Estimated Time to Read: 2 minutes
Property rights are often discussed as an economic concern and a matter of markets and development. In truth, they are something far more fundamental. Property is liberty made tangible. Without the secure right to control what one owns, freedom itself becomes conditional.
Texas Policy Research places private property rights among its core Liberty Principles for good reason. Property is not merely land or structures; it is the physical extension of individual autonomy. To own something is not simply to hold title, but to exercise control, to use, improve, exchange, or preserve it without undue interference.
Yet modern governance increasingly severs ownership from control.
Across Texas, property owners find their rights narrowed not by overt seizure, but by incremental restriction. Zoning rules dictate permissible uses. Regulatory mandates shape development decisions. Permitting processes delay or deny lawful improvements. In many cases, value is diminished, flexibility is constrained, and decisions are transferred from owners to administrators, all without compensation, resulting in a “taking” disguised as the “public good.”
The distinction is crucial. A formal taking is visible and politically accountable. A regulatory taking is quieter, wrapped in procedure and justification. But the practical effect can be strikingly similar. When government controls how property may be used, what risks may be taken, and what choices may be exercised, ownership begins to lose its meaning.
John Locke understood this centuries ago. The preservation of property, he argued, is one of the chief purposes of government itself. Frédéric Bastiat later warned that when law moves beyond protecting property and begins directing its use, it risks transforming from guardian to manager.
Texas has long prided itself on a stronger tradition. The Texas Constitution contains explicit protections for private property, reflecting a clear understanding that liberty requires boundaries the state may not casually cross. Property was not treated as a policy preference, but as a structural safeguard against concentrated power.
This principle remains as relevant as ever.
A society that weakens property rights does not merely alter land use policy; it reshapes the relationship between citizens and the state. Ownership becomes provisional. Control becomes negotiable. Freedom becomes contingent.
Property rights are not absolute, nor are they immune from legitimate public concerns. But they must remain anchored in a simple, enduring truth: ownership without meaningful control is ownership in name only.
Because if you do not control what you own, you do not truly own it.
Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!
