Headquarters of the U.S. BLM belongs in the seat of government, as Founders envisioned
A view of oil and gas development on Bureau of Land Management lands in Colorado, on Jan. 3, 2015. (Bob Wick/BLM/Public domain)
For over a decade I have helped lead an annual trip of community leaders from western Colorado to meet with federal agencies and our members of Congress. We travel to Washington, D.C., because the U.S. Constitution established the need for a compact and independent seat for the federal government.
In contrast, Project 2025 — the current administration's top-down blueprint to dismantle government and inspire 'trauma' in its workforce — undermines this critical foundation of our republic.
Project 2025 attacks many things, including America's public lands. It would open up our national estate to increased privatization, industrialization and outright liquidation. In its section on the Department of Interior, Project 2025 specifically states: '(The Bureau of Land Management) headquarters belongs in the American West.' But my own experience has led me to think otherwise, and to conclude that America's Founders who debated, drafted and then agreed on our Constitution, are instead the ones who are correct.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Each year, we travel from our valley to meet with leadership at agencies and with all our federal elected officials or offices. In just a few days we can meet with the Interior Department and its agencies like the bureaus of Land Management and of Reclamation to talk about public lands and irrigation projects.
Our rural delegation, which includes farmers, can meet with U.S. Department of Agriculture, and agencies such as the Natural Resources Conservation Service to talk about soil health funding and program priorities, and with the Forest Service to talk about managing the local watersheds. Within a few days we bring concerns and questions directly to top leaders of several agencies and to our representatives only because we are able to visit a single seat of government.
I feel confident that this is as the Founders intended.
The rationale for relocating BLM headquarters — to better serve public lands stakeholders — is dubious. Project 2025 itself admits that the agency is already highly decentralized, writing that '97 percent of BLM employees are located in the American West.' These state and field offices, and agency employees who staff them, are indeed critical. But Project 2025 also demands vast federal workforce reductions. This transparent bad-faith argument made by Project 2025 should be a warning to any and all who want to see the efficient and proper management of our public lands.
BLM headquarters belongs with its department, which belongs with fellow federal departments in the independent and compact seat of government. This most efficiently allows states, citizens and stakeholders from across a far-flung nation the opportunity to petition the government for redress. And it better meets other purposes for which businesses, states and localities, and citizens might have to meet, share information, and work with the variety of agencies that make up our national government.
Like most of the parts of our Constitution, the idea and particulars of a federal seat of government and its agencies was discussed and debated. In the Federalist Papers, James Madison emphasized the necessity of complete authority at the seat of government to ensure its independence and effectiveness. '… but a dependence of the general government on the State (that holds the seat of authority) … for protection in the exercise of their duty, might bring on the national councils an imputation of awe or influence, equally dishonorable to the (federal government) and dissatisfactory to the other (states).'
The American republic is a union of free and sovereign states. As Madison and the Founders rightfully concluded, a functional federal government protects the individual sovereignty of all the states and of all its citizens. States, and the people, serve to check overreach by the federal government. And the federal government is also sovereign, as a necessary force to provide balance among the needs and perspectives of the varied states.
Madison saw a federal seat of government and its agencies as key to protecting the republic's own independence, which in turn best guards the equal footing of the states. One can suppose that the Constitution's authors wanted to ensure that the presence of the federal government in any of the various states could not compromise the nation's ability to perform its duties with impartiality.
That federal functions not be paired closely with particular states 'has the more weight, as the gradual accumulation of public improvements at the stationary residence of the government would be both too great a public pledge to be left in the hands of a single State,' Madison wrote.
Project 2025 does not seek to create more efficiency, but to deconstruct the federal government and to privatize public lands and resources so that a narrow set of wealthy interests can take an even greater share. Madison correctly saw peril in a weak federal government and intended for the national capital to serve as its 'stationary residence.' The establishment of major national agencies outside of this seat runs contrary to that purpose and need.
Project 2025 stands contrary to the shared American project. Project 2025 is not interested in better management for our public lands, more public engagement in decision-making, or even that these lands, or much of the government, remain public at all. Moving the BLM headquarters away from its department and all its sister agencies is part and parcel of the Project 2025 plan.
And no one who cherishes our national public lands ought to be fooled one bit, or for one moment, otherwise.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
20 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Hegseth Defends Move to Deploy National Guard and Marines to LA
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth pushed back against Democrats' criticism of the decision to deploy troops to Los Angeles, telling Congress that the Trump administration wants to protect immigration agents and keep demonstrations there from getting out of control. Asked by Representative Betty McCollum, a Minnesota Democrat, how much the deployment would cost, Hegseth criticized Governor Tim Walz's handling of protests that erupted after the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis 2020.
The Hill
26 minutes ago
- The Hill
Eurasia is the future — the US needs to get on board
A major discovery of rare earth elements in central Kazakhstan earlier this year sent a jolt through global markets and policymaking circles, with early estimates suggesting it could place the country among the world's top three holders of rare earth reserves. As the Trump administration scrambles to secure alternatives to China's near-monopoly over these critical materials, used in modern technology such as smartphones, electric cars and computers, the spotlight is once again turning to a region long overlooked by Washington: the post-Soviet Turkic world. These Turkic nations — Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan — are unfamiliar to most Americans. Yet U.S. officials have long recognized the region's value, measured in energy, strategic minerals, rare earth elements and alternative supply routes. For many thorny reasons, Washington has failed to establish firm allies there. Diplomatic presence tells the story: while Chinese leader Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin have visited Central Asia 14 and 83 times, respectively, since taking office, no U.S. president has visited any Turkic nation besides Turkey. And now the U.S. has fallen behind. Russia, China and the European Union have all successfully made inroads in the Turkic world in recent years. Moscow, which has traditionally dominated the region, has largely taken control of Uzbekistan's gas industry, while partnering with Kazakhstan on gas and oil exports and nuclear technology for a planned power plant. In 2023, China increased trade with Central Asia by 27 percent from the year prior while signing strategic partnerships with Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. And the EU recently held a large summit with Central Asian countries in Uzbekistan, announcing it would invest $12 billion in the region. These global powers understand the stakes. Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan together hold 6.5 percent of global gas reserves. Turkmenistan ranks sixth worldwide in gas, and Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan are major oil producers. And over the past several months, Astana has massively exceeded OPEC-plus production targets without signs of slowing. But most important today is the region's supply of minerals and rare earth elements. Besides Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan also has significant reserves and recently invested $2.6 billion to develop mineral extraction. Both Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan also have large reserves of strategic minerals with military, economic and technological uses, like gold, uranium, copper, tungsten, silicon, lithium and titanium. Given Central Asia's large reserves, Washington should invest in refining and mining rare earth elements, to break Beijing's dominance. Refining is particularly important, as these countries lack the ability to refine important strategic minerals like lithium, uranium, nickel and cobalt and often do so in China or Russia. To pave the way for such investment, Congress should consider granting the Turkic world Permanent Normal Trade Relations status. Besides having valuable resources, the region plays an important role in supply routes. During the height of the ancient Silk Road's importance, the Turkic world glued the continent together, serving as a thoroughfare between China, India and Europe. Today, it may be resuming its historic role as a bridge between the East and West, as the Middle Corridor gains in popularity — a transit route from East Asia to Europe bypassing both Russia and Iran. U.S. officials have spoken of the importance of the Middle Corridor in the past, and last year, Washington and Europe signed a Memorandum of Understanding to further develop the route. Such developments give the U.S. a clear opportunity. Should Washington start seriously developing the corridor, it would give Kazakhstani energy a bypass through Azerbaijan while weakening Russia's hold on Kazakhstan. An important step would be brokering a final peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan, widening the corridor and giving an alternative to Georgia, which has become closer to Russia in recent years. Many Turkic leaders, including former Kazakhstani President Nursultan Nazarbayev, former Kyrgyz President Almazbek Atambayev and former Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev, have spoken about decreasing their outward reliance by forming a Turkic bloc. The bloc would represent a total of roughly 175 million inhabitants, with a GDP of some $1.9 trillion — about 95 percent of the Russian GDP, and a growth rate 2 percent higher than the global average. Currently, Turkic countries have deepened cooperation through the Organization of Turkic States. Should Turkic countries increase cooperation further, they will be better able to dictate their own terms. Although Turkey was once expected to lead a unified Turkic bloc, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's Islamist policies and Ankara's focus on the Arab world have alienated key regional powers. The secular Turkic governments are wary of ideological influence, and of becoming subordinate to Ankara. This has led to a leadership vacuum — although possibly not for long. After the conclusion of the 2020 Karabakh war with Armenia, Azerbaijan has begun to position itself along with Kazakhstan as a leader of the Turkic world. Both countries hold the largest reserves of energy and minerals and are most crucial to trade routes. Azerbaijan is located on the very bottleneck between Iran and Russia that crosses the Middle Corridor. Kazakhstan's location makes it the most feasible country for Chinese products to cross over to Europe. The U.S. must take the Turkic world seriously, and soon — not just in words, but with a presidential visit, sustained investment and a new Silk Road strategy. Joseph Epstein is director of the Turan Research Center, a nonpartisan research program at the Yorktown Institute focused on the Turkic and Persian worlds.
Los Angeles Times
31 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Letters to the Editor: What Californians are saying about the National Guard's deployment to L.A.
To the editor: I've lived in Los Angeles long enough to know that this city weathers fire, quake and fury and still manages to bloom. We grow food in our backyards, paint our pain on walls and find beauty in the struggle. But right now, there's a pressure in the air thicker than smog, a national fear winding through our streets, and its name is Donald Trump ('National Guard arrives in Los Angeles as fallout from immigration raids continues,' June 8). The helicopters overhead aren't just news choppers anymore. They're echoes of something ancient and dangerous: Fascism rising on American soil. I never thought I'd say this in my lifetime, but we're watching a man try to bring down a republic with the smug grin of a game show host who already knows the final answer. President Trump, you can stop now. Turn on your TV. Watch what you've done. You will not be remembered as a patriot. You will not be remembered as a liberator. You will be remembered as the worst leader this country has ever produced. A divider. A destroyer. We write, we paint, we protest and we plant seeds of hope in cracked concrete. But we are exhausted. We need moral leadership, not messianic delusion. What do we tell our children when their leaders praise dictators, vilify the press and mock the weak? That chaos is power? That empathy is weakness? Mr. Trump: History is not on your side and neither is Los Angeles. Patsy Pitts, South Los Angeles .. To the editor: It is important to remember that the president who sent the National Guard to Los Angeles because the administration 'has a zero tolerance policy for criminal behavior and violence' is the same president that incited the insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, declined to take steps to stop the attack on our Capitol or protect members of Congress and, as soon as he took office in 2025, pardoned everyone (more than 1,500 people) indicted or sentenced for the attack. Approximately 140 law enforcement officers were injured with more than $2.7 million in damage to the Capitol. He is sending a message. Marcia Scully, Whittier .. To the editor: Gov. Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass have not told the L.A. disruptors to go home because these politicians fear alienating an important voting bloc. If Trump does nothing, there will be the creation of no-go zones throughout our country, in which local groups bring parts of major cities to a halt in order to impose an illegal immigration political agenda. If Trump attempts to restore order, rioters — like those on college campuses — will increase their pressure to demonstrate who has power in this country. It really is necessary to send in the troops. Otherwise, we are headed toward a variant of mob rule. Julia Lutch, Davis, Calif. .. To the editor: The last time a president called in the National Guard without a request from a governor was in 1965 in Selma, Ala., to protect civil rights demonstrators. This current action by the president is not to protect civil rights or even legal rights. The troops' wearing of masks indicates a complete lack of training and accountability. In other words, unrestrained gangs with the backing of POTUS. Joanne Weckbacher, Burbank .. To the editor: Protests by the undocumented and their supporters without permits are futile and stupid. The resulting arrests and detentions are inevitable. Law enforcement is only doing their job and the protesters are breaking the law in trying to stop them. If the undocumented and their supporters want to make a statement, boycott their workplaces in agriculture, construction, the garment industry or housekeeping in hotels, nationwide. Those industries are fully aware just how dependent they are on those who toil to keep the profits rolling in. Elliott H. Boone, Long Beach .. To the editor: Now that the Trump administration has launched open warfare against the values of Californians, the most effective response would be resistance that is massive and, above all, passive. When thousands of people in the streets lie down and play dead in a blocking action against whatever action military forces attempt, those forces have no good options to defeat the people. Roughing protesters up will only recruit more to the cause. This will take discipline on the part of the resistance, but the conscience of the average American will recoil at the sight of peaceful protesters being subjected to violence. Mahatma Gandhi prevailed against the British and won a subcontinent without firing a shot. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. helped defeat white supremacy using nonviolence. This is a pivotal moment in history that will be squandered if the resistance resorts to violence. Where the cause is righteous, good trouble demands massive peaceful protest to win. Alan B. Posner, Santa Barbara .. To the editor: I stand with those of the city who are protesting against Trump's intervention into California's autonomy. I am proud of you and your efforts. To those who committed acts of vandalism including burning cars, deep shame upon you. To those who remained peaceful, report those who committed crime. It deeply hurts your cause when the weak-brained commit stupidity. Mat Lakota, Oroville, Calif.
