As you well know, President Joe Biden has signed over more than few executive orders in his short time in the Oval Office, more than any other US president in history actually. But while the idea of our Commander in Chief completely bypassing our legislative process is scary enough, it’s not nearly as terrifying as what some of these executive orders seek to implement.
Take EO 14008, signed into law by Biden on January 27, a mere week after pledging an oath to serve America and her people as our president, for example.
Like several other executive orders, this one aims to push forward the Democratic Party’s agenda of fighting “climate change,” as it is apparently ruining our nation and the world. Known as the 30 x 30 initiative, its goal is that the federal government will own no less than 30 percent of all American land and water in the United States by the year 2030.
According to the order, those lands and waters will supposedly be set aside, protected, and conserved to restore nature and keep our climate and environments at their best. As Biden says, the plan is to “deliver an equitable, clean energy future and put the United States on a path to achieve net-zero emissions” by 2050.
However, what is less clear is how the federal government will achieve that goal, either in acquiring the 680 million some odd acres of land and water nationwide or making sure they are protected and kept pure from the scourge that is humanity.
Naturally, this vagueness, as well as the White House’s inability to comment on the order on multiple occasions, has left many with some severe doubts about the true intentions of EO 14008. Some, like Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts, even claim it could be part of a larger move to simply gain more federal power in what could be defined as nothing more than a land grab.
And as such, Ricketts is pushing conservatives in his state and beyond to oppose the order, starting with some resolutions to ban it.
Rickets said in a June 8 news release, “While private owners have successfully stewarded our land and water here in Nebraska, new leadership in the White House wants more federal control.” He went on to state that in order to gain this control, Biden “requires restricting a land area the size of the State of Nebraska every year, each year, for the next nine years, or in other words a landmass twice the size of Texas by 2030.”
Several counties in Nebraska have already listened, speaking out against the sinister land grab and passing legislation that effectively blocks any initiative for the federal government to buy up Nebraska lands and waterways.
One main concern of the potential land grab, beyond that of it giving Washington even more unchecked power, is that it will effectively hurt and restrict state economies and businesses, particularly in states such as Nebraska, where some 97 percent of land is privately owned.
Should the government take over 30 percent, restrictions will be placed on those lands for business, agriculture, and infrastructure, nearly making such enterprises or development impossible and further limiting state revenues. Additionally, as federal land is not taxed, the burden of property taxes for the remaining 70 percent will be left to a much fewer number of farmers, ranchers, homeowners, and businesses.
Suffice it say, taxes will be forced to rise again…
It’s not hard to see why current landowners, farmers, and businessmen, and women should be concerned with such a radical and overreaching plan.
And Ricketts is not alone when it comes to state leadership opposition to the 30 x 30 land grab. In fact, Ricketts is one of 15 Republican governors who have recently made a stand against Biden’s “climate change” plans. Joining him are those such as Greg Abbott of Texas, Brad Little of Idaho, Kristi Noem from South Dakota, and Greg Gianforte of Montana, just to name a few.
And they all claim that such an executive order is nothing less than tyranny.
Of course, Washington officials like Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack deny that, saying, “There’s no intention to have a land grab.”
But saying it doesn’t make it true, does it?
