"What the [U.S. Supreme Court] justices did in their 5-to-4 decision, Kelo v. New London, was allow the city redevelopment authority to condemn the old waterfront neighborhood so a private developer can put office and apartment buildings in their place.

...Nine state supreme courts, including those in Illinois, Michigan and Washington, have forbidden the use of eminent domain simply to bring in more revenue and jobs."

(Source:  Avi Salzman and Laura Mansnerus, "For Homeowners, Frustration and Anger at Court Ruling," The New York Times, June 24, 2005; http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/24/national/24newlondon.html .)

"Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner, so long as it might be upgraded-i.e., given to an owner who will use it in a way that the legislature deems more beneficial to the public-in the process.

...While the government may take their homes to build a road or a railroad or to eliminate a property use that harms the public, say petitioners, it cannot take their property for the private use of other owners simply because the new owners may make more productive use of the property.

...For who among us can say she already makes the most productive or attractive possible use of her property? The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall or any farm with a factory.

...Today nearly all real property is susceptible to condemnation on the Court's theory.  ...Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. As for the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result."

(Source:  Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, dissenting, Supreme Court of the United States No. 04-108 Susette Kelo, et al., Petitioners v. City of New London, Connecticut, et al.  June 23, 2005; [545 U. S. 04-108 (2005)];http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/23jun20051201/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-108.pdf .)

On the campaign trail this past fall, President Bush frequently spoke of creating an "ownership society" where greater numbers of citizens become homeowners as well as investors in the stock market. While such policy goals may be commendable, a study by Lisa A. Keister of Ohio State University warns that current patterns of family disruptions, particularly divorce and single parenthood, significantly handicap the younger generation in becoming stakeholders in such a society.

Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, Keister analyzed waves from 1985 through 1998, when the respondents to the survey (which began in 1979) were between the ages of 31 and 38. She discovered that parental separation, divorce, and remarriage during childhood reduced adult wealth accumulation (p<.01). The magnitude of this negative coefficient was "substantial," significantly and directly reducing racial differences in adult wealth, as well.

Other childhood family structure variables that reduced adult wealth were number of siblings and having extended family in the home (both variables, p<.01), presumably because additional people in a household dilute family financial resources. However, the sibling size coefficient was weaker relative to the family disruption variable. Furthermore, the effect of the extended family variable was reversed in non-intact families, reflecting the role of the extended families in compensating for parental divorce.

These findings not only "highlight an important part of the picture that has been neglected previously," as the sociologist maintains, they also suggest that policy makers who are optimistic about the potential of the free market and tax reforms helping more Americans achieve their dreams may be underestimating the family dynamics that are the true foundation of wealth.