TransCanada out of line on eminent domain? (Lincoln, Ogallala: renters, how much)

[SCGranny]

Senator Johanns in the Lincoln JournalStar today..
Johanns: TransCanada out of line on eminent domain

"Nebraska Sen. Mike Johanns suggested Thursday that TransCanada is "way out there on a limb" with its plans to use eminent domain to acquire easements without having federal permits in hand to build its Keystone XL pipeline."

What do ya'll think about this?

[NaleyRocks]

I have to research more to see if my understanding of eminent domain is correct, but as it stands I do not think it is ever a justifiable solution. If you own property and don't want to sell you shouldn't be forced into it.

However I have not looked into the policy of eminent domain to see if it is different from the way it is commonly understood to be. As I type I find it hard to believe that property can be taken away simply for "progress", when the homeowner legally owns the property. I think I need to look into this to see what the real policy is.

[NaleyRocks]

Okay, looked it up. Still disagee, it is totally against the spirit of freedom. If you own a little plot of land that is where they want to build the coolest, most economical, life changing thing and you don't want to sell then too bad for them. You own it.

[SCGranny]

"Eminent domain" is a HUGE topic back east; it assumes that the government or the majority knows better what your property can be used for than you do. Depending on what State you live in, they can offer you a price (usually well below even market value) and, when you refuse, they can simply take your property and you have to move off of it. Then they can do what they please with it. The 'possessors" usually will do their best to tell the general populace how poorly the current owner is managing his/her resources, and how much better the intended owners can do with it - provide jobs, tear down 'eyesores' and put up pretty and profitable structures that will raise everyone else's property values and resources and income.

It's a sneaky way to get what you want wherever you want it - and to ignore individuals' private property rights. If your (absentee) neighbors sell their property, then those who are using the eminent domain can usually force you to sell yours too...

[mattpoulsen]

Naleyrocks,

Eminent domain isn't a new topic. This has been hashed and rehashed for centuries now.

It doesn't matter whether eminent domain "should" be used. Supreme Court precedent clearly states that it can, even in cases where the recipient of the property right is a private entity (which is a new development handed down from the Court fairly recently).

Its not as simple as saying they are taking the property from someone. There is a pretty thorough and well articulated test for it. But the test isn't the issue, its a matter of politics. Its up to the state to determine whether or not to use eminent domain to force land owners to grant easements for the pipeline.

While TransCanada says its going to use eminent domain, the reality is they don't get to decide. All they can do is petition the government for it. It is then a matter of political forces after that.

And I think Johann's point is a fair one. Why are we worried about the easements if you aren't guaranteed the federal permits?

Eminent domain has been around for centuries. However, eminent domain utilized to benefit private companies is relatively new. Its not usually used either as its usually very politically unpopular. This would be an interesting case though. As its not as simple as a new mall coming in. One landowner could greatly disrupt the entire project, which spans a continent.

[Idunn]

'Legislators in Nebraska moved to block the controversial Keystone XL project on Tuesday, introducing a bill that would give state officials authority over pipeline routes.

The bill, introduced in a special session by Senator Annette Dubas, would grant the state's public service commission authority to review major pipeline projects – especially those which could affect natural resources … The 1,660-mile project would cross an ecologically sensitive part of Nebraska, the Sandhills, and an aquifer that is an important source of irrigation and drinking water in the state.' [1]



Apparently TransCanada is of the opinion that it can do what it likes, and the citizens of Nebraska will just have to accept it.

The Legislature of Nebraska disagrees.

1) 'Nebraska legislators move to block Keystone XL pipeline route,' The Guardian
Nebraska legislators move to block Keystone XL pipeline route | Environment | guardian.co.uk

[SCGranny]

Originally Posted by mattpoulsen

Naleyrocks,

Its not as simple as saying they are taking the property from someone. There is a pretty thorough and well articulated test for it. .

It depends on the State and its political makeup as to the "pretty thorough and well-articulated test for it". In some Nawthern eastern states, it is used by political machines to gain and maintain power and influnece. First they start by having their friends and families buying up run-down and little-used properties, and systematically running any renters off, letting them sit vacant, permitting squatters and other dregs to move in. Then they proceed by telling the people of a city or state that that part of that area is "blighted". Then they have a friend (Donald Trump, whomever) who is going to come in and "save" the area. By the time the remaining residents go to court, public opinion as well as the developers who bought up the surrounding property are aligned against anyone who dares to mention "property rights".

Unless you've seen it in action, you usually don't know that the "test" can be rigged.

[Idunn]

"Successful efforts to delay or derail the permitting process will not only affect TransCanada's investment in the Keystone XL, but also result in diminishing the value of the entire Keystone pipeline system," Jones said in an Oct. 7 sworn statement filed in U.S. District Court of Nebraska.' [1]



Robert Jones of TransCanada is complaining that any delays in approving their pipeline across Nebraska and the the central United States will cost them $1 million per day.

Although not as concerned when TransCanada peremptorily mowed down a 100-mile swath of native Nebraska grasslands without any approval.

Seemingly the citizens of Nebraska should hurry up and relinquish their rights and state so TransCanada will not suffer "substantial economic harm."

1) 'Developer says pipeline delays could cost $1M a day,' The Seattle Times
Nation & World | Developer says pipeline delays could cost $1M a day | Seattle Times Newspaper

[Idunn]

'Tar sands oil is heavier and more corrosive than conventional oil; critics say that means a bigger risk of pipeline leaks … Protesters in Nebraska are also worried about the routing of the pipeline; it would cross the Ogallala Aquifer, an important source of irrigation and drinking water.' [1]


This article cited a brief recap of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline project of TransCanada.

1) 'Q&A: Keystone XL oil pipeline,' The Guardian
Q&A: Keystone XL oil pipeline | Environment | guardian.co.uk

[JustMe_T3K]

Silly just silly.
They should go right beside the current pipe.

Keystone Pipeline Map