Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Should Smart Devices Be Allowed in Murder Investigations?

January 03, 2017
Lori Hanes

Writer

The fine line between privacy and technology has made headlines in an Arkansas murder case. Amazon, currently under pressure to release recordings made by its in-home smart device Alexa, has refused to turn over what could be critical evidence in the ongoing investigation.

In the quest for continual improvement and ease of life, have we turned over too much power to technology? Should smart devices like Alexa and Google Home, which listen to and record everything you say in your home, be allowed in criminal investigations?

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these questions:

• Are we living in a Brave New World?

• What would a Jeffy blood test reveal?

• Would the Supreme Court rule in favor of Amazon or the government?

• Why is Google laying Google Fiber everywhere?

• How did Pat and Glenn interfere with listeners' Alexa devices during the program?

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: Amazon is pushing back against an Arkansas prosecutor's demand for information on what they have stored at Amazon from Alexa.

Now, here's -- here's the story: A guy died in a hot tub early in the morning. And they get a call and say, "Hey, my friend died. You know, four times the limit of alcohol in his blood. It was just an accident." And he's dead.

Police are concerned because there were signs of a struggle. There was a broken shot glass. There was some blood. But you could explain the blood and the shot glass. Right?

But there's a device in the home that is a smart meter for the water usage. And in the middle of the night, the water usage happens to use exactly the amount of water to drain and refill the hot tub.

So it looks as though something happened around the hot tub, and they drained it and then cleaned it up and then filled it back up.

So smart device, number one.

Now the police are saying, "Look, there's evidence here that something is not right. And we don't think it's an accident." And they have Amazon's Alexa.

Did anybody have Alexa or Google Home?

PAT: Yeah.

JEFFY: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: You do?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Shut up. You do not.

PAT: Yeah, we do.

GLENN: Do you really?

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Do you like it?

PAT: No, it's terrible.

GLENN: It's terrible in the Siri way, or?

PAT: Yeah, it's terrible in the Siri way. I mean, it's worthless. We just got it recently. And I understand that it learns the kinds of things you're looking for and what you want, but right now, it's like, "I don't understand what you're asking me. I'll have to look that up. Hmm. I'll think about that." Shut up. It's -- like Siri. You know, Siri has those same issues. You ask it something, and it's like, "I can't find that on the Web."

JEFFY: I just got one as well, and it seems to be that it's hoping for better.

PAT: Yeah.

JEFFY: In the future.

PAT: I understand Ok Google is better.

GLENN: What's Ok Google?

PAT: The Google Home.

JEFFY: Yeah. That's possible.

GLENN: Let's get one. Let's put one in the studio.

JEFFY: That would be great.

PAT: We should try both of them and get one each. See which one works better.

GLENN: I'm not putting one in my house.

JEFFY: You can order what you want from it. If you're an Amazon Prime customer, in this area --

PAT: We haven't used it for that yet.

JEFFY: Because this area, we're close to a huge Amazon outlet -- warehouse. You'll have it within hours.

GLENN: Yeah, here you'll have it within five hours. You go on Amazon Prime now, and they'll deliver it to you same day.

PAT: Well, the commercials say, "Hey, we need -- Alexa, we need more paper towels. Order more paper towels. Okay. Ordered."

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: I mean, that's pretty cool.

JEFFY: I know.

PAT: I haven't used it in that way yet because it can't even find the BYU score. So I'm a little nervous about it.

GLENN: Oh, there's -- if it didn't come in blue, it doesn't know you.

PAT: Right. Right.

GLENN: Okay. So here's the thing: So Alexa or Google Home, they're going after Amazon's Alexa. And they're saying that it records everything, listening for the key word, the wake word. And with Amazon, it's either Amazon or Alexa.

PAT: So I didn't know that. Everything that you say is recording.

GLENN: Recorded.

PAT: Even when you don't say, "Alexa," and wake it up? It's recording everything?

JEFFY: Yes.

GLENN: It is constantly listening to you.

PAT: That is fascinating.

GLENN: And it's recording everything waiting for the wake-up.

PAT: That's amazing.

JEFFY: The command.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. We have welcomed the NSA into our homes.

PAT: Right. We sure have. We sure have. I didn't even think of that. We'll have it in the kitchen, and we'll be sitting in the living room. And I tested it a few times to see how well it hears. And I've said, "Alexa," just speaking in a normal voice, and it turns on. It hears. So, I mean, it hears from a long way.

GLENN: Yeah, no. It is constantly listening and evaluating.

PAT: Wow. Wow.

GLENN: And learning from your speech.

PAT: That's interesting.

GLENN: And so here's the thing: So the police have gone in Arkansas and said, "We need the tapes." Amazon has said, "No, we're not giving you the tapes."

JEFFY: Thank you.

GLENN: And they said, "Well, we need them because we think there was a murder."

JEFFY: Oh, well.

GLENN: Now, who wins in this?

PAT: You'd like a murder to be solved, but --

JEFFY: It's always for your safety when --

PAT: That's always the deal.

GLENN: It's always for your safety. The attorneys are now saying, if this goes all the way to the Supreme Court, there's no way Amazon wins.

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: Oh, I wouldn't bet on that.

JEFFY: Amazon's got a lot of money.

PAT: And look at the decisions that have been made recently. I mean, I would not bet -- I would not bet against the government winning that case.

GLENN: No, that's what they're saying.

PAT: Yeah. Okay.

GLENN: Amazon will not win the case.

PAT: Oh, I believe that. I believe that.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah.

PAT: Because look at the way the Supreme Court has been ruling lately.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. So they're saying, "What's the difference?" If I can go and monitor what you've done at the typewriter, at the keyboard --

JEFFY: Your phone.

GLENN: If I can just get that from the keyboard, what's the difference between you at the keyboard and you speaking it? There's no difference.

JEFFY: Yeah. And they're already taking access to all our mobile devices for all that stuff.

PAT: Wow. We literally have invited them into our home.

GLENN: Invited them into the house.

JEFFY: There's no getting out of it.

GLENN: There are no secrets.

PAT: We are living 1984.

GLENN: And we welcomed it. We're not living 1984. We're living Brave New World.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: We welcomed it in.

PAT: That's for sure.

GLENN: 1984 was a hostile takeover.

PAT: That's true.

GLENN: Brave New World was better living through pharmaceuticals, better entertainment, better everything. You're just going to welcome it in.

PAT: Which is exactly what we have.

GLENN: You're just going to welcome it in. That's exactly what happened.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

JEFFY: When did the pharmaceuticals --

GLENN: Huxley was right --

JEFFY: When did the pharmaceuticals start?

GLENN: When did the pharmaceuticals start? Oh, they've already started, my friend. They've already started.

Alexa, can we get Jeffy a blood test?

JEFFY: No. No, Alexa, turn off. Turn off.

(chuckling)

GLENN: So now everything in your home is being listened to. And you know who uses this? At least nobody uses Siri, except the kids.

PAT: Yeah.

JEFFY: Kids love it.

GLENN: Kids will grab the phone, and they'll say, "Siri, what's the -- I don't use Siri. Nobody uses --

PAT: I tried Siri a few times, and it was so worthless, I just gave up.

JEFFY: Yeah, but the kids have fun with it.

GLENN: They love it.

JEFFY: It's just like the virtual reality headsets from Samsung.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Don't get me started.

PAT: Oh, those are cool.

JEFFY: I mean, I love it. But my kids fell in love with it.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. It's the end of civilization as we know it. Hey, 14 minutes into the show, end of civilization.

PAT: Happy New Year!

JEFFY: Good night, everybody.

GLENN: Fourteen minutes in the new year, Happy New Year.

PAT: Happy New Year.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: It's true though. We welcomed all of this stuff, and it's amazing when you stop and think about what we have in our homes. And it's amazing how much more intrusive it's going to become.

GLENN: Hang on just a second. Before we go there, I want to go to Betty, New Jersey. We have a problem I guess, Alexa. Betty in New Jersey. Hello, Betty.

CALLER: Yes, hello. We do have a problem. Tell Pat Gray to be quiet. He keeps turning on my Alexa. Three times already.

(laughter)

PAT: Alexa --

GLENN: Alexa, play bad jazz.

CALLER: Stop it! It does that too. Really bad jokes though. They make you laugh. Have a great day, but shut up!

GLENN: All right. Thanks, Betty.

(laughter)

PAT: Alexa, record everything Betty says.

GLENN: Tony. Let's go to Tony in Florida. Hi, Tony.

CALLER: Yeah. Hey, there. I was going to say, I was actually listening to you guys on my Alexa. And every time you say "Alexa," the first couple of times she would stop the program. She'd say, "I heard what you said. That's not a very nice thing to say." And I'm not making it up. I've never heard her say that before.

GLENN: Oh, yes, Alexa, we are talking about you.

JEFFY: Yes, we are.

CALLER: Yep. But she does not like it. She does not like you guys.

PAT: That's great.

GLENN: Thanks a lot. Stand in line, Alexa. Stand in line.

Steve, go ahead.

CALLER: Hello, man, I just wanted to let you know, I'm 61 years old, and I am a massive fan of Ok Google. I called the show. I said, "Call Glenn Beck Radio Show." Popped me right in, and here I was.

JEFFY: Nice.

PAT: Nice.

CALLER: My wife has Siri. Siri is the worst thing there is. You can't get that thing to do anything for you. Ok Google, when you try it, it is awesome.

PAT: That's right. That's great.

GLENN: So you're in Arkansas, right?

CALLER: Yes.

GLENN: So, Steve, are you paying attention to this story in Arkansas about the murder?

CALLER: Well, Ok Google only responds when you ask it. It isn't on all the time. But when you need information, Ok Google is right there.

PAT: No. That's the same with Alexa too. That's the same.

GLENN: It's the same.

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: It's off, but it's always listening for its wake word.

CALLER: Oh, I see.

PAT: Yeah, so -- so it records everything you say whether you're talking to it or not.

CALLER: When I need information, Ok Google is on the spot. Siri, no way.

GLENN: No, I understand that.

PAT: I believe that. I believe that.

GLENN: I understand. I look at it and say -- for instance, who's going to lead this one? Why do you think Google is laying Google Fiber everywhere? They're trying to make Google cities.

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: Yeah. And they've done it in some cases.

GLENN: They've done it. They'll control the smart meters, they'll control -- they'll control the information in whole towns.

JEFFY: And okay. As long as our life is easy.

GLENN: Right!

And I am, up to a point, comfortable with a private business doing that than having a contract.

But now, Steve, you're talking to me about the benefits of it. I'm saying to you that it's listening to everything that you say. It is recording you. And now police are trying to get a -- through a court order, trying to get the tape to be able to solve a murder case. If that happens, the police will be able to grab all private conversations from your home, if they suspect you of something. Are you comfortable with that?

CALLER: Well, I'm like you, Glenn, to a point I'm saying, "I love it." As a law-abiding citizen, never been involved in a crime, love to be able to solve these issues.

JEFFY: Right. Nothing to be scared of.

CALLER: But, man, I don't know where you're going to draw the line.

PAT: That's exactly right. That's right. And the problem is, a lot of people will say, "Well, I don't care if they're listening. I'm not saying anything wrong."

Well, that's not up to you to decide, is it?

CALLER: Right.

PAT: Because it might be wrong to whomever is listening, or they might make it into something wrong.

JEFFY: And can. And have.

PAT: And have.

GLENN: Just with the regulations that they've put in, in the last eight years, everybody is breaking some law.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And I'm not saying that this -- I'm not saying this is happening now. I'm saying, you don't worry about who's in office today. For instance, I gave the Democrats this warning eight years ago: Don't do this with executive power.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: Because you're not always going to hold power. And when somebody else comes in and wields that same stick --

PAT: And now look at them. Look at them. Freaking out.

JEFFY: Yeah, I know.

GLENN: And now they're freaking out. Right.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And I'm saying the same thing now to the Republicans: Don't do this because you're not always going to be in power. I don't know who the next Hitler is. I have no idea. But one will appear. If you give all of this power, all of this information, all of this regulation and we instill it behind one man, we're begging for someone to step in, in an emergency and take care of things for us.

Featured Image: The Amazon Echo, a hands-free speaker you control with your voice. Echo connects to the Alexa Voice Service to play music, provide information, news, sports scores, weather and more, instantly. (Photo: Amazon)

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

How private stewardship could REVIVE America’s wild

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.