120 million acres of public lands eligible for sale in SENR budget reconciliation package

[nyker]

If the government wants to save some money, they should try to pay down some of the $7 trillion on the Fed balance sheet, and then use that to help extinguish some of the $36 trillion in national debt... The interest on which alone is over $1 trillion per annum.... Most of these bills put forth are only going to increase that debt.

Hypothetically, even if they sold 250 million acres, I doubt that would make much of a dent in repaying the national debt (but would make a terribly large dent in reducing our precious natural wilderness resource).

Pretty foolish that while every company on Earth was raising long-term debt over late 2020 and 2021, the government really did not and what debt they did issue was short term that needed to be refinanced at rates 4x and 5x as expensive in 2022 and 2023, dramatically increasing annual interest expense.

[dwoodward13]

Senate Parliamentarian has struck the current language for violation of the Byrd Rule, and thus therefore would be ineligible under the reconciliation process (simple majority vs 60 vote threshold).

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/536 ... -megabill/

Sounds like Mike Lee is rewickering his proposal to comply with the Byrd Rule. It would only include BLM land within 5 miles of a population center (USFS land completely excluded), but I have yet to find any draft text to see what the actual details of the new bill are.

https://www.abc4.com/news/politics/insi ... ands-sale/

[SkaredShtles]

Also, f*** Mike Lee.

QFT

Should continue being quoted on each page of this discussion, IMNSHO.

[Boggy B]

Senate Parliamentarian has struck the current language for violation of the Byrd Rule, and thus therefore would be ineligible under the reconciliation process (simple majority vs 60 vote threshold).

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/536 ... -megabill/

Sounds like Mike Lee is rewickering his proposal to comply with the Byrd Rule. It would only include BLM land within 5 miles of a population center (USFS land completely excluded), but I have yet to find any draft text to see what the actual details of the new bill are.

https://www.abc4.com/news/politics/insi ... ands-sale/

That's a welcome development. I'd probably still pass on the revision since population centers can move, but excluding USFS and most BLM that is used for recreation, hunting, etc. is huge.

[LURE]

Now we need to hammer the Senate Majority Leader, Senator Thune, to respect the Parliamentarian's ruling - it can be overruled.

We'll see what Lee cooks up next. I'm gonna go out on a wild limb and guess it's gonna be a crock of s**t, just a different color.

Also, here is a great article on the issue overall.

https://www.lomez.press/p/the-public-la ... -one-asked

[cottonmountaineering]

Senate Parliamentarian has struck the current language for violation of the Byrd Rule, and thus therefore would be ineligible under the reconciliation process (simple majority vs 60 vote threshold).

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/536 ... -megabill/

Sounds like Mike Lee is rewickering his proposal to comply with the Byrd Rule. It would only include BLM land within 5 miles of a population center (USFS land completely excluded), but I have yet to find any draft text to see what the actual details of the new bill are.

https://www.abc4.com/news/politics/insi ... ands-sale/

this is great news, i see in another article that the bill plans to be reintroduced:

"The Senate’s parliamentarian ruled against a provision championed by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) that would have sold off millions of acres of Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management land in up to 11 states.

Lee, in a post on the social platform X, said he would revamp the plan. The new legislation will still sell off land owned by the Bureau of Land Management — but not that owned by the Forest Service.

He also said he would “SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE” the amount of land in the bill, limiting it only to lands within 5 miles of a population center."

I think that language is a lot more reasonable

[LURE]

this is great news, i see in another article that the bill plans to be reintroduced:

"The Senate’s parliamentarian ruled against a provision championed by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) that would have sold off millions of acres of Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management land in up to 11 states.

Lee, in a post on the social platform X, said he would revamp the plan. The new legislation will still sell off land owned by the Bureau of Land Management — but not that owned by the Forest Service.

He also said he would “SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE” the amount of land in the bill, limiting it only to lands within 5 miles of a population center."

I think that language is a lot more reasonable

It's good news. But it's not the end. Lee has created a headache for himself the and the Big Beautiful Bill that no one could have expected, that is really good. But he's not ending it yet and that is what we need to happen. The man has been a broken record for his political career on the notion the feds should not own land. He's trying to get his foot in the door on the means to that end.

I guarantee definitions and siderails will remain sparse if not nonexistent in whatever else Lee introduces.

What's a populations center? As population centers grow does more land become eligible? Will affordable housing still be a part of the purpose of the land? Will affordable housing be defined or even actually found in the text?

BLM land is a treasure of recreation and wildlife habitat. Whatever Lee cooks up should be untenable regardless for public lands advocates. Gotta keep the pressure on until the headache for Lee to continue trying to push it becomes too much.

[cottonmountaineering]

this is great news, i see in another article that the bill plans to be reintroduced:

"The Senate’s parliamentarian ruled against a provision championed by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) that would have sold off millions of acres of Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management land in up to 11 states.

Lee, in a post on the social platform X, said he would revamp the plan. The new legislation will still sell off land owned by the Bureau of Land Management — but not that owned by the Forest Service.

He also said he would “SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE” the amount of land in the bill, limiting it only to lands within 5 miles of a population center."

I think that language is a lot more reasonable

It's good news. But it's not the end. Lee has created a headache for himself the and the Big Beautiful Bill that no one could have expected, that is really good. But he's not ending it yet and that is what we need to happen. The man has been a broken record for his political career on the notion the feds should not own land.

I guarantee definitions and siderails will remain sparse if not nonexistent in whatever else Lee introduces.

What's a populations center? As population centers grow does more land become eligible? Will affordable housing still be a part of the purpose of the land? Will affordable housing be defined or even actually found in the text?

BLM land is a treasure of recreation and wildlife habitat. Whatever Lee cooks up should be untenable regardless for public lands advocates. Gotta keep the pressure on until the headache for Lee to continue trying to push it becomes too much.

Yeah I still see it as a potential disaster with slimy deals and I would be happiest selling 0 land. The west is basically maxed out on people because we dont have enough water anyway.

[12ersRule]

Yeah I still see it as a potential disaster with slimy deals and I would be happiest selling 0 land. The west is basically maxed out on people because we dont have enough water anyway.

I concur. The continued drying up of the West and increased pressure on that limited resource are going to get ugly.
[

[susanjoypaul]

Same old same old... Introduce something outrageous. Watch everyone freak out. Give your cronies something to "object to" so their constituents see them as heroes. Peel it back. Watch the sighs of relief. Easily ram through something less offensive than the outrageous provision, but still something nobody wanted in the first place. Watch everyone think they "won." 

We're not winning here. We're getting screwed again by the same old tactics. 

I agree with keeping the heat on and not being okay with any public land selloff at all. A lot of what you guys are saying here makes sense. This is a foot in the door.

[SkaredShtles]

Same old same old... Introduce something outrageous. Watch everyone freak out. Give your cronies something to "object to" so their constituents see them as heroes. Peel it back. Watch the sighs of relief. Easily ram through something less offensive than the outrageous provision, but still something nobody wanted in the first place. Watch everyone think they "won." 

We're not winning here. We're getting screwed again by the same old tactics. 

I agree with keeping the heat on and not being okay with any public land selloff at all. A lot of what you guys are saying here makes sense. This is a foot in the door.

This.

The BLM and Forest Service can *already* sell public land - but there are rules and regulations. This is just an attempt by Lee to circumvent the existing rules/regulations from what I can tell.

F**k Mike Lee and f**k any representatives that go along with weakening the existing BLM/FS rules/procedures.

[justiner]

Killed:

https://apnews.com/article/public-land- ... 005fdb9d2d

It doesn't mention BLM, but I believe this includes now the BLM land as 3200 square miles ≈ 200 million acres.