April 19, 2014

"It’s time the states in the West come of age."

"We’re every bit as capable of managing the lands in our boundaries as the states east of Colorado."

15 comments:

David said...

Except maybe California.

YoungHegelian said...

It's interesting that in DC, which bitches and moans about not having control of it finances since it's not a state, has far less land under by percentage under federal control than Nevada does.

Here's a list of percentage of federal ownership by state. Nevada is up at 81% and is by far the highest. On a case by case basis of each state, maybe there are good reasons for such federal control, but. at first glance, it really does seem absurd that the feds control that much land in so many states.

Michael K said...

This might be the beginning of the real Sagebrush Rebellion. I wonder how the Congress can get this rolling? Maybe after the 2015 Congress takes the oath, write a bill and send it to Obama to veto. I could see this as a real issue in 2016.

Of course, if the BLM is really stupid, they could pull a Waco.

Hagar said...

I thought Texas was the only state that owns all its un-allocated land, and that is because Texas was an independent country that joined the Union with its own set of conditions.
The original 13, I do not know about, but then I don't think there is much un-allocated land in those little states on the Atlantic seaboard.
For all the rest, I think there was an agreement made that Virginia, New York, etc. would give up their outlandish claims on unoccupied (by anglos) lands to the west, and it would all belong the the Union.

Hagar said...

I believe on of the arguments for federal management of unallocated lands is that the federal agencies are supposed to be incorruptible, and not as likely as the local officials to collude with big corporations and their politicians and lawyers in dvious schemes to deprive the regular citizens of their homes and livelyhoods?

Bob Boyd said...

Yeah, that's going to happen.
I can hear it now.
"We are not going to give our children's precious natural resources over to a bunch of shotgun pumpin', cousin humpin', toothless inbreds who will turn right around and trade it all to the Koch brothers for a new set of monster truck tires before you can say "toxic wasteland". So you folks just hitch up your overalls and get back to hootin' on your whiskey jugs, okay? We got this."

Anonymous said...

It's not even the Steven Chu types I worry most about, the brilliant but politically naive physicists cum bureaucrats.

It's the second-raters, the company men etc.

You all know the middle-manager in your company who knows mostly how to schmooze, kiss-ass and never fully be responsible for anything when it goes wrong.

Well, these middle-managers are analogous to bureaucrats in Federal government following their incentives and writing the rules.

Always meet the budget. Never put your ass on the line. Always seek out the next ass to kiss etc.

I wonder how some Lefties at Althouse deal with this in relation to a large Federal and State structure:

How can such human clay be molded into mostly benevolent perfectible institutions and constantly more well-informed citizens when its made up of such flawed people and limited knowledge?

Don't you ever worry about the structure that results from your idealism and ideological commitments being turned on you and yours?




Hagar said...

Today it is going a bit farther than that. The agencies have large numbers of activists that quite enegetically use the powers of the Federal Government to further their personal ideological goals.
And the way bureaucracies work, the activist gets his way.

mtrobertsattorney said...

Aside from considerations of federalism, the fact that the public now knows that the BLM has its own private military (under the control of a single unelected person) will make this movement politically popular.

The Godfather said...

(a) Bundy isn't the ideal poster boy for this issue.

(b) A libertarianish president could make a good argument for selling the "federal" land (excluding national parks and monuments)to the states or state-approved private interests, and using the proceeds to reduce the national debt.

Hagar said...

The Bundy Ranch deal has at least 3 separate levels to it.

1. Cliven Bundy and his grazing permit. This has apparently been going on for 20+ years, which must have every rancher with a federal grazing lease asking, "What the ..?"
The normal thing is that if a lease is not renewed and paid on time, the rancher gets a notice to pay up or remove his cattle within 30 days or the Gov't will place a lien on the cattle, rendering them unsellable and worthless. This s not difficult.
So what has been going on here?

2. Some company wants to do a gov't subsidized solar power generating plant down the road a ways (It is not the Chinese deal - that fell through). They will have to grade the site, which will kill the prairie tortoises in the area. They therefore have to make a deal to provide a "mitigation area" to make up for the hbitat that will be destroyed, which is where the Gold Butte BLM reserve where Bundy has got his cattle comes in.
This deal probably involves at least the DoE, EPA, Fish & Wildlife, and maybe a couple more agencies in addition to the BLM, which is were Harry Reid & Sons, LLP comes in to help smooth the way and put it all together.

3. Harry Reid can not afford to have it look like he is getting old and loosing his grip on things Nevada in general. Hence, "This is not over."

cubanbob said...

Hagar's point 2and 3 are spot on. The Bundy's are getting in the way of Senator M ( Mafia) Reid's graft and making him look weak-something that would cost him and friends and family a lot of money in the future. If repaid can't deliver than what's the point of bribing him?

Jason said...

Reid: "He made me look ridiculous, and a man in my position cannot afford to be made to look ridiculous!"

Crazy Jane said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Phil 3:14 said...

I'm sure the Southern Poverty Law Center is all over this.