Why Not Oregon 12/19/2025

Luke 1:68-70 (King James Version)

Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:

Forests for Oregon is a thought which will free Oregon in a number of ways to free Oregonians from the oppression they have been under over the past forty years. It is geared towards the rural forests although it is for all of Oregon is the goal. Oregon should be the most prosperous and freest state in the union if it were able to manage its resources properly. This state is trying to fight with both hands tied behind its back.

Forests for Oregon’s goal was to have the Federal Government turn over its land to the state so the state could disperse it to the people as was intended at the formation of the Union. The group had found a legal case being proposed by Utah to have the state of Utah to sue to have the Fed turn over two thirds of the state under federal control. This lawsuit explained the histoir of why all the states in the west have large percentages held by the Fed as opposed to the lack of federal land in the East.

There were four main arguments why the Fed should turn over the land to Utah and all of the Western states and here are those arguments:

The Sovereignty Principle which says at the formation of the thirteen original states that all states should have equal sovereignty. Every state should have the same laws handling land as they have for other states’ rights. Some states would have certain freedoms although all of them would have the same laws such as voting rights. This is why the Constitution explained all the voting laws and had to be changed such as giving the vote to women and blacks.

As states were added they would be divided by natural federally determined borders and then the Federal troops would maintain the peace and set up forts and administrative buildings to keep those borders. Inside the forts the states would form their gummits and divide the land into parcels for citizens to settle whether it was by purchase of the Homestead Act giving them 640 acres to develop in ten years. This is how the land was divided for all the states East of the Rockies which is how the Forefathers intended the land to be dispersed rather than retained

The Equal Footing Doctrine Builds on the Sovereignty principle stating that all new states were expected to have Equal Footing as the original thirteen states as well as every other state. This is what the Founding Fathers said when new states were added to the original thirteen so there were no super states receiving favored treatment especially concerning the land. The retention of the land takes away from the sovereignty of the state as well as making them unequal to states like New York or Nebraska which has dispersed nearly all of their Federal lands.

This makes states like Oregon completely unequal since it does not have the ability to use or settle all of their land and has less than fifty percent available to develop. This makes it more difficult to farm, ranch, log, mine, or house which breaks the equal footing clause in the Constitution. This cripples Oregon since it does not have the ability to develop, tax, and grow its population like states in the Eastern two-thirds of the country. Not only does it handicap the state economically, but the lack of land to develop for housing cripples the state population and its representation politically. The state of Oregon is obviously not on equal footing to the original thirteen states as was the original expectation as well as not giving sovereignty to the state of its own land.

The Compact Theory states that when a state was formed there is a compact clause which infers a solemn compact between the state and federal govt there would be a timely dispersal of the land. There was no intention to withhold the dispersal of the land and the Fed has broken that compact by not turning the land over to the states as it was done historically. There is a Compact Clause in Oregon’s constitution and has not been tested for its legality although the Supreme Court has ruled favorably the times it has been challenged in the past.

These are the main arguments in the Utah lawsuit Forests for Oregon has built its argument around. The same arguments apply to the state as to why it has taken so long to sell the land to the people. It should have occurred 150 years ago and certainly should be done now. They are mismanaging their 10,000 square miles and have given no indication they will do any better in the future. There needs to be a massive selloff and land grab so people can manage their portion of paradise properly since ownership always leads to taking care of your property better than something nobody has any real ownership in.

This is the biggest issue in Oregon as the forests are in crisis right now due to not being good stewards of the land and mismanaged it into a tinder box waiting for a spark. What has happened to Maui, Paradise CA and Los Angeles is happening here many times over and is only an act of God it has not wiped out a city or town. It is only a matter of time which underlines the need to disperse this land as the Founding Fathers laid out in the beginning.

This would be a boon to the state as the resources would be used rather than destroyed and people could have affordable housing by giving them low-priced land to build their homes on. It is time to get on board with Forests for Oregon and turn this state into the economic powerhouse it deserves.

Pray for Forests for Oregon