Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
On the Necessity of Federal Lands
DT had a chat with Field and Stream. Twitchy:
The GOP front-runner came out against letting states control public lands now run by the federal government saying, “I don’t like the idea because I want to keep the lands great, and you don’t know what the state is going to do.”
Absolutely right. America cannot be Great if its constituent elements do something doubleplus ungreat. But there’s more to consider here. Imagine for a moment that “lands” was replaced by some other concept. Schools. Gun laws. Welfare reform. It really does remind you how important the federal government is, how necessary it is, how it’s really the backstop that protects us all no matter where we reside. You don’t know what the state is going to do. Is that an uncertainty you’re willing to bear?
Published in General
I haven’t read all the comments so I could be repeating someone’s point but this is what some of us worry about with Trump , he doesn’t seem to understand conservative principles as they relate to the Constitution , specifically the 9th and 10th amendments. The idea that the states can’t be trusted and that if something is ‘nice’ the Federal Government should be able to force it on unwilling states is the very liberal fascism that we are fighting against. Trump seems not to understand or care about any of this.
My point was about DT’s attitude towards Federalism, which ought to matter for a conservative. I don’t think he’s given the matter much thought.
James, I think you are correct that he has not given it much (any?) thought.
Who among the others have? Ted Cruz, maybe Rand Paul? This is the recurring problem with some of the criticism of DT. He holds many positions we don’t consider conservative – true. So who among the field is the alternative that does?
Mostly I hear a group of candidates that want to manage the welfare state differently for their donor constituents. So if we are going to hire a welfare state manager why not hire the one with the most experience?
I damn sure know what Hillary will do. If the nominee is Trump, I vote Trump.
And imagine how little thought he will give federalism after becoming CEO of the US? “So federalism is like franchising?”
In fairness, I don’t think many of our candidates see federalism in terms much larger than franchising.
Another complicating, maybe deciding factor, in the federal lands issue which douses the sagebrush fires: This year the Federal government through the Forest Service, the BLM and the PILT program et al. will spend over $7 billion dollars in and around federal lands. Often the highest paid, most secure jobs in the rural West.
Ya got that right, Pilgrim.
Any. I think the word you were looking for is “any.”
(With apologies to Homer Simpson)
Scene 1: Trump reading the Federalist Papers.
Scene 2: Federalist Papers in the trash can, Trump reading “Federalism: An Introduction” by George Anderson.
Scene 3: “”Federalism: An Introduction” in the trash can, Trump looking up “federalism” in the dictionary.
Well, I was trying to take his “we don’t know what they’ll do” seriously.
Actually, on the Republican side, which one do we know what he would do? I’m going to say the most predictable is… Jeb Bush.
Guru, I’m just asking here, not critical:
How much is the concept of federalism warped in your state because of the NoVa proximity to and dependence on our central government?
I went to high school in Loudoun County. Once dated a girl there who lived five miles from the nearest paved road, in Ashburn. Now, I’d get lost driving through that area without a Garmen.
There are only 2 states where rural voters make an electoral majority.
While NoVA has fundamentally changed the state, for this particular issue, nearly every state is Virginia.
Now, instead of talking about nonexistent federalism concerns (when all you have is a hammer…..), a better question would be what if he knew what the state was going to do with the land.
Yuh. But if you have the right hammer, you can do a heckuva lot.
Ted Cruz, check out his record on the Constitution. It is the best we will likely ever see in a Presidential candidate.
To follow up, Ted Cruz’s senior thesis at Princeton was about the importance of the tenth amendment. His biggest case as Texas’s solicitor general was to oppose the Bush administration’s attempt to force a UN Treaty on Texas and negate Texas’s criminal law.
Brent, respectfully, you are far off the mark here my friend. These federalism issues have been a primary motivating factor in the conservative movement at least as far back as the founding of the Federalist Society or, to take it further, back to William Rehnquist’s appointment to the Supreme Court and the Goldwater nomination. The notion that Rubio, Christie, Fiorina, and Bush (heck, even Huckabee) haven’t considered federalism and dual sovereignty at length is absurd.
Now, you may disagree with the conclusions they draw on the balance of federal and state authority (take Bush and Common Core, for instance). The difference, however, is he was quite aware that dual sovereignty and federalism were a big part of the conversation. Trump doesn’t, and I’m not inclined to cast a vote for a man who will require a remedial civics lesson before he takes the oath of office.
The only land the federal government should own is the amount specified in the constitution for the District of Columbia.
Everything else should be sold. All government installations should be leased from the states or the tribes.
from a previous thread (reformatted slightly):
Does this bring to mind Bill Clinton’s comment in the late ’90’s when he was asked why he didn’t go for a general across-the-board tax rate cut? He replied that we might do the wr9ng thing with 0ur money if he gave it back.
Freedom’s just another word / for “they can’t tighten the screws”
My prescription for retirement of the federal debt has been for a long time, SELL THE WEST. Auction off the majority of Western lands not part of national parks to the states or the ranchers who already use that land. Trust the PEOPLE who use that land every day to be its stewards.
Yes, but then you’d be betraying conservatism. How voting for Hillary (or third party) helps conservatism, I don’t know, but apparently, lots of punditry seems to think that’s preferable. But hey, at least you’d still be pure.
I don’t know who (it’s not NR) is saying to vote for Hillary instead of Trump. I despise Trump but would never ever ever vote for Hillary. If it played out that there was a realistic conservative 3rd party candidate thats something different.
Pah. I’d need to take a shower, then get sandblasted, then spend time in an autoclave, then take another shower, then wait a week and a half for my BAC to back down below .08.
If my choice is Trump v Hillary, I vote Trump not for conservatism, but for the (off) chance of national survival.
Glenn Beck said he’d rather see Sanders president than Trump, let alone Hillary. And Beck was a contributor to NR’ s Dump Trump issue. He also said… not kidding… that the thinks we may have found the next George Washington in Cruz.
Back in the old days, we called this thinking in terms of principles. We don’t do that anymore. In the modern age, we talk about our feelings, about how angry people are and how their feelings have to be respected.
What do you mean “we,” white man?
I was speaking informally. I was in a rush because I was looking for my bongos for the drum circle at the end after we’ve shared our feelings.
I think the quote I heard was something like he had prayed for the next George Washington and he thinks Cruz is it. Now talk about some pressure! Not only do you have to try and win the election but now you are supposed to be on the level of George Washington?? My reaction was “why can’t he just be a good conservative candidate”? lol
I don’t really pay a lot of attention to Beck so he may very well have said that about Sanders….seems nutty to me but from the Cruz comment it’s obvious he doesn’t go for understatement. lol
His record before declaring for President is the best we’ve had in a candidate in decades.
His rhetoric and voting since declaring. Not so much.
You’re an easy fellow to disappoint, partner! (Probably made you a great pilot, though.)