Utah lawmaker: The key to statehood rights is
the transfer of public lands
If we fail to secure our statehood
rights to the transfer of the public lands, it will not be because it is
illegal, unconstitutional or impossible. If we fail to enforce this “solemn
compact” of statehood, it will be because our leaders lack the knowledge or the
courage to do what has already been done.
Raising
a voice
As much as 90 percent of the lands
in Illinois, Missouri and several other states were federally controlled for
decades when Thomas Hart Benton was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1821. In “A
Thirty Years View,” Benton recounts: “My election to the Senate of the United
States… found me doing battle for an ameliorated system of disposing our public
lands; and with some success. I resolved to move against the whole system…”
Thanks to one man, Illinois,
Missouri and neighboring states have, on average, less than 5 percent federally
controlled lands today. So distinguished was Benton’s courage that President
John F. Kennedy featured him in his best-selling book, “Profiles in Courage.”
Is that just ancient history? Well,
upon admission to the Union in 1959, the state of Hawaii exercised courage and
compelled the federal government to transfer title to all the public lands
directly to the state. Its Enabling Act of March 18, 1959 includes, “The United
States grants to the state of Hawaii, effective upon its admission into the
Union, the United States’ title to all the public lands… title to which is held
by the United States immediately prior to its admission into the Union.”
A
federal obligation
Some ignorantly assert that it would
be illegal or unconstitutional for Western states to compel the federal
government to transfer title of the public lands to the states even though it’s
been done before — repeatedly.
Public
lands held in trust
The public lands question is older
than our nation. By 1780, in the midst of battling for independence, the 13
states had run completely out of money. In this dire circumstance, seven states
pledged in trust to the confederated government their claims over all the
Western lands, but only to:
1.
Create “distinct republican states,”
with “the same rights of sovereignty, freedom and independence as the other states.”
2.
And use the proceeds from the
transfer of these Western lands, if any, to pay the debts from the Revolution.
Courts, Congresses, presidents and
the language of the statehood-enabling acts reaffirmed these solemn compacts,
but for which our nation may have perished at its birth.
String
of broken promises
In 1976, Congress enacted a policy
to unilaterally alter this 200-year-old obligation, moving to retain forever
the public lands in federal ownership with the Federal Lands Policy Management
Act. Under FLPMA, Congress promised there would be multiple use/sustained yield
with local planning on the public lands. Congress also promised to pay Western
states and communities for not using their lands and resources to fund the
education of their own children and care for their own communities. These
promises are known as payment in lieu of taxes (PILT), secure rural schools
funds (SRS) and federal mineral lease payments (FML).
PILT payments, by some estimates,
were only 13 cents on the dollar of the average taxable value of the land. SRS
payments were only a fraction of the revenues local communities had generated
from harvesting timber. Traditionally, timber harvesting kept the forest fuel
loads in check and local economies thriving. As for FML, states east of
Colorado with the same statehood promises retained 100 percent of their mineral
lease royalties instead of the 48 percent promised to Western states by
Congress.
FLPMA imposed an untenable deal upon
the Western states to be paid paltry amounts for not using their own lands and
resources. This year, under the guise of “sequestration” to cut federal
expenses, the federal government began limiting Western revenues in the form of
PILT, SRS and FML cutbacks.
So Congress breaks its 200-year-old
obligation to dispose of the public lands. Instead, it promises PILT, SRS and
FML concessions, as well as multiple use/sustained yield with local planning to
placate Western states. Now it is reneging on even those terrible substitute
promises while imposing ever-increasing restrictions on states, communities,
businesses and individuals, preventing them from using their own lands and
resources to care for their own communities, lands and forests and grow the
national economy in the process.
Blessing
state sovereignty
Fortunately, in 2009, the U.S.
Supreme Court opened the door for a resolution of this economic and
environmental dilemma facing not only Western states but also our nation. In
Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Supreme Court unanimously declared
that “the consequences of a State’s admission are instantaneous,” such that
Congress does not have the authority to unilaterally alter or diminish “the
uniquely sovereign character of that event” particularly “where virtually all
of the State’s public lands are at stake.” This makes sense. If Congress could
unilaterally alter or diminish the very terms of statehood, states would cease
to be states and would become mere administrative subdivisions of an
all-powerful national government.
The only solution big enough to
promote the health, access and productivity of our lands is within our reach.
We must choose this to fund education, better care for our lands and forests,
protect access, create jobs, and grow local, state and national economies and
tax bases. If we don’t, we will answer to our children, to future generations
of our states and to our nation as a whole that we failed, not because it was
illegal, unconstitutional or impossible, but because we and our leaders simply
lacked the knowledge and the courage.
–Ken Ivory
Ken Ivory is a member of the Utah
House of Representatives and the president of American Lands Council. He
sponsored HB148, the Transfer of Public Lands Act, and is building a coalition
to spread the knowledge that statehood promises to transfer title to public
lands are the same east and west of Colorado. “It’s been done before and it’s
the only solution big enough.” For information or to offer support, go to
www.AmericanLandsCouncil.org.
Comments
This is a critical piece in making the federal
government comply with the US Constitution that states the federal government
can’t own land other than that land necessary to perform its functions. These would be office buildings and military
bases.
The federal lands are not well maintained. California has forest fires every year. Federal lands are being put off-limits to
citizens to implement the “Wilding Project” with corridors for animal
migration. This is nuts. UN Agenda 21 plans for all land to be owned by the UN.
Recent federal land grabs are the result of Agenda 21 implementation in the
US. This must stop. Private property
rights is the key to citizen wealth and a healthy private economy.
States can do better. States should be able to own and sell this
land to be put to productive use. States will need this revenue to adjust to
losing federal grants to states and absorb unconstitutional federal activities.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment