Eminent domain a necessity |

Eminent domain a necessity

Pennsylvania’s energy resources have given our region a competitive edge and the opportunity to deliver these resources across the commonwealth. To safely deliver those goods, Pennsylvania needs to quickly build new pipelines and upgrade existing ones. We depend on private companies to do that.

Because these private companies build infrastructure that many people need for their everyday lives, the law gives them the power of eminent domain so no one can arbitrarily stop a project that benefits many. Unfortunately, too often the debate over pipelines is fixated on the use of eminent domain to gain access to land.

The reality is that eminent domain has been around for more than a century. It was written into state law not to benefit private companies but to promote the public good — and to ensure landowners are fairly compensated.

These pipeline projects create long-term, safe access to energy resources that can power homes and businesses, attract investment and jobs, and help revive our manufacturing economy. They cannot and will not be built without limited use of eminent domain authority.

Environmental groups have already lined up landowners to block these pipelines simply because they oppose the entire natural gas industry.

We don’t oppose the shale industry. In fact, we’re helping to build it. Because we know that Pennsylvania businesses, consumers and residents stand to benefit from it.

James T. Kunz Jr.

The writer is business manager of International Union of Operating Engineers Local 66 in O’Hara

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.