The Basics of the Transfer of Public 
Lands
“Public Lands” 
"[t]he words ‘public lands’ are 
habitually used in our 
legislation to describe such as 
are subject to sale or other 
disposal under general laws." 
Barker v. Harvey, 181 U.S. 481, 
490 (1901).
“Where socialized 
ownership of land 
is concerned, only 
the USSR and 
China can claim 
company with the 
United States.” 
John Kenneth Galbraith, 
Economist
www.AmericanLandsCouncil.org 
Facebook:American Lands Council 
@AmericanLandsCn 
801.ALC.6622 
This Nation Needs YOU 
To “Hire & Inspire” Leaders to Battle For 
The Only Solution Big Enough
Men & Women of Good Faith, From All Walks 
Await Your Invitation to Join Together 
To Hire & Inspire 
Local, State & National Representatives 
with 
The Knowledge & Courage 
To Battle For 
The Only Solution Big Enough!
Land with Limited/No Access
Wallow Fire 2011 
Dave Williams (left) and Michael Demlong, both with the Arizona Game and Fish 
Department, give water to a female baby red-tailed hawk that was found in Eagar during 
the Wallow Fire on June 14, 2011. The bird appeared to be dehydrated and starving. 
PHOTO BY: Tom Tingle/The Arizona Republic
Why the Difference??
U.S. Constitution Article IV, Section 3 – 
New States 
The Congress shall have power 
to dispose of and make all needful rules 
and regulations respecting the Territory or 
other property belonging to the United States; 
and nothing in this Constitution shall be so 
construed as to prejudice any claims of 
the United States, or of any particular State.
Madison Constitutional Debates 
Tuesday, August 30, 1787 
Mr. WILSON ... There was nothing in the Constitution affecting one 
way or the other the claims of the U. S. & it was best to 
insert nothing leaving every thing on that litigated subject in statu 
quo. 
Mr. MADISON ... He thought it best on the whole to be silent on 
the subject. He did not view the proviso of Mr. Carrol as dangerous; but 
to make it neutral & fair, it ought to go farther & declare that the 
claims of particular States also should not be affected. 
Mr. CARROL withdrew his motion and moved the following. "Nothing 
in this Constitution shall be construed to alter the claims of 
the U. S. or of the individual States to the 
Western territory, ...."
Article IV 
Power to Create “States” 
“The power of Congress in respect to 
the admission of new states is found in 
the 3d section of the 4th article of the 
Constitution. That provision is that, 
‘new States may be admitted by the 
Congress into this Union.’” Coyle v. 
Smith, 221 U.S. 559 (1911)
Article IV 
Power to Create “States” 
“But what is this power? It is not to 
admit political organizations which 
are less or greater, or different in 
dignity or power, from those political 
entities which constitute the Union. It 
is a ‘power to admit 
states.’” Coyle v. Smith, 221 U.S. 
559 (1911)
Federal Government Holds 
Public Lands “In Trust” for the 
States 
The federal government holds territorial 
lands “in trust for the several states to be 
ultimately created out of the territory." 
(Shively v. Bowlby, 1894)
Federal Govt is Duty-Bound 
to “Execute These Trusts” 
"Whenever [i.e. once] the United States 
shall have fully executed these trusts, the 
municipal sovereignty of the new states 
will be complete, throughout their 
respective borders, and they, and the 
original states, will be upon an equal 
footing, in all respects whatever.” Pollard 
v. Hagan, (1845)
Federal Govt Holds Public Lands 
for “Temporary Purposes” to 
“Execute The Trusts” 
“. . . the United States never held any 
municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction or right of 
soil in and for the territory ... of the new States ... 
except for temporary purposes, and to 
execute the trusts created by the acts of the 
Virginia and Georgia Legislatures, and the deeds 
of cession executed by them to the United States, 
and the trust created by the treaty with the 
French Republic of the 30th of April, 1803, 
ceding Louisiana.” Pollard v. Hagan, (1845)
Why the Difference??
Myth: 
“You Didn’t Want Your Lands” 
(“forever disclaim all right and title”)
Forever Disclaim All Right and Title ...? 
“that the people inhabiting the said territory, do agree 
and declare that they forever disclaim all right and 
title to the waste or unappropriated lands lying within 
the said territory; and that the same shall be and remain 
at the sole and entire disposition of the United 
States...” 
ALABAMA 
2.7% PUBLIC LANDS
Forever Disclaim All Right and Title ...? 
“That the people inhabiting said proposed States do 
agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right 
and title to the unappropriated public lands lying 
within the boundaries thereof, … and that until the 
title thereto shall have been extinguished by the 
United States, the same shall be and remain 
subject to the disposition of the United States, …;” 
NORTH DAKOTA (3.9%) 
SOUTH DAKOTA (5.4%) PUBLIC LANDS 
(THEY SHARE THE SAME ENABLING ACT)
Forever Disclaim All Right and Title ...? 
“That the people inhabiting said proposed States do agree 
and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title 
to the unappropriated public lands lying within the 
boundaries thereof, … and that until the title thereto 
shall have been extinguished by the United States, the 
same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of 
the United States, …” 
Montana (30%) 
Washington State (30%) 
Public Lands 
They Share The Very Same Enabling Act Document As ND & SD!
The Promises are the Same! 
Forever Disclaim All Right and Title ...? 
Utah 
66.5% Public Lands 
“That the people inhabiting said proposed State do 
agree and declare that they forever disclaim all 
right and title to the unappropriated public 
lands lying within the boundaries thereof; ... and 
that until the title thereto shall have been 
extinguished by the United States, the same shall 
be and remain subject to the disposition of the 
United States,...” 
Section 3, Utah Enabling Act, July 16, 1894
Enabling Acts are 
“Solemn Compacts” 
Enabling Acts are "solemn compacts" 
and "bi-lateral [two-way] agreements" 
that are to be performed "in a timely 
fashion" (Andrus v. Utah, 1980)
2009 U.S. Supreme Court 
Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs 
(Unanimous Decision) 
“‘[T]he consequences of admission are 
instantaneous, and it ignores the uniquely 
sovereign character of that event … to suggest 
that subsequent events [acts of Congress] 
somehow can diminish what has already been 
bestowed.’ And that proposition applies a fortiori 
[with even greater force] where virtually all of the 
State’s public lands . . .are at stake.”
It’s Already Been Done Before!
Does this sound familiar? 
The federal government is not disposing of our 
public lands as it promised; 
We can’t tax the lands to adequately fund 
education; 
Our ability to grow our economy and create 
jobs is stifled; and 
The federal government is hoarding our 
abundant minerals and natural resources.
IL, MO, IN, AR, LA, AL, MS, Fl, were as much as 90% federally 
controlled for decades ...
One Man... 
One LEADER... 
Refused To Be Silent or Take 
“NO” 
for an Answer
“... my election to the Senate of the United 
States ... found me doing battle for an 
ameliorated system of disposing of our 
public lands; and with some success. I 
resolved to move against the whole 
system ... I did so in a bill, renewed 
annually for a long time; and in speeches 
which had more effect upon the public 
mind than upon the federal legislation ...” 
U.S. Senator 
Thomas Hart Benton 
(D-MO)
“They were as a stepmother, instead of a 
natural mother: and the federal government 
being sole purchaser from foreign nations, 
and sole recipient of Indian cessions, it 
became the monopolizer of vacant 
lands of the West: and this monopoly, 
like all monopolies, resulted in hardships 
to those upon whom it acted.” 
U.S. Senator 
Thomas Hart Benton 
(D-MO)
“But the members in Congress 
from the new States should not 
intermit their exertions, nor vary their 
policy; and should fix their eyes 
steadily upon the period of the 
speedy extinction of the federal 
title to all the lands within the limits of 
their respective States ...” 
Thirty Years View, Thomas Hart Benton 
U.S. Senator 
Thomas Hart Benton 
(D-MO)
It’s The Only Solution Big 
Enough!
Arizona’s $31.5 Billion Annual Revenues 
Arizona’s 
Looming 
$16.3 Billion 
Budget Hole 
51.7% 
The $16.3 Billion 
of “Federal Funds” 
Arizona Spends Annually 
Source: Intergovernmental Financial 
Dependency: A Study of Key 
Dependency Measures for the 50 States, 
CliftonLarsenAllen, LLP, 2012
Washington’s $43.6 Billion Annual Revenues 
Washington’ 
The $18.3 Billion of 
s “Federal Looming 
Funds” 
Washington Spends 
$18.3 Annually 
Billion 
Budget 42% 
Hole 
42% 
Copyright (c) 2011 Ken Ivory All Rights Reserved 
Source: Intergovernmental Dependency: A Study of Key Dependency 
Measures of the 50 States, 2012 CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP
We Can’t Afford Not To 
Secure the Transfer of our 
Public Lands
Why The difference?
What Do We Do About It?
TPL Legislative 
Summit 
Next Steps: 
Educate 
Negotiate 
Legislate 
Litigate
What Can You Do 
Now? 
Educate 
Donate 
Delegate
• Educate 
• Know & Share Key Points from 
www.AmericanLandsCouncil.com 
• Think Benjamin Franklin with a Facebook Page, Twitter, 
YouTube, email, etc…. 
• #TransferPublicLands & #HonorThePromise 
• Will YOU Be The ONE … to Open The Next Door?
Follow & Share! 
Facebook.com/AmericanLandsCouncil 
Twitter.com @AmericanLandsCN 
Youtube.com/AmericanLandsCouncil 
Instagram.com @AmericanLandsCN 
Pinterest.com/americanlandscn/
• Donate 
• Money and Manpower 
Make the Difference
• Delegate 
• “Hire & Inspire” local, state, and national 
representatives who have the Knowledge & 
Courage to Battle For the Only Solution Big 
Enough - #TransferPublicLands
www.AmericanLandsCouncil.org 
Info@AmericanLandsCouncil.org 
American Lands Council 
@AmericanLandsCn

Tpl overview slides

  • 1.
    The Basics ofthe Transfer of Public Lands
  • 2.
    “Public Lands” "[t]hewords ‘public lands’ are habitually used in our legislation to describe such as are subject to sale or other disposal under general laws." Barker v. Harvey, 181 U.S. 481, 490 (1901).
  • 3.
    “Where socialized ownershipof land is concerned, only the USSR and China can claim company with the United States.” John Kenneth Galbraith, Economist
  • 4.
    www.AmericanLandsCouncil.org Facebook:American LandsCouncil @AmericanLandsCn 801.ALC.6622 This Nation Needs YOU To “Hire & Inspire” Leaders to Battle For The Only Solution Big Enough
  • 5.
    Men & Womenof Good Faith, From All Walks Await Your Invitation to Join Together To Hire & Inspire Local, State & National Representatives with The Knowledge & Courage To Battle For The Only Solution Big Enough!
  • 7.
  • 10.
    Wallow Fire 2011 Dave Williams (left) and Michael Demlong, both with the Arizona Game and Fish Department, give water to a female baby red-tailed hawk that was found in Eagar during the Wallow Fire on June 14, 2011. The bird appeared to be dehydrated and starving. PHOTO BY: Tom Tingle/The Arizona Republic
  • 18.
  • 19.
    U.S. Constitution ArticleIV, Section 3 – New States The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the Territory or other property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
  • 20.
    Madison Constitutional Debates Tuesday, August 30, 1787 Mr. WILSON ... There was nothing in the Constitution affecting one way or the other the claims of the U. S. & it was best to insert nothing leaving every thing on that litigated subject in statu quo. Mr. MADISON ... He thought it best on the whole to be silent on the subject. He did not view the proviso of Mr. Carrol as dangerous; but to make it neutral & fair, it ought to go farther & declare that the claims of particular States also should not be affected. Mr. CARROL withdrew his motion and moved the following. "Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to alter the claims of the U. S. or of the individual States to the Western territory, ...."
  • 21.
    Article IV Powerto Create “States” “The power of Congress in respect to the admission of new states is found in the 3d section of the 4th article of the Constitution. That provision is that, ‘new States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union.’” Coyle v. Smith, 221 U.S. 559 (1911)
  • 22.
    Article IV Powerto Create “States” “But what is this power? It is not to admit political organizations which are less or greater, or different in dignity or power, from those political entities which constitute the Union. It is a ‘power to admit states.’” Coyle v. Smith, 221 U.S. 559 (1911)
  • 23.
    Federal Government Holds Public Lands “In Trust” for the States The federal government holds territorial lands “in trust for the several states to be ultimately created out of the territory." (Shively v. Bowlby, 1894)
  • 24.
    Federal Govt isDuty-Bound to “Execute These Trusts” "Whenever [i.e. once] the United States shall have fully executed these trusts, the municipal sovereignty of the new states will be complete, throughout their respective borders, and they, and the original states, will be upon an equal footing, in all respects whatever.” Pollard v. Hagan, (1845)
  • 25.
    Federal Govt HoldsPublic Lands for “Temporary Purposes” to “Execute The Trusts” “. . . the United States never held any municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction or right of soil in and for the territory ... of the new States ... except for temporary purposes, and to execute the trusts created by the acts of the Virginia and Georgia Legislatures, and the deeds of cession executed by them to the United States, and the trust created by the treaty with the French Republic of the 30th of April, 1803, ceding Louisiana.” Pollard v. Hagan, (1845)
  • 26.
  • 27.
    Myth: “You Didn’tWant Your Lands” (“forever disclaim all right and title”)
  • 28.
    Forever Disclaim AllRight and Title ...? “that the people inhabiting the said territory, do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the waste or unappropriated lands lying within the said territory; and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States...” ALABAMA 2.7% PUBLIC LANDS
  • 29.
    Forever Disclaim AllRight and Title ...? “That the people inhabiting said proposed States do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof, … and that until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United States, …;” NORTH DAKOTA (3.9%) SOUTH DAKOTA (5.4%) PUBLIC LANDS (THEY SHARE THE SAME ENABLING ACT)
  • 30.
    Forever Disclaim AllRight and Title ...? “That the people inhabiting said proposed States do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof, … and that until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United States, …” Montana (30%) Washington State (30%) Public Lands They Share The Very Same Enabling Act Document As ND & SD!
  • 31.
    The Promises arethe Same! Forever Disclaim All Right and Title ...? Utah 66.5% Public Lands “That the people inhabiting said proposed State do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof; ... and that until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United States,...” Section 3, Utah Enabling Act, July 16, 1894
  • 32.
    Enabling Acts are “Solemn Compacts” Enabling Acts are "solemn compacts" and "bi-lateral [two-way] agreements" that are to be performed "in a timely fashion" (Andrus v. Utah, 1980)
  • 33.
    2009 U.S. SupremeCourt Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs (Unanimous Decision) “‘[T]he consequences of admission are instantaneous, and it ignores the uniquely sovereign character of that event … to suggest that subsequent events [acts of Congress] somehow can diminish what has already been bestowed.’ And that proposition applies a fortiori [with even greater force] where virtually all of the State’s public lands . . .are at stake.”
  • 34.
    It’s Already BeenDone Before!
  • 35.
    Does this soundfamiliar? The federal government is not disposing of our public lands as it promised; We can’t tax the lands to adequately fund education; Our ability to grow our economy and create jobs is stifled; and The federal government is hoarding our abundant minerals and natural resources.
  • 36.
    IL, MO, IN,AR, LA, AL, MS, Fl, were as much as 90% federally controlled for decades ...
  • 37.
    One Man... OneLEADER... Refused To Be Silent or Take “NO” for an Answer
  • 38.
    “... my electionto the Senate of the United States ... found me doing battle for an ameliorated system of disposing of our public lands; and with some success. I resolved to move against the whole system ... I did so in a bill, renewed annually for a long time; and in speeches which had more effect upon the public mind than upon the federal legislation ...” U.S. Senator Thomas Hart Benton (D-MO)
  • 39.
    “They were asa stepmother, instead of a natural mother: and the federal government being sole purchaser from foreign nations, and sole recipient of Indian cessions, it became the monopolizer of vacant lands of the West: and this monopoly, like all monopolies, resulted in hardships to those upon whom it acted.” U.S. Senator Thomas Hart Benton (D-MO)
  • 40.
    “But the membersin Congress from the new States should not intermit their exertions, nor vary their policy; and should fix their eyes steadily upon the period of the speedy extinction of the federal title to all the lands within the limits of their respective States ...” Thirty Years View, Thomas Hart Benton U.S. Senator Thomas Hart Benton (D-MO)
  • 41.
    It’s The OnlySolution Big Enough!
  • 42.
    Arizona’s $31.5 BillionAnnual Revenues Arizona’s Looming $16.3 Billion Budget Hole 51.7% The $16.3 Billion of “Federal Funds” Arizona Spends Annually Source: Intergovernmental Financial Dependency: A Study of Key Dependency Measures for the 50 States, CliftonLarsenAllen, LLP, 2012
  • 43.
    Washington’s $43.6 BillionAnnual Revenues Washington’ The $18.3 Billion of s “Federal Looming Funds” Washington Spends $18.3 Annually Billion Budget 42% Hole 42% Copyright (c) 2011 Ken Ivory All Rights Reserved Source: Intergovernmental Dependency: A Study of Key Dependency Measures of the 50 States, 2012 CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP
  • 44.
    We Can’t AffordNot To Secure the Transfer of our Public Lands
  • 46.
  • 55.
    What Do WeDo About It?
  • 56.
    TPL Legislative Summit Next Steps: Educate Negotiate Legislate Litigate
  • 57.
    What Can YouDo Now? Educate Donate Delegate
  • 58.
    • Educate •Know & Share Key Points from www.AmericanLandsCouncil.com • Think Benjamin Franklin with a Facebook Page, Twitter, YouTube, email, etc…. • #TransferPublicLands & #HonorThePromise • Will YOU Be The ONE … to Open The Next Door?
  • 59.
    Follow & Share! Facebook.com/AmericanLandsCouncil Twitter.com @AmericanLandsCN Youtube.com/AmericanLandsCouncil Instagram.com @AmericanLandsCN Pinterest.com/americanlandscn/
  • 60.
    • Donate •Money and Manpower Make the Difference
  • 61.
    • Delegate •“Hire & Inspire” local, state, and national representatives who have the Knowledge & Courage to Battle For the Only Solution Big Enough - #TransferPublicLands
  • 62.

Editor's Notes

  • #43 What about Utah? Introduce Erskine Bowles (former Clinton White House Chief of Staff) and Fmr. Sen. Alan Simpson R-WY co-chairs appointed by Pres. Obama to the National Fiscal Responsibility Commission. This is about a 2 minute excerpt of their testimony to the Senate Finance Committee this past March