Posted on 02/23/2002 7:07:45 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:51:40 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
President Bush's budget includes a conservation tax credit that gives a 50 percent capital-gains-tax break on land sold to the government or land-trust groups.
The budget describes the incentive as a "cost effective, non-regulatory, market-based approach to conservation."
But private-property activists, who typically support the Bush administration, say the tax incentive benefits environmental groups over the private sector and ultimately puts more property and wealth into government hands.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Bush should support a capital gains tax cut for ALL Americans, not just those that surrender their land to marxist enviromentalists or an expansive federal government.
Further, no private land may be sold to the federal government unless the restrictions/use comply with state guidelines- in other words, the federal government may purchase the land, but the resoources of that land purchased will fall under the jurisdiction of the state and not the federal government.
The federal government should be reduced to a silent partner, facilitating the purchase if need be, but having no role in managing the land.
If the federal government wants to buy land, they have to put up for sale 1 and one half the amount of like kind acreage they already own at the market rate they purchase the land in order for the county to allow the title transfer to be recorded.
Further, each county board or commissioners or managers will have the right to reject the transfer of title to the federal government from private hands based on local zoning and resource use determinations made at the rural/local level.
In short, the federal government will have to negotiate with the local people/government, to ensure that land use is not cut-off, restricted from recreation or natural resource use, etc.
The policy of states in the west SHOULD CLEARLY be to begin a long term process of getting the federal government out of the land ownership and management business save for limited areas like national parks or small monument acreage.
The state has the right NOT to allow private citizens to transfer title to the federal government without state approval- that is the Constitutional basis for the legislation.
I'll run, I'll work tirelessly to have this enacted, and in my state, I trust we will likely succeed.
It's a shame I have to work to fight against this President to protect American lands from becoming UN lands or whatever other nonesense the federal government appears to have in mind.
I will actively oppose BUSH at the next election if he is doing this. WHY? Because with a Gore in office, the public support in my state for requiring the federal gov't to begin a long term policy of returning lands to the people of the states will fly a whole lot easier with Al Gore trying to give them to foreign entities.
Bush has lost his friggin mind and absolutely lost my vote and gained my opposition if he even thinks about going down this apparent road. End of story.
The dam guy can not be trusted at that point. He said he was in favor of local control, and he's doing just the opposite. I hate a liar.
In the CARA compromise of 2000, Congress committed to 100% appropriation for the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act for six years.The LWCF is the tool by which govt buys private land. They also made the same committment to Urban Park and Recreation Recovery, National Historic Preservation Act, and Indian and Federal Land Restoration.
The full funding for LWCF is $900 mil/year with the feds and the states each getting $450 mil. You will note that the article mentions the reduction in the federal portion for year 2002. Bush requested, and Congress complied, in diverting this reduction into grants for private land owners to make environmental improvements to their properties. The article mentioned further reductions for year 2003. This is not a done deal, but Bush will be requesting this further reduction when he submits his budget. As with 2002, the reduction for 2003 will be diverted to grants for private land owners.
If you want to stop the govt from buying private land, TALK TO CONGRESS.
All right, Mr. Genius, so you get elected County Commissioner and on the agenda of your next meeting is one of these landowners who has finally been tormented into becoming a "Willing Seller" by THE Nature Conservancy, or some such NGO, but he/she resents the torment so much that they just decide to see what the BLM is offering because they are scared and broke.
Now it just so happens that this tormented rancher is one of your constituients that voted for you and even held a barbeque/fund raiser for you hoping you could become their hero. But now he's cornered, scared, broke and you're even thinking about voting to keep him from throwing in the towel? You know he'll sue and the voters won't back your courage in the next election.
If you're using your election to Commissioner as a stepping stone to State office, or even the Federal Congress, the same people that came to the BBQ and threw money at your campaign will be at the next fund raiser of your challenger over the way you voted against this constituent in such an unfair and arbitrary way that suddenly no one but you understands.
But it really doesn't matter since you won't even be able to get one other vote to bar this sale from any of your colleagues. So fergeddaboutit. You're all full of righteous indignation over something that matters to very few people who are old enough to remember what America once was based on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.