Interesting how things spread - I just talked to a high ranking Air
Force officer in Nebraska and he had just talked to others and all agreed that
this sure looses their support for retaining Hill AFB in the next round of cuts.
The comment was made to the effect that you would never know what those
"utahns" would ask for next!How to win friends &
influence people !
jfarker, I know the Constitution very well, and I think you're less
qualified to make such judgements than the state's own legal counsel, who
have advised them that it's unconstitutional. Your claim that federal law
doesn't trump state law is absurd. Just wishing that the Supremacy Clause
didn't exist doesn't make it so.
Wildlife belongs to the State... much of the lands belong to the feds.
Wouldn't it be nice is wildlife managers had the ability to manage habitat
the animals need. The feds are a failure in doing what mule deer need to
We don't need Herbie ripping on the Federal Government when we get more
Federal dollars than we are pay, and when Hill AFB is being considered to
close--which would have devastating results on Northern Utah jobs--yes even
private sector jobs.Governor, choose a smart and respectable way to
voice your disagreement and quit trying to appeal to the far right to survive a
primary challenge and quit wasting tax dollars. What's next another
fluoride challenge--GOOD NIGHT, the bats are out tonight!
jfarker - what part of the constitution says the federal government can't
own property? I don't recall reading that part - but it may be there.
Is it therefor your conclusion that the Louisiana Purchase, and the
purchase of Alaska were illegal and unconstitutional?Just
wondering...... I want to read that section you are referring to.
Absurd hypocrisy is all this is about. I think this state and its legislators
are all suffering from dementia, Alzheimer, and Parkinson disease for how
irrational and brain dead they are.Public lands of the BLM do not
belong to any single state and I am glad they are federally owned and
controlled. Why Utah is wasting time and money to posture this demand further
adds to this states nationally recognized selfish and immoral standards.Or does Utah hope to use this demand so they can declare themselves and
independent and sovereign nation?Will his doctor please give this
governor and the Republicans in the legislature a dose of Riddlen to calm them
down and make them more submissive to reason and common sense? Since all these
Representative got out of school and off their Riddlen medication they have lost
their minds.Don't know what public lands have to do with per
child spending in school but if you want to quote it properly the range of
spending is from a few hundred dollars(rural schools) to $30,000+ dollars per
student in the SLC school district. That $5700 is so phony its pathetic to even
Prodicus, you're wrong. HB 148 is designed to restore states' rights.
Please read the Constitution.DeltFoxtrot, Federal does NOT trump state
except in clearly defined situations. Please read the Constitution.VegasBart, the governor is absolutely entitled to try to correct this problem.
Stowaway, it's the principle of the thing.Isrred, it's
not about education--it's about righting a very old wrong.UtahBlueDevil, you might want to check your facts again.Abe Sarvis, this
is an appropriate use of state money, and a great investment in your future.Durwood Kirby, you are the person who scares me the most. Please read the
Constitution. And don't vote in November unless you understand it.
Thanks.ParkCityAggie, please read the Constitution.
"Democratic legislators opposed the legislation, calling it unconstitutional
and a waste of time and money. "This is probably true with our
court system; however, a court challenge would not be without merit. Article 1
section 8 paragraph 17 of the US Constitution sets forth the terms under which
the Federal Government can own land in a state. The land must be for specific
purposes and it must be approved by the state legislature.The Utah
state legislature probably never approved the Feds owning the land in question
and they certainly are not using for one of the allowed purposes.The
courts will through this challenge out only because they believe in a
"living constitution". The written constitution would make victory
Utah_1,Sadly, as much as I agree with you- I somehow doubt
we'll see a good end to this issue. The Fed typically does things their way
or gets it their way in the end and courts seem to uphold actual law, even the
actual constitution. We tend to put things in the constitution that aren't
there and take things out when it's convenient for us.
Gosh, Utah, if you want more spending per pupil, get a state lottery already.
Many other states have them, and many of those other states are doing much
better than Utah in a lot of ways. A lottery isn't going to turn Utah into
Sodom and Gomorrah, contrary to what many of our state leaders might have you
think. What do I care, I'm moving out of Utah soon, to the real world, then
I won't have to bother with ridiculous stories like this! I might even buy
a lottery ticket now and then :)
Utah_1 has it right. The rest of you need to take a constitutional law class.
The federal government is specifically disallowed from owning land outside of
Washington, D.C. except for defense purposes. Teddy Roosevelt was the first
president to ignore this clause when he created national parks. The American
people are so ill-educated about the Constitution that we are probably doomed to
repeat the mistakes our founding fathers sought to protect us from. Shame on
In the Utah Enabling Act, the Federal Government promised in that agreement to
sell the 2/3 of Utah, and not to keep it. They officially violated that
agreement with FLIPMA in 1976, leaving Utah and not the Federal Government,
jurisdiction and the owner of 2/3 of the land.Under the US
Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 8, Clause 17, and the 10th amendment, the Federal
Government can not exercise exclusive jurisdiction or own land in Utah, unless
it is for Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful
Buildings, and it was purchased by the Consent of the Utah Legislature. Clearly
the 2/3 of the land in Utah "claimed" by the Federal Government does not
fit within this constitutional power
Federal Government: Dear State of Utah uber right-wing Republican Lawmakers -
LOL! Might we remind you that WE purchased what is now known as the "State
of Utah" from the Government of Mexico in 1896. We were gracious enough to
let you have the land you now control, but that's not good enough for you?
Perhaps if you would picked up a history book or do a little research on the
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, you might know how your "State" really came
to be what it is today. We fought a little war you might remember, called the
Mexican-American War. Oh and thanks for sending those troops down to San Diego,
they were a big help! Listen, when you can prove to us that you can be good
stewards of the land you hold now, maybe we'll think about relinquishing a
couple hundred acres back to you. Oh and by the way, allow ranchers to
over-graze, or allowing your rich oil buddies to drill and mine Willey Nilley
all over the place is not what we consider "good stewards of the land"
just so you know. Anyway best of luck!
The Western US states are virtual colonies of the Federal government, though
they allow us congressmen and senators. Congressman Hansen some years back
proposed that 1% or 2% of other US states be taken by the Federal government to
make his point. All of them found the proposal absurd.Now, what is
absurd, is where the Federal Government owns 2/3 of the land in this state. And
for Nevada, 82$! Both are asenine!
I trust the fed's management much more than the Utah Legislature. By far.
May I suggest the legislators who voted for it - and the governor who signed the
bill - put up the money to defend this bill in court? If they win, they can have
a 50% profit on what they put in. If they lose, then Utah taxpayers aren't
on the hook.C'mon, boys - put your money where your mouths are.
And stop putting MY money where your mouths are.
"Democratic legislators opposed the legislation"Take a look
again.There were democrat representatives who voted for the bill.
You know, I think Utah should have more control over land that just isn't
doing anything. But the election year hyperbole being spewed is
something else. As if this is the missing link to funding schools. How can
anyone not want more money for schools - right? And then to make
claims like in Texas the oil companies are unrestrained by the federal
government because they can drill on private land. What a load of
mis-information that is. The same rules and regulations that prevent drilling
on federal land still exist on private land. If anyone believes Lee's
version of the truth, there is some great slightly wet land in Florida that is
available at a really good price for you.
Nevada= 82% federally owned. They spend about $8,300 per student.Alaska= 62% federally owned. They spend about $15,000 per student.Idaho= 62% federally owned. They spend about $7,000 per student.Utah= 64% federally owned. We spend about $5,700 per student.The
arguments that Utah can't fund its education system without trying to STEAL
land that ALL AMERICANS own, is absurd.
That stunning vista attached to the article. It'd be a shame if my
children and grandchildren lose being able to go there.Seriously, I
was annoyed heavily when the Clinton administration came in under the cover of
night and declared a national monument, but realize that this piece of
legislation is only going to enrich the lives of lawyers at the expense of
children. The scope of the seizure was too big. They needed to file small
FIRST, then if that was successful go for more. You NEVER put all your money
down on the table for the first roll. The smarter person doesn't put ANY
money down on the table.
$3 million message?! I didn't know Utah legislators had that kind of money
to throw away. Oh yeah, it's easy to spend when it's not yours.
Demand? You demand? Good luck on this one Governor.
I was pretty disappointed in Herbert over the sex education veto- but this he
most certainly has my full support on.1- I believe that Utah land
should be... Utahn?2- I also believe in honoring what you have
agreed to. And if the Fed hasn't met their word- clearly Utah has a right
to regain what is rightfully ours.
$3mil that could be used for so many other things. Federal trumps State... or
did Gov. Herbert miss that day in Civics class?
This absolutely is a "matter of chest-thumping." No matter what you
think of the BLM you have to face these facts: the bill is completely
unconstitutional, the Legislature has been advised by its legal counsel that
it's unconstitutional and that we'll have to waste state funds trying
to defend the indefensible in court, and they did it anyway to try to show
off.I don't agree with Dabakis on very many things, but
he's right that our legislature does quite a lot of pointless "message
bills." If the Legislature wants to express an opinion they can do it by
passing a resolution; they shouldn't fill our state code with garbage and
waste our state funds trying to enforce or defend unconstitutional bills.