Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Land grab? Aren't we talking about land owned by the United States?
Yes. And, also, many of the areas under consideration were originally proposed for protection by the local and state legislatures/governors. That is certainly the case in New Mexico, where people have been working for more than a decade to have the Otero Mesa designated protected wilderness. The President would simply be applying protection at the federal level.
Have to wonder why it is that when the last administration was seizing public lands for drilling, etc. the same folks weren't viewing that as a 'land grab?'
An appeals court actually found the seizure of Otero Mesa for gas and oil exploration by the previous administration illegal just last year. There is nothing illegal about what the current President is considering.
I don't think you get the point of the criticism. Other presidents have most certainly gobbled up private land under this act but the issue now is that now such a grab has monumental consequences for the employment of those engaged in farming, ranching, forestry services etc. It will cost thousands of jobs that will be lost when the lands are pulled out of "active duty" and turned into newly protected public lands. The complaint that I and others opposed to this ihave s that people should come first. Taking away someone's livelihood and that of his family and the resulting loss of economic infusions within communiites, for the sake of "preservation" is just not putting our values in the appropriate place. It is the principle of eminent domain that allows a government entity to take over privately held properties for the "greater good." People should come first! If there was full employment then maybe this wouldn't be quite as devastating but we don't and there will be jobs lost that will never be replaced.
And I don't think you get the point. These are not privately owned lands. They are already owned by the federal government, ie: We The People, and all the President MAY be proposing to do is to change their designation. How can you "grab" something which is already yours?
A secret administration memo has surfaced revealing plans for the federal government to seize more than 10 million acres from Montana to New Mexico, halting job- creating activities like ranching, forestry, mining and energy development. Worse, this land grab would dry up tax revenue that's essential for funding schools, firehouses and community centers.
that would be just like our dear government, the area where they want to build a solar plant in new mexico, would be come a national park, for a prairie chicken and the sand dune lizard , and no more solar power.
I thought the republicans were bad, but I swear the democrats are dumber than rocks
A secret administration memo has surfaced revealing plans for the federal government to seize more than 10 million acres from Montana to New Mexico, halting job- creating activities like ranching, forestry, mining and energy development. Worse, this land grab would dry up tax revenue that's essential for funding schools, firehouses and community centers.
Below, the red shows all the land the UN has snatched from under us so far. Looks like all the major cities are included.
yes the government may "own' it already, but it is still buildable, and could be used for "good" things such as solar / or/ wind farms....or for actual farm land to sustain a growing population............BUT........by changing the 'designation' to a national park...then that cant be done...........
.so the question here is does our government want us to use and expand in alternative energy, and us government land for such things...or does the government want to redesignate land as a monument to nothingness................
You just don't get it, do you?
Let's just look at vacated malls and failed developments throughout the US.
Just because you can develop something doesn't mean you have to.
If you ignore the environment, maybe it will just go away.
Very short sighted and selfish post.
poor child come see the truth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
10,000,000 more acres to be taken by fed govt
