Republican Lawmakers Propose Selling Public Lands To Pay For Billionaire Tax Cuts

And it should come as no surprise that they're already lying about it too

Back in January, I reported that a mass sell-off of public land was one of the options Congressional Republicans were considering, to help offset the cost of giving billionaires a $5 trillion tax cut. Now, E&E News confirms that there’s, “some discussion” of such sales going forward.

That quote comes from Senator Dan Sullivan (R—Alaska), who went on to tell E&E, “I think it’s a great idea. We’re looking at different options for revenue raising. The federal government owns a lot of lands—a lot of lands.”

To recap, the only legislation this dysfunctional Congress will be able to pass this session is a budget reconciliation package. Those are able to avoid a filibuster in the Senate through a simple majority vote (rather than the 60 votes other types of bills need), but can only deal with the budget, and in budget reconciliation, stuff that adds to the deficit must be offset by equivalent deficit reductions.

Trump is asking for $5 trillion in tax cuts for billionaires over the next 10 years, so to make budget reconciliation work, they’ve got to find $5 trillion in savings.

That’s the reason Elon Musk has tasked himself with slashing government spending, something he’s so far been unable to do.

The math used in budget reconciliation also involves picking and choosing numbers. Cutting 30 percent of the workforce in national parks, as is the administration’s target, could “save” about $228 million, for example. But losing those workers could lead to more than $40 billion in annual damage to national parks, while costing the economy $3.3 billion in consumer spending each year. Republicans are only adding up those savings, while ignoring the potential costs that might result.

Back to selling off public lands. E&E spoke to Congressperson Bruce Westerman (R—Arkansas), who seemed delighted by the idea. “It would just be in areas where you can’t get affordable housing, like for gateway communities,” he said. “So you could actually have people to work in the National Parks, maybe around some big metropolitan areas in the West.”

Westerman chairs the House Natural Resources Committee, which has been tasked with finding at least $1 billion in deficit reduction measures.

That’s an interesting quote, because we already know it’s impossible to build affordable housing on public lands, especially adjacent to gateway communities. And, the last time a Republican told that lie (which was two weeks ago), the Secretary of the Interior said he was going to give away public land, not use it to offset billionaire tax cuts.

There are, of course, Republicans who are claiming they’d never sell public land. Not them, no way.

“Senator Daines has never and will never support the sale of public lands,” an aide to Steve Daines (R—Montana) texted E&E. Daines is my Senator, and while he loves to say he’d never sell land, he is all about revoking its protections, and leasing it to oil companies, even when there’s no oil under it. Daines is currently involved in yet another effort to strip Wilderness Study Areas in Montana of their protections, in order to drill on them (he does this every year, like clockwork), and has also introduced a bill that would require the Bureau of Land Mangement to hold lease sales for land in Montana once every three months, until it’s all bought up.

Meanwhile, Congressperson Ryan Zinke (R—Montana), introduced a bill this session that would ban the sale of public lands. But as with anything Zinke does, this is just one more grift.

“I have made clear: there are some things I won’t do,” the big tough man, who definitely lives in Montana, told E&E. “I will never bend on the Constitution and I won’t bend on selling our public lands.”

Zinke then went on to suggest that he’d be ok with transferring public land to state management, where state constitutions would promptly force its sale.

“There’s not gonna be any lots on the rim of the Grand Canyon for sale,” Westerman stated, before waffling: “And I’m not even sure any of that will be in the reconciliation bill we have.”

“Public lands belong to the American people,” Jordan Schreiber, government relations director at The Wilderness Society, said in a statment. “These are the places we hunt, fish, hike and commemorate our history and culture. Selling them off cannot be an option in the budget process, full stop. We’ve already seen this administration fire thousands of park rangers and other staff, weakening the agencies that are entrusted with managing our national parks, forests, wildlife refuges and other special places, and this is part of the same larger effort to end the institution of public lands as we know it.”

Top photo: BLM

Wes Siler is your guide to leading a more exciting life outdoors. Upgrading to a paid subscription supports independent journalism and gives you personal access to his expertise and network, which he’ll use to help you plan trips, purchase gear, and solve problems. You can read more about what he’s doing on Substack through this link.