Posted on 02/22/2016 10:25:45 AM PST by magellan
Real estate mogul Donald Trump would not let states take control of federal lands, the Republican presidential candidate said in a recent interview.
"I don't like the idea because I want to keep the lands great, and you don't know what the state is going to do," Trump said during a talk with Field & Stream magazine earlier this week.
The trade publication, sitting down with Trump at Las Vegas' Shooting, Hunting, and Outdoor Trade Show, had asked about the issue of turning over federally controlled lands to individual states -- an idea previously floated by rival 2016 contender and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and supported by staunch states-rights activists.
The proposal has also received more attention in light of recent actions by radical conservatives like Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his son Ammon Bundy, who led an armed group earlier this month in occupying a national wildlife refuge in Oregon to protest federal land use policies.
Trump cautioned, however, that states would be unpredictable in maintaining the designated lands.
"I mean, are they going to sell if they get into a little bit of trouble?" Trump asked. "I don't think it's something that should be sold."
He added: "We have to be great stewards of this land. This is magnificent land. And we have to be great stewards of this land."
The billionaire businessman suggested later in the interview that while he was a fan of oil and gas companies drilling and fracking on federal lands, protecting the earth should still be a top priority.
"I'm very much into energy, and I'm very much into fracking and drilling, and we never want to be hostage again to OPEC and go back to where we were. And right now, we're at a very interesting point because right now there's so much energy," Trump said. "And maybe that's an advantage and maybe--actually, it's more of an advantage in terms of your question because we don't have to do the kind of drilling that we did."
"I am for energy exploration, as long as we don't do anything to damage the land. And right now we don't need too much -- there's a lot of energy," he said.
Trump has little concept of the Constitution. And it's a shame some conservatives having been pushing this guy from the start.
Allow me to paraphrase: “You are too stupid and unreliable to make your own decisions, I know what’s best for you.”
Yup, he’s conservative through and through.
It concerns all states. Not just the ones we dump our nuclear waste in. Trump is right, can you imagine what California would do ? The entire San Joaquin valley would be made off limits.
OK, then any income from oil, mining minerals and precious metals on BLM land goes to the states, not the federal government and no mineral rights can be sold or transferred to foreign governments. If that doesn’t work for the feds, then the states should OWN and CONTROL the land, not the feds. Trump is really sucking on this one.
I will rephrase what I was trying to say.
This has not been on the front burner of American politics for the vast majority of political campaigns. So, I excuse people who have never been educated on it.
Not me. I can just see some corrupt state level politicians selling off land to China to line their pockets.
And he’ll do it on Twitter! Amazing.
“Trump supporters will see this as another brilliant statement.”
Nope. I think Trump is on the wrong side here.
If OBAMA can’t destroy the Constitution, nobody can. The issues are immigration, military, jobs, low taxes...done.
He will be. But why should I trust the others. They just knife the voters in the back when they get to Washington anyway.
How can I do worse than that? Might as well gamble that Trump means it. I know the rest of them are liars and backstabbers.
I listened VERY closely to Trump on this issue, his kids also, his kids are avid hunters says the FEDS have done a horrible job of taking care of the lands and it heeds to be changed!!! Trump stated that EPA is destroying lands, not thinning the forests, ect. I can see things both ways, I DO BELIEVE though that Trump knows the ranchers leasing these lands WILL care for them because it is their livelihood and business to do so!!! Trump WILL always side with hard working ranchers his core belief is hard work deserves being rewarded!!!
I’m not here to argue about it, I honestly don’t care much about this issue beyond “they probably control too much of the land”.
You can send your hate mail to these liberals.
http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/4/essays/126/property-clause
He has also said the ranchers caught up in the protest in Burns, Oregon are victims of federal land policy.
Trump will likely take a look at it and decide policy on a case-by-case basis.
Because it is true that pawning land off from one government to another may not solve the problem, in fact, may make it worse.
I think he will hear from the ranchers and make decisions that put their needs in perspective.
<><><><><
It sounds as though you are suggesting that Trump has made a policy statement that he will shortly be walking back once he has done the actual research on the topic.
We’re used to it now.
Ready.
Fire.
Aim.
Fire again.
Don’t look now....but doesn’t China already own US land? Not via anything the ‘states’ did though. And if it isn’t already illegal for states to ‘sell off’ land to foreign entities like that, it would be easy enough to make it so. Again, who would you more trust? The Federal Government? Seriously???
No I don’t. This is a huge issue for me. I want to ask him more about it.
It smells of agenda 21.
Sad, but true.
I do.
To keep a federal park, for example, intact with consistent management it needs to be under the jurisdiction of one entity. For example, Yellowstone National Park. If Wyoming spends too much money, they shouldn’t be able to sell part of it to developers or even cut back on rangers managing it.
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.