[meteorite-list] New BLM Rules - Proposition 120
From: Michael Farmer <mike_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 11:06:59 -0700
This was talked about last year by our amazing Arizona government as a way to open mining in Grand Canyon, a horrible idea by them to profit from the rape of our most beautiful national park! The state wants "sovereignty" to pillage anything of value. This same state government and our esteemed governor sold the state capital building I fund the government during the downturn, only to pay it off and buy it back last year, a $130,000,000 "million" dollar scam and loss to the taxpayers.
We can not trust them to take care of anything.
Go Feds, tell Brewer to "shove off". Since the federal government bought Arizona, all federal lands need to be protected from these short-sighted politicians looking to line their own pockets!
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 23, 2012, at 9:26 AM, "Paul H." <oxytropidoceras at cox.net> wrote:
> In ?New BLM Rules? at
> Jim Wooddell wrote,
> ?In light of these new meteorite rules, the people
> of AZ have Proposition 120 to consider. In a nut
> shell, it's AZ telling the Feds to go pound sand and
> reclaim sovereignty they should have had in the
> first place.... which is a states right! Something we
> all should seriously look at and consider. I know
> politics are vodoo here...so I wont state an my
> opinion. It does directly effect meteorite hunting
> in the State of AZ. How this plays out will be
> interesting, to say the least.?
> There is an article about Proposition 120 in:
> Proposition Challenges Control Of Federal Lands
> Move to seize 25 million acres divides candidates
> for Legislature by Pete Aleshire, Payson Roundup,
> September 23, 2012.
> The article states:
> ?Many opponents maintain that the whole crusade
> amounts to a waste of time and effort, since federal
> courts have repeatedly ruled that federal law takes
> precedence over state law and that states have no
> power to nullify federal law, including the landmark
> Cooper v. Aaron case in 1958. The federal government
> acquired much of Arizona from Mexico through the
> Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo that ended the Mexican-
> American War. The federal government acquired the
> rest of the territory through the Gadsen Purchase. By
> contrast, the 13 original colonies entered the union
> with very little public land.
> As a result, a number of independent legal scholars
> have concluded that the federal courts would quickly
> overturn the measure even if it passes, according to
> an analysis of the proposition published by the
> Morrison Institute for Public Policy.?
> Look at:
> Perkins, E. J., 2012, Understanding Arizona's Propositions:
> 2012 Series. Prop 120 ? State Sovereignty Act. Morrison
> Institute for Public Policy, Arizona State University, Phoenix,
> I would not hold my breathe waiting for proposition
> 120 to change matters as far as the BLM goes.
> Also, one result of proposition 120 would be to turn
> all national parks, including the Grand Canyon, within
> Arizona to the state of Arizona, who could then sell
> this property to private individuals and corporation
> to do what they want with them. Destroying all of the
> national park system within Arizona seems to be a
> steep price to pay for getting rid of BLM regulations
> that people do not like.
> Also, you may find state officials no different, or even
> worse, than federal officials with which to deal. Be
> careful for what you wish.
> Best wishes,
> Paul H.
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Received on Sun 23 Sep 2012 02:06:59 PM PDT