefit since such a benefit will not be reflected in a fair market price. Tell me again how the Republicans are the party of the rich and powerful and the Democrats are for the “little guy”. On second thought, please don’t bother the tortured logic would likely give me a headache.
Related OTB Posts:
Souter̢۪s House Targeted
Eminent Domain Ruling Affects Dallas Cowboys Stadium
So Much For Property Rights
Supreme Court Rules Cities May Seize Homes for Private Use
Supreme Court to Rule on Eminent Domain Limits
_____
FN1Note that I’m not saying that Democrats are economic boneheads, but that does seem to be a view many people hold. Further, the Democrats are not noted for their staunch support for property rights, and Pelosi’s later comments confirm this…well that and the fact that she is an ignorant dingbat on this particular court decision.
