No Federal Expansion Designation in West Texas Act; No FED in West Texas Act
Summary
H.R. 839, also known as the "No Federal Expansion Designation in West Texas Act" or the "No FED in West Texas Act," aims to prohibit the implementation of a Land Protection Plan for the Muleshoe National Wildlife Refuge. The bill specifically targets the plan outlined in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service document titled "Final Land Protection Plan & Environmental Assessment Muleshoe National Wildlife Refuge" (February 2023). The bill was reported with an amendment and committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union.
The bill prevents the Secretary of the Interior from finalizing, implementing, administering, or enforcing the Land Protection Plan. This action effectively blocks the federal government from expanding its control or influence over land use within and around the Muleshoe National Wildlife Refuge. The bill reflects concerns about federal overreach and its potential impact on local communities and land management practices.
The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives and has progressed to the stage of being reported with an amendment, indicating it has garnered some level of support within the legislative body.
Expected Effects
The primary effect of this bill, if enacted, would be to prevent the implementation of the Land Protection Plan for the Muleshoe National Wildlife Refuge. This means the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would be unable to proceed with the actions outlined in the "Final Land Protection Plan & Environmental Assessment Muleshoe National Wildlife Refuge".
This could lead to a continuation of existing land management practices in the area. It would also prevent any potential changes to land use regulations or restrictions that might have been imposed under the plan.
Potential Benefits
- Preservation of Local Control: Prevents federal overreach, allowing local communities to maintain control over land management decisions.
- Economic Stability: Reduces uncertainty for businesses and individuals who rely on the current land use practices.
- Protection of Property Rights: Safeguards private property rights by preventing potential federal land acquisitions or restrictions.
- Reduced Regulatory Burden: Avoids the imposition of new federal regulations that could stifle economic activity.
- Supports existing agricultural practices: Prevents changes to land use that could negatively impact local agriculture.
Potential Disadvantages
- Environmental Concerns: Prevents potential environmental protections outlined in the Land Protection Plan.
- Loss of Conservation Efforts: Hinders efforts to conserve and protect the Muleshoe National Wildlife Refuge and its surrounding ecosystem.
- Missed Opportunities for Federal Funding: Prevents access to federal funding and resources that may have been available for conservation and land management.
- Potential for Unsustainable Practices: May allow for unsustainable land use practices that could harm the environment in the long term.
- Limited Long-Term Planning: Prevents the implementation of a comprehensive, long-term plan for the management of the refuge and its resources.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's alignment with the U.S. Constitution is centered around the balance of power between the federal government and the states, as well as individual property rights. The Tenth Amendment reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states or the people. This bill can be viewed as an assertion of state or individual control over land use within its borders, potentially aligning with a strict interpretation of federal power.
However, the Constitution also grants the federal government the power to manage federal lands and resources. Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2, gives Congress the power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States. The Muleshoe National Wildlife Refuge is federal property, so the federal government has a constitutional basis for implementing a land protection plan.
Therefore, the constitutionality of the bill depends on the interpretation of the scope of federal power over federal lands and the extent to which the Land Protection Plan infringes upon state or individual rights.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).