stitution, which requires that private property shall 
not be taken ‘‘for public use, without just compensa-
tion’’. 
(2) Rural lands are unique in that they are not 
traditionally considered high tax revenue-generating 
properties for State and local governments. In addi-
tion, farmland and forest land owners need to have 
long-term certainty regarding their property rights 
in order to make the investment decisions to commit 
land to these uses. 
(3) Ownership rights in rural land are funda-
mental building blocks for our Nation’s agriculture 
industry, which continues to be one of the most im-
portant economic sectors of our economy. 
(4) In the wake of the Supreme Court’s deci-
sion in Kelo v. City of New London, abuse of eminent 
domain is a threat to the property rights of all pri-
vate property owners, including rural land owners. 
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con-
gress that the use of eminent domain for the purpose of 
economic development is a threat to agricultural and other 
property in rural America and that the Congress should 
protect the property rights of Americans, including those 
who reside in rural areas. Property rights are central to 
liberty in this country and to our economy. The use of
eminent domain to take farmland and other rural property 
for economic development threatens liberty, rural econo-
mies, and the economy of the United States. The taking 
of farmland and rural property will have a direct impact 
on existing irrigation and reclamation projects. Further-
more, the use of eminent domain to take rural private 
property for private commercial uses will force increasing 
numbers of activities from private property onto this Na-
tion’s public lands, including its National forests, National 
parks and wildlife refuges. This increase can overburden 
the infrastructure of these lands, reducing the enjoyment 
of such lands for all citizens. Americans should not have 
to fear the government’s taking their homes, farms, or 
businesses to give to other persons. Governments should 
not abuse the power of eminent domain to force rural 
property owners from their land in order to develop rural 
land into industrial and commercial property. Congress 
has a duty to protect the property rights of rural Ameri-
cans in the face of eminent domain abuse. 
SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS. 
In this Act the following definitions apply: 
(1) 
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT.—The 
term 
‘‘economic development’’ means taking private prop-
erty, without the consent of the owner, and con-
veying or leasing such property from one private
person or entity to another private person or entity 
for commercial enterprise carried on for profit, or to 
increase tax revenue, tax base, employment, or gen-
eral economic health, except that such term shall not 
include—
(A) conveying private property—
(i) to public ownership, such as for a 
road, hospital, airport, or military base; 
(ii) to an entity, such as a common 
carrier, that makes the property available 
to the general public as of right, such as 
a railroad or public facility; 
(iii) for use as a road or other right 
of way or means, open to the public for 
transportation, whether free or by toll; 
(iv) for use as an aqueduct, flood con-
trol facility, pipeline, or similar use; 
(B) removing harmful uses of land pro-
vided such uses constitute an immediate threat 
to public health and safety; 
(C) leasing property to a private person or 
entity that occupies an incidental part of public 
property or a public facility, such as a retail es-
tablishment on the ground floor of a public 
building;