Lee got busted getting Money from Big Developers and Tech companies who’d be looking at campuses and data centers. Rendering the claims of it being for affordable housing questionable. As there was nothing in the bill limiting what the land could be used for once sold.

Parts of the bill were also vaguely worded. Possibly opening up far more land than what he publicly claimed according to legal definitions. Versus whatever he may have intended.

He also crashed out and started accusing opposition to the Bill of being Marxists and Communists. Despite some of them being vehemently more Right-Wing than the majority of Congress. And claimed that it’d raise far more money than it actually would.

The drama surrounding the Bill was ultimately funny in my opinion. In part because of the amount of self-proclaimed Libertarian and Small Government Outdoorsmen and survivalist influencers who were steadfastly opposed. Despite the Bill ultimately accomplishing what they claimed to want. The Government divesting itself of real estate and having less control over States. While simultaneously growing the Economy and creating jobs.

I guess it was the first time many of them actually had to deal with potential outcomes for what they wanted actually affecting them personally.

I spent all my young life roaming BLM acres to hunt.

As an adult I was forced by cirmcumstance to move to Texas where very little public land is available. You want to hunt and even in some places have access to fish? You better have money. This pay to play is already spreading across most of the west. Sell off the remaining public lands, and those without the bucks get locked out.

I remember when James Watt did the same shit under Clinton. They sold five acre plots along the highways and the people that bought those plots used them to block access to thousands of acres behind their little shit **farm. Thus ultimately giving themselves those thousands of acres as their private hunting lease.

Bullshit. That land is OUR land.

The Missing 411 - David Paulides. A lot of people go missing in the national parks and it’s not talked about near enough. The park services refuses to hand over data regarding missing people. There seems to be a concerted effort to keep that land inaccessible to people and also have it available to “harvest” people. If you don’t know about this, you should look into it. Also, don’t go into a national park without a personal beacon.

I am not up on this, but I will speculate. One reason housing is so expensive is that the democrats restrict land development, unless they own it, etc. Then they also pack in the housing claiming preservation of green spaces, which they later build on. Should be like a quarter acre minimum so green space is integral instead of separate.

Second, I think they are using a budget trick. Projected revenue from land sales to offset phantom tax cut deficits.

My proposal. All National Monuments are turned over to the states to become state park with the exception of Mount Rushmore and Crazy Horse which become National Parks.

I still like the Big Buitiful Bill.

When on rallies of the 2024 campaign trail, in one iteration of his stump speech Trump promised that "we will build new cities." Unlocking government land may be the first preparatory step for that to happen.

Maybe this has something to do with the proposal. How many acres of federal land is not accessible to US citizens? Estimates indicate that approximately 9.52 million acres of federal public lands in 13 Western states are currently inaccessible to the public. This means that while these lands are owned by the US government, they cannot be legally accessed without permission from neighboring private landowners, due to factors such as being surrounded by private property or being within a "checkerboard" pattern of ownership where "corner crossing" is considered trespassing. Here's a breakdown of the inaccessible federal acreage by state in the West: Wyoming: 3,046,000 acres Nevada: 2,054,000 acres Montana: 1,523,000 acres New Mexico: 554,000 acres California: 492,000 acres Oregon: 443,000 acres Colorado: 269,000 acres Utah: 264,000 acres Arizona: 243,000 acres Idaho: 208,000 acres South Dakota: 196,000 acres Washington: 121,000 acres North Dakota: 107,000 acres It's important to note that: This issue primarily impacts public lands in the Western United States. The reasons for restricted access are often related to historical land grants, land use policies, and the resulting land ownership patterns. Efforts are being made by organizations like the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) and onX to identify and unlock these inaccessible lands, sometimes through the use of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Federal agencies are also seeking public input to identify areas where access to public land should be improved. In summary, while the US federal system sets aside over 640 million acres of public land, a significant portion of this land remains inaccessible to the public due to complex land ownership issues, with estimates pointing to around 9.52 million acres in the West facing this challenge.

Excellent Discussion everyone. Very smart & detailed responses!

Thanks for the summary.

The land was seized for Chinese loan collateralization under Clinton, Bush and Obama. Once we loaned Mexico money and were going to make them.collateralize the Baja peninsula. Clinton said no, but then collateralized huge public mineral holdings in Utah for Chinese loans. He locked up the land from exploitation and then we paid a Canadian mining company who had the rights to mine billions for taking it away. I think this land has been seized back and putting it up for sale is a good idea. There is plenty of usable public land left over. Holding that land can be expensive, of you have a range fire, you have to pay to have it put out. When blm holds it in trust ND you use it for let's say grazing cattle. Then blm pays if there's a fire. Its damn expensive