Related articles:

Proposition 207 con: Developers are the ones that would benefit from the passage of Prop. 207 Proposition 207: NO

Dental
Dr. John Carson, DDS, PC
Dental Asst/Treatment Coordinator General
Health Care
Visiting Angels
Caregivers Trades/Construction
Paragon Electric
Electricians General
Big State
Sell construction tools and supplies nation wide. General
Chapel Haven West
Program Staff Driver/Transportation
Pioneer Landscaping
Drivers/End-Dumps

By David Euchner

All too often, people decide their stance on an issue based on where their favorite politicians stand. Commonly, but not surprisingly, the "friends in high places" betray their supporters at the first opportunity.

A prime example of this betrayal is how politicians are reacting to Proposition 207 on this year's ballot. This proposition protects the rights of all property owners, rich and poor alike, from the misuse of eminent domain. The only people who stand to lose are politicians.

Politicians hate Prop. 207 because it puts strict controls on how they may use eminent domain to take property. Small-town politicians — Democrats and Republicans alike — have been taking people's homes and small businesses and giving that property to real estate developers or large corporations.

In the most notorious of these cases, the U.S. Supreme Court told some citizens that it was OK for New London, Conn., to take their homes and give the land to Pfizer to build office space, because the "public purpose" this act served was to generate additional tax revenue for the community. Note that the Constitution requires eminent domain takings be for public use, not a public purpose.

Those who did not follow this case through the courts might say: "Of course, the conservatives on the court would sell out to Pfizer and step on the little guy." But it was the liberals who voted to uphold the taking, and standing up for the homeowners were William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Sandra Day O'Connor (who took the majority to the woodshed in one of her final opinions on the court).

Since that decision in June 2005, voters across this country have been signing petitions to change their eminent-domain laws. Arizonans take great pride in upholding the notion that your home is your castle, and wealthy conservatives funded a petition drive for a proposition that would do nothing to help them personally but would uphold a principle that we all hold dear.

Look at your voter guide and read Prop. 207. It describes eminent domain abuses committed by local politicians in Arizona and it provides a remedy for those abuses. Nowhere in this proposition is there an opportunity for the wealthy to profit at the expense of the poor. The opposite is true: The proposition gives the poor a fighting chance to save property from special interests and politicians.

Politicians want to increase tax revenues without increasing tax rates. So they kick a few people out of their houses, give the land to private developers, and suddenly there are all these extra dollars in the public coffers. Then the politicians seeking re-election can truthfully claim they did not raise taxes and hope we never find out about the poor few who lost their homes.

Prop. 207 will force these politicians to use eminent domain only for real public uses, such as roads or utilities. Thanks to Prop. 207, the people will not have to rely on the politicians to protect their rights.