Why would anyone oppose shrinking the Fedgub’s bloated land portfolio?
Constituent votes.
In Alaska in particular, the argument is that as soon as it is in private hands, it will be cut off from the ability to hunt and fish. People would block the land and block access. A minor argument is that big businesses would buy land and develop it and harm the natural environment. Whether for tourism or resource development.
Because they are Deep State.
It may have to do with grazing rights. And it is taxpayers’ land. I am against taking land away that taxpayers have paid for and continue and pay for and putting it in the hands of a few. Now explore more use for the land and increasing its productivity is another matter. Good management should be a given. That can save taxpayers money without making them lose access to the benefits of the lands.