|
Reclaiming the Moral High
Ground
In conclusion, by drawing together and
summarizing these several points, adding a few refinements in the
process.
First, the demise of property rights has
gone hand in hand with the rise of the modern redistribute, regulatory
state, and a state that has grown well beyond its constitutional limits.
The courts should be the ultimate institutional bulwark against that
growth in government, but they can withstand only so much political
pressure. In the end, therefore, it is WE THE PEOPLE who must right the
wrongs that have been brought about through our endless demands for public
goods and services. It has been stated that a government big enough to
give us everything we want is a government strong enough to take away
everything we have.
Second, to restore the protection for
property rights that the Fifth Amendment affords, we need to be clear
about the principles of the matter. We need to be clear, in particular,
about how the protection of property and the protection of the environment
go hand in hand. Indeed, as a practical matter, it is particularly
important that defenders of property rights be seen as protectors of the
environment as well. That is what we are. Let us say it. Third, it is
crucial to distinguish between environmental harms, defined as violations
of property rights, and environmental goods. The state does not have to
compensate property owners when it prohibits them from using their
property in ways that violate the rights of others. However, when
regulations are aimed at providing public goods, and they do so by
prohibiting property owners from doing what they would otherwise have a
right to do with their property, thereby reducing the value of that
property, the state does have to compensate those owners.
Fourth, and finally, not every regulation
affecting property should lead to compensation for the owner. The owner
should not be compensated (a) when he has no independent right to do what
the regulation prohibits him from doing, as just noted; (b) when the
regulation has the effect of reducing property values without denying any
uses - say, if a government agency downsizes, leading to a reduction in
property values in a community; and (c) if the owner can show no loss,
say, if a particular zoning restriction actually raises property
values.
With those principles in view, Forever
Albemarle needs to go forward from here and press our cause in every arena
we can. The principles at issue are nothing less than the principles
on which this nation was founded: individual liberty, individual
responsibility, private property, and public accountability. As stated at
the outset, those who defend property rights when properly understood, are
those who defend the environment as well. We occupy the moral high ground.
Let us hold to that, look up, and go boldly forward!
|