Sure does. Some senators buddies or family will get rich off the deal at taxpayers expense. But that's nothing new.

The Wilderness Society opposes selling public lands.

Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. The Wilderness Society-- [22] This U.S. Supreme Court case involved the Alyeska Pipeline, which runs from the north to the south in Alaska. The Wilderness Society wanted to stop construction on the pipeline. They argued that it would damage the environment and violate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Alyeska Pipeline Company. This allowed the pipeline to proceed with its construction.

Successfully persuaded the government to protect sensitive habitat for caribou and other wildlife in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska from oil and gas drilling, and helped move a bill to Congress to protect the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge;

These are the people who will eventually control your public lands.

Maybe. These last few weeks we’ve seen the influence and impact “we the people” can have when we stand up for the things we want and believe.

The U.S. should do this. I want to watch the Government steal or force my neighbors to give up their property. They already got treated like crap during covid.

Quite literally in many areas you cannot go vertical. That's one of the reason housing in Los Angeles is so expensive and non-existent is that multi-story buildings are basically banned.

I’d bet there’s plenty of abandoned buildings to be refurbished in LA. That’s if the Santa Ana’s don’t wipe the slate clean first.

Why can't you use it? The rest of us that are against it don't want the public lands we use sold off. What makes you special so you can't use the public lands the rest of us do?

ID and WY are the only two states left. FWIW the senate has tossed out the BLM / Forest sale part of the BBB. The debt increase is still there. Why should I care about states that wont let me trap BLM or Forest?

Danny you can trap Utah Oregon Montana Arizona both North and South Dakota Nebraska Kansas.
The list goes on. Each state makes the decision as to weather you can trap public land. Not the federal government. Would you want your state of Kansas to sell of its little bit of grass lands, public recreation arias and parks so they can produce more tax revenue for the Government to plunder.

But that's NOT what they want to sell.

I am done arguing. I just don’t care. You want to trap the states you mentioned with their absurd rules then have at it

That's exactly what they're selling. 0.5% of BLM and NF land. I posted that part of the bill earlier.

The land grab is not over keep your eyes peeled it will come back soon.

I enjoy trapping. Trapping is important.

However, whether or not someone thinks he can or cannot trap in another state has absolutely nothing to do with the stupid decision to sell off those federal lands to pay for that big, bad piece of crap of bill.

Don't worry BC the Reid appointed parliamentarian is strpping it down much more than just this. Like stopping welfare for illegals. Thune refuses to override, Swamp wins again with the help of western state "conservatives" and their constitutes.

Yep, can't even throw able bodied childless bums off medicaid so your fence builders are safe. Lol.

The swamp at its best,
Throw out anything that may save tax payers and keep what keeps bums on our dime.

Y'all pretend you're more anti welfare than me. LOL.

Wish suppressors and SBRs stayed. Now the dummies need to do it right.

No way would they stop there.

"Additionally, the Founders believed that the protection of property rights was essential for economic development and the overall prosperity of the nation. They recognized that secure property rights encourage investment, innovation, and entrepreneurship, which are vital for a thriving economy. By ensuring that individuals could reap the benefits of their labor and investments, the Founders aimed to create a society where people had the incentive to work hard and contribute to the common good.

In summary, the Founding Fathers wanted private property because they viewed it as a fundamental natural right, essential for individual liberty and independence. They also recognized its practical benefits in promoting economic productivity and social stability, and they sought to protect it through constitutional safeguards to prevent government abuse and ensure the long-term prosperity of the nation."



"When Marxists speak of private property under capitalism, it refers to the tools of production that should be owned by all of society, such as factories, lands, stores, mines and all those things that are gifts of nature or are built by many people over many centuries, but are now being monopolized by a few. These few don’t concern themselves with how many years of human labor went into their creation, just so long as they alone can reap profits from legal ownership of that property."

But that's not the land they want to sell

Just like Gun laws, trapping laws give m an inch and the next thing you know snow ball.