Among the many controversial proposals Exit from the American Senate This week, as it is considered the draft tax and spending law promoted by President Donald Trump as a “large and beautiful bill” that would make parts of the Occanogan Winatchi National Forest in Washington State, the Bouvalo Hills Wilders region a study in Nevada, and Apache-SitGrections National Forest in Arizona Qualified for sale For housing developers.
The proposal, shown in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee in the Senate Part of the billIt would force the American forest service and the Land Management Office over the next five years to determine and sell between 2.2 million and 3.3 million acres in 11 Western states for “the development of housing or to treat the infrastructure associated with supporting the needs of local housing.” In total, 250 million acres of land will be eligible to obtain these mandatory sales – including camps and other entertainment sites, areas that are not student, and important wildlife habitats. The draft law excludes protected areas such as national parks and specific national entertainment areas.
In a statement, Senator Patti Murray, a democrat from Washington State, called for the proposal.Full betrayal of future generationsAlso, the memorization groups have installed them as “as” as “A rude trick to sell virgin public lands for the homes of the cup and the walled societies“In order to pay for the price”The tax discounts of the wealthy are superior“
The proposal is expanding in a failed attempt in the parliament version of the spending bill to sell 500,000 acres of federal lands in Nevada and Utah. This proposal has been compensated by the opposition of actor Ryan Zenk, Republican from Montana and the former internal minister. The new and expanded proposal came from Senator in Utah Mike Lee, a Republican, who said in a video on YouTube that the ownership of federal lands is “”Not“
He said: “We open the federal territories that are not used to expand the scope of housing, support local development, and make Washington, DC, away from societies that are only trying to grow.” “We convert federal obligations into taxpayers’ value.” The states that are suggested by land sales are Alaska, Arizona, California, Ourado, Idahu, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utta, Washington and Wyoumeng. Montana state in Zenk is not in the list.
Several defenders of the indigenous and environmental population noted that the idea of ”public lands” denies the roads that were stolen from the tribes. beginning Sixteenth centuryEuropean settlers whitening North America sweptand The expulsion of the indigenous Americans In order to build homes, railways and other infrastructure.
After establishing the country, the United States government extended this disposal of possession, often by force or coercion, and to this day landowners are like universities Profit from stolen tribal lands. The federal government now claims up to 63 per cent of some western countriesWith high concentrations in the state of Idaho and Utah. While a faction of the Republican Party spent more than 50 years Call against “Federal colonialismIn the West, some Republicans intensify their efforts to impose confiscation from the same land in a new way.
Bill Clark / CQ-Roll Call, Inc. Via Getty Images
From his first day in office, Trump I promised Delivery of federal lands to private interests Including registration interests and oil and gas companies, as well as housing developers. In March, the Trump administration launched a business squad to determine.Unarpsed federal lands are suitable for residential development“Virtual effort to address the housing crisis at reasonable prices for the United States.
Critics say that the ability to afford home costs is a product of multiple factors such as deportation trends and construction costs, which has exacerbated cities that do not give priority to building new housing within their borders to calculate the new demand. But opening remote areas away from the current infrastructure, they say, is a misleading approach to reducing housing costs.
“The argument of housing is a wolf in sheep clothes,” said Jordan Shrebar, director of government relations at the non -profit association of the Land Association. “Do not even pass the laughter test.”
Some of the invitation and expert groups also noted that a proposal for me in the spending bill, which was reported Refusing to participate with most other legislators For weeks before being disclosed on June 11, it does not include Any requirements of the ability to afford costsLeave a space for developers who have the defense of profits to build large farm homes, second homes for the wealthy, or short -term rents to be inserted on Airbnb. In some cases, land sales have already been created Luxurious real estate clubs.
“There will be no significant handrails to prevent the sale of valuable public lands for the cup homes, precious holiday places, exclusive golf communities, or other developments.” Books From the proposed bill.
Democrats, conservative groups and representatives of the external industry, who oppose a proposal for me, emphasized the indispensable nature of the land concerned. “Our public lands are not available assets,” Patrick Perry, CEO of BackCountry Hunters and Angles, a group that seeks to maintain unsuccessful lands for fishing and fishing, Tell Radio Colorado General.
Sherbar said, from the Broadcasting Association, that the draft law “represents a major problem from a tribal perspective” because it failed to give the tribes the right of the first refusal to present the lands that are part of the homelands of their ancestors. (It can also be said that even the idea of giving tribes the option to buy the lands that were stolen from it is a low justice tape.) Schreiber also criticized the draft law to make land sales possible “at Breakneck speed” without general listening sessions or inputs.
in Colorado College poll It was released in January in January, only 14 percent of the voters registered in eight western states said they supported the sale of “some limited areas of national public lands to developing housing in the natural areas.” Nearly 90 percent said that they visited Federally owned lands at least once in the past year.
Even among Republican policy makers, a controversial proposal. Senator Mike Crabo spokesman from Idaho The reference spokesman saidA newspaper in Spokan, Washington, that Senator is still reviewing the proposal, but “does not support the transfer of public lands to private property.” “We will never return them,” said Senator Jim Rich, a Republican of Idaho,.
