The message from the White House for the last year has been aggressively promoting “Change”. And from what they’ve been doing, it hasn’t been small changes, but colossal, eye-brow-raising change.
But even given that, it’s highly unlikely that what Utah’s governor is advocating, is at all in line with what the Obama administration was aiming for.
In a state that is know for their good work ethic, clever resourcing and self efficiently, the vast regions of Utah’s land currently owned by the government and not being used for anything, seems like a terrible waste.
They aren't looking for new housing or commercial shopping expansion. Utah simply wants to more effectively use natural resources in and on the land (for among other things) to generate cost effective energy. Utah’s governor, Gary Herbert may be hoping to set a precedent of state self-efficiency for other states to follow.
In a nation where energy resources are generated, monitored and profit gleaned on a Federal basis, states are often frustrated by the governments inability to recognize their particular needs and they’re sometimes thwarted from doing what would be cheaper through use of common sense.
Economic statistics show (and most people have experienced this personally) that when there is a monopoly and only one person/company/organization is in controls and has the power to regulate anything, the buyers/consumers/general population suffers from lack of options.
Competition keeps companies/organizations focused on winning customers which in turn forces them (against their greedy, lazy, complacent tendencies) to provide safer, cleaner and more functional products and services.
If the “Eminent Domain” bill passes, this could affect more than just Utah’s ability to provide energy for their own state (and possibly neighboring states?) and make better use of the land and resources they are surrounded by but not allowed to use. It could possibly encourage other states to find ways to tap their own natural resources to provide for their own state and establish independence.
The White House has been struggling to maintain systems and methods that already exist and this makes them less likely to experiment with greener and less familiar ways of doing things even if in the long run they'll save everyone money and be kinder to the environment.
If the government weren’t so determined to micro manage everything, they could see this as an opportunity to be relieved of so large a responsibility. Chances are though, this could tear small a hole in their monopoly and they certainly wouldn’t like that.
With consistently rising costs for energy (that hasn’t improved in decades) and the issues that the government has had regulating and maintaining America’s energy resources (gasoline spill anyone?), it might be time for the government to do what they should have done a long time ago:
Allow more control to the individual states to focus on their particular needs and abilities, so the White House administration can spend more time doing what they’re supposed to be doing (and that states cannot): Solidify international diplomacy, conclude whatever is necessary to end the war in Iraq, make a Health Bill that works, and maybe finally taking a whack at actually LOWERING the national debt.
Efficiency in the government? Now there is an eye-brow-raising change worth making!