You are here

Home » "Add An Acre, Sell An Acre" Proposal Aimed At Keeping Federal Estate From Growing Introduced To Congress

"Add An Acre, Sell An Acre" Proposal Aimed At Keeping Federal Estate From Growing Introduced To Congress

Share
By NPT Staff - March 12th, 2015

In an effort to keep the federal landscape from growing appreciably, a Republican from Virginia has introduced to Congress a measure that would, in many cases, require land-management agencies to offset every acre added to their oversight by selling an acre.

The measure, introduced by Rep. H. Morgan Griffith, was referred to the House Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry. As drafted, it would have any profits realized from land sales deposited into the federal Treasury for use in reducing the public debt.

NO NET INCREASE IN CERTAIN FEDERAL LANDS.

(a) In General.--For acquisition of land by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture that would result in a net increase of total land acreage under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, or the Forest Service, the Secretary concerned shall offer for sale an equal number of acres of Federal land that is under the same jurisdictional status.

(b) Exemptions.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to easements acquired--

(1) by the Secretary of the Interior to facilitate management of Federal lands; or

(2) by the Secretary of Agriculture to facilitate management of Federal lands.

(c) Consideration.--

(1) In general.--Land sold pursuant to subsection (a) shall be offered for sale--

(A) at fair market value (based on local comparable sales); and

(B) at a price that is reduced by 10 percent each month if the land is not sold or under contract to be sold by the date that is 6 months after the land was first offered for sale.

(2) Exception.--Time periods during which land is under contract for sale or withdrawn from the market shall not be counted for the purposes of price reduction under paragraph (1)(B).

(d) Existing Rights.--The sale of Federal lands pursuant to this section shall be subject to valid existing rights.

(e) Proceeds of Sale of Lands.--All net proceeds from the sale of Federal lands pursuant to this section shall be deposited directly into the Treasury for reduction of the public debt.

 

Interestingly, another measure, introduced in both the House and the Senate, calls for 44 acres to be added to John Muir National Historic Site.

Comments

Submitted by trailadvocate on March 15, 2015 - 10:44am.

Lee & rmackie, don't leave out the "Bipartisan" part of my post.  Things haven't been between the 40's for quite some time, I believe.  More like to the left of the 10 dragging everyone else along with constant deception.  Yep, between the 40's would be a vast improvement.  

NPT is an awesome site 


Submitted by Lee Dalton on March 15, 2015 - 11:05am.

If necessary for pandering is a legitimate necessity, then perhaps.  But that's not my idea of good governance.

It would be wonderful if we could find a way to moderate the feuds in Congress, online, and among the talking heads of radio and television.  But until voters wake up and begin to demand that those at the extremes of both sides moderate or vacate, nothing is going to change.

What we really need is a viable, middle of the road, sensible, third party.

What prevents that from happening?  May I suggest that it may simply be a matter of money?  Powerful interests on both sides pour their dollars into campaigns that they believe will further their agendas and they are not going to send any greenbacks to an organization that hasn't a proven record of delivering for them.

In the meantime, we all suffer.


Submitted by ecbuck on March 15, 2015 - 11:38am.

If necessary for pandering is a legitimate necessity

And what is your evidence that that is the case and that his proposal isn't a sincere one?


Submitted by Lee Dalton on March 15, 2015 - 1:56pm.

What is your evidence that it is sincere and without any pandering?

 


Submitted by ecbuck on March 15, 2015 - 4:09pm.

I don't have evidence either way. But then i haven't made a claim either way. You did.  Its up to you to back your claim not for me to back up something I never said.  But then that is a favorite tactic of yours.  Claim somebody said something they never said (create the strawman)  and then attack. 

i have no reason to believe he isn't sincere.  The legislation is clear in scope and intent and I don't think it goes anywhere near far enough. 


Submitted by Lee Dalton on March 15, 2015 - 4:29pm.

Another contradiction. ;-]


Submitted by ecbuck on March 15, 2015 - 4:37pm.

Really, what is the contradiction, now or before. You made a claim, you can't back it up but you do dance like Fred. 


Submitted by Lee Dalton on March 15, 2015 - 7:06pm.

I'm sure other readers will be able to decide.

In the meantime, perhaps we can sell the Federal land in Colorado to China. 


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.