Re:Republicans move to sell off 3.3m acres of national land,...
by mikestew on Wednesday February 01, 2017 @12:27PM
(#13542742)
What benefit do you personally get from having some desert scrub available to access?
Ask yourself this: what benefit do you personally get from my having access? Let me answer that question for you: when you're hoping to snag a camp spot in Mount Rainier National Park, you can because I'm camping on BLM land. You want to go see Mount Rainier, I just want a place in the middle of nowhere to drop the VW camper for a weekend. But the BLM land went away, so even though I don't give a shit about viewing a big volcano, I'm taking your camp spot because there's nowhere else left.
...and we could make some money selling it.
"A representative for the interior department, Mike Pool, who weighed in on a version of the bill in 2011, said selling those 3.3m acres 'would be unlikely to generate revenue'."
IOW, we can sell it to our campaign contributors for pennies on the dollar, and it's all perfectly legal (thanks to a recent change to House rules by Republicans).
Ask yourself this: what benefit do you personally get from my having access? Let me answer that question for you: when you're hoping to snag a camp spot in Mount Rainier National Park, you can because I'm camping on BLM land. You want to go see Mount Rainier, I just want a place in the middle of nowhere to drop the VW camper for a weekend. But the BLM land went away, so even though I don't give a shit about viewing a big volcano, I'm taking your camp spot because there's nowhere else left.
...and we could make some money selling it.
"A representative for the interior department, Mike Pool, who weighed in on a version of the bill in 2011, said selling those 3.3m acres 'would be unlikely to generate revenue'."
IOW, we can sell it to our campaign contributors for pennies on the dollar, and it's all perfectly legal (thanks to a recent change to House rules by Republicans).