Selling Federal Lands

[mtmuley]

I think most of yhe HT folks are smart enough .

The Brent. The. mtmuley mtmuley

 

[BrentD]

The Brent. The. mtmuley mtmuley

Thanks. I hate proof reading.

 

[Big Fin]

The drum beat continues at the Wall Street Journal. Copied below for those not able to get behind the paywall. Merry Christmas from the Hoover Institute.

The World’s Biggest Landlord Is Washington

The incoming Trump administration will confront some huge financial challenges. It will have to cope with the vast increase in the national debt created by the Biden administration’s reckless spending. It will also need to maintain the solvency of the Social Security system after decades of financial irresponsibility by politicians of both parties.On top of all this, there is an urgent need to build up American military defenses, which have been neglected while taxpayers’ money has been lavishly spent on such things as subsidizing electric cars and paying hotel expenses for illegal immigrants.There is no question that doing all the things that urgently need doing will require huge amounts of additional government spending. The key question is: Where will the government get this money?

There is much to be said for the new administration’s plan to have a nongovernmental organization investigate how well, or how badly, government agencies are currently handling the taxpayers’ money. But there is a limit to how much money can be recovered by simply cutting back on “waste, fraud and abuse” in federal spending.

There are, however, additional billions of dollars that could be tapped, from a source that not many people think about. That is the vast—almost unbelievable—amount of land owned by the federal government. Some of that land—such as military bases—is used to house the government’s own operations. But the great majority of that land is not.

The rest of this government-owned land is so vast that there is little to compare it with—except whole countries. And not small countries like Belgium or Portugal. The amount of land owned by the National Park Service alone is larger than Italy. The land owned by the Fish and Wildlife Service is larger than Germany. The land owned by the Forest Service is larger than Britain and Spain combined. The land owned by the Bureau of Land Management is larger than Japan, North Korea, South Korea and the Philippines combined.

The idea of selling huge amounts of government-owned land is not new. Before the federal income tax was created in the early 20th century, land sales were sometimes a significant source of federal government income in the preceding two centuries. The prospect of large-scale land sales was considered during the Reagan administration, but the political opposition was too strong.

As of 2015, government-owned lands were valued at $1.8 trillion by the Commerce Department. This is the kind of money that can make a real contribution to the government’s fiscal balance, at a time when so many government operations are urgently in need of support.

As for the current value of these lands to the government, that value is largely negative. The money that these lands bring in is often only a fraction of what it costs the government to take care of them. Wildfires on land managed by the federal government have been about five times the size of wildfires on “non-federal lands,” according to a 2022 study by the Congressional Budget Office.

Land transferred from federal ownership to the market economy can also contribute to more affordable housing. When the same kind of house costs several times more in one part of the country than elsewhere, it is often because the cost of the land is higher rather than because the house costs more to build. That in turn is often because the land is either more scarce or because of laws restricting the building of anything on that land. But, where more land is available to build on, the same kind of house can cost a fraction of what it costs elsewhere.

The federal government owns a little more than one-fourth of the total land area of the United States. The time is long overdue to consider whether that is the best economic arrangement. And reconsideration is especially needed at a time of urgent fiscal problems.

Mr. Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.

 

[44hunter45]

So ends my love of Thomas Sowell.

 

[Nameless Range]

The drum beat continues at the Wall Street Journal. Copied below for those not able to get behind the paywall. Merry Christmas from the Hoover Institute.

View attachment 354400

“As for the current value of these lands to the government, that value is largely negative.“

Interesting framing, and Sowell is smart enough that I’m sure it was intentional. If instead he had written, “to the country”, the discussion would be far more broad than the dollars and cents economists are drawn to and have a tendency to reduce value to.

The market of experiences and adventure, clean air and water, potential, and soul - they are far afield from the study of the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. And I don’t know if they cover those in Ivy League economics classes.

It’s up to us to educate em.

 

[Treeshark]

I am trying to wrap my head around what a federal “sale” would even look like.

It’s not like the US Gov would just list this land on Zillow, I assume a transfer to the states would be involved somehow.

 

[Straight Arrow]

I assume a transfer to the states would be involved somehow.

Not necessarily. Pioneer Mountain area was previously USFS lands but then deeded directly to Yellowstone Club, Tim Blixseth, as part of a land swap. That type of direct transaction has been repeated with USFS and BLM lands and, IIRC, even with money exchanged.
This issue-awakening shot across the national bow by short-sighted Sowell of the Hoover Institution is just the sort of malarkey that the newly minted Dept of Government Efficiency (DOGE) will likely grab hold of and try to push. (When more space exploration monies are paramount to the perpetuation of a certain gazillionaire's legacy, the sale of Bears Ears National Monument will seem an easy decision by DOGE and a welcome transaction for some in Utah.)

This is a serious threat to the public lands and landscapes which are national treasures to most of us ... and we thought in perpetuity. With this Congress of ovines willing to march the lemmings trail to whatever end dictated ... it is more scary than ever!!!

 

[Treeshark]

This issue-awakening shot across the national bow by short-sighted Sowell of the Hoover Institution is just the sort of malarkey that the newly minted Dept of Government Efficiency (DOGE) will likely grab hold of and try to push.

Yep, agreed. From that perspective, this is perfect timing.

 

[SAJ-99]

Yep, agreed. From that perspective, this is perfect timing.

Sowell is applying for a job. But the fact has always been that when 3 of 4 Americans don’t use public lands at all and the ones that do don’t pay an amount high enough to make them attractive to keep, the argument can more easily gain traction.

 

[Treeshark]

Sowell is applying for a job. But the fact has always been that when 3 of 4 Americans don’t use public lands at all and the ones that do don’t pay an amount high enough to make them attractive to keep, the argument can more easily gain traction.

Absolutely agree.

This is an uncomfortable reality, but he actually makes a point that most people are probably going to find fairly compelling.

 

[TOGIE]

Absolutely agree.

This is an uncomfortable reality, but he actually makes a point that most people* are probably going to find fairly compelling.

*that party line cheerleaders and entrenched team sport participants will find compelling.

at a maximum you could assume every D will be against because it came from the R/Trump megaphone and at a minimum most Ds + a handful of Rs and Ms beginning to harbor disdain.

but you're right, wild times - the path has probably never been clearer and bump free.

but that's not to say there will not be bumps and roadblocks aplenty.

i say we just get together as a collective west of the 100th meridian group and secede. can finally call them our public lands and keep the slimy apartment dwellers on the east coast out of our business for good

 

[Hunting Wife]

I think both sides are licking their chops to start selling, albeit for different reasons on the face of it but in the end mostly to expand their own kingdoms and wallets. I’m not sure we’re going to stop it this time.

Our new puppet master is going to be all over this. Raise a whole bunch of capital and get rid of a huge portion of the DOI at the same time. What’s not to love?

 

[Forkyfinder]

I think both sides are licking their chops to start selling, albeit for different reasons on the face of it but in the end mostly to expand their own kingdoms and wallets. I’m not sure we’re going to stop it this time.

Our new puppet master is going to be all over this. Raise a whole bunch of capital and get rid of a huge portion of the DOI at the same time. What’s not to love?

Votes dont exist in the house for that.

 

[Nameless Range]

With Rosendale's departure, I do not see any of Montana's Congressional Delegation being on board with selling federal lands. I would be less surprised to see some of them come out in favor of PLT though.

 

[Nick87]

I think both sides are licking their chops to start selling, albeit for different reasons on the face of it but in the end mostly to expand their own kingdoms and wallets. I’m not sure we’re going to stop it this time

Money, it always the money.

 

[Hunting Wife]

Votes dont exist in the house for that.

If they have enough D’s seeing opportunities for low income housing and green energy, they might.

 

[SAJ-99]

Votes dont exist in the house for that.

The Utah petition allows SCOTUS to give them cover. Wait for it....

 

[TOGIE]

If they have enough D’s seeing opportunities for low income housing and green energy, they might.

regarding energy wouldn't both sides of the aisle be shooting themselves and their pocket liners in the foot by seeing public lands privatized? private leases and royalties for energy aren't much of a screaming a deal in comparison to those rock bottom public land rates, right?

you'd think both sides would see the long term investment opportunity in having ample cheap public land to drill and grade for solar.

 

[Forkyfinder]

regarding energy wouldn't both sides of the aisle be shooting themselves and their pocket liners in the foot by seeing public lands privatized? private leases and royalties for energy aren't much of a screaming a deal in comparison to those rock bottom public land rates, right?

you'd think both sides would see the long term investment opportunity in having ample cheap public land to drill and grade for solar.

 

[TOGIE]

View attachment 354468

exactly.

i did want to continue my post with "or, is energy and housing simply the shroud to pull over the voters eyes so folks can stop getting their pockets lined and instead line em themselves"