| 
 The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 2372.  If the bill were presented
 to the President, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto it.
 H.R. 2372 would shift authority over State and local land use issues to
 Federal courts, creating a threat of expensive litigation that would favor
 the wealthy developer over the common homeowner.  This shift entails
 radical changes to the existing legal doctrines of ripeness and
 abstention, and would result in judicial inefficiencies and confusion.
 
 The Administration is fully committed to the protection of private
 property, including the payment of just compensation under the Fifth
 Amendment when private property is taken for public use.  H.R. 2372,
 however, would harm neighboring property owners, weaken local public
 health, safety and environmental protections, and lower the quality of
 life in a community by undermining the ability of local officials to
 protect their communities through local land use planning.  The changes to
 "ripeness" and "abstention" doctrines would allow claimants to bring
 premature and inappropriate lawsuits in Federal court, thereby shifting
 authority to Federal courts at the expense of State and local officials.
 The shift could also greatly burden local officials through the threat of
 premature, expensive litigation.
 
 H.R. 2372 would violate constitutional limits on congressional power if
 read, as its supporters intend, to allow for a ruling that an
 uncompensated taking has occurred even when a claimant has declined to
 pursue available State compensation remedies.  The Supreme Court has held
 that without a denial of compensation by the State court, a takings claim
 does not exist.  Therefore, the very claims that are supposedly being
 expedited are likely to be dismissed, resulting in increased costs and
 delayed resolution of the issue.
 
 Aside from the compensation issues, the bill's administrative finality
 provisions would raise additional concerns.  These provisions would
 supersede existing case law requiring landowners to obtain a final
 decision from State or local land use officials before suing in Federal
 court.  H.R. 2372 would require Federal courts to decide takings claims
 without the benefit of adequate factual records, thereby, forcing Federal
 courts to render poorly informed decisions.  As well, this bill would
 further delay the resolution of pending claims by channeling more lawsuits
 into already overcrowded Federal courts.
 
 In summary, H.R. 2372 would improperly and seriously interfere with needed
 property rights protections at all levels of government, especially local
 protections for neighborhoods and communities.
 
  |