More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from Green Party
Last answered 7 hours ago
Distribution of answers submitted by Green Party.
Data includes total votes submitted by visitors since Feb 10, 2016. For users that answer more than once (yes we know), only their most recent answer is counted in the total results. Total percentages may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
Choose a demographic filter
* Data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011)
Learn more about Eminent Domain
Eminent domain is the power of a state or a national government to take private property for public use. It can be legislatively delegated by state governments to municipalities, government subdivisions, or even to private persons or corporations, when they are authorized to exercise the functions of public character. Opponents, including Conservatives and Libertarians in New Hampshire, oppose giving the government the power to seize property for private projects, like casinos. Proponents, including advocates of oil pipelines and national parks, argue that the construction of roads and schools would not be possible if the government could not seize land under eminent domain. See recent eminent domain news
More stances on this issue
Yes, only if it is for environmental protection or preservation. 2 years ago from a Green in Bradenton, FL
Yes, but only when it is a necessity for public health or if the property is in a strategic location that will bring great benefit to the community or if the land is absolutely needed in a time of war. 2 years ago from a Green in West Sacramento, CA
In principal the government should be allowed to, but given this government's lack of principals on the metaphysical order, its reasons for seizing land most likely would be unjustified, so no. 2 years ago from a Green in Cary, NC
It depends on how much property is owned by the owner and if it will deprive them of livelyhood, also forcibly seizing the property should only be done in extreme situations. 2 years ago from a Green in Lake Arrowhead, CA
Yes as long as they are fairly compensated and is for the use of Public Projects that will benefit the community and NOT for oil pipeline use, fracking or any other project that could have negative environmental impact. 2 years ago from a Green in New York, NY