slide 9 to 15 of 15
Premium

No, Seriously, the Feds Shouldn’t Turn Public Lands Into Another Housing Debacle

AP Photo/Hassan Ammar

Last night, the Trump Administration made their first announcement with which I disagree. 

My initial reaction was a strong negative response to this proposal. Perhaps I’ve watched too many seasons of Yellowstone, but I deeply value keeping American lands pristine and undeveloped—that’s my primary objection. My second concern is the federal government’s involvement in low-income housing. Historically, it rarely turns out well. Lots of people disagreed with me.

Many people wanted me to know the federal government owns wide swaths of land out west and honestly, it's too much. 

For those (like me), who weren't aware of the sheer volume of land, this was a helpful map. It does seem like that is a whole bunch of land owned by the federal government. 

I'm always willing to be corrected. It is the best way to go through life as we all can stand to learn new things. After taking in this new information, I amended my initial thoughts:

If the federal government is indeed holding an excessive amount of land, it should relinquish control and return it to the states, allowing them to determine its best use. Another option would be to sell the land to private citizens, though ideally not to large-scale developers like Blackrock, who often build homes solely to profit as landlords. Historically, federal attempts at constructing affordable housing have proven ineffective. Instead, local governments should take the lead on such initiatives, enabling market forces to operate more freely.

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement