As a resident of the State of Idaho, I cannot let pass without comment your disparaging reference to "Western state ninnies who feel that they should get all the federal land in their states for nothing."
People outside the Intermountain West seem to have great difficulty understanding why Westerners resent so much the intrusions of the Federal government on their states. I think the explanation for this is that most people from outside the West just do not understand how much of the Western state's territory the Federal government is sitting on.
In Idaho, for example, the Federal government owns approximately 62% of all the land in the state. In Utah, the Feds own 64% of all land; in Arizona, 48%; in Nevada, 83%; in Wyoming, 49%; and in Oregon, 53%.
As a basis for comparison, even in Texas the Federal government owns only about 1% of all of the land in the state. Indeed, in nearly every state east of Colorado, the total percentage of land in each state owned by the Feds is less than 5% of all the land in the state. The only exceptions are South Dakota (6%), Minnesota (10%), Wisconsin (10%), Michigan (13%), Arkansas (8%), Florida (9%), North Carolina (8%), Virginia (6%), West Virginia (7%), and New Hampshire (13%). In all other such states, the Feds own less than 5% and, in many cases, as little as 1 to 3%.
In short, the percentage of all state land in the West which is owned by the Feds (and, therefore, incapable of being put to productive use or forming part of the local and state government tax base) is not only higher but FAR higher in the West than in any other area of the country.
If the eastern states operated under the same restrictions, their economies would be as hampered from development as those of the Western states have been for so many years. I feel sure the attitude of New Yorkers (just to pick one example) towards the Federal government would be entirely different if their economy was being throttled by a Federal government that owned 62% of all the land in their state instead of less than 1% of the state (the actual figure).
I must say also that I don't know anyone in Idaho who wants the Federal government to give up its land "for nothing," as you state. Most Westerners I know would be perfectly happy to have the Federal government auction off the many millions of acres of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land that it is presently sitting on. In other words, Westerners would be perfectly happy to have the Feds treat its land the same way it is treating it's spectrum: sell it for a fair price.
Perhaps Congress should simply pass a law requiring that the Feds seize and keep comparable percentages of state land in the East as they do in the West. Then folks east of the Rockies might better understand our viewpoint out here.
Lu Xun |
