Posted on 12/28/2017 8:07:15 AM PST by Olog-hai
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell put out a press release on the Friday before Christmas touting of his efforts to secure a $4.99 million federal grant from the Natural Resources Conservation Service to The Nature Conservancy “to support the conservative of private lands” in Kentucky.
“Senator McConnell contacted the NRCS in support of TNC’s application,” said the release. […]
McConnell’s press release also quoted Will Bowling, who is the director The Nature Conservancy’s Central Appalachian Project. Bowling expressed his gratitude to McConnell for securing his group this multi-million-dollar grant of taxpayer money. …
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
I can hear the panties wadding and the teeth gnashing.
Turtle. Please jump to the dems. We can’t take any more of your ‘help’.
So from the comments on the article it looks like the Feds are giving taxpayer money to a private group to buy privately-owned land and then sell it back to the government?
And apparently that’s a good thing. Go figure.
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States."—Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
In other words, the private Kentucky land owners who will be affected by this unconstitutional, vote-winning federal funding will arguably be recovering personal money that the corrupt feds stole from them by means of unconstitutional federal taxes, not that they would be spending their money this way if they had a choice.
Corrections, insights welcome.
Patriots now need to be making sure that there are plenty of state sovereignty-respecting, Trump-supporting patriot candidates on the 2018 primary ballots and pink-slip career lawmakers by sending patriot candidate lawmakers to D.C. on election day.
And until 17th Amendment is repealed, as evidenced by concerns about the integrity of Alabama's special Senate election, patriot candidates need to win elections by a large enough margin to compensate for possible deep state ballot box fraud and associated MSM scare tactics.
The sound of the swamp sucking in the darkness.
Government grants to charities, makes them not charities, over time makes them government-grant dependents, and in the long run makes charities and government policy and government spending indistinguishable.
I used to support the Nature Conservancy because their main conservation program was not legal, to get government policy to declare an area a government “protected” area. Their main conservation program was to themselves buy private lands they felt ought to be conserved.
But a government grant makes their effort indistinguishable from government policy, government action, and no longer a wholly private act of conservation. I could not support it.
If only there was somebody - anybody - in DC who understood the Constitution the way ol’ Horatio Bunce did. Coolidge may have been the last to even come close.
Qualifying groups would be conservation groups like Nature Consevancy, Hunting groups like Ducks Unlimited, timber companies.
Lets say the original grant was 50 grand and the Conservancy finds some acreage for 25 grand which they buy. Then they attach conservation easements to land which are like deed restrictions. It's written into the deed that the land can't be subdivided or clear cut.
By adding those conservation easements the land is no longer worth 25 grand, but they could sell it for 15 grand. So the Conservancy goes out raising money from donors to set aside the land. So they raise 10 grand in donations from the do-gooders which they combine with the 15 grand from selling the acreage to re-coop their original 25 grand investment which goes back into the 50 grand grant which is actually being used as a revolving fund.
Repeat.
Many people would be surprised how much land in the US is under conservation easements, especially out west.
If a rancher will sell a chunk of his ranch to the Conservancy for full price, then buy it back at half price with the restrictions on the deed that he can live with, he comes out smelling like a rose.
So why is government money involved here?
Because they didn’t want people to think that they were agnorant aholes.
“This is for conservation easements. You can find plenty info on it. This is the GOP’s way of setting aside land without the govt buying.”
The government buying the land, or giving taxpayers money to someone else to buy the land, or even to acquire the easements is the same thing in my book - taxpayer financed government policy and action and not not-for-profit private charity.
Government money should not go to “charities”. When they do they are no longer charities and no longer functioning as charities should - on just private donations.
Well, that certainly backfired, didn’t it.
I live near one...and they certainly don't need FEDERAL $$$....
Bitch probably getting a kickback....
Bitch is just another poster boy for TERM LIMITS!!!!
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.