FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Thursday, March 12, 2015

CONTACT: NGC Press Office, 415-802-2423
or press@nextgenclimate.org

REPUBLICAN SENATORS CONTINUE TO DEFEND

TRANSCANADAS LAND GRAB
When it comes to the Keystone XL pipeline Senate
Republicans are not only fine wasting time for the benefit of
a foreign oil company, theyre also willing to completely
abandon their own principles in order to kowtow to their Big
Oil backers. Recently, Senate Republicans voted against a
measure to ensure private property cannot be seized
through condemnation or eminent domain for the private
gain of a foreign-owned business entity, the exact methods
that TransCanada has attempted in order to build the
Keystone XL pipeline. However, these same members have a
long history of supporting eminent domain and private
property rights as detailed below.
Would Senate Republicans be willing to give up their home,
uproot their lives, and relocate their families all for the
benefit of a foreign oil company? Is a project that only
creates 35 permanent jobs and transports dirty tar sands,
which threatens our air and water quality, worth the
hypocrisy? Would they be willing to ignore their previous
positions to push a project that was not supported by their
Big Oil backers?
Its time for Republicans stop hiding behind rhetoric and
start taking accountability for their actions.
Heres a list of Republicans that voted in favor of
TransCanadas land grab with previous

positions opposing such action.

LAMAR ALEXANDER
Alexander Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Alexander voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to
S.Amdt. 2 to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Alexander Wrote A Letter With Concerns About Using
Eminent Domain. Concerns over eminent domain and the
ongoing fight over renewal of the wind production tax credit
have pulled a Clean Line Energy Partners transmission
project into the spotlight in Congress. Two Tennessee GOP
lawmakers, Sen. Lamar Alexander and Rep. Stephen Fincher,
sent a letter Wednesday to the Tennessee Valley Authority
over their concerns with the Plains and Eastern Clean Line, a
$2 billion transmission project to take wind power from the
Oklahoma and Texas panhandles to utilities in the
southeastern United States. Among their concerns are the
costs to ratepayers, the reliability of wind power and the use
of eminent domain to secure a route for the 700-mile highvoltage, direct-current transmission line. [Daily Oklahoman,
5/14/14]
JOHN BARRASSO
Barrasso Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned

business entity, Barrasso voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt.

2 to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Barrasso Has Proposed Restrictions On Eminent
Domain. In the midst of an Energy and Natural Resources
Committee bill drafting session, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo.,
proposed to restrict the governments eminent domain
authority in states where it controls more than 40 percent of
the land. [Las Vegas Review Journal, 5/14/09]
ROY BLUNT
Blunt Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have
Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Blunt voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Blunt Praised The Passage Of A Bill Protecting Private
Property Rights Against Eminent Domain. House
Majority Whip Roy Blunt today praised the passage of H.R.
4128, the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005,
376-38. The bill was co-sponsored by Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO)
and Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL). The House acted today to
protect private property rights, a bold plan that enhances
the penalty for states and localities that abuse their eminent
domain power and defends the freedoms of private
ownership, said Blunt. [Joplin Independent, 11/4/05]
JOHN BOOZMAN
Boozman Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As

TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure

private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Boozman voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt.
2 to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Boozman Introduced Legislation To Restrict The Use
Of Eminent Domain. U.S. Sens. John Boozman and Tom
Cotton, both Arkansas Republicans, introduced legislation
last week that would require the Energy Department to get
approval from the governor and public service commission
before exercising the federal power of eminent domain for
Section 1222 transmission projects such as the one Clean
Line wants to build. The Arkansas Advanced Energy
Association is supporting the project. The association, of
which Clean Line is a member, is a trade association of
companies and organizations that says it is dedicated to
helping Arkansas create more jobs in the emerging
renewable energy field. [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette,
2/18/15]
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO
Capito Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Capito voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Capito Supported Legislation To Halt Funding For
Projects That Use Eminent Domain. To discourage the
bulldozing of private homes to build shopping malls that
generate more tax revenue, Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (RWV) supported legislation yesterday that would halt the flow
of federal economic development grant funding to states or

local governments that utilize eminent domain to seize

private property for the purposes of economic
development. [Press Release, US Fed News, 11/4/05]
BILL CASSIDY
Cassidy Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Cassidy voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt.
2 to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Cassidy Voted In Favor Of The Private Property
Rights Protection Act. In a vote taken on February 26,
2014, Cassidy voted yea on the Private Property Rights
Protection Act. [House.gov, 2/26/14]
JOHN CORNYN
Cornyn Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Cornyn voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Cornyn Introduced Legislation To Protect Against
Eminent Domain. U.S. Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and
Rand Paul, R-KY, today introduced legislation (attached) to
protect homes, small businesses, and other private property
rights by limiting the power of eminent domain. Saturday
marks the seventh anniversary of Kelo vs. the City of New

London in which the Supreme Court ruled that local

governments could use eminent domain to take private
property against the owners will for use in private
development. [Press Release, Senator John Cornyn, 6/21/12]
TOM COTTON
Cotton Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Cotton voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Cotton Introduced Legislation That Would Require
Approval From Governors And Public Service
Commissions Before Exercising Eminent Domain. U.S.
Sens. John Boozman and Tom Cotton, both Arkansas
Republicans, introduced legislation last week that would
require the Energy Department to get approval from the
governor and public service commission before exercising
the federal power of eminent domain for Section 1222
transmission projects such as the one Clean Line wants to
build. The Arkansas Advanced Energy Association is
supporting the project. The association, of which Clean Line
is a member, is a trade association of companies and
organizations that says it is dedicated to helping Arkansas
create more jobs in the emerging renewable energy field.
[Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 2/18/15]
MIKE CRAPO
Crapo Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have
Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As

TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure

private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Crapo voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Crapo Cosponsored Legislation To Protect Against
Eminent Domain. Idaho Senator Larry Craig joined a
number of his colleagues today, including the rest of the
Idaho Congressional Delegation, in cosponsoring legislation
to protect citizens from some federal land grabs. Last week
the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Kelo v.
City of New London Connecticut in which it significantly
expanded the power of governments to seize private
property. Idaho Senator Larry Craig is disturbed by the
decision, offering the following commentary, The Supreme
Court has seriously weakened the Constitutional protection
of private property rights. Allowing the eminent domain
power to be used for private to private transfers for nothing
more than economic development effectively eliminates that
portion of the Fifth Amendment. It is unfortunate that the
Supreme Court came to such a conclusion that will have a
dramatic impact on private property rights. In order to right
the wrong, Craig joined the efforts of Senator John Cornyn, RTexas, who introduced S. 1313, the Protection of Homes,
Small Business, and Private Property Act of 2005. Idaho
Senator Mike Crapo is also a cosponsor, and Idahos
Congressmen cosponsored a similar measure in the House.
The legislation dictates that the federal government cannot
use eminent domain to seize property for purely economic
development. [Press Release, Senator Larry Craig, 6/30/05]
TED CRUZ
Cruz Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have
Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure

private property cannot be seized through condemnation or

eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Cruz voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2 to
S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Cruz Said He Is Disturbed About Eminent Domain
Abuse. In a Texas U.S. Senate debate held on June 22,
2012, Cruz said, I am disturbed about eminent domain
abuse because I think private property rights are
fundamental to who we are as Americans and who we are as
Texans. [KERA Dallas, 6/22/12]
Cruz Said He Doesnt Think The Government Should
Use Eminent Domain To Help Out Private Interests. In
a Texas U.S. Senate debate held on June 22, 2012, Cruz said,
The U.S. Supreme Court said, wrongly I think, that the
government could do it to help out private interests. I dont
think we should be helping out private interests. [KERA
Dallas, 6/22/12]
STEVE DAINES
Daines Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Daines voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Daines Voted In Favor Of The Private Property Rights
Protection Act. In a vote taken on February 26, 2014,
Daines voted yea on the Private Property Rights Protection
Act. [House.gov, 2/26/14]
JONI ERNST

Ernst Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have

Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Ernst voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Ernst Said She Doesnt Agree With Taking Property
Rights Away From Individuals. The United Nations has
imposed this upon us, and as a U.S. senator, I would say, No
more. No more Agenda 21. Community planning to the
effect that it is implementing eminent domain and taking
away property rights away from individuals I dont agree
with that. And especially in a place such as Iowa, where we
rely heavily upon our agricultural community, our rural
communities. We dont want to see things like eminent
domain come into play, Ernst said in response to a question
about Agenda 21 at the forum. [Yahoo News, 8/13/14]
DEB FISCHER
Fischer Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Fischer voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Fischer Said She Supports Protecting The Private
Property Rights Of Nebraskans From Eminent Domain.
Many politicians like to talk about being a conservative, but
they have few accomplishments to show for all their
campaign rhetoric, she said. Ive focused my time and

energy in the Nebraska Unicameral on getting conservative

policy passed. I authored a priority bill to protect the private
property rights of Nebraskans from eminent domain abuse;
Ive helped pass the largest tax relief package in Nebraska
history; Ive made the tough decisions to cut spending and
balance the budget seven times; and Ive co-sponsored
several pieces of pro-life legislation that have helped make
Nebraska a leader in protecting the unborn. [NTV ABC,
2/1/12]
JEFF FLAKE
Flake Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have
Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Flake voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Flake Voted To Prohibit Funds From Being Used To
Enforce The Supreme Courts Case Allowing Eminent
Domain For Private Purposes. In amendment 427 of H.R.
3058, Flake voted in favor of an amendment to prohibit use
of funds in the bill to enforce the judgment of the United
States Supreme Court in the case of Kelo v. New London.
[House.gov, 6/30/05]
CORY GARDNER
Gardner Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned

business entity, Gardner voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt.

2 to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Gardner Voted In Favor Of The Private Property
Rights Protection Act. In a vote taken on February 26,
2014, Gardner voted yea on the Private Property Rights
Protection Act. [House.gov, 2/26/14]
CHUCK GRASSLEY
Grassley Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Grassley voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt.
2 to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Grassley Questioned Sotomayor About Eminent
Domain During Her Confirmation Hearing. Sen. Lindsey
Grahams (R-S.C.) vigorous prosecutorial questioning of
Supreme Court hopeful Sonia Sotomayor was the sole bright
spot in an otherwise difficult day for Senate Republicans on
Tuesday, who struggled to use Sotomayors confirmation
hearings as a forum to restart the culture wars of the recent
past. The exchange between Graham and Sotomayor
stood in stark contrast to those of his Republican colleagues
on the Judiciary Committee. Aside from Sen. Chuck Grassley
(R-Iowa), who largely stuck to parochial concerns regarding
eminent domain laws, Republicans sought to use Sotomayor
as a foil for a much larger fight over abortion, race relations,
capital punishment and other culture war issues that harken
back to the GOPs heyday in the 1990s. [Roll Call, 7/15/09]
ORRIN HATCH
Hatch Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have

Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized

Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Hatch voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Hatch Introduced A Plan To Help Property Owners
Facing Eminent Domain. Standing in hot summer sun
with a wizened grandmother in the background, Sen. Orrin
Hatch, R-Utah, announced his solution Tuesday to eminent
domain takings across the nation. Hatchs plan, called
EMPOWER for the Empowering More Property Owners With
Enhanced Rights Act, would create a federal ombudsman for
property owners who find themselves in the sights of federal
agencies exercising eminent domain. Hatch modeled his bill
after a 1997 Utah law and the states ombudsman, Craig
Call. Hatch believes Call is the only such private-property
ombudsman in the country. Hatch unveiled the bill because a
U.S. Supreme Court decision last month said governments
could take property for private development. [Deseret
Morning News, 7/6/05]
JOHN HOEVEN
Hoeven Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Hoeven voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Hoeven Said He Is Very Concerned About Forcing
Someone To Sell Their Home For An Economic

Development Project And Called It An Overreach.

The North Dakota Association of Realtors intends to explore
the possible impact of the U.S. Supreme Courts ruling, said
its president, Scott Louser, a Minot real estate broker. We, as
Realtors, understand and appreciate the need for eminent
domain, Louser said. But it seemed to be redefined by the
Supreme Court. Gov. John Hoeven said he was dubious of
the idea of forcing someone to sell their home for an
economic development project. When you start talking
about taking someones home to develop other properties,
the argument being enhancing tax base, I am very
concerned thats an overreach, Hoeven said. [Associated
Press, 7/10/05]
JIM INHOFE
Inhofe Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have
Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Inhofe voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Inhofe Introduced Legislation To Protect Property
Rights And Limit Eminent Domain. I believe in the right
to own private property, and I believe in the right to enjoy it
and not be harassed, especially by the government. There
are three issues addressed by the Private Property
Protection Act of 2006 that I will soon introduce. First, this
legislation aims to protect the right to own and enjoy private
property, one of our governments core purposes. Second,
the bill directly confronts the Supreme Courts decision in
Kelo v. City of New London, Connecticut, which allows local
governments to take private property for economic reasons.
Finally, the bill forces the Court to reign in its incessant
judicial activism, returning to the true intent of the Fifth

Amendment. In sum, the bill limits government intervention

into the private market. [Statement, Senator Jim Inhofe,
8/18/06]
JOHNNY ISAKSON
Isakson Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Isakson voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Isakson Co-Sponsored Legislation To Restrict How The
Government Uses Eminent Domain. Johnny Isakson (RGa.) today announced that he is co-sponsoring legislation to
restrict how the government may exercise its power of
eminent domain. The Protection of Homes, Small
Businesses, and Private Property Act of 2005, which was
introduced by Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), states that the
federal government is prohibited from using the power of
eminent domain to condemn property for the purpose of
economic development. It also imposes the same prohibition
on state and local governments when the condemnation
involves the use of federal funds. [Press Release, Senator
Johnny Isakson, 7/5/05]
JAMES LANKFORD
Lankford Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned

business entity, Lankford voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt.

2 to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Lankford Voted In Favor Of The Private Property
Rights Protection Act. In a vote taken on February 26,
2014, Lankford voted yea on the Private Property Rights
Protection Act. [House.gov, 2/26/14]
JOHN MCCAIN
McCain Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, McCain voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
McCain Said He Would Amend The Constitution If
Need Be To Protect Property Rights And Called The
Supreme Courts Eminent Domain Decision
Disastrous. The senator, who is trying to revive his
struggling White House campaign, told a crowd in Cedar
Rapids, Iowa, that he plans to appoint constructionist judges
to the Supreme Court who respect the Constitution and
understand the security of private property it provides. If
need be, I would seek to amend the Constitution to protect
private property rights in America, he added. McCain was
referring to the 2005 Supreme Court eminent domain
decision, which he blasted as disastrous. The ruling gave
local governments the right to take the house of a
homeowner and use it for economic development. [The Hill,
8/6/07]
JERRY MORAN
Moran Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have

Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized

Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Moran voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Moran Voted To Prohibit Funds From Being Used To
Enforce The Supreme Courts Case Allowing Eminent
Domain For Private Purposes. In amendment 427 of H.R.
3058, Moran voted in favor of an amendment to prohibit
use of funds in the bill to enforce the judgment of the United
States Supreme Court in the case of Kelo v. New London.
[House.gov, 6/30/05]
LISA MURKOWSKI
Murkowski Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Murkowski voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to
S.Amdt. 2 to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Murkowski Voted Against An Energy Amendment
Because She Was Concerned It Would Encourage The
Use Of Eminent Domain. The Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee on Thursday adopted language that
would broaden the authority of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission to intervene when it suspects that
electric and natural gas companies are engaged in market
manipulation at the expense of consumers, and would allow
the agency to freeze company assets to ensure payment of
penalties. The amendment was passed 13-10 with only

Democratic support. Republicans, including Alaska Senator

Lisa Murkowski, the panels senior GOP member, worried the
amendment would encourage the use of eminent domain,
which should be employed only sparingly as an option of
last resort. [Megawatt Daily, 6/12/09]
JAMES RISCH
Risch Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have
Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Risch voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Risch Said He Does Not Support Expanding Federal
Powers Of Eminent Domain For Power Lines. First and
foremost, new upgrades must be sited with deference to
personal property rights. I do not support the expansion of
federal powers of eminent domain and I believe that every
effort should be made to locate new power lines on federal
lands instead of private lands where it is feasible. [Senator
James Risch, accessed 3/11/15]
MIKE ROUNDS
Rounds Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Rounds voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]

Rounds Signed A Law Prohibiting Government

Agencies From Seizing Property For Transfer To Any
Private Person, Nongovernmental Entity, Or Other
Public-Private Business Entity. This month, South
Dakota Gov. Mike Rounds signed into law HB 1080,
prohibiting government agencies from seizing private
property by eminent domain for transfer to any private
person, nongovernmental entity, or other public-private
business entity. [Press Release, Castle Coalition, 2/27/06]
MARCO RUBIO
Rubio Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have
Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Rubio voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
The Rubio-Chaired House Select Committee To Protect
Private Property Rights Drafted Legislation That
Would Limit The Ability Of Local Governments And
State Agencies To Condemn Property So It Can Be
Redeveloped. Local governments and state agencies
would be severely limited in their ability to condemn
property so it can be redeveloped by businesses and other
private groups under legislation proposed Monday by a
House committee. ATwo proposed state constitutional
amendments and a bill that also would put the restrictions
into state law are a reaction to a U.S. Supreme Court
decision last year. The high court approved taking homes in
New London, Conn., for a redevelopment project because it
would economically benefit the community overall. The
justices, however, said states are free to ban the use of
eminent domain for private purposes and Florida is one of
several considering such action. It has not been a

widespread problem in Florida, said Rep. Marco Rubio,

chairman of the House Select Committee to Protect Private
Property Rights, which drafted the legislation. [Associated
Press, 3/14/06]
JEFF SESSIONS
Sessions Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Sessions voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt.
2 to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Sessions Said So Much For The Constitutional
Guarantee That Your Property Can Only Be Taken For
Public Use, Not Private Use. During a Senate session on
judicial nominations, Sessions said, So much for the
constitutional guarantee of life, liberty, and property and the
constitutional guarantee that your property can only be
taken for public use, not private use. [CSPAN, 9/22/10]
JOHN THUNE
Thune Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have
Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Thune voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Thune Called The Supreme Courts Decision Allowing
The Government To Seize Property For Private

Development A Slap In The Face To Private Property

Rights. Supreme Court decisions like the recent Kelo v.
City of New London eminent domain decision show the
dangers of having activist judges who change the intent of
the Constitution. That decision allows government to seize
private homes and businesses, not just for public use, such
as a highway or a bridge, but for private development that
will bring more tax revenue to the city. That decision was a
slap in the face to private property rights and greatly
expanded the practice of eminent domain as provided for in
the Constitution. [Senator John Thune, 7/18/05]
THOM TILLIS
Tillis Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have
Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Tillis voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2 to
S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Tillis Said An Amendment To Prevent Seizure Of
Property For Anything Other Than Public Use
Protects Our Citizens Ability To Make Their Own
Choices About Their Property. The North Carolina
House of Representatives on Tuesday passed House Bill 8,
which proposes an amendment to the North Carolina
Constitution preventing state and local governments from
seizing private property for anything other than a public use.
The Constitutional amendment would further require just
compensation to be paid to the property owner. House Bill 8
protects private property rights for North Carolinians against
the practice known as eminent domain, said House
Speaker Thom Tillis (R-Mecklenburg.) We have seen
government abuse of this power all-too-often. This measure
protects our citizens ability to make their own choices about

their property and codifies their rights in our Constitution.

[Press Release, Speaker Thom Tillis, 2/12/13]
PAT TOOMEY
Toomey Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Toomey voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt.
2 to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Toomey Asked Secretary Of Housing And Urban
Development Nominee Julian Castro To Agree to Deter
Use Of Eminent Domain. San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro
sought to reassure a Senate panel Tuesday he would
demand performance and accountability if confirmed to be
Housing and Urban Development secretary. Sen. Patrick
Toomey, R-Pa., wanted Castro to agree to deter use of
eminent domain to confiscate mortgages from private
lenders and prohibit FHA from refinancing mortgages for
properties seized this way. [NBC News, 6/17/14]
ROGER WICKER
Wicker Voted Against An Amendment That Would
Have Ensured Private Property Could Not Be Seized
Through "Eminent Domain For The Private Gain Of A
Foreign-Owned Business Entity Such As
TransCanada. On an amendment intended to ensure
private property cannot be seized through condemnation or
eminent domain for the private gain of a foreign-owned
business entity, Wicker voted nay. [S.Amdt. 72 to S.Amdt. 2
to S. 1, Vote Number 22, 1/22/15]
Wicker Voted To Prohibit Funds From Being Used To

Enforce The Supreme Courts Case Allowing Eminent

Domain For Private Purposes. In amendment 427 of H.R.
3058, Wicker voted in favor of an amendment to prohibit
use of funds in the bill to enforce the judgment of the United
States Supreme Court in the case of Kelo v. New London.
[House.gov, 6/30/05]
###
NextGen Climate
NextGen Climate is focused on bringing climate change to
the forefront of American politics. Founded by investor and
philanthropist Tom Steyer in 2013, NextGen Climate acts
politically to prevent climate disaster and preserve American
prosperity.