Uncle Sam Owns This Much Of America [Interactive Map]

dailycaller.com ^ | 12/8/2015 | Kathryn Watson

[rktman]

But “a picture is worth a thousand words,” according to Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert, chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources’ Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. So, his full committee created an interactive map revealing every acre the federal government owns in each congressional district, color-coded by agency.

[rktman]

Hmmmm. Looks like us taxpayers own some water as well. Oh, it's not us it's the feds? Can we charge them rent? I don't seem to remember anyone(us) siging papers to fess up with all this land. And I also don't see any designation as to how much land ted turner holds. I think I read someplace that he holds more land than any other individual in the country. I could be wrong. (again)

[Pearls Before Swine]

Do the rapidly proliferating National Monument lands count as part of Uncle Sam’s empire? Or were they already “his”, with the designation just reducing “our” usage, for example, as in logging, grazing, or just toolin’ around.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

The doctrine being “all land has an owner.” Maybe you want Warren Buffett to own it all?

[DJ MacWoW]

Tis The Season
To End The FReepathon

Click The Pic To Donate

[rktman]

Sorry. I think he’s restricted to railroads and rc willey’s. Oh, and capital gains. All legal so what am I complaining about? :>)

[Robert DeLong]

With approximately two million acres of personal and ranch land, Ted Turner is the second largest individual landholder in North America

Liberty Media tycoon John Malone owns 2.2 million acres, more than twice the size of Delaware.

[sphinx]

Just to start the discussion in the right place: it is important to remember that most of the U.S. west of the Appalachians came into the Union as federal estate. After the Revolution, the first 13 states had inherited various and often conflicting western land claims from the British Crown, based on grants drawn by "statesmen" in London for territories that had not yet been mapped or explored. Had we been Europeans, we might still be fighting wars over these today.

Instead, the states with such claims agreed to yield them to the federal government in the interest of a coherent (and peaceful) national settlement policy in the West. Then followed the Louisiana purchase, the acquisition of Florida from Spain, the conquest of the southwest from Mexico, the Gadsden purchase, the settlement with Britain over the Pacific Northwest territories, and the purchase of Alaska from Russia. The exceptions to the rule were Texas and Hawaii, both of which were independent republics before joining the Union.

The feds by and large did not "take" land from the states and the people; the federal government always owned it. What changed in the late 19th century was the longstanding policy of privatizing the federal estate as rapidly as possible, which is why federal lands are concentrated in the West.

If I could wave a magic wand and redistribute the acreage, I would sell off some of the federal lands in the West and increase federal parkland in the East (especially, given the targets of opportunity, for historical preservation). A lot of the nutty politics regarding federal lands arises from maldistribution. People in the West live surrounded by federal lands, and the feds are not always sensitive to their needs. The overcrowded East, however, would benefit from increased parks and open space, especially in proximity to major cities. History has dealt us a problem.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” Can we charge them rent? “

I know you are half joking, but I like this idea. We start by charging $10,000 per year rent to every member of congress.Let’s see how fast the fedgov sells off government held land : )

[Redbob]

The fedgov never intended to own the land forever: they were interested in getting it settled and occupied. Thus the Oklahoma land rush and various homesteader settlement plans.

What we have now is vast areas of the West designated by Easterners as their own version of Disneyland, a giant amusement park reserved to the young bike-riders and hikers, and off-limits to motorized transportation.

[marktwain]

Even bike riding is forbidden in vast acreages.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

The feds by and large did not “take” land from the states and the people; the federal government always owned it.

---

HOW?

You forget somebody, white man.

[MarkL]

First buy up all the property, and make private property ownership illegal.

Then the government doesn’t just own everything, the leviathan will also own everyone.

Mark

[Seattle Conservative]

Thanks for sharing! Bkmrk

[sphinx]

I agree. What happened in the late 19th century, however, is that settlement moved into semi-arid and arid regions unsuited for yeoman agriculture. The feds were selling land at a song for vast cattle ranches, and in many places the primary value was timber and mining. The legacy policy of selling land cheaply (or granting it, via the Homestead Act) to small farmers in a Jeffersonian frontier democracy no longer seemed relevant to the facts on the ground.

The western states are indeed abused by an absentee federal landlord heavily oriented towards urban constituencies. People who live in the megalopolis and fiercely resent spending the majority of their non-work waking hours stuck in traffic are easy marks for environmental radicalism. They view open space as a vacation destination and have no glimmer of the issues facing rural people trying to make a living. The East needs more parkland close to major cities. The pent up demand of Manhattanites gets displaced onto Montana and Idaho. Maybe we should designate the entire Meadowlands as the Great American Swamp Park and set about restoring it to its natural state. Let urbanites fight some of these battles on their own turf.

[dangus]

The ENTIRE state of Tennessee?

[rarestia]

My God... that website has more trackers and ad service hooks than Fox has actual news! I can’t bring myself to turn off my script, adware, and tracking software blockers to see the actual map. I’m sure it’s a lot.

[Flick Lives]

The Daily Caller is so overwhelmed with ad content that by the time my adblocker software is finished, the site renders with a header, footer, and no content!

[rktman]

Sorry. I usually post stuff from them in the print version to avoid the pop ups etc but I think the interactive map no worky in print mode. In any case, the feds control a LOT of the land. But, aren’t the feds funded by us?

[Foundahardheadedwoman]

Before Clinton left office there was a large discovery of coal reserves in, I think, Utah. Clinton promptly declared the property a National Monument to stop any mining from going on. If I remember correctly that was one of Clinton’s parting gifts to us. There was a coal co. trying to get a permit to mine it at the time. Had the co. just paid him off they would be mining now.

[sphinx]

True. IIRC correctly, that was on BLM land so the feds controlled the leasing. The other wrinkle to the wtory is that the Lippo Group owned some competing coal reserves.