Comments on: Barros on Kelo and Eminent Domain http://www.lawsocietyblog.com/archives/120 Notes from the intersection of law, society, technology, economics, and culture Tue, 06 Jan 2009 06:34:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: Kenneth Holzman http://www.lawsocietyblog.com/archives/120#comment-295 Kenneth Holzman Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:42:06 +0000 http://www.lawsocietyblog.com/archives/120#comment-295 I do not believe that there is anything in the constitution which would prohibit Congress from adding further restrictions to the procedure required for the state to acquire a property via the power of eminent domain. Moreover, this proposal offers the very real benefit of recognizing the stock which individuals within our society place on their residences. This reflects a real social value, and one which is almost universally held throughout our culture. Taking a person's emotional attachment into account when compensating them for a taking of their property would address a real world social problem, and create the appearence of a government which values the lives of its citizens. It has been well documented over the past decade that human beings are not rational creatures, and that emotional aspects of decision making must be taken into account when engaging in social projects. A homeowner does not see the taking of their property as being a purely economic exercise. Instead, they often see it as robbing them of their own history, their very life's work. A modest premium would go a long ways towards recognizing this, and dealing with it in a reasonable fashion. I do not believe that there is anything in the constitution which would prohibit Congress from adding further restrictions to the procedure required for the state to acquire a property via the power of eminent domain. Moreover, this proposal offers the very real benefit of recognizing the stock which individuals within our society place on their residences. This reflects a real social value, and one which is almost universally held throughout our culture. Taking a person’s emotional attachment into account when compensating them for a taking of their property would address a real world social problem, and create the appearence of a government which values the lives of its citizens.

It has been well documented over the past decade that human beings are not rational creatures, and that emotional aspects of decision making must be taken into account when engaging in social projects. A homeowner does not see the taking of their property as being a purely economic exercise. Instead, they often see it as robbing them of their own history, their very life’s work. A modest premium would go a long ways towards recognizing this, and dealing with it in a reasonable fashion.

]]>