So emminent domain to take your house is good but selling it back is bad?

Lot of rich people hate on this thread?

I'll say out loud what we all know. The few people on here that are twisting this issue around to try to make it defensible would be wailing and nashing their teeth if the Biden administration had proposed this. And that's all you really need to know.....

Not really a fair comparison and not how eminent domain is used, they don't sell your house back to you. I'm glad ole Teddy did what he did so I'll say yes, I appreciate what he did and all the reasons behind it. Public lands were set aside for us and should never be sold for any reason including private or political gain.

You know as well as I do that if sold they will be raped and pillaged by the wealthy or good Lord forbid, foreigners. To me, public lands are not a commodity and the US sure ain't that poor to justify selling. It's bad enough that we all experience some sort of loss of access to public lands, think about the precedent it will set to sell off a huge chunk.

If DC follows the Constitution then so be it, nothing to do about it I reckon. I truly can't believe on a outdoor forum people are advocating for the selling of OUR public land. It's a win win for the rich to get richer and a loose loose for all the rest, including the redneck hilljacks like me. I'm sure the federal gov will spend that sale money wisely.

Not really a fair comparison and not how eminent domain is used, they don't sell your house back to you. I'm glad ole Teddy did what he did so I'll say yes, I appreciate what he did and all the reasons behind it. Public lands were set aside for us and should never be sold for any reason including private or political gain.

You know as well as I do that if sold they will be raped and pillaged by the wealthy or good Lord forbid, foreigners. To me, public lands are not a commodity and the US sure ain't that poor to justify selling. It's bad enough that we all experience some sort of loss of access to public lands, think about the precedent it will set to sell off a huge chunk.

If DC follows the Constitution then so be it, nothing to do about it I reckon. I truly can't believe on a outdoor forum people are advocating for the selling of OUR public land. It's a win win for the rich to get richer and a loose loose for all the rest, including the redneck hilljacks like me. I'm sure the federal gov will spend that sale money wisely.

(2) NOMINATIONS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned shall publish a notice soliciting nominations of tracts of Bureau of Land Management land and National Forest System land for disposal by the Secretary concerned under this section from interested parties, including 25 States and units of local governmen

(B) CONSULTATION.—Before selecting for disposal under this section any tract of Bureau of Land Management land or National Forest System land nominated for disposal under subparagraph (A), the Secretary concerned shall consult with— (i) the Governor of the State in which the nominated tract is located regarding the suitability of the area for residential development; (ii) each applicable unit of local government; and (iii) each applicable Indian Tribe. (C) REQUIREMENTS.—A nomination of a tract of Bureau of Land Management land or National Forest System land for disposal submitted by an interested party under subparagraph (A) shall include a description of— (i) the planned use of the tract of Bureau of Land Management land or National Forest System land; and (ii) the extent to which the development of the tract of Bureau of Land Management land or National Forest System 25 land would address local housing needs (including housing supply and affordability) or any associated community needs. (3) PRIORITY CONSIDERATION.—In selecting tracts of Bureau of Land Management land and National Forest System land for disposal under this section, the Secretary concerned shall give priority consideration to the disposal of tracts of Bureau of Land Management land and National Forest System land that, as determined by the Secretary concerned— (A) are nominated by States or units of local governments; (B) are adjacent to existing developed areas; (C) have access to existing infrastructure; (D) are suitable for residential housing; (E) reduce checkerboard land patterns; or (F) are isolated tracts that are inefficient to manage.

e) FAIR MARKET VALUE.—A sale of a tract of covered Federal land under this section shall be for not less than fair market value. (f) RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL.—The Secretary concerned may provide a State or unit of local government in which a tract of covered Federal land is located a right of first refusal to purchase the applicable tract of covered Federal land for community development purposes, subject to subsection (e). (g) LIMITATIONS.— (1) USE.—A tract of covered Federal land disposed of under this section shall be used solely for the development of housing or to address associated community needs as defined by the Secretary concerned. (2) MAXIMUM TOTAL ACREAGE.—The Secretary concerned shall establish a maximum total acreage of tracts of covered Federal land that a person may purchase under this section. (3) RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.— (A) IN GENERAL.—As a condition of the conveyance of a tract of covered Federal land under this section, the conveyance shall include a restrictive covenant requiring that the tract of 25 covered Federal land conveyed be used for a period of not less than 10 years in accordance with the planned use of the tract of covered Federal land— (i) as described pursuant to paragraph (2)(C)(i) of subsection (c), in the case of covered Federal land nominated under that paragraph; or (ii) as identified by the Secretary concerned, in the case of covered Federal land initially identified for disposal by the Secretary concerned. (B) RIGHT OF ENFORCEMENT.—The United States shall retain a right of enforcement against any use inconsistent with a restrictive covenant included in a conveyance of a tract of Federal land under subparagraph (A). (4) FEDERALLY PROTECTED LAND; VALID EXISTING RIGHTS; OUTSIDE ELIGIBLE STATES.—The Secretary concerned may not dispose of any tract of covered Federal land that is— (A) federally protected land; (B) subject to valid existing rights; or (C) not located in an eligible State.
(5) NUMBER OF TRACTS.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a person may not purchase more than 2 tracts of covered Federal land in any 1 sale under this section unless the person owns land surrounding the tracts of covered Federal land to be sold under this section. (B) EXCEPTION.—Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to a State or unit of local government.

Land suitable for housing and near a road.

Population growth, your gonna need housing. Here we're losing farm ground at an alarming rate to houses, maybe its that way most places and this is to relieve some of that pressure?

You're also going to need energy for the growth, another thing that good farm ground is going to here. Solar farms going up, and is a major issue for candidates in our local elections as to if they support them or not.

Reality sucks sometimes.

A forced reality would be more accurate. One thing is solar plots, solar systems, solar mines, not solar "farms", they do not meet the def of a farm. "Solar farm" is a term used to connect them to nature and they don't belong in nature. They belong on top of buildings, vacant city lots that are left vacant, not utilized for housing, parking garages etc. Industrial solar has no business on land zoned for AG or our public lands, solar destroys wildlife and the ground it's on. Also, the Chinese nor any foreign Country should own any of our soil.

As for population, we grew what, 0.98% last year. Figuring the boomers @ 20% and Xer's @20% I don't see a real surge in population unless they keep the borders open. Plus, everywhere I look there's vacant housing, vacant apartment complexes that aren't being utilized. The Gov has set this up and now tell us hey, it's reality. I digress, if this sale goes through it will be the tip of the iceberg. It will sell to "any interested party", who will take the oil, timber, mine it and move on to the next tract for sale cause hey, it's just reality.