What's interesting about this is that most people do not consider that the Federal Government once own almost all the land and has been selling it for over 200 years. Hell, we used to give it away to settlers through homesteading. However, I get the concerns because in places without much public land, there's not a lot of trail systems. Texas is a great example of that.
Bottom-line, there needs to be a balance. The government has locked up a lot of land that could be opened and reduce the skyrocketting housing costs. Arizona and Colorado are in that boat where, here in Arizona, finding land over an acre is tough. Similarly, Colorado Springs in sandwiched between federal land and large ranches making it hard to expand.
I’m not in the camp that believes the federal government should never sell any land for any reason. But the guy who cooked up this plan has been so consistently dishonest about what the bill actually does, I think the outdoor community would be foolish to trust him with overseeing the sale.
I’m also not convinced his arguments for doing it hold water. Our government will waste the revenue in less than a day, and we’ll be down millions of acres of an irreplaceable asset.
This also seems like a very round about way of dealing with affordable housing, since our population is now shrinking. Before developing more, I think we need to circle back and address the hoarding of single family homes by private equity… at least for starters.
Excellent post, Cole! Although I don't agree with your characterization of environmentalists on the left versus those who are conservative... I too, considered scrapping my post on the subject but I added the rescission of the roadless rule to the mix. I chose not to go into a legal analysis of the provisions, but I agree that they (in this case the Republicans) are obscuring the facts of the bill.
The thing that stopped me from scrapping it was that some leaked drafts look just as slimy. Going back in time, it looks like Lee’s entire motivation since getting elected is selling off our natural resources. I’m glad this is an issue that bridges the partisan divide.
I'm a national parks journalist, and this post does an excellent job of describing what's going on to someone who would otherwise be considered "out of the loop." Thank you for spending the time and mental space to pick this apart.
Thank you so much for the feedback! Also, I didn’t know you were a national parks journalist. Let me know if you’d ever be interested in a guest post; I love adding other perspectives to Quandary Mag!
What's interesting about this is that most people do not consider that the Federal Government once own almost all the land and has been selling it for over 200 years. Hell, we used to give it away to settlers through homesteading. However, I get the concerns because in places without much public land, there's not a lot of trail systems. Texas is a great example of that.
Bottom-line, there needs to be a balance. The government has locked up a lot of land that could be opened and reduce the skyrocketting housing costs. Arizona and Colorado are in that boat where, here in Arizona, finding land over an acre is tough. Similarly, Colorado Springs in sandwiched between federal land and large ranches making it hard to expand.
I’m not in the camp that believes the federal government should never sell any land for any reason. But the guy who cooked up this plan has been so consistently dishonest about what the bill actually does, I think the outdoor community would be foolish to trust him with overseeing the sale.
I’m also not convinced his arguments for doing it hold water. Our government will waste the revenue in less than a day, and we’ll be down millions of acres of an irreplaceable asset.
This also seems like a very round about way of dealing with affordable housing, since our population is now shrinking. Before developing more, I think we need to circle back and address the hoarding of single family homes by private equity… at least for starters.
Thanks for reading!
Excellent post, Cole! Although I don't agree with your characterization of environmentalists on the left versus those who are conservative... I too, considered scrapping my post on the subject but I added the rescission of the roadless rule to the mix. I chose not to go into a legal analysis of the provisions, but I agree that they (in this case the Republicans) are obscuring the facts of the bill.
Thanks for reading!
The thing that stopped me from scrapping it was that some leaked drafts look just as slimy. Going back in time, it looks like Lee’s entire motivation since getting elected is selling off our natural resources. I’m glad this is an issue that bridges the partisan divide.
I'm a national parks journalist, and this post does an excellent job of describing what's going on to someone who would otherwise be considered "out of the loop." Thank you for spending the time and mental space to pick this apart.
Thank you so much for the feedback! Also, I didn’t know you were a national parks journalist. Let me know if you’d ever be interested in a guest post; I love adding other perspectives to Quandary Mag!