In Which I Helpfully Simplify a Mediocre New Federal Plan That Has Some Merit Lurking in the Background

Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Scott Turner announced a new interdepartmental plan today to create affordable housing on “underutilized” federal land.

An op-ed piece at the Wall Street Journal previewed the announcement, under the headline, “Federal Land Can Be Home Sweet Home.” Sample description of the new plan, in remarkably uninspiring language:

Streamlining the regulatory process is a cornerstone of this partnership. Historically, building on federal land is a nightmare of red tape—lengthy environmental reviews, complex transfer protocols and disjointed agency priorities. This partnership will cut through the bureaucracy. Interior will reduce the red tape behind land transfers or leases to public housing authorities, nonprofits and local governments. HUD will ensure these projects align with affordability goals and development needs.

The public responded warmly:

Of course, the thing people mostly heard as they listened to a plan to put affordable housing on public lands was “Cabrini-Green, but in Yosemite Valley.” Avon Barksdale, he owns them Half Dome Towers.

“Omar comin!”

A reminder, though, as people post comments like “leave the national parks alone.”

The federal government owns more than 80% of Nevada, nearly two-thirds of Idaho and Utah, and about half of California and Oregon. Most of that isn’t “national parks.”

Another argument you’ll see if you scroll through the responses to Turner is that it’s absurd to talk about building housing on federal lands, because federal lands are all rural and enormously remote. What are we going to do, build new neighborhoods in the middle of the Teton Wilderness? “I’m gonna run to the store — back next Thursday.”

But look at the map again. There’s an enormous amount of federal land directly adjacent to major cities and decent-sized towns, and a lot of it isn’t beautiful wilderness. The federal government condemned and cleared forty acres of downtown St. Louis to build Gateway Arch National Park, which you can read about here:

St. Louis Riverfront Clearances

It’s a national park, in downtown St. Louis, with a giant emptied riverside property around the arch. It was a vibrant community, back when St. Louis was a pleasant city. The federal government made it less vibrant by coercively turning it into federal land. And I like the Gateway Arch, but still.

So a plan that proposes to transfer excessive federal landholdings to local governments is a great idea, representing a wise instinct, but it should be made much, much, much simpler. Here’s the part to remove: “HUD will ensure these projects align with affordability goals and development needs.”

We have too much federal land, especially in the West. Start transferring some of it to communities. It shouldn’t be that complicated. Some of it could become the core of new agricultural communities, in a country that’s losing family farms and ranches — including, at the moment, some soon-to-be-lost ranch housing on public land that Doug Burgum oversees. Simplify and move faster. We need a new Homestead Act, in some form, and soon. If federal land is underutilized, the simplest answer is that it shouldn’t be federal land.