By Kevin Rogers
 
“In the aftermath of the Kelo Supreme Court decision, two questions remain: How will the term ‘public benefits’ be defined, and how will we define "takings" by government action?
 
Government interests are hoping for no restraints around the definition of ‘public benefits,’ and then betting they can confuse the takings issue by conjuring up all sorts of examples why there should be no curbs on government power. Secure and marketable property rights are the cornerstone of our liberties and freedom as well as being necessary for the creation of capital.
 
We don't need to be clarifying Kelo. We need to be moving from Kelo as it is the direct opposite of secure property rights. Powerful interests however are relentlessly undermining that cornerstone.”