bill Progress
- Not enactedThe President has not signed this bill
- The senate has not voted
- The house has not votedIntroducedNovember 27th, 2018
Government
Anytime that the government makes a move upon a private land owner which negatively impacts the value of an individuals land of course they should be compensated.
For God’s sake once again I find that we, “Average Joe” America have to be the common sense ones to comment/respond to these idiotically written proposals. Of course you compensate those you bludgeon over the head with your patriotic eminent domain club.
Upon reading the bill, it appears to favor oil companies and fracking. There is a 6 year statue of limitation on law suits. Fracking can affect ones water wells and if one sues for action before the 6 year limits, they would be liable for legal expenses of the other property. This sounds like a wolf in sheep’s clothing to protect the oil and coal companies.
I am in favor of banning eminent domain. But when I read this, it seems to be punitive to states that ban fracking. Another boon for the gas and oil vompanies
This question has a large shadow in the mind of ‘should taxpayers pay for #45’s Wall’, How should the government pay restitution to landowners on the border. Throughout our history, our government has claimed private domain when taking land from landowners in the name progress. Yes, landowners should be fairly compensated. Hell NO!, should the government use private landowners land for The Wall.
Colorado just tried this. Oregon tried it too and it bankrupted a few places and they had to remove it. The fact is it’s in place to let oil and fracking companies shove their way into communities by saying the add value to land. The thing is even without that, it opens the door to have people sue the cities and governments unendingly in the perceived notion of a violation. It will bog courts down from doing actual work, bankrupt smaller cities and communities, and drive away tax revenue from programs that need funding. It’s bad. Colorado shot it down and Oregon did and it was almost the exact same language.
“Or a State” <— no, from federal, sure, but not from state. If passed “as is”, this law is a violation of state rights as it decimates their ability to make functional zoning laws. Cannot support a unconstitutional bill.
H.R. 7178 AKA the Defense of Property Rights Act
I’m in support and recommend passage of HOUSE bill H.R. 7178 AKA the Defense of Property Rights Act — would give private landowners a right to compensation when federal government or a state takes an action that adversely affect their property’s value.
It’d also prohibit the government from taking private property for public use without compensation, curtailing the use of eminent domain. Further, it would require the government to compensate landowners for lost income due to bans on leasing land to drilling companies for energy development, such as hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”).
SneakyPete..... 🤔👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻. 12*17*18.....
Compensate fracking companies because a state has determined that they don’t want their environmentally harmful activities? What a stupid bill. Fossil fuel companies don’t have a right to do business in any state. If New York or any other state says no, too bad for those companies!
Just because someone could make a buck while destroying our planet doesn’t mean they should be able to. Some things are more important than money, and an inhabitable planet is one of them. Find another way to make a buck, like a solar or wind farm. There are lots of options if you take the time to think about it. Don’t ask the government to pay you just because you’re too lazy to think of a way to make a living that doesn’t destroy the planet.
If the intent is to now subsidize the fracking companies, then I say go to hell. I am so sick of subsidizing wealthy corporations and individuals. We, as citizens, have been so complacent for such a long time now that we did not see how often our TRUSTED elected officials, little by little, were screwing us over. Well, they FINALLY got so greedy and, consequently, brazen about it, we couldn’t ignore it any longer. So let’s get a list of whom we subsidize, why, and for how much. We cannot make decisions on what we do not know. I want information and lots of it! Then, we make decisions!
I see this is in response to banning fracking in New York - this is not to help people - it is heavily weighted to oil companies. Go figure - it was introduced by. Republican to benefit his buddies - disguised as a sheep. Shame !
No. The companies that do the damage are to be held accountable, not the American people. Corporations are taking the money and the American people are stuck with the cleanup and lose! Corporate America screw up private and public property and leave it to super funds to cleanup and bale out their ass!
Fracking should be Banned period! The environmental impacts have so far been negative to the environment. Cracked oil is sent to China, the USA can sell them alternative energy technology!
This is simply a smoke and mirrors legislation that seeks to protect the oil and gas industry from being sued over pollution caused by their actions. The 6 year indemnification clause is a case in point. I ask that my legislators start protecting citizens and stop protecting big business and polluters... our grandchildren will suffer the consequences of pollution
This is another Repugnacant attempt to circumvent environmental laws.
Property owners should not lose value because of government actions. If the government acts to devalue land, the property owners should be compensated for their loss.
The government is perfectly within its rights to limit or disallow certain types of uses of land, as is the case with zoning laws or bans on certain environmentally harmful activities, such as fracking, and shouldn’t be expected to compensate landowners for economic losses in these cases.