"Hallowed
Ground" and Government's Relentless Assault on Private Property
Rights
By Tom
DeWeese
October 07,
2006
Politics is a very cynical, sinister
business. As Government has gotten ever-bigger and further removed
from the electorate, elected officials have become more and more
interested in image over actual substance in the issues and programs
they promote; their messages created for emotional appeal rather than
practical or even legal sense.
Such is the case concerning legislation proposed
in the Senate by Senator George Allen, and in the House by
Representative Frank Wolf, both Republicans who claim limited
government as one of their major reasons to serve in public office.
Their actions in sponsoring the "Journey Through Hallowed Ground
National Heritage Area" speak otherwise.
This Heritage Area is designed to cover a
175-mile corridor from Thomas Jefferson's "Monticello" in
Charlottesville, Virginia, to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. Sponsors of
the Heritage Area claim the purpose is simply to honor the many
historic sites in the corridor and to help local communities promote
tourism.
Senator Allen and Representative Wolf vigorously
deny that the Heritage Area is a danger to property rights, pointing
to specific language in the bill, that says they will be protected.
They claim the designation serves only to preserve valuable historic
sites. The designated area includes many of the locations where the
Civil War was fought, as well as the homes of six U.S. presidents.
The reality of Heritage Areas, however, is not
so friendly. Heritage Areas are federal land use mandates with
specific boundaries - foisted upon local communities. Those boundaries
have consequences for property owners caught inside.
It must be understood: the Heritage Area affects
all the land in the designated area, not just recognized historic
sites. The federal designation, made up from Congressional
legislation, creating federal regulation and oversight through the
National Park Service, requires a form of contract between state and
local governmental entities and the Secretary of the Interior to
manage the land-use of the region for preservation. That means federal
control and zoning, either directly, under the terms of the
"management pact" or indirectly.
Such "indirect" control is the real
danger. In spite of the specific language in the bill which states
property rights will be protected, the true damage to homeowners may
well come from outside private groups and preservation agencies, which
receive public funds through the Park Service to implement the
policies of the Heritage Area.
The funds flowing from the Park Service provide
a seductive pork barrel system for private advocacy groups to enforce
their vision over the development of the Heritage Area. The experience
with more than twenty-four Heritage Areas, nationwide, clearly shows
such groups will convert this money into political activism to
encourage local community and county governments to pass and enforce
strict zoning laws. While the tactic makes it appear that home rule is
fully in force, removing blame from the federal designation, the
impact is fully the fault of the Heritage Area designation. The result
being that private property owner's rights are diminished, and much of
the local land use brought to a standstill.
Zoning and land use policies are and should be,
local decisions, to be made by locally elected officials who are
directly accountable to the citizens they represent. However, National
Heritage Areas corrupt this inherently local procedure by adding
federal dollars, federal oversight, and federal mandates to the mix.
Specifically, when an area is designated as a
National Heritage Area, the Park Service partners with an
environmental special interest group, to restore, preserve, and manage
anything and everything that is naturally, culturally, historically
and recreationally significant to the Heritage Area. That is exactly
what legislation for Heritage Areas states. This sweeping mandate
ensures that every square inch of a Heritage Area is a prime target
for regulation or acquisition - private property included.
But what of the promised tourism, that is
supposed to help local economies? Many members of Congress admit they
support the concept of Heritage Areas for that very reason: jobs
created by people visiting their little part of the world, to see why
it's so special. Is it true?
As has been stated, those boundaries have
consequences - strict control over the use of the land. Certain
industries may prove to be too "dirty" to be allowed.
Eventually, such existing industrial operations will find themselves
regulated or taxed to a point forcing them to leave or go out of
business. Property that is locked away for preservation is no longer
productive, and no longer provides the community with tax dollars.
Roads will be closed (to protect the integrity of the historic area).
That means the land is locked away from private development,
diminishing growth for the community. It also means hunting and
recreational use of the land will be curtailed.
Eventually, such restrictions will take away the
community's economic base. Communities with sagging economies become
run-down and uninviting. Preservation zoning and lack of jobs forces
ordinary people to move away. Experience has shown that the promised
tourism rarely materializes as promised. And it's never enough to save
an area economically.
These are the reasons why the specific language
in the Heritage Area legislation designed to protect private property
rights is meaningless to the actual outcome. While the land is not
specifically locked away in the name of the federal designation, its
very existence creates the pressure on local government to act. The
result is the same.
It is interesting to note that proponents of
Heritage Areas refuse to even consider a program to officially notify
land owners of pending Heritage Area designations. When specifically
asked to include such notification in their plans, they shuffle their
feet, say there is no way to do it, and then drop the subject. Of
course the ability is there. The mailman delivers to each of these
homeowners every day. No matter how noble a project may sound, alarm
bells should go off when proponents want to enforce their visions in
secret.
The fact is, vital historic sites in the Journey
Through Hallowed Ground Heritage Area are preserved. Much of it is
already controlled by the National Park Service. Thomas Jefferson's
Monticello, the Manassas Battlefield, the Gettysburg Battlefield, and
several other birthplaces and significant historic sites - are well
preserved.
The boundaries of the Gettysburg battlefield
were specifically laid out by the men who fought there. Most of the
land was private and donated by the owners for the park. While
protecting private property and the farms across which the battle
raged, they preserved the most significant parts, into what today is a
comprehensive memorial. Such a system of preservation may not be
perfect, but it's superior to a process that uses the massive power of
the federal government to rip out the roots of property owners unlucky
enough to live near something that should be special and precious.
In contrast, it is significant to note that
today, as coercive preservation policy is imposed in Gettysburg, the
community has seen the near destruction of its once-vital downtown
area, where private businesses are being forced out. Many parts of the
downtown now seem rundown and void of significant businesses like
clothing shops or hardware stores. Most businesses in the downtown
area today are restaurants and tee shirt shops designed for the
tourist industry.
True, some areas of battlefields have been
developed, and lost to preservation. Given their way, preservationists
would set out to turn the entire nation into a museum. Some would
simply be happier to live in the past, and now seem to hide behind
historic preservation to try to achieve it.
Every inch of land had something from the past
occur on it. But let us remember, those who fought on those fields did
so to protect our liberty, including the ownership of private
property. One must ask how they would react to huge government
restrictions over that land now, simply because they fought there. One
can envision them again taking up arms to free it from government
clutches.
Senator Allen and Congressman Wolf tell us they
simply want to honor history. If that is truly their goal, then
legislation to honor the areas without establishing a flow of cash
through the Park Service would be enough. Then, local communities
would be free to do their own tourism efforts based on the honorary
designation.
In truth, Allen and Wolf are using our great
love of history as an emotional sledgehammer to impose a massive
federal pork barrel scheme that enriches the pockets of private
advocacy groups, while helping to impose draconian controls over the
dreams of average Americans caught in the cynicism of their political
ambitions.
See biography for Tom
DeWeese