Mike Crapo: “We have to understand, in this debate, the difference between protections under the U.S. Constitution and what this…”

“We have to understand, in this debate, the difference between protections under the U.S. Constitution and what this statute seeks to do. The Supreme Court has made it clear that the constitutional protections relate to what amounts to a full taking of the property. And when the Federal agencies do not fully take your property but simply regulate what you can do with your property to a lesser extent than actually taking it from you, the constitutional provisions under the Supreme Court decisions provide no protection. This statute is intended to fill that void and provide compensation when your property is diminished in value but not totally taken.”