The Property Clause and Its Discontents: Lessons from the Malheur Occupation

[KerningChameleon]

There wouldn't hardly be anybody living there, dude.

I mean, the most obvious example is Las Vegas, which wouldn't have ever existed if the US Government didn't build a bunch of testing bases in Nevada, and the soldiers that were then stationed there needed SOMEWHERE in the state to get their vice on while off duty.

Also, tell me your plan for making vast swaths of sweltering, arid desert profitable (keeping in mind the also dwindling water reservoirs in such areas in the US coupled with continuing drought patterns is putting the pinch on already existing farms), and I'll grant you perhaps the government should free up some acreage.

Solar power plants are an acceptable answer, by the way.

[C-Mag]

There wouldn't hardly be anybody living there, dude.

I mean, the most obvious example is Las Vegas, which wouldn't have ever existed if the US Government didn't build a bunch of testing bases in Nevada, and the soldiers that were then stationed there needed SOMEWHERE in the state to get their vice on while off duty.

Also, tell me your plan for making vast swaths of sweltering, arid desert profitable (keeping in mind the also dwindling water reservoirs in such areas in the US coupled with continuing drought patterns is putting the pinch on already existing farms), and I'll grant you perhaps the government should free up some acreage.

Solar power plants are an acceptable answer, by the way.

I will entertain all these questions, but it is besides the point. The law in the country is that states should be equal. Allowing the Federal government to control that vast majority of property in a state is unfair when other states are primarily privately owned.

As far as Vegas, I would argue that the government did no one any favors for aiding in the development of a unsustainable massive city in a desert. It is a complete waste of resources. Turn the land over to the states and let them best determine what to do with it and how to make if profitable, if that's what you choose to do.

[Speaker to Animals]

There wouldn't hardly be anybody living there, dude.

I disagree.
Some of these states had the highest per capita income before Federal control shut down the means of production.

Dude, what?

The federal government always controlled that land. It's been that way since before they were states.

The only way to keep those states viable is through some centralized management, especially of water and grazing resources. Those states need huge investments and subsidies.

[SuburbanFarmer]

The law in the country is that states should be equal.

I'm not aware of any such law....

[C-Mag]

There wouldn't hardly be anybody living there, dude.

I disagree.
Some of these states had the highest per capita income before Federal control shut down the means of production.

Dude, what?

The federal government always controlled that land. It's been that way since before they were states.

The only way to keep those states viable is through some centralized management, especially of water and grazing resources. Those states need huge investments and subsidies.

Over the last 30-40 years rules and regulations have changed dramatically. The Federal government has cut off the people of these states from natural resource extraction, and instead sell the resources to the highest bidder or lock it up. For instance Hillary Clinton selling Uranium to Russia, or selling hydro electric to big energy companies. The citizens of these states are not allowed self-determination if the government controls the means of production.

[C-Mag]

Yo, BroGrump, First Page

The Property Clause and Its Discontents: Lessons from the Malheur Occupation

Michael Blumm - 43 Ecology L.Q. 781 (2016)
Abstract

Although there is no justifiable legal case against federal ownership and management of public lands

This is not true and there is historical precedence as well.

Docterine of the Equality of States
http://law.justia.com/constitution/us/a ... tates.html

State’s act of admission a clause providing that the State enters the Union “on an equal footing with the original States in all respects

Since the U.S. Constitution mandates that states be equal in sovereignty, a state like Nevada could easily argue that having 90% of it land in Federal hands is unfair based on land ownership percentage in Eastern states.
In addition the Equal Footing clause reinforces this case.

in United States v. Texas. 285 Since the original States had been found not to own the soil under the three mile belt, Texas, which concededly did own this soil before its annexation to the United States, was held to have surrendered its dominion and sovereignty over it, upon entering the Union on terms of equality with the existing States. - See more at: http://constitution.findlaw.com/article ... nn8YG.dpuf

In the 1820s Missouri was 90% government owned like Nevada and they weren't alone. Florida and Illinois were others that came together and argued it was unfair to have their states economic potential controlled by far away Washington DC. And obviously they won. It is merely time to repeat history and give Western States the same fair shot at self determination that other states have gotten.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Is 'sovereignty' measured in percentage of land not under Federal control?

[C-Mag]

Is 'sovereignty' measured in percentage of land not under Federal control?

As I posted a number of other states made that claim and won. There is historical precedence for it. If you read How the States got their shapes(yes there was a series on that as well) you will find the US government has done a ton to create equality amongst the states. The little spur at the top of West Virginia was put there to all access to the Ohio River, the 19th C equivalent of the Interstate or airport shipping hub.

[SuburbanFarmer]

That series gave me the impression that this was much more about congressional horse-trading, than any sort of "equality mandate".

[C-Mag]

That series gave me the impression that this was much more about congressional horse-trading, than any sort of "equality mandate".

As per usual, the book is much better. The key point I took out of the book is actually how well Congress worked together, and worked hard to ensure equality between the states. Made me envious of a time long past.

All the big square flyover states were made up with a rule of thumb of 3 degrees by 4 degrees on lat/long. With modifications for certain geography. Making states equal is a huge part of our history. We need to honor that again.