We are being bombarded with the political races today and again hearing the debate over the size of government. Last week one candidate proposed transferring the federal public lands to the states for management. The debate extends beyond the question of public lands, into rebuilding our infrastructure, administration of our education systems and even more. My concern is mainly on the public land issue but, the whole question of size of the federal government concerns me. It seems that the rationale for government is based on two primary needs. History has proven that societies cannot live together properly without defining the boundaries we must live within, ie. rules and regulations. It also seems that as we concentrate our rapidly growing population in urban areas, the importance of boundaries becomes more demanding. Therefore, the first need for government is to provide the rules and regulations required for our society to function successfully. The second reason we find government essential is the fact that we continue to encounter problems and issues that are beyond our ability to solve individually. By pooling our resources, we are able to provide the services we demand and find resolutions for complex issues and problems. I suggest one can not simply reduce the size of our federal government without indepth analysis of the complexity and magnatude of the individual issue or problem, in order to determine at what level of government we have sufficient resources to address the problem.
The debate over federal public lands deserves the same intense type of analysis. We have cut taxes over the past 15 years which means less revenue. The result is the federal government has had to cut spending and the easiest place to cut was to reduce or eliminate federal grant monies to the States. Monies for education and highway maintenance and construction are examples. The result has been significant financial problems for the states with some states close to being bankrupt. States have done some creative efforts to try to offset the loss of grant monies such as selling state public lands, selling tollways to foreign countries and so forth. Transferring federal public lands to the States will, without question, result in their loss as public lands in most cases. These lands are a valuable asset to the American citizens and will play an ever-increasing role in providing the required environment for our future generations!
The debate over federal public lands deserves the same intense type of analysis. We have cut taxes over the past 15 years which means less revenue. The result is the federal government has had to cut spending and the easiest place to cut was to reduce or eliminate federal grant monies to the States. Monies for education and highway maintenance and construction are examples. The result has been significant financial problems for the states with some states close to being bankrupt. States have done some creative efforts to try to offset the loss of grant monies such as selling state public lands, selling tollways to foreign countries and so forth. Transferring federal public lands to the States will, without question, result in their loss as public lands in most cases. These lands are a valuable asset to the American citizens and will play an ever-increasing role in providing the required environment for our future generations!
