July 20, 2005

Corker Speaks Out - Finally - on the Kelo Decision

Former Chattanooga Mayor Bob Corker, running for the U.S. Senate, has - finally - revealed his view on the controversial Supreme Court decision in Kelo v New London which effectively gutted 200-plus years of constitutional protection of private property rights in America. But not to BillHobbs.com, which has repeatedly emailed Corker to invite him to address Kelo on this site as every other candidate for the U.S. Senate from Tennessee has already done.

Corker responded to an email from Nashville blogger Nathan Moore, saying:

I am very concerned about the recent Kelo decision because it places citizen’s private property rights in jeopardy. One bedrock principle in America is that the government cannot take your private property just to give it to someone else. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution contains a very important limitation on the power of government to take property. Unfortunately, this decision essentially eliminated that safeguard by allowing the city of New London to take the homes of citizens, without their consent, and transfer their property to other private parties. It will now be important for legislators to pass laws to restore that safeguard.

That's it? He doesn't say which legislators - state or federal - should pass laws to address the issue. Does he think it's a matter for state legislators, Congress or both? Will he, if elected, work to pass such laws?

Corker's statement could have been written in the first 10 minutes after the Kelo decision was issued four weeks ago. Compare it to first response to Kelo from Ed Bryant's campaign, issued the same day that Kelo was handed down. Compare it to Bryant's official statement released the next day. Compare it to the response from Van Hilleary, which I received one day after the Kelo decision was announced.

Bryant and Hilleary's responses showed a deep understanding of the issue, and a serious committment to address the issue if they are elected to the Senate - the speed of their response alone shows just how serious they regard the issue.

Corker's five sentences show a basic understanding of Kelo but little committment to do anything about it

Why did it take so long for Corker to make a public statement about the Kelo decision? Some have wondered if perhaps Corker's background as both a wealthy real estate developer and, later, a city mayor who lead a waterfront redevelopment effort that included privately owned property, may make him a bit, uh, conflicted about the decision.

Others think he's too busy fundraising to think about the issues.

I think the first comment over at BloggingForBryant may be close to the truth:

It appears as though Corker put off criticizing the Court's decision until he saw which way public opinion was going to go on the issue. The public is overwhelmingly opposed to Kelo, and now one month later Corker's just hopping on the "I'm against it too" bandwagon.

Bob Corker is going to have to do a lot better than five vapid sentences on Kelo to convince conservatives he really undstands the threat of the decision, and intends to do something about it if he is elected to the U.S. Senate.