Congress just changed the rules to make national parklands giveaways easy

Alessandra Kelley · Jan 19, 2017

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/19/bureau-land-management-federal-lease

In the midst of highly publicized steps to dismantle insurance coverage for 32 million people and defund women’s healthcare facilities, Republican lawmakers have quietly laid the foundation to give away Americans’ birthright: 640m acres of national land.

In a single line of changes to the rules for the House of Representatives, Republicans have overwritten the value of federal lands, easing the path to disposing of federal property even if doing so loses money for the government and provides no demonstrable compensation to American citizens.

Essentially, the revised budget rules deny that federal land has any value at all, allowing the new Congress to sidestep requirements that a bill giving away a piece of federal land does not decrease federal revenue or contribute to the federal debt.

Republican eagerness to cede federal land to local governments for possible sale, mining or development is already moving states to act. Western states, where most federal land is concentrated, are already introducing legislation that pave the way for land transfers.

KateSmash · Jan 19, 2017

Theodore Roosevelt said:
We have become great because of the lavish use of our resources. But the time has come to inquire seriously what will happen when our forests are gone, when the coal, the iron, the oil, and the gas are exhausted, when the soils have still further impoverished and washed into the streams, polluting the rivers, denuding the fields and obstructing navigation.

Not to worship old TR, but ... Jesus Christ, I can't see any good coming out of any of this.

Myrealana · Jan 19, 2017

FUUUUUUUUUUCK!

Roxxsmom · Jan 19, 2017

KateSmash said:
Not to worship old TR, but ... Jesus Christ, I can't see any good coming out of any of this.

Except for the entities who will make short-term profits from the sales, of course. That's who this law is meant to placate. Oh, and of course it's a response to what happened at Standing Rock. Remember that Trump wants to privatize Native American held lands.

KateSmash · Jan 19, 2017

^ That's not good, that's just profit. :tongue

Alessandra Kelley · Jan 19, 2017

KateSmash said:
Not to worship old TR, but ... Jesus Christ, I can't see any good coming out of any of this.

Do you know, back when the Nixon-Reagan-Gingrich-Cheney-Norquist crowd was angling and scheming and wriggling to undo President Clinton's legacy, and President Johnson's civil rights laws, and even FDR's New Deal and Social Security itself, I joked to my friends that the Republicans appeared to be planning to roll back the entire twentieth century's progress, all the way to before Teddy Roosevelt's monopoly busting and consumer safety laws and environmental reforms.

At the time I hoped I was exaggerating, but by the gods it looks like this lot really want to do it.

Brightdreamer · Jan 19, 2017

And people wonder why I'm fearful that we'll even have a country left in four years...

Alessandra Kelley · Jan 19, 2017

My chief hope against these particular shenanigans is that a hell of a lot of Republicans themselves have a vested interest in there being protected nationally owned wilderness areas -- hunters, fishers, campers, etc. Heck, some of them just care about the environment.

Remember, Teddy Roosevelt himself was a Republican, and at least part of his interest in vast protected wilderness areas was in order to have giant game preserves for hunting in (The diorama descriptions in the American Museum of Natural History in New York, kind of a big monument to TR, used to be remarkably honest -- one might almost say brutally blunt -- about the good-huntin' qualities of each particular creature.).

Brightdreamer · Jan 19, 2017

Alessandra Kelley said:
My chief hope against these particular shenanigans is that a hell of a lot of Republicans themselves have a vested interest in there being protected nationally owned wilderness areas -- hunters, fishers, campers, etc. Heck, some of them just care about the environment.

Remember, Teddy Roosevelt himself was a Republican, and at least part of his interest in vast protected wilderness areas was in order to have giant game preserves for hunting in (The diorama descriptions in the American Museum of Natural History in New York, kind of a big monument to TR, used to be remarkably honest -- one might almost say brutally blunt -- about the good-huntin' qualities of each particular creature.).

The voting Republicans, yes... but it seems to me that the ones currently in power care more about their rich buddies and industry interests who have been aching to frack, clear-cut, strip mine, and develop every last square foot of land they can possibly grasp.

Roosevelt likely wouldn't recognize today's party as his own.

Congress just changed the rules to make national parklands giveaways easy

Alessandra Kelley

Sophipygian

KateSmash

this was a triumph

Myrealana

I aim to misbehave

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido

KateSmash

this was a triumph

Alessandra Kelley

Sophipygian

Brightdreamer

Just Another Lazy Perfectionist

Alessandra Kelley

Sophipygian

Brightdreamer

Just Another Lazy Perfectionist