You mean like the Republican front runner Donald Trump who wants to expand the role of goverment in providing healthcare and increase taxes on the rich to pay for it?
My only problem with the Right Wing Candidates this year (Ironically except for Trump) is that of Federal vs State Land Ownership... As a DIY Western Hunter this is a HUGE issue to me, and states all have horrible track records of keeping lands open for public access. Not only do most states lease up the rights to land for the biggest profit, They usually end up selling it off completely. Nevada started with over 2 million acres of state owned land and now has less than 1% of it left. I don't want to see other's follow suite. Ted Cruz 100% WILL turn over lands to states, he adamantly states it. Most others including Rubio agree. I'm not straight ticket across the board for all issues, and this is one that I side with the liberals on. Land should remain in Federal Hands and open to everyone for access.
Talk about a rock and a hard place.......... maintain ownership of lands, but with the socialist/progressive agendas we won't be able to hunt it or access it. Under the conservatives/constitutionalists, land is given to the states and they mishandle it and we can't hunt it. ????????????????????????????????????
did you guys hear yesterday that Obama and the DOJ are trying to have the illegals vote in the election? I about had a heart attack. he is still trying to damage our country as much as possible before he goes back home to iran. this action will never fly, but you never know with that idiot what he will pull off.
Our current president has shown that it doesn't matter how congress voted, he can pass whatever he likes. So yes, it still matters and no... It wasn't meant to be a lifetime job, however saying that's a reason that who is voted in as president, doesn't matter is a bit of a cop out.
I agree, unfortunately we can't pick and choose our issues and "build a candidate." Personally, I think there are other issues that probably take precedence over the land issue, that the liberals will ruin us on. When China calls the note, the Feds will try to sell the lands to the states, since they can't afford to buy it... It will get sold to someone.... You can take your chances with state ownership or foreign ownership.
I believe China owns around 7-8% of the US debt. They cannot prematurely call anything as that is not how bonds work. They may sell their bonds which they have been doing recently. Bonds are also not secured by anything but the US has never defaulted on payments. Anyway, the US is a very important trading partner to China so attempting to try to screw us in some way would not be good for them.
The public lands issue is number one for me. There's no way I could vote for someone that's determined to transfer the lands over. There are some things, like public lands, that should never have an expectation of making money.
You've never left the state of Missouri either though correct? (Not being a smart*** just thought I read that somewhere). Those of us who love to travel and explore all this great country has to offer appreciate what the federal government did centuries ago by securing land for people to enjoy.
I do think the feds "mismanage" the lands they own (states always seem to get better grazing rights deals/oil leases not to mention the states spending FAR less to manage the same chunk of land)... That said, States have and DO sell off land to private bidders all the time. Once it's gone, it's gone forever. I honestly don't care which section of our governments own it, as long as it can never be restricted or sold off by law. Ironically, and this goes against my initial posts, the Feds are the ones restricting access up here in Alaska. They are trying to ban bear baiting on federal ground, and are usually the ones who come up with the crazy access restrictions like no planes between these dates, no boats on this river between these dates, etc. For Alaska, the state government seems to allow better access than the feds (at least for hunting). Given our economy's direction up here with oil in the crapper though, I'd still rather see the excess lands remain out of the state's hands and their temptation for an easy budget fix.
No, that's not correct. You're probably referring to the how many states have you visited thread. I've been to a handful of states but I don't travel extensively and I don't rely on public ground to explore. I don't have any problem with the federal government owning a few national parks, I just don't like the idea of expanding that to millions of acres...that feels over-inflated and outside the needed operational intent of a federal government in a constitutional republic to me. I think there's a balance there that could work for both our intents and purposes. As far as that goes I feel the same about state owned lands.
I am ok with a few national parks and such, but they're acquiring land simply to take it out of reach from private land owners and hoarding it. China is even buying up huge chunks of our land. I think that's completely overstepping what should be. I am ok with state's owning land for state parks and public game lands so long as it's managed properly and doesn't cost more than the amount of revenue being brought in to support it. If it's unmanageable then it's useless for public use and will end up being abused. What road am I on, this is about Trump, right?
(skip to the 1:20 mark to get to the greasy stuff) Ted Cruz: I would fight to transfer federal land back to the states. - YouTube I think the Federal Land issue is not something we can sleep on, especially if this guy gets the nod. How is it possible to "give the land back to the states" when they were never the states to begin with? Are there things that need to be fixed with the Federal land? Yes. Who is in charge of fixing it? The same people trying to give it away... Congress.
