It's nice that the president has put the White House on record as being opposed to the use of eminent domain strictly for economic development purposes. But critics are right that this is mostly window dressing and that much more is needed:
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, praised President Bush's order, but the senator pointed out the federal government has a limited role in such projects. He has introduced legislation to block federal funding for any state or local projects in which land was taken through eminent domain.
Even supporters of the broad use of eminent domain don't think much of the president's symbolic act:
Doug Kendall, executive director of the Community Rights Counsel, said he's not aware of any federal government agency that takes property for economic development.
"It's an effort to appease the property rights base, while ignoring the difficult question of when eminent domain should be used to help downtrodden communities," he said, according to the AP.
Note that this guy's organization is called a Community Rights group. I don't think "communities" have rights any more than animals do. Only individuals. Indiana legislators seemed to realize that and passed legislation last session to strengthen property rights.
(Nitpicky language gripe: I think the writer meant Community Rights Council, or else the guy who formed the group isn't too swift.)
