Red River Private Property Protection Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, every now and then, we have a chance to stop an injustice and restore the fundamental purpose of our government to secure the inalienable rights of the people. In this instance, the Federal Government has become destructive of this end. It is attempting to seize thousands of acres of private land lawfully owned by American citizens along a 116-mile stretch of the Red River between Texas and Oklahoma. Mr. Thornberry's bill would stop this injustice, reassert the rule of law, and restore the unclouded title of these lands to their rightful owners.

In 1923, the U.S. Supreme Court established the rules for determining the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma that established the property rights over this land. For nearly a century, the Federal Government recognized and respected the property lines established by this ruling. Property owners purchased and sold this land and, in some cases, passed it down from generation to generation. These property owners, in good faith, dutifully paid taxes on their lands year after year, invested in these lands, maintained them, cultivated them, and improved them.

Out of the blue, the Bureau of Land Management has now announced that it is arbitrarily changing the boundaries established by the Supreme Court and is seizing this land for itself.

This outrageous claim clouds the property rights along this vast territory. It is based on the flimsiest of pretexts, a limited survey over a fraction of this land that ignored the 1923 Supreme Court decree that originally established these boundary lines. In other words, it is a guess based upon a fraud.

The Red River Private Property Protection Act rights this obvious wrong. It requires the Federal Government, in conjunction with the affected State and tribal governments, to make clear the true ownership of this property.

It tells the BLM to back off, and authorizes a collaborative survey to be conducted by the affected State and tribal governments, according to the rule of law established by the Supreme Court. And if this new survey determines any errors in the old, it provides that the landowners who have poured their blood, toil, tears, and sweat into this land can repurchase it for a $1.25 per acre, the price set by the Color of Title Act to resolve disputes of this nature.

Without this act, title to the farms and homes will be clouded for decades while this matter drags on through the courts.

Meanwhile, the BLM's assertion that it has regulatory jurisdiction would have devastating impacts on local landowners and businesses and make it much more difficult to encourage economic development in the region.

We should also beware of an amendment sought by several neighboring tribal governments that attempts to seize this property for themselves. Despite the fact that this bill is to be amended to reaffirm all tribal treaties to assure that the tribes are an integral part of the new survey process, and are guaranteed the right of first refusal over any lands they currently occupy, they are seeking to replace the injustice perpetrated by the BLM with an injustice of their own.

Whether private property is seized by the Federal Government or by a tribal government makes no difference to the innocent victims whose land is being stolen, and it is an equal affront to the just principles of property rights that this bill seeks to restore.

Tribal governments whose own sovereignty and property rights are often threatened by this Federal Government ought to be particularly sensitive when that same government threatens the rights of others.

Government exists to protect our natural rights, including our property rights. This bill realigns our government with its stated purpose.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source