Discussion: GOP Platform Committee Wants Feds To Turn Fed Lands Over To States ASAP

TPM Article Topics
41

I wonder how many dicks were in that box and how many dicksticks the feds found while they were searching for IEDs?

1 Like
42

Big fucking deal. Its in their platform. Does anyone give a shit about what’s in a party’s platform once the respective Conventions have ended. You never hear another word about the party platform after that. The media doesn’t even report what’s going on in Congress at this point. Does anyone think they’ll be reporting on the ideological objectives of platform items past this summer? If any of it ever gets close to becoming law, I’ll be surprised. Dems have a better chance of getting a $15 minimum wage before the Federal government turns over land to the states…and even that’s not likely to happen anytime soon.

3 Likes
43

The previous two replies are correct, of course. I only note the manipulation of language designed to mislead: “Gee, the big, bad fed took this land from the states and should give it back!”

Which sounds better than: “Yes, our state constitution expressly recognizes the federal ownership of certain land that predated the existence of our state, and our agreement that we cannot tell the fed what to do with their own land.”

5 Likes
44

Just another reason for Republicans not to vote Republican.

4 Likes
45

To China.

5 Likes
46

Someone needs to rip those flag pins from their lapels. Fricking morons seem to have misplaced their allegiance to the United States of America.

9 Likes
47

Good thought!

3 Likes
48

American Indians: Makes sense. States will ultimately give the land to us, the rightful owners.

3 Likes
49

Here, have a blanket. Don’t bother washing it before you use it, we took care of that already…

4 Likes
50

TPM: Why do you use the conservatives’ poisoned language, “return to the states ?”

These were never state lands. They were Federal from the beginning.

Using their language cedes the argument to them before it begins.

6 Likes
51

Might be worth considering an option to SELL what are currently federal lands to the states, with specific stipulations as to use and disposition. Of course, none of these red states could afford to purchase the lands they want to own, let alone maintain said lands. I am not really in favor of that option, but it is better than a federal, unjustified and likely unsupportable “gift” of my land (being a member of the federal electorate) to those asshats.

3 Likes
52

It’s called “The CNN Effect”. Prophylactic measures have proven fruitless.

2 Likes
53

No longer the party of Teddy Roosevelt, let alone Lincoln, this is now the party of Fuck Everything Just for Fun.

5 Likes
54

The land that’s being referred to here is not so much National Parks as it is Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service land. The parks are national treasures, for sure, but they’re closely managed and heavily visited.
The BLM and Forest Service lands are our real national treasure. Priceless, full of beautiful and incredible places, where it’s still possible to go into the wilderness for days at a time.
Today, these lands are used not just by hikers, but are grazed by ranchers (yes, the Bundies). They’ve been mined, although not so much these days. Since GW’s tenure, they are being increasingly drilled, and in serious danger of losing their wilderness/landscape character (think of standing at Delicate Arch in Arches NP and looking at a couple of rigs on a well pad just beyond).
To those who think the states can manage these lands, and are buying the ‘line’ that they’ll remain accessible and won’t be sold, here are examples of what UT does with their OWN public land: http://www.sltrib.com/home/3952184-155/trek-program-celebrates-pioneer-legacy-but, and http://www.sltrib.com/home/4062922-155/rolly-dont-think-utah-has-a

To “give” (or even sell) these lands to the states would be an incalculable, irreversible loss for the entire country. Take a look at just a little of what you’d be losing: http://www.blm.gov/ut/st/en/prog/recreation_home/places.html and
https://www.facebook.com/US-Forest-Service-Manti-La-Sal-National-Forest-879461288799152/

Don’t let this happen…

7 Likes
55

I will say again:

If people from 18-49 voted to the same degree as older voters. most of this idiocy would not be happening. And I am going to get jumped on for saying this, but I have never looked at a non-voter on the Left as anything other than a rough equivalent of a TeaBagger.

This means all the hip folks laughing at Maher, Jon and Trevor.

This means all the rallygoers who forget to vote EVERY election (including off-year)

This means the people for whom Steph’s three-point average is more important than Civic Duty

This ESPECIALLY means the super-liberal perfect-the-enemy-of-the-good folks who never met an election they couldn’t boycott

They all, to me, are the same as the most avid NRA zealot…because, ultimately, with their non-participation, the zealots have influence far beyond their actual numbers.

13 Likes
56

So the GOP wants to be takers, eh?

2 Likes
57

Utter nonsense. repugs want free land. They didn’t build that either.

3 Likes
58

That video never gets old!

1 Like
59

We all know that party platforms generally don’t mean much. But it’s good to know what they truly want. SOMETHING FOR NOTHING. repugs to the core.

4 Likes
60

The whole reason the GOP has been induced to adopt this plank is that the vested interests know it is vastly easier to capture the state government than it is to capture the Feds.

5 Likes