Pace Allen
TaxTeaParty.com
TaxTeaParty.com
| FloridaOil.org, Inc. 5726 Cortez Road West #151 Bradenton, FL 34210 941-538-8547 Don@FloridaOil.org © 2008 FloridaOil.org, Inc. |
| FloridaOil.org |
"Freedom Favors the Bold"
When speaking of the management of the “Submerged Lands”, it should not be confused with the issue of
managing the “Navigable Waterways.” The two are completely different as the “Navigable Waterways”
maintain shipping channels and vessel traffic and the “Submerged Lands” cover the sea bed and the
minerals beneath them.
As the activities in the waters surrounding the State of Florida have a substantially greater impact on the
state as opposed to the interior territories of the country, the people of the State of Florida should have
greater controls of submerged territories.
History of the “Submerged Lands” issue:
The Submerged Lands Act was enacted in response to litigation that effectively transferred ownership of
the first 3 miles of a state’s coastal submerged lands to the federal government. In the case United States
v. California (1947), the United States successfully argued that the three nautical miles seaward of
California belonged to the federal government, primarily finding that the federal government’s responsibility
for the defense of the marginal seas and the conduction of foreign relations outweighed the interests of the
individual states.
SUBMERGED LANDS ACT
Acronym: SLA
Citation: 43 U.S.C. §§1301-1315 (2002).
Legislative Purpose:
In passing the Submerged Lands Act, Congress sought to return the title to submerged lands to the states
and promote the exploration and development of petroleum deposits in coastal waters.
Congress adopted the SLA in 1953, granting title to the natural resources located within three miles of their
coastline (three marine leagues for Texas and the Gulf coast of Florida). For purposes of the SLA, the term
“natural resources” includes oil, gas, and all other minerals.
Title II addresses the rights and claims by the States to the lands and resources beneath navigable waters
within their historic boundaries and provides for their development by the States. Title III preserves the
control of the seabed and resources therein of the Outer Continental Shelf beyond State boundaries and to
the federal government and authorizes leasing by the Secretary of the Interior in accordance with certain
specified terms and conditions.
The SLA was upheld in 1954 by the U.S. Supreme Court (Alabama v. Texas) emphasizing that Congress
could relinquish to the states the federal government's property rights over the submerged lands without
interfering with U.S. national sovereign interests.
The SLA also leaves the door open for the states to re-claim control of the submerged lands:
Ҥ 1312. Seaward boundaries of States.
The seaward boundary of each original coastal State is hereby approved and confirmed as a line three
geographical miles distant from its coast line or, in the case of the Great Lakes, to the international
boundary. Any State admitted subsequent to the formation of the Union which has not already done so may
extend its seaward boundaries to a line three geographical miles distant from its coast line, or to the
international boundaries of the United States in the Great Lakes or any other body of water traversed by
such boundaries. Any claim heretofore or hereafter asserted either by constitutional provision, statute, or
otherwise, indicating the intent of a State so to extend its boundaries is hereby approved and confirmed,
without prejudice to its claim, if any it has, that its boundaries extend beyond that line. Nothing in this
section is to be construed as questioning or in any manner prejudicing the existence of any State's
seaward boundary beyond three geographical miles if it was so provided by its constitution or laws prior to
or at the time such State became a member of the Union, or if it has been heretofore approved by
Congress.”
The most important part of this section is:
“Any claim heretofore or hereafter asserted either by constitutional provision, statute, or otherwise,
indicating the intent of a State so to extend its boundaries is hereby approved and confirmed, without
prejudice to its claim, if any it has, that its boundaries extend beyond that line.”
It is clearly the intent of the United States Congress to recognize the states rights to manage the
submerged lands around their state. As stated in the tenth amendment of the United States Constitution:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are
reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The Submerged Lands Act is not a Constitutional
Amendment ratified and approved by the states and at no point has any coastal state initiated action to
delegate the management of the submerged lands to the Federal Government.
As one more point, and probably the most powerful point, The State of Florida revised its Constitution in
1968 and it was subsequently approved by Congress. Article II section 1 of that Constitution defines the
boundaries of the State of Florida. Article II section 1 (b) states specifically “The coastal boundaries may be
extended by statute to the limits permitted by the laws of the United States or international law.” In this
statement the word “or” is very significant as the international law, commonly referred to as the “Exclusive
Enterprise Zone” define this zone as 200 nautical miles except when there is less than 400 nautical miles
between states. This would be a good time to remind people that our country is unique as we are truly a
union of sovereign states and commonwealths and therefore, under international law, each state in our
union should be recognized as such.
Another interesting point to note is that none of our countries founding documents or subsequent
documents define the boundaries of the country. That is because the boundaries of the country are based
on the definition of each individual sovereign states boundaries and the joining of such as a member of the
Union. In addition, Article IV Section 3 of the United States Constitution prohibits states forming within
states or by joining states. This would also prohibit the forming of states in the submerged lands
surrounding the coastal states. An action by the Federal Government to claim these submerged lands for
themselves would violate this part of the Constitution.
Summary
Regardless of ones position on mineral recovery from the submerged lands, it is in the best interest of all
Floridians to put control of the submerged lands surrounding the State of Florida in the hands of the people
of the State of Florida.
Recommendation
• Under the powers of the Constitution of the State of Florida, declare by statute, that the submerged
lands surrounding the Sovereign State of Florida, to the limits of International Law, immediately fall under
the jurisdiction and control of the State of Florida.
• Establish a 25 mile buffer zone that prohibits mineral recovery within 25 miles of the coast of Florida.
• Establish a “No Oil on the Beach” guarantee fund to be established and funded by companies and
individuals engaged in the business of recovering minerals from the submerged lands before any future
mineral recovery shall begin. This guarantee should cover, but not be limited to, reimbursing tourist for
hotel bills, rental cars and air fair should oil contaminate the beach in their area and disrupt their vacation.
• Also require that equipment and personal trained and prepared to contain and clean up the equivalent
of two simultaneous sever oil spills are in place prior to any future recovery of minerals from these
submerged lands.
By Don Baldauf
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |