Trump can help America open a new frontier right here in the US

Fox News

24-03-2025

Americans have always been defined by their frontier.
It began with the vast, unexplored West, which historian Frederick Jackson Turner described in an influential 1893 essay as "a new field of opportunity, a gate of escape from the bondage of the past."
By the time Turner put pen to paper, the frontier was already closing. Space, the "final frontier" in "Star Trek," animated American imaginations for a time, but after the initial excitement of putting a man on the moon, the project seemed to peter out.
President Donald Trump promised in his second inaugural address to revive that dream, telling the crowd that "we will pursue our manifest destiny into the stars, launching American astronauts to plant the Stars and Stripes on the planet Mars." Elon Musk, whose innovations at SpaceX will help make this dream a reality, cheered wildly.
But space cannot be a frontier the way the American West was. In the 19th century, any sturdy lad from the East Coast or Midwest could pack a wagon and light out for the territories. The Homestead Act of 1862 handed out 1.6 million parcels of federal land in the West. Space holds no such promise for the everyman. Astronauts are highly trained specialists, not regular guys with common sense and a good work ethic. The kind of large-scale space colonization that would make the solar system a true frontier might be a century or more in the future.
There are, however, other ways to revive the pioneer spirit. Acquiring Greenland would open up a harsh new environment for hardy would-be homesteaders, but even if the Danes refuse to play ball, Trump still has options.
The U.S. government owns about 620 million acres of land, which comes out to approximately 27% of the country. More than a third of that land is in Alaska, with the rest largely concentrated in a few Western states like Arizona (38% federal land), Colorado (36%), Idaho (62%) and Nevada (80%). National Parks make up only around 13% of federal land, leaving plenty of opportunities for development.
Two of Trump's cabinet secretaries are already on the case.
Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Scott Turner published a Wall Street Journal op-ed March 16, proposing a joint effort to solve America's housing crisis.
"Under this agreement, HUD will pinpoint where housing needs are most pressing and guide the process by working with state and local leaders who know their communities best. Interior will identify locations that can support homes while carefully considering environmental impact and land-use restrictions," they wrote. "Working together, our agencies can take inventory of underused federal properties, transfer or lease them to states or localities to address housing needs, and support the infrastructure required to make development viable—all while ensuring affordability remains at the core of the mission."
It's the kind of bold action America needs after four years of Biden-Harris housing policy, which saw rents skyrocket and the cost of a median-price home more than double. Other than a few vague noises about building more houses, the only major solutions they offered were throwing taxpayer dollars at first-time homebuyers (which would have made housing inflation even worse) and new race-based regulation preferring one racial group over another and ultimately aiding neither.
They also sued RealPage, a company that makes rental pricing software (which will have no effect on prices, since the software merely reflects existing market conditions and even suggests lower prices when demand dips). Americans for Tax Reform and over 30 conservative groups sent a letter opposing this Biden Department of Justice suit for this very reason.
Unlike the hackneyed ideas of the past that we saw during the Biden administration, the possibilities of Burgum and Turner's housing plan are endless — and enticing. Libertarians could found hyper-innovative charter cities governed by CEOs. Devout Catholics could build intentional communities centered on monasteries. Crunchy homesteaders could grow everything they eat on a few acres (and get that land at a discount if they agree to host students from a new federal sustainable agriculture training program).
Ambitious young men (and women) who've flooded into the cities would suddenly have options other than exorbitant rent and small-town stagnation. In a start-up city on previously undeveloped federal land, they could become founding fathers (or mothers) and help shape vibrant new communities in the midst of unstained natural beauty. They might even be able to keep their old telecommuting jobs while they do it.
And for the poor, the desperate, the ex-con, the denizen of a bad neighborhood or dying town facing high odds of an early death from a gangland shooting or fentanyl overdose, these new developments hold out the promise of adventure. Anyone willing to work hard and brave enough to leave behind the familiar can light out for the territories and make a better life. Go West, young man, and be reborn!
It's true that much of this land is inhospitable, but so was Las Vegas, which grew from 800 people in 1910 to nearly 600,000 a century later. Imagine it: in a few short decades, there could be a great new American city springing up from the desert or prairie, boasting its own industries, arts scene, signature dishes and iconic landmarks — its own unique cultural "brand." It will be a challenge, but we're the nation destined to colonize Mars. Surely, we can handle rural Idaho.