Land Sale bills introduced by Utah Legislators

[5MilesBack]

I prefer to look for common ground, and I have yet to meet any particular political party that I agree with wholeheartedly. I haven't either.....they're both too liberal for my blood. So common ground isn't exactly common.......just like sense.

Partisanship in general, retards reasonable discussion, IMO.

I don't believe in "compromising" on my values or beliefs just for the sake of coming to some agreement that has no benefit to the greater good.

 

[5MilesBack]

The problem with the land Grabbers is that they cant be honest about their true motivations. Its transparent that the motivation behind the transfer is so states can depose of the land for their own profits.

So.......using your quote, please explain to me how Cruz benefits from this. He wouldn't be a "Land Grabber" he'd be a land transferer.

And like I've said previously, if you don't like the state selling any possible federal land transfers, then get the petition started and get the ballot proposal together, and get a state constitutional amendment to prevent any of these "possible" sales.

 

[Trial153]

So.......using your quote, please explain to me how Cruz benefits from this. He wouldn't be a "Land Grabber" he'd be a land transferer.

And like I've said previously, if you don't like the state selling any possible federal land transfers, then get the petition started and get the ballot proposal together, and get a state constitutional amendment to prevent any of these "possible" sales.

you want to see how Cruz benefits from it, why don't you look of the list of contributors to his super pacs. It will read like the who who in big oil, big mining, Natural gas exportation. not to mention all their private equity investors from the likes of Goldman Sacs. These same name will the first on the list buying up this land from the states or getting sweetheart deals for leases and rights from the state politicians they are already greasing for this transfer.


Federal lands belong to all citizens, not just the citizens of the state the land resides in. I haven't heard any mention of theses states paying fair market value for these lands and that money being deposited in the federal treasury. Why is that? They, the states politicians and seeking hand out at the rest of the countrys expense.

 

[mmw194287]

you want to see how Cruz benefits from it, why don't you look of the list of contributors to his super pacs. It will read like the who who in big oil, big mining, Natural gas exportation. .

Hmmmm.....who would've thought.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/25/politics/ted-cruz-wilks-brothers/

 

[Matt Cashell]

The Wilks Brothers:

"In 2011, they cashed out -- and began to buy enormous amounts of land in Montana for elk hunting and fly fishing. As of last year, they owned more than 310,000 acres of land in the state, making them Montana's largest private landowners, according to the Billings Gazette."

 

[TJ]

I don't believe in "compromising" on my values or beliefs just for the sake of coming to some agreement that has no benefit to the greater good.

Democracy is built on compromise. Not compromising on anything has led to the situation this government is in now.

"...By coming up with a mixed solution that balanced state sovereignty and popular sovereignty tied to actual population, the Constitution was forged through what is known as the Connecticut Compromise. In many respects this compromise reflected a victory for small states, but compared with their dominance in the Congress under the Articles of Confederation it is clear that negotiation produced something that both small and large states wanted..."

My way or the highway.

 

[5MilesBack]

Federal lands belong to all citizens, not just the citizens of the state the land resides in. I haven't heard any mention of theses states paying fair market value for these lands and that money being deposited in the federal treasury. Why is that?

Actually........the first I ever heard of this land transfer idea was a few years ago, and the idea then was to just "sell off" the public land for the Federal coffers, supposedly to pay down the national debt. But to me that's kind of like a drug addict selling his house to pay off his $200k debt. The house proceeds would never make it anywhere near his debt, and he'd blow it all on more drugs. You can't trust the Federal Government with money........any money. For that matter, you can't trust the states with any money either.

 

[5MilesBack]

Democracy is built on compromise. Not compromising on anything has led to the situation this government is in now.

Actually, it's my contention that compromising is exactly why we're in the situation we're in now.

 

[mplane72]

Actually, it's my contention that compromising is exactly why we're in the situation we're in now.

Unfortunately you're not alone and that is why we have a do nothing Congress and keep getting the wackos from the fringes of both parties winning elections and gumming up the works.

 

[Jason Snyder]

I guess you could categorize me as a singe issue voter in that I vote against liberalism every single time.

Coming from a "conservative", this makes me laugh. Typically appellate court judges that are Democrats are MUCH more likely to rule for individual rights and rule against perceived government intrusion. In contrast, appellate court judges are MUCH more likely to rule in favor of law enforcement entities as it pertains to individual Constitutional freedoms. It is so contradictory that it's amusing. The complete right wing folks typically uphold a much greater degree of governmental intrusion into our everyday lives.

 

[Mike7]

Jason, I would like to know where you come by this assessment. Are these different Democrats than are in the Washington legislature or on the Supreme Court. Every month here there are bills in Olympia that are against individual rights...with gun control being the most common recurring theme. Thank God that the NRA is there to help fight some of these. The political control in the State of Washington is instead all about special rights at the exclusion of others.

If Ted Cruz is a true Constitutionalist but has a personal opinion that some Federal land should be transferred to the states, then as a President, he can only advocate for Congress to take this up and consider it. Congress has supreme legislative authority over these completely Federal lands within the western states. I think that this is a good argument to consider, and a case could be made for some land exchanges based upon wildlife issues or possibly some land sales to the states even. I really enjoy using the federal/public lands, so will make my voice heard..but this is not even close to one of my top 5 issues right now in picking a candidate. Ultimately as I understand it, the states have little say regarding many of these lands.

What is not up for debate or compromise for me, is electing a President who will subvert the law of the land or nominate a Supreme Court Justice that will not strictly adhere to the Constitution within its original intent. This would be the biggest assault on individual rights and viability of this country that could possibly occur.

 

[Trial153]

In case anyone is wondering why Cruz is so pro land transfer he took in over 26m this year alone from the Real estate industry. That's only one super pac. Most of this comes from the Wilkes bothers in addition to them being in the Real estate industry they make their money via fracking, oil and natural gas. The also have some pretty low key religious views.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/indus.php?cycle=2016&id=N00033085&type=f

 

[Trial153]

Next you might what to look at the hedge fund billionaire from my neck of the woods, Robert Mercer ....does he ring any bells? he is coming in second with 11m this year to the super PAC. Hey Trial? What the hell does a hedge fund have to do with the land transfer? Real estate anyone?

Renaissance Institutional Equities Fund (RIEF)Edit
In 2005 Renaissance Institutional Equities Fund (RIEF) was created.[21] RIEF has historically trailed the firm's better-known Medallion fund, a separate fund that only contains the personal money of the firm's executives.[22] Renaissance also offers two Renaissance Institutional Diversified Alpha (RIDA) to outsiders.[9] Simons ran Renaissance until his retirement in late 2009.[10] Renaissance Institutional Equities Fund had difficulty with the higher volatility environment that persisted throughout the end of the summer of 2007. According to an article in Bloomberg in August 2007,[31]

 

[Mike7]

Trial153...and all of this prooves what? What act is Ted Cruz proposing that is not Constitutional? How have his views been inconsistent? What block of voters is he pandering to in a way that is completely contrary to his priciples? How is Ted Cruz personally enriching himself financially from all of this? Take these same questions here and apply them to every other candidate on both sides right now, and truthfully see how you do with that. We get it, you don't like Ted Cruz irrespective of his public lands postition. Some of us may not agree with all of his public lands positions, but find him many times better on a host of other issues.

You have to listen to hear. Our Federal gov't is stealing our children's future. There will be no money for any lands, services, nothing. It will all go to interest. The federal gov't will have two choices when they can't keep getting loans...sell things and print money. Read world history and see how this turns out. Republican and Democratic progressive policies are leading to that. These are important issues and not fear mongering. We don't have to wonder what might happen with the country. Look no further than the states to see just one small step in either direction. Today, would you rather live as a somewhat free man or woman in Idaho or Wyoming...or live as a subject in New York or California? That is the choice. Our federal gov't is pushing for our entire nation to become California but worse...California, one of the most beautiful states in the nation with great climate, ports, natural resources, etc....yet it is becoming a total crap hole.

I think it might be more concerning if a candidate solicited campaign money based upon secret promises to companies...companies that plan on getting gov't favors for themselves later from the candidate, and companies who plan on enriching the candidate personally later on based upon those secret promises and favors. Ted Cruz must be really bad at this and not have learned anything from Clinton or Reid, because that Cruz just comes out and says what he believes in. What an idiot. And, look at his work outside of politics where he just argued cases to make a buck...like District of Columbia v. Heller.

 

[CrzyTrekker]

Airlocksniffer you are welcome. I'll be in the building all day.

The constitutional aspect of this land grab is what fascinates me. Fact is, the legislative, judicial, and executive branches have circumvented the constitution with "creative" arguments for many, many years. Politicians desiring to please their oil & gas, private land baron friends are making this into a "constitutional issue" in order to pander to a certain demographic; a group of people that are being blatantly used.

Once the states have the land, assuming it happens, we'll have given up something of tremendous value and there will be no recovery of it.

 

[-bowfreak-]

Coming from a "conservative", this makes me laugh. Typically appellate court judges that are Democrats are MUCH more likely to rule for individual rights and rule against perceived government intrusion. In contrast, appellate court judges are MUCH more likely to rule in favor of law enforcement entities as it pertains to individual Constitutional freedoms. It is so contradictory that it's amusing. The complete right wing folks typically uphold a much greater degree of governmental intrusion into our everyday lives.

I am speechless.

 

[2ski]

[video=youtube;EgSL3hY5iPE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgSL3hY5iPE[/video]

 

[Trial153]

Trial153...and all of this prooves what? What act is Ted Cruz proposing that is not Constitutional? How have his views been inconsistent? What block of voters is he pandering to in a way that is completely contrary to his priciples? How is Ted Cruz personally enriching himself financially from all of this? Take these same questions here and apply them to every other candidate on both sides right now, and truthfully see how you do with that. We get it, you don't like Ted Cruz irrespective of his public lands postition. Some of us may not agree with all of his public lands positions, but find him many times better on a host of other issues.

You have to listen to hear. Our Federal gov't is stealing our children's future. There will be no money for any lands, services, nothing. It will all go to interest. The federal gov't will have two choices when they can't keep getting loans...sell things and print money. Read world history and see how this turns out. Republican and Democratic progressive policies are leading to that. These are important issues and not fear mongering. We don't have to wonder what might happen with the country. Look no further than the states to see just one small step in either direction. Today, would you rather live as a somewhat free man or woman in Idaho or Wyoming...or live as a subject in New York or California? That is the choice. Our federal gov't is pushing for our entire nation to become California but worse...California, one of the most beautiful states in the nation with great climate, ports, natural resources, etc....yet it is becoming a total crap hole.

I think it might be more concerning if a candidate solicited campaign money based upon secret promises to companies...companies that plan on getting gov't favors for themselves later from the candidate, and companies who plan on enriching the candidate personally later on based upon those secret promises and favors. Ted Cruz must be really bad at this and not have learned anything from Clinton or Reid, because that Cruz just comes out and says what he believes in. What an idiot. And, look at his work outside of politics where he just argued cases to make a buck...like District of Columbia v. Heller.

Naïvety in children is cute, in adults its down right scary. The hair on the back on neck stood up reading this post.

 

[5MilesBack]

The complete right wing folks typically uphold a much greater degree of governmental intrusion into our everyday lives.

This is false. In actuality true right wing folks will NEVER take the view of "safety at the expense of liberty". We'd rather keep the government completely out of our lives. Also, the true right wing are willing to lay down their own lives to defend and protect the Constitution at all costs. We're principled, we don't flop around on the issues depending on whether they benefit us, or are a detriment to us individually. That's why there are so few of us left. Don't ever make the mistake of mistaking a Republican as a conservative.

 

[airlocksniffer]

Why is there the assumption that the founders were perfect people and the original draft of the Constitution is a perfect document? If that were the case we wouldn't have the needs for amendments 13,14,15,17,19 or 24. I'd bet the founders would be rolling in their graves knowing that our country is way down the path to an oligarchy. Money<>Freedom.