Make America Beautiful Again Commission, the right vision if it avoids more red tape

President Trump’s Make America Beautiful Again Commission reflects many of the goals we pursue in PLF’s Environment and Natural Resources practice group: Americans should be free to use and care for our lands and resources in ways that promote prosperity and human flourishing.

The plan for this Commission gets quite a bit right. It recognizes that people—not federal regulators—are best equipped to care for our natural resources. It aims to cut red tape, expand access to public lands, and support common-sense public and private land use.

That’s good.

But we are also ambivalent about any “good government” plan that includes a new commission. Good intentions go off course when they create more bureaucracy or invite Washington to dictate how Americans use their land. In fact, we’ve known elected government officials to campaign and win on the idea of creating no new commissions, since new commissions equal new government bloat.

In that context, let’s look at what the Commission gets right, and let’s consider where it could get off track if those in charge lose sight of first principles.

• The Commission plans to open public lands for hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, and other uses. Bingo! People who use and enjoy the land are the ones who care for it. The more we trust Americans to engage with our lands, the better.
• It also intends to focus on voluntary conservation. People protect what they own and value. They do not need the government to force them to do it.
• It recognizes that decades of federal government public land mismanagement have fueled the catastrophic wildfires in the west we see almost every year. The Commission’s commitment to better management of that land demonstrates that the bureaucrats in charge at least admit this problem exists. Can they actually fix the problem? The jury is out. But still, on balance let’s give credit where it’s due. Admitting there is a problem is the first step on the road to recovery.
• It acknowledges that outdoor recreation drives a $1.2 trillion economy and supports millions of people and their families and communities. It’s good to see the Commission spotlight this truth: prosperity and environmental care go hand in hand.

Those points sound good. But let us not ignore what could go wrong:

New commission, old risk

The idea of cutting red tape is great—but adding another layer of federal bureaucracy to do it? That’s not great. When government builds new structures, those structures tend to grow. The Commission needs to focus on getting government out of the way—not adding new hurdles.

Federal overreach is always a threat

The best way to care for our lands is not to hand Washington more power. Individuals are far better positioned to protect and use these resources than the government is. The Commission should stay in its lane and leave the heavy lifting to the people closest to the land.

Stay true to access and use

The Commission starts with the right focus—but we’ve seen before how initiatives like this can drift. We hope this effort stays centered on expanding access, supporting productive use, and respecting freedom—without picking winners or losers or creating carveouts that benefit a few at the expense of many.

President Trump’s Commission may indeed unlock America’s lands, and we hope it does. If the Commission sticks to its promises—cutting red tape, promoting prosperity, and trusting Americans to care for the land—it can deliver lasting good. But we’ll be watching for when it gets off track. When it does, you can be sure that PLF will act to get it back on track.****