Thread by @Spencer_Durrant

Once again:

I read your bill. These exclusions aren’t found ANYWHERE.

Let’s start with the basics.

🧵

https://twitter.com/senmikelee/status/1935913045173133532

What your bill says is that any National Forest, and virtually any BLM land, is for sale.

Parks, monuments, and a few other specific types of land are exempt. But the majority of public land is in National Forests, and that’s on the chopping block.

Receipts:

Also, it’s important to note that Montana is excluded from this bill. We can assume Ryan Zinke (Montana Senator) gave his tacit support for Lee’s plan, in exchange for exempting Montana from these sales.

That’s concerning because Montana has housing problems just like Utah (and Colorado, to an extent). Bozeman and Missoula are close to full.

But let’s move on to the criteria for the land being sold.

Mike Lee says they’ll only sell land to use for housing/infrastructure.

Receipt:

On its face, seems cut-and-dry, right? Like Lee is telling the truth?

Like every politician, he’s selling you half the truth wrapped in a lie. Like oatmeal raisin cookies.

The land sold can be nominated for ANY of these 4 reasons:

A governor/town nominates it
The land is adjacent to existing developed areas
Land has access to existing infrastructure
OR its suitable for residential housing.

Nowhere in the bill did I find definitions for what

Those terms mean. What’s the definition of “developed” land? If I had a cattle pasture that sits next to 10,000 acres of national forest, could someone nominate that Forest land for sale because I’ve “developed” my cattle pasture with fences?

And what if a developer makes a pitch that the National Forest directly outside Yellowstone (or BLM land outside Zion) is “suitable for housing?”

That housing won’t be affordable. And that prime forest where we hunt and fish is now privatized because it “has development

Potential” and, if you build on the doorsteps of National Parks, probably has access to some infrastructure.

This is a reckless move to “build housing” that only rich people can afford (and government shouldn’t be involved in housing, anyways).

Take a look at this highlighted piece of land (green means it’s managed by USFS).

That chunk of land runs along the North Fork of the Shoshone River, a hugely popular fly fishing destination.

It’s also critical habitat for big horn sheep, elk, deer, wolves, and grizzlies.

That road goes directly to the East Gate of Yellowstone.

Under Lee’s bill, that public land that hundreds of thousands recreate on as they head to Yellowstone, would be sold and developed.

You can’t, in good faith, tell me that’s a net positive for America.

This is just one example, in one spot, of land that’s potentially made available for sale because Mike Lee hates public land.

It won’t ease the housing crunch. Only rich people will be able to afford these homes.

It’ll just lock us out of our hunting and fishing heritage.

Last, and perhaps most important:

Nowhere in the bill are there any guarantees of public access through land that’s sold. No easements for fishing access, no through roads to access the backcountry for hunting/hiking/camping. All of this is in serious jeopardy.