Posted on 12/12/2024 6:47:53 AM PST by Twotone
Last week, I filed a brief in support of our neighbor Utah in their lawsuit against the federal government regarding the widespread federal ownership of “unappropriated” land—that is, land owned by the federal government but not used for any federal purpose—across their state and throughout most of the West. Utah’s suit asks the United States Supreme Court to release much of this land back to the ownership and management of the states.
As many of you know, I spent 8 years in Washington, D.C. representing Idaho’s First Congressional District. You can’t throw a rock in that town without hitting federal property of some sort like the Capitol, the White House, the National Mall, military bases, monuments, parks, courts, museums, galleries, statues, and of course, the metastasizing federal bureaucracy with administrative offices on every corner. Yet, with all that, the federal government owns only 25% of Washington, D.C. Yes, you read that right. The federal government owns only 25% of our nation’s capitol city and yet owns over 60% of our state.
Idaho is over 83,000 square miles, and the federal government owns 61% of it. That’s land the State of Idaho can’t use. Instead, the federal government has the final say over what is allowed on this land. For example, the federal government has exclusive say over whether prescribed burns and other necessary maintenance will—or, in many cases, will not—take place in federally owned forests. Or if Idaho wants to cross federal lands with new roads, power lines, pipelines, or other items and activities essential for commerce and economic growth, it must obtain federal permission.
This arrangement flips the division of power between the state and national governments that our Founders envisioned. The federal government is supposed to use its limited enumerated powers to address national issues, as it does by making treaties, regulating interstate commerce, or declaring war. States can then use their general authority to address local concerns, like land management. But on unappropriated federal lands—nearly a third of the federally owned land in Idaho—the federal government is involved in local issues without pursuing any constitutionally authorized aim. There are no courthouses or military installations on these lands, for example. Instead, the federal government simply acts as a self-interested landowner leasing out the land for timber, mining, and grazing—but without being subject to state law or state management practices.
The problem of unappropriated federal land disproportionately affects western states, and places them on unequal footing with other states in which the federal government owns almost no land. Idaho, Utah, and other western states should have just as much say over how land within their borders is used and maintained as Iowa or Connecticut. But time after time, the sovereignty of western states is diminished by distant federal regulators overriding our will.
A perfect example is the Lava Ridge Wind Project that the federal government is pulling out all the stops to ram through despite widespread opposition within Idaho. Because the federal government owns the unappropriated land on which the massive wind turbines for the project will be built, it doesn’t matter whether Idaho wants the project or not. Federal agencies can put their own priorities first—they can pursue the Biden-Harris “green agenda,” build wind turbines in Idaho that will send power to California and pocket the land-use fees for themselves.
And that raises another concerning aspect of federal ownership of unappropriated lands in Idaho—it siphons what is likely tens of millions of dollars out of the state. If Idaho owned the land, it could conduct the same sort of activities that the federal government does—like leasing for timber, mining, and grazing—and reinvest the revenue within the state. Instead, Idaho’s land is used to generate money for the United States Treasury, where it can be used for federal projects in any part of the country.
Congress knows this is unfair to western states and attempts to compensate them through a program called Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT). But western states receive pennies on the dollar compared to what they would receive if they managed the land themselves. Moreover, the whole arrangement just reinforces federal dominance over western states—as sovereigns, they should not be forced to come hat-in-hand to Congress to ask for money that the federal government has no constitutional authority to have in the first place.
That’s why the Utah suit is so critical. It seeks to restore the proper balance of power between the western states and the federal government and place the western states on the same level as their eastern counterparts. This is yet another example in which Idaho has been oppressed by the federal government’s overreach.
The sovereignty of states to manage their own lands was such an important topic that it was even brought up in the Constitutional Convention in 1787. It was insisted, ironically by a Massachusetts delegate, that state legislatures should first consent to the federal purchase of land within their borders to keep the federal government from buying up all the territory and pressuring any state by strangling their commerce and ability to grow. The idea of a powerful, unaccountable central government wasn’t particularly trusted some 200 years ago and not much has happened since to contradict the sentiment.
It seems that the federal government consistently attempts to undermine the voice and opinions of the people of Idaho and regulate us into perpetual social and economic servitude. I’ll continue to fight every day for our state sovereignty and our ability to manage our own land, resources, and affairs here in Idaho.
If Trump really wants to cut gov't, the first thing to do is give all these lands back to the states & then eliminate every agency that manages them. Simple! I wish I knew how to get in touch with Elon & Vivek. :-)
I thought DOGE set something up for input.
I’ve heard you need to subscribe to X to reach DOGE — some kind of premium service for $8 a month? I’m not sure, but they wanted to have that to stop trolls. I don’t subscribe, but that might be worth a try. I’ll start with my senators & see who else I can send this suggestion to.
I’ve heard you need to subscribe to X to reach DOGE — some kind of premium service for $8 a month?
I subscribe to a lot of things & X is something I have had time for. Do YOU think this is a bad idea?
I subscribe to a lot of things & X is something I have had time for. Do YOU think this is a bad idea?
All ideas are “good” until you pay a price to promote it.
I can get a lot of “good” ideas with free beer. What are the worth?
New Mexico has huge tracts of land managed by BLM. I’m sure most states would like to monetize that acreage to the benefit of their citizens
I don’t disagree in general on this issue but there is a fundamental difference between land in most of the eastern states versus land in the western states. A significant portion of the land in the west was acquired by cash purchases undertaken by the Federal Government thus implying ownership by the people of the United States. Once states were formed from this land, it becomes a bit blurry as to who and how to deal with unappropriated land and who would assume the costs and responsibilities or derive the benefits associated with that land. Perhaps we can just give it back to the Indians and then it is their problem.
I believe the number is 88% of the land west of the rockies is owned by federal government or its entities.
That is absurd. 95% east of rockies is owned by the citizens. Teddy Roosevelt created that federal ownership monster.
“Do YOU think this is a bad idea?”
Thank you for your post.
Maybe not a first priority for DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) to slash federal spending. Nevertheless, I agree it is a very good idea.
I do understand DOGE will set a pathway for the public to submit ideas & suggestions.
>>I also remember W saying he tried to turn some of the land back to western states, but they wouldn’t accept it because they didn’t want to deal with the cost of managing it.
If the states don’t want the land, then sell it off to private owners to pay down the national debt.
The richest person in the world and a social media is not how we, the people, control our subservient government.
We’ve all (I hope) attended civics class in school to learn how this is done.
If our elected representative will not get the bill drafted, presented and carry it through the process then they need to be fired and replaced with someone else.
Our constitution lays out this process and paying 8 dollars to X is not part of that process.
Some things to remember:
The Constitution does not lay out our rights and responsibilities. It lays out what the government can do. The amendments do not tell us what we can or cannot do: we are the people we have ultimate say. It describes how the federal government must behave.
The job of the president is to preside over Congress. He is the boss. He is there to ensure that rules are being followed. Our presidents have been remiss in this duty since Coolidge. Trump had the power, and will again, to simply toss out Congress members who are corrupted or treacherous.
We can no longer operate within the framework of the Constitution. This is not our fault. The government has solidified their power in double speak and frivolous laws that are illegal and counter-constitutional.
To fix this we must reverse the course. Eliminate ALL laws written outside of our founding documents. All federal laws are deemed illegitimate. State laws are within their own Constitution.
The federal government was never meant to have any law or power outside of those granted in the Constitution. Period.
The job of federal government, member of Congress and senator should be a very boring job that doesn’t pay.
That land also comes with costs. Just closing and cleaning up abandoned mine waste (e.g. cyanide / lead / arsenic / radioactive waste in the ground water) eats up a tremendous amount of money. I am not certain state governments are eager to take on the costs of some the negative issues the Federal government pays to do now on that land. I guess states would want the choicest parcels of land but allow the Federal government to retain the problematic parcels.
“ The job of the president is to preside over Congress. He is the boss.”
The Executive Branch (President) is co-equal to the Legislative Branch (Congress). The President is not Congress’ boss.
I’ll say one thing about BLM, they have really nice campgrounds, and the tend to be less expensive than USFS campgrounds.
We also once stopped at a BLM facility in Utah for a rest break. The bathrooms were immaculate.
“...give all these lands back to the states...”
Give back to the states?? When did they have it to start with?
Much if not all of the land in question was part of territories owned by the United States. When states were formed from these territories, not all of the land within the boundaries of the state was given to the new state. Ownership of said land was retained by the United States as a whole.
Or is this like a gun “buy back” when a government entity “buys back” a gun it never owned to start with?
“I also remember W saying he tried to turn some of the land back to western states, but they wouldn’t accept it because they didn’t want to deal with the cost of managing it.”
Bush admitted lying to Putin regarding NATO expansion (and thus has a role in starting the Ukraine War), but I didn’t realize that he also lied to Americans.
Bottom line is that if federal lands are handed over to the states without strings attached (like ‘Endangered’ species), then the states could easily just put the lands up for sale. They DO NOT have to manage these lands longer than the time it takes to sell them off.
X basic is free to sign up. The are 2 additional service levels at 3 and 8 bucks a month with discounts if you pay annually instead of monthly.
You can sign up for free to follow DOGE and contact them.
Thanks for the First Chuckle of the Day :)
I wasn’t being facetious. That’s been my experience.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.