TOS Blog: Daily Commentary from an Objectivist Perspective
Monday, February 13, 2012
Oil Shale Politics Points to Problems of Federal Land Ownership
Why is energy production in the United States subject to so much political oversight? Public News Service reports the latest news about oil shale: “Two competing plans for the development of oil shale in the West are making their way through Washington, D.C.” Both plans involve government-owned lands, and both are subject to extensive political wrangling.
The Reason Foundation’s Leonard Gilroy summarizes a major reason why federal politicians exert so much control over energy production: “The federal government owns nearly 30 percent of all the land in the country,” including “more than 84 percent of the land in Nevada” and large chunks the land of various other states.
The fact that the government has socialized so much land necessarily involves federal politicians in the management of that land and of any economic activity thereon.
Those federal lands should be converted to private property for Constitutional, economic, and (most importantly) moral reasons.
Regarding the Constitution, as legal scholar Rob Natelson points out in his book The Original Constitution, permanent federal land ownership for unenumerated purposes is contrary to the intent of the Constitution. Natelson points out that “Founding-Era records disclose a universal belief that most federal lands would be sold promptly.”
In terms of economic incentives, private owners, whether individuals, for-profit businesses, or conservation groups, tend to manage their property (whether by developing it, preserving it, selling it, or leasing it) to best achieve their values. Politicians tend to manage lands to the advantage of those with the most political pull.
More fundamentally, the government’s proper role is to protect individual rights, including rights to develop and gain title to property; the government has no moral business managing lands or their development. Property owners, not political fiat, should determine the development of oil shale, natural gas, outdoor recreation, and every other land use.
If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to The Objective Standard and making objective journalism a regular part of your life.
Related:
Image: Wikimedia Commons
Posted in: Environmentalism, Individual Rights and Law
- Next Post: Modern Greeks Destroy ‘Foundations of Justice’
- Previous Post: Should a “homosexual contract” be called something other than marriage?
-
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CRE6REGHBOCNFLN4NJIXNMIEFM Mike Kevitt
Join Our Mailing List
If you enjoy TOS Blog please make a donation to keep us blogging
Blog Archive
Blog Topics
- Announcements (152)
- Events (36)
- Ayn Rand and Objectivism (74)
- Business and Economics (61)
- Education and Pedagogy (22)
- Environmentalism (42)
- Foreign Policy and War (147)
- History (53)
- Individual Rights and Law (463)
- Abortion and Reproduction (17)
- Antitrust (11)
- Banking and Monetary Policy (6)
- Education Policy (41)
- Free Speech (23)
- Guns and Self Defense (8)
- Health Care (66)
- Immigration (4)
- Libertarianism (4)
- Property Rights (5)
- Regulations (24)
- Taxation (27)
- The Left (5)
- Unions (4)
- Welfare State (7)
- Philosophy (79)
- Ethics (16)
- Presidential Candidates (69)
- Productivity (15)
- Psychology (4)
- Religion (99)
- Romance (2)
- Science and Technology (87)
- Sports (11)
- The Arts (31)
Ideas presented in posts on TOS Blog are those of the authors of the posts and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Objective Standard. TOS Blog is powered by WordPress.
