I'm thinking the Sagebrush Rebellion might not be wrong to continue on as a request, though it shouldn't be a demand.
Having looked at the Enabling Act Congress passes as the states are awarded statehood, and seeing it says the states forever relinquish right to the lands that were unappropriated at time of statehood, it seems a little much for the states to be demanding the federal government turn over the lands.
Just wrong to do that.
In fact, it seems such a land grab is exactly what the Enabling Act prohibits. It seems the act forbids the states from coming forth at some future time to claim that the lands belong to them.
Yet, with the Sagebrush Rebellion, that is exactly what is happening.
I don't take the Enabling Act to be saying the states cannot ever own the property. After all, the act does suggest the federal government might dispose of the property at some point. Surely, should the feds decide to sell, the states were not intended to be barred from being buyers.
So, let the states continue to petition for the lands from the federal government. But, instead of saying the federal government is shortchanging the states if the lands are not given over, let them simply say, "Pretty please. We know the lands are yours, and we won't argue with that, but, if you don't mind, and if you'd be so kind, can we please, please have them."
That's about as forceful a petition as they should make.
After all, the enabling act says the federal government shall maintain right to the lands until it decides to sell them or give them away.
But, I do not take the enabling act's saying the states forever relinquish right to the property to mean that they cannot have the lands, only that they will not demand the property
No comments:
Post a Comment