Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ben Ficklin

Well, yeah. What’s your point? My point is congress is not empowered by the constitution to do this. Where is federal control over such a huge amount of so-called public land within a state’s sovereign boundaries enumerated and delegated by the constitution to the central government? Why is it not left to the states and the people as per the 10th amendment?


45 posted on 04/22/2014 12:47:02 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: Jim Robinson
Technically speaking, the Louisiana Purchase was unconstitutional. As was the Gadsden Purchase and Alaska. I don't know who Mexico would have ceded the land to if not the federal govt.

Back east the feds made money selling these federal lands to settlers, because that was the wet zone and farming could be profitable on small acres. Even in the west where the feds built dams and irrigation systems people snapped up those small acre lands because they could grow a good crop with the irrigation water.

But out in the western deserts nobody wanted that land. Nevada has the most federal land because it has more desert than any other state.

If its free I'll take it, but only if you give me low cost grazing on this other 15,000 acres.

49 posted on 04/22/2014 1:05:59 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson