Lex Anteinternet: Hoping this is true.
Lex Anteinternet: Teton County Wants Same Federal Land Sale Exemptio...
Teton County Wants Same Federal Land Sale Exemption Montana Got
This is one of those areas which Mike Lee imagines will benefit from his land sale provision:
Teton County Wants Same Federal Land Sale Exemption Montana Got Teton County commissioners have sent a letter to Wyoming’s congressional delegation asking that federal lands in the county be exempt from any proposed sale. Montana got an exemption, and Teton
Wyomingites don't want this. Teton County, which has a housing problem (caused by the super wealthy) doesn't want it.
When will we see Hageman, Barrasso and Lummis begin to reflect what Wyoming wants?
Lex Anteinternet: Congress woman Hageman responds, and Sen. Lee reacts.
Congress woman Hageman responds, and Sen. Lee reacts.
Lee Offers Compromise On Public Land Sales Bill, Hunters Say No Deal
Sen. Lee is apparently offering something, but it's not clear what, and the opposition is saying no. I'm saying no as well. I adamantly opposed transferring public lands away from public hands.
Congressman Hageman responded, or somebody working for her did, to a letter I wrote. It may of course be a form letter.
Dear Mr. Yeoman
Congress is currently in the budget reconciliation process, which allows for expedited consideration of certain tax, spending, and debt limit legislation. The House recently passed its version of the bill, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which now awaits Senate consideration. Those Senate committees that received reconciliation instructions pursuant to H.Con.Res.14 have begun releasing legislative text for reconciliation consideration, but I want to note that such materials are not the final bill. These committee proposals must still be reviewed by the Senate parliamentarian for compliance with the Byrd rule and then pass the entire Senate to officially become part of the reconciliation bill. Such bill will then come back to the House for consideration in relation to what we passed earlier.
On June 11, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee released legislative text to be considered as part of Senate Republicans’ budget reconciliation bill. As you have noted, Subtitle C of the bill instructs the Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Chief of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to identify not less than 0.50 percent and not more than 0.75 percent of the lands managed by these agencies for disposal pursuant to the specific conditions set forth in the statutory instructions. This would amount to between two and three million acres of the roughly 640 million acres owned by the federal government, with such lands to be made available solely for the purpose of housing and community development.
There is an extensive amount of downright flagrantly incorrect information being circulated as to the intent of this proposal, what lands would qualify for disposal should this become law, and how the process would proceed. Most notably, the Wilderness Society has produced a map for the purpose of ginning up opposition, despite the fact that such map has nothing to do with Subtitle C in any way whatsoever. It is thus necessary to clarify the situation, starting with the readily confirmable observation that there are no specific parcels or areas designated under the bill, and the details of the bill itself show that this is a commonsense proposal to identify and dispose of those BLM and USFS lands that are hindering local communities from meeting their housing and infrastructure needs, an issue with which Wyoming is all too familiar.
First, the bill does not propose selling off all federal lands. As I mentioned, it would only make available two to three million acres within the jurisdiction of the BLM and USFS in eleven states, including Wyoming. All such lands that are subject to valid existing rights (including grazing permits, ski areas, etc.), and those that are not located in the eleven eligible states are not subject to the bill. Those “Federally Protected Lands” (for example, National Parks, National Monuments, the National Wilderness Preservation System, the National Wildlife Refuge System, and more as defined in the bill) are not eligible for sale. All the lands sold pursuant to this proposal must be used “for the development of housing or to address associated community needs,” limiting not only the number of buyers, but likely making state and local governments the primary advocates and purchasers.
Second, this legislation does not directly offer any parcels for sale but instead provides for a robust public identification and nomination process to evaluate those unused lands that are close to existing infrastructure (such as surrounding Kemmerer, Wyoming), that are ideal for addressing the affordable housing crisis.
Both the BLM and USFS must consult with the governor, local governments, and Indian tribes regarding the suitability of the particular parcel of land for disposal before the proposed sale. Both agencies must also give priority to those lands that are nominated by state and local governments, are adjacent to existing developed areas, have access to existing infrastructure, are suitable for residential housing, reduce checkerboard land patterns, or which are isolated and inefficient to manage. All sales are to be held at fair market value, must provide state and local governments the first right of refusal, limit individual persons in how many acres they can acquire, and share revenue of the sales with the local government to assist with housing development.
This legislative proposal is now pending in the Senate and is thus not something I am currently being asked to vote on as your representative. This proposal was not included in the OBBBA that I voted for and which passed the House. However, I want to reiterate that much of the maps and information circulating about the bill are incorrect and that the proposal as drafted is a much more targeted approach to answer the needs of our local communities, who are hampered from further development due to the oversized footprint of the federal government in our states.
I encourage you to read the bill itself to understand what it does, and as importantly, what it does not do, when considering the benefits of this legislation. Thank you for reaching out to us.
Sincerely,
Rep. Harriet Hageman
Member of Congress
Well, at least its a response.
A few things.
I've taken at look at the bill, and I had before I received this letter, contrary to Congressman Hageman's suggestion that I, and others opposing this didn't.
This proposal still sucks. I have no interest, for example, in reducing checkerboard land patterns, particularly if we are now able to corner cross, as it sees we can. This land just opened to the public and now
Nor do I have any interest in disposing of Federal lands for an alleged "housing crisis" that largely doesn't exist in the form these things suggest. There's no requirement in any of these proposals to restrict sales of land to those really in need of housing. A process already exists to transfer lands where such things really exist. Sales for "fair market value", in the areas where this would apply in Wyoming, would result in transfers of land in Wyoming for castles for the rich, which I do not support. There's nothing to suggest the land would go to state and local governments given that, and I don't want state in local governments in the housing business to start with.
More than anything, this is the wolf's nose in the door. Once its passed, it'll push its way into the house.
Trump appointee, a Jackson Hole consultant, ID’d pitfalls of Wyoming managing its federal land
Here's Six Ways Trump’s Budget Will Hurt Rural Americans
Going Feral: Blog Mirror: Public Lands Victory: BHA Applauds R...
Blog Mirror: Public Lands Victory: BHA Applauds Removal of Public Land Sale Amendment from House Budget Reconciliation Bill
Very good news:
Public Lands Victory: BHA Applauds Removal of Public Land Sale Amendment from House Budget Reconciliation Bill
Voters need to remember who favored this horrific action to privatize public lands in 2026. All over the West there seems to be a view that you have to vote for Republicans. You don't, if they aren't voting for you. There are other options, or there can be if people consider what's being done and oppose it.
Anyhow, this is good news.
Remember that some things aren’t for sale
Foothill Agrarian: Just a Piece of Land
Going Feral: Disaster.
Disaster.
Federal Land Can Be Home Sweet Home
America needs more affordable housing, and the federal government can make it happen by making federal land available to build affordable housing stock.
The Interior Department oversees more than 500 million acres of federal land, much of it suitable for residential use. The Department of Housing and Urban Development brings expertise in housing policy and community development. Together we are creating the Joint Task Force on Federal Land for Housing to increase housing supply and decrease costs for millions of Americans.
Under this agreement, HUD will pinpoint where housing needs are most pressing and guide the process by working with state and local leaders who know their communities best. Interior will identify locations that can support homes while carefully considering environmental impact and land-use restrictions. Working together, our agencies can take inventory of underused federal properties, transfer or lease them to states or localities to address housing needs, and support the infrastructure required to make development viable -- all while ensuring affordability remains at the core of the mission.
Streamlining the regulatory process is a cornerstone of this partnership. Historically, building on federal land is a nightmare of red tape -- lengthy environmental reviews, complex transfer protocols and disjointed agency priorities. This partnership will cut through the bureaucracy. Interior will reduce the red tape behind land transfers or leases to public housing authorities, nonprofits and local governments. HUD will ensure these projects align with affordability goals and development needs. This isn't a free-for-all to build on federal lands, although we recognize that bad-faith critics will likely call it that. It's a strategic effort to use our resources responsibly while preserving our most beautiful lands.
This is about more than building houses. We want to build hope. Overlooked rural and tribal communities will be a focus of this joint agreement. We are going to invest in America's many forgotten communities. As we enter the Golden Age promised by President Trump, this partnership will change how we use public resources. A brighter future, with more affordable housing, is on its way.
###
What total bullshit.
And a disaster.
We need 7 million affordable homes in America and 20% of America’s landmass is owned by the Department of Interior. Today, and I are announcing a partnership between & to identify and open under utilized federal lands for affordable housing.1:30HUD and DOI Open Under Utilized Federal Lands For Affordable Housing
Math is apparently not the stable genius' strong suit.
Trump: "Very importantly for Iowa, this bill rescues over 2 billion family farms from the so-called estate tax or the death tax." ...
-
The heavy duty, or at least heavy, premium American automobile of the golden age of American manufacturing which Trump seems to dream can be...
-
Same day, same paper. One ad celebrating agriculture, and one celebrating its destruction.
-
The Real Threat to Food Security : Our lawmakers need to take farmland access seriously. The next farm bill should work more for the health ...