Public Lands and the Public Trust

A letter to my elected officials about a housing crisis and public lands sales

One of my goals with West of 98 for 2025 was to take a thoughtful approach to expressing my vision and concerns for pressing issues that face rural America. This newsletter addresses one of those matter. What follows is a letter that I have written to my representation in Congress about a proposed sale of public lands now pending before the United States Congress and which offers a meaningful solution to the housing crisis that this proposal purports to address. Got thoughts? Agree? Disagree? Want to discuss better solutions for housing? Comment or email me!

Download this letter as a PDF here.

June 26, 2025

Hon. John Cornyn

517 Hart Senate Office

Washington, DC 20510

Hon. Ted Cruz

167 Russell

Washington, DC 20510

Hon. Jodey Arrington

1111 Longworth House Office Building

Washington, DC 20515

Dear Senator Cornyn, Senator Cruz, and Representative Arrington,

I am writing to you because I am troubled by a proposal that has been added to H.R. 1, your pending multipurpose government funding and policy legislation. Specifically, I am concerned by Senator Mike Lee’s proposal to mandate the sale of certain public lands. I find this proposal to be short-sighted, deeply flawed, and in conflict with the American spirit.

Texas may be a private lands state, but this proposal still impacts your constituents. Public lands have been an essential federal responsibility since the founding of the Republic. They have spawned some of our greatest achievements, such as the Lewis & Clark Expedition to explore the Louisiana Purchase and the magnificence of our National Parks. Public lands have also contributed to our worst national crises, such as the policy failures that gave rise to the Dust Bowl and exacerbated the Great Depression. How we manage our public lands impacts our national heritage, the well-being of our citizens, and the future that we leave to our children and their children. This responsibility descends directly from our Creator and His instruction to Adam to steward the land in a responsible manner. Even if Adam failed on that obligation, God has never withdrawn the instruction to man and we are called to tend and keep the land in a manner that would please Him.

Different Americans have different views about our ultimate goals for public lands, whether we should preserve every acre or sell every acre. I believe that whatever path we choose in government, we should always enact wise policies that recognize the lasting consequences of our decision. There is an axiom passed down by farmers and ranchers that land is so valuable because they are not making any more of it. This underscores the gravity of a federal land sale. Once public lands are sold, they are never to be returned in the same form.

I am most concerned that Senator Lee’s proposal fails to consider those lasting consequences. This proposal was originally billed as an effort to alleviate our national housing crisis. That is a noble goal. Congress should expend significant energy on that very real problem. This forced land sale would do nothing consequential to help solve the crisis. A proposal focused on housing would concentrate its land sales around areas adjacent to crisis-ridden housing markets. Unfortunately, the maps for Senator Lee’s plan are a much wider sale of lands, including areas that are wholly unsuitable for housing or many miles removed from any population center. This suggests that housing is not the true motivation or there is no organized plan. Either is concerning.

Our nation has a housing problem but it also has a suburban sprawl problem. As our cities grow larger, they grow outward. They create prosperous new subdivisions as mere replacements for older cities and towns that decay into hollow shells. A nation that is serious about solving its housing crisis would not merely create more sprawl. It would identify aging cities and towns with inventories of land and infrastructure ready for development and incentivize new housing in those places. Congress took a step towards this goal with the “opportunity zone” classification in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. My community of Stamford was designated as an opportunity zone. Candidly, the rollout, rules, and planning were too vague for interested parties to capitalize on the idea. If your Congress wishes to alleviate our national housing crisis, I suggest enhancing the opportunity zone idea with a clear program centered around building new housing in existing cities and towns where land and infrastructure are lying dormant, waiting to be redeveloped.

Senator Lee himself has encountered significant backlash from outdoors groups, conservationists, ranchers, and individual citizens who are concerned by this proposed land sale. His proposal seems to constantly shift to address criticisms, which suggests the goal is a land sale, not a housing solution. A cynical observer wonders if “new housing” is merely a guise to place more Western lands into the hands of developers or large landowners. I hope that is not the case and I trust that you would not stand for such a ruse.

“Leave it as it is,” Theodore Roosevelt famously said in 1903 on the edge of the Grand Canyon. The Canyon was not yet protected and hungry developers sought to turn it into a valuable mining district. Colonel Roosevelt would not stand for trading our national inheritance for a quick profit. He was right. Thankfully, cooler heads prevailed. The Grand Canyon stands today as one of our most popular and cherished landmarks. It would not be so without the leadership of Colonel Roosevelt. Senator Lee has stated that he would never sell national parks, but the vagueness of his policy proposal gives me no confidence to believe that. Once the door opens to quickly liquidate federal lands, it becomes far easier to reclassify and sell protected lands. It is a hallmark belief of small government conservatives like yourselves that new laws are unnecessary when existing laws can be more efficiently utilized. Federal law already contains suitable options to sell public lands in appropriate circumstances. If Congress desires to sell land for housing, it can do so without an entirely new and hastily arranged proposal in a reconciliation package.

They are indeed not making any more land. As such, we should carefully consider the permanent dispensation of any public land and only do it for wise purposes. I trust that you see the wisdom of redeveloping cities and towns across America, rather than creating more irrevocable suburban sprawl with new laws that do not reflect our obligation for wise stewardship of God’s creation.

I thank you for your consideration to my concerns and for your hard work for the State of Texas and the United States of America. May God bless each of you and your hard-working staff.

Yours very truly,

James M. Decker

Mayor of Stamford, Texas

James Decker is the Mayor of Stamford, Texas and the creator of the West of 98 website and the “Rural Church and State” and “West of 98” podcasts. Contact James and subscribe to these essays at westof98.substack.com and subscribe to him wherever podcasts are found. Check out the West of 98 Bookstore with book lists for essential reads here.