Posted on 03/10/2015 11:58:17 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Many aspects of Gov. Scott Walker’s 2015-’17 budget have come under heavy criticism, but this headline on a state Democratic Party news release really caught our attention:
"Scott Walker's Iowa Caucus Budget Would Sell Off Wisconsin's State Parks."
The Iowa part didn’t surprise us -- it’s just the party’s latest dig at Walker for spending more time out of state as he weighs a potential 2016 presidential bid. That includes Iowa, home to the first voting in that contest.
But would Walker’s budget "sell off Wisconsin’s state parks"? As in, to private bidders?
No. It wouldn’t.
When we asked Democratic Party spokeswoman Melissa Baldauff for evidence to support the claim, it became evident that there was some false advertising in the news release.
"We are referring to the proposals by Walker administration officials at the DNR to sell off naming rights to the state parks to offset his budget cuts to the state park system," Baldauff wrote in an email, adding "the people who do live here aren't likely to want to see our richest natural resources sold off to corporations and campaign donors."
OK. But selling naming rights is far, far different than selling any of Wisconsin’s 64 state parks, forests and recreational areas. And even that is not in the budget itself. Rather, naming rights is an idea that came up in questioning during a March 3, 2015, hearing of the Joint Finance Committee.
Under Walker’s budget, state parks would have to sustain themselves through higher admission and camping fees. That stirred questions from lawmakers when Department of Natural Resources Secretary Cathy Stepp, a Walker appointee, testified.
State Sen. Jon Erpenbach, D-Middleton, quizzed Stepp about her plans for keeping the state parks in business.
A video of the meeting shows that Stepp said there was sufficient money to run the parks for the next two years, and said officials would use the time to consider ways to best fund parks beyond that.
Said Stepp: "We also are going to be engaged in conversations with external partners and opportunities for us to be able to leverage -- I guess for lack of a better word -- more support within our state parks."
The senator asked whether that meant Stepp was considering selling state parks.
"Well, we’re not talking about that," Stepp responded.
Despite her answer, Erpenbach pressed on and asked if sale of parks had been discussed within the agency.
"We have not discussed that at this point...it’s very premature. I don’t anticipate that’s going to be a problem," she said. "We’re talking about engaging with external partners for opportunities for, say, concessions, sponsorships, while still maintaining the integrity and the unique state park experience for our users."
Stepp declined Erpenbach’s invitation to say what the state might be willing to accept for, say, a sponsorship of Devil’s Lake, the most-visited state park.
When we reached out to the department, assistant deputy secretary Michael Bruhn said in an email that Stepp was drawn into the selling of parks discussion by the questions.
"Cathy’s testimony did NOT say anything about selling state parks. Senator Erpenbach made the claim," he wrote. "We are NOT considering selling state parks."
Our rating
The state Democratic Party of Wisconsin said Walker’s budget "would sell off Wisconsin’s state parks."
But that is not included in the budget, and Stepp said during testimony it was not under consideration. At best, what is up for discussion is the potential sale of naming rights as a way to derive extra revenue for the parks.
We rate the claim False.
As kids our parents took us camping everywhere from Reelfoot Lake to the the Smokey Mountains, LBL(Land Between the Lakes in Kentucky-Tennessee, and way down in on Florida beaches and lots of other places.(including Disney World) Saw lots of Civil war battlefields along the way!
Not including the drive time, which seemed unbearable, we had lots of fun because our parents let us kids roam on our own(sometime unthinkable now!)
and we make made friends with other kids from across the nation. We had our own “tribe”, at least for a time. We enjoyed our National Parks and it was great to get away from the constant bombardment of rank commercialism(an ugly but necessary part of capitalism) and escape, if just for a time, and enjoy the great wild outdoors(and I am from a farming family and used to rural living!)
Best memories were going to caves like Mammoth Cave, Ruby Falls, and Dunbar and Ruskin Cave(when the last two were “unguided caves”) However, each were at one time, in private hands.(Ruby Cave still is, if my memory holds)
Not knocking commercialism in sports generally.( Nascar, almost from the start had commercial logos so no big whop there)(I used to watch till it got “political correct” and lost it's southern roots and can't stand the preening prima donnas they call “drivers” nowadays)
But in the selling of naming rights of stadiums to corporations, something special was lost. Local favor and history, not to mention honoring local heroes. Gillete Stadium, AT&T Stadium will never hold the imagination of sports fans as does Soldier Field, Candlestick Park, and Lambeau Field.
Nor the permanence. LP field, home of the Tennessee Titians in Nashville was the Adelphia Coliseum before the company went bankrupt. Before that, it was “The East Bank Stadium” Now it is simply as “The Coliseum”
Such is the chance of stadiums named after “current” businesses.
Separate from our National Parks, we can both agree with “Silent Cal” private enterprise outclasses stifling government overbearing to the betterment of a free people.
This current “president” and his tactics offer an “negative” Example One.
(Please pardon for my delayed response, health issues got I the way of a timely reply)
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.