Posted on 03/14/2014 6:48:43 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Ugghhh. Via The Hill:
President Obama on Thursday urged Congress to “do even more” on conservation projects after signing legislation protecting a 35-mile stretch of Lake Michigan’s coastline.
“There are currently dozens of conservation proposals before Congress — many supported by Democrats and Republicans — that would protect important lands across the country and help grow our economy,” Obama said in a statement.
The Sleeping Bear Dunes conservation law was the first public lands designation by Congress in more than five years — the longest lawmakers had gone without making a wilderness designation in nearly 50 years.
While urging lawmakers to take up additional conservation measures, Obama pledged to “continue to do my part to protect our federal lands for future generations to enjoy.”
I’m sorry, but simply implying that adding more land to the one-third of the surface area the United States government already owns is not quite the same thing as the president doing his “part to protect our federal lands for future generations to enjoy” and simultaneously “growing the economy.” If Obama really wanted to ensure the best possible environmental and economic stewardship of those precious lands, he might start considering opening them up for public-private management setups or leasing them for other commercial uses that could actually turn their own profits — instead of subjecting them to clunky, political, top-down policy decisions and turning them into a further strain on our deferred maintenance backlog.
In that same vein, the many empty and abandoned buildings currently beefing up the federal estate are a major drain on taxpayer resources, but the bureaucracy is gummed up with rules and regulations that directly deny the properties from being put to productive uses. Via NPR:
Government estimates suggest there may be 77,000 empty or underutilized buildings across the country. Taxpayers own them, and even vacant, they’re expensive. The Office of Management and Budget says these buildings could be costing taxpayers $1.7 billion a year. …
Wise and his colleagues have been using the only known centralized database that the government has, the Federal Property Profile, and it’s not reliable, he says. …
But Carper says that even when an agency knows it has a building it would like to sell, bureaucratic hurdles limit what it can do. No federal agency can sell anything unless it’s uncontaminated, asbestos-free and environmentally safe. Those are expensive fixes.
Then the agency has to make sure another one doesn’t want it. Then state and local governments get a crack at it, then nonprofits — and finally, a 25-year-old law requires the government to see whether it could be used as a homeless shelter.
Which means that federal agencies usually end up giving up and just locking the gates on these blighted opportunity costs. Instead of focusing on placing still more lands and properties under federal control, perhaps the government should be a little more focused on getting rid of some of them.
No problemo...the Blumb organization will get the exclusive contract to sell them all...like Feinsteins’s hubby did with the surplus Post Office buildings.
A very large concrete warehouse sat idle for about 3 decades near here. It was whispered in the local population that it was a superspook facility. Nobody ever came or went.
Finally a hardware store chain asked about it because it would make a decent distribution center. It took a couple of years of asking and a personal visit with one of our Senators to find out who owned it. It turned out to be some obscure alphabet agency who didn’t know they had it.
It belongs to the hardware store now.
Is there any way of getting a list of all these buildings?
It is not just buildings. It is former military bases too. I have always thought we could pay off the national debt if we just sold off the Presido in downtown San Francisco.
RE: Is there any way of getting a list of all these buildings?
We could probably start here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/fiscal/excess-property-map
When you are empire building, one of the first things you want is a Monument for your new empire.
There is no incentive for the self-important empire builder, to look for efficiencies, when they are encouraged and rewarded for STEAL MORE TAXPAYER DOLLARS.
Until taxpayers DEMAND POSITIVE RESULTS, they will continue to be robbed for the benefit of the unproductive.
Not only could my friend not find one upper management person who cared about waste and fraud. . .he discovered THEY WERE WILLING PARTICIPANTS. . kickbacks on kickbacks. . .Needless to say. . .my friend was soon retired for his efforts to bring FDA corruption to light. . . .and this was just one department. . .multiply it by a million.
SEIU janitors?
Would you like some cesium-137 to go with your base? This is the problem with older property used during the 40’s and 50’s
http://cironline.org/reports/nuclear-byproduct-levels-treasure-island-higher-navy-disclosed-4362
We have a similar issue up here at the Portsmouth, NH naval station. This is where they built the Nautilus(the first nuclear submarine). The base, which is on the list to potentially close again, is on an island in the river separating NH & ME. They currently rebuild attack subs there. There is an old prison on the island called the Castle. It was the main naval prison in the 1800’s. They want somebody to buy it. However, it is rumored to be so toxic from all the chemicals that were dumped there by the govt. that it really should be an EPA superfund site. Therefore, no one will touch it.
Hey, thanks, that's what I was looking for.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.