Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sen. Mike Lee withdraws proposal to put federal land up for sale
fox13 ^ | June 28, 2025 | Spencer Burt

Posted on 06/28/2025 9:02:24 PM PDT by backpacker_c

After widespread public opposition, Sen. Mike Lee says he is withdrawing his controversial proposal to sell millions of acres of public lands.

The amendment to the national "Big, Beautiful Bill" could have made more than 18 million acres of land eligible for sale in Utah alone

Lee later revised the proposal to remove Forest Service land from it, and to only include Bureau of Land Management property within five miles of "population centers."

On Saturday, Utah's Senior Senator announced that he is withdrawing the federal land sales from the bill completely.

(Excerpt) Read more at fox13now.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: corruption; federallandsale; mikelee; privatize
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-44 next last
Likely bought and paid for mike lee was expecting a big windfall from hedge funds and equity group, as they bought up thousands and millions of acres of land, as they would be the only ones able to front the millions of dollars each lot would be sold for.

Thankfully, there appeared to have been enough opposition that it caused him to reconsider it, and hopefully, it tanks his career....

Remember, this isn't the only bad thing mike lee is responsible for. lee is also the one that has been mostly responsible for the large number of H1b visas that get issued every year...

1 posted on 06/28/2025 9:02:24 PM PDT by backpacker_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: backpacker_c

He should have stood firm. The federal govt owns 64% if the land in the state of Utah. Its unconstitutional and Barack Obama grabbed 1.35 million acres totally unconstitutionally in Utah during his term. The government is not supposed to own that much land.


2 posted on 06/28/2025 9:31:23 PM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2

The Sierra Club owns the politicians and they think the Fed should own the land rather than the people.


3 posted on 06/28/2025 9:37:48 PM PDT by bray (It's not racist to be racist against races the DNC hates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: backpacker_c

You think the Fed should own all the land? Sounds like a Communist.


4 posted on 06/28/2025 9:38:28 PM PDT by bray (It's not racist to be racist against races the DNC hates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backpacker_c
Likely bought and paid for mike lee was expecting a big windfall from hedge funds and equity group, as they bought up thousands and millions of acres of land, as they would be the only ones able to front the millions of dollars each lot would be sold for.

In fairness to him, he said, in his official statement, he wanted to keep the land out of the hands of China and blackrock.

Provisions need to be made to keep it out of the hands of china, blackrock, and section 8 slumlords as well. No need to have 1000000 refuse-gees move into New Hampshire and other nice states.

5 posted on 06/28/2025 9:39:12 PM PDT by Captainpaintball (America needs a Conservative DICTATOR if it hopes to survive. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2

I thought this was a great idea! Sorry to hear it’s failed, for now...


6 posted on 06/28/2025 9:41:18 PM PDT by 4Liberty (One person’s Socialism is another’s neighborliness. -Tim Walz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2

“He should have stood firm. The federal govt owns 64% if the land in the state of Utah. Its unconstitutional and Barack Obama grabbed 1.35 million acres totally unconstitutionally in Utah during his term. The government is not supposed to own that much land.”

The government should ONLY own land that they have a purpose for...which is likely more like 5% of the land. They own what they have by DEFAULT as it was originally obtained by them...so now they use their huge control over land to blackmail states, at least when Leftists are in the White House.


7 posted on 06/28/2025 9:52:50 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: backpacker_c

Good decision.


8 posted on 06/28/2025 10:19:04 PM PDT by Sequoyah101 (Donald John Trump. First man to be Elected to the Presidency THREE times since FDR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bray
You think the Fed should own all the land? Sounds like a Communist.

You calling FReepers communists?

No, we've just learned the hard way to never, ever trust Mumbai Mike Lee, inflictor of the H-1B.

9 posted on 06/29/2025 12:05:39 AM PDT by Yossarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Yossarian

IMO one of the best ways we can prevent leftist abuses in the future is to get the Feds to divest as much land as possible while we can. We should start with ANWR and get it permanently out of their hands.


10 posted on 06/29/2025 12:09:46 AM PDT by Windcatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: backpacker_c

Didn’t I read that this was put back in last minute?


11 posted on 06/29/2025 12:37:41 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

not interested in having predatory developers and imported savages exploiting the Great American landscape


12 posted on 06/29/2025 12:39:39 AM PDT by Gene Eric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backpacker_c

I believe the feral gubmint just took that land. They paid nothing for it. They should not be allowed to “sell” it. All the land the feds own should be given back to the states it is in. For nothing.


13 posted on 06/29/2025 1:34:56 AM PDT by exnavy (See article IV section 4 of our constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exnavy; SunkenCiv; BeauBo; AdmSmith; BroJoeK

I don’t think the federal government just TOOK land in most cases. Money was paid for the huge areas of the Louisiana Purchase and Alaska. Also for the Gadsden Purchase desired to clean up the border lines in the southwest after the wars with Mexico. Regarding Texas which was originally gained through war with Mexico, I am not sure how title was managed after Texas became a state. Probably an interesting and complex story. Spain had Florida, how did we end up with it? Another history to explore.


14 posted on 06/29/2025 2:59:37 AM PDT by gleeaikin (Question Authority: report facts, and post theihr links')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BobL

You almost need a constitutional amendment....saying the federal gov’t cannot own more than 1-percent of state property, and a state cannot own more than 5-percent of it’s property...unless for commercial-use (tax revenue).


15 posted on 06/29/2025 3:00:41 AM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2

Can you cite the part of the Constitution that makes the feds owning land unconstitutional?


16 posted on 06/29/2025 3:26:48 AM PDT by redfreedom (Happiness is shopping at Walmart and not hearing Spanish once!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: backpacker_c

Rinos don’t get it right any more than demonRATs do.

Who was Lee going to “sell” it to- the Chinese? The fed should GIVE it back to the states for management with the proviso that it will never be sold to any developer. Let the PEOPLE own and manage their OWN lands.


17 posted on 06/29/2025 4:46:37 AM PDT by 13Sisters76 ("It is amazing how many people mistake a certain hip snideness for sophistication. " Thos. Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redfreedom

The tenth amendment


18 posted on 06/29/2025 4:56:06 AM PDT by Daveinyork ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric
not interested in having predatory developers and imported savages exploiting the Great American landscape

What's the difference? The illegals just move into sections of the national forest and take it over anyway. You might as well allow some private citizens to make a buck off of it instead of the govt allowing illegals to live there for free.

19 posted on 06/29/2025 5:36:51 AM PDT by eastexsteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: backpacker_c

You don’t see the problem if you don’t live here.

People with money buy up large chunks of land and put up fences with No Trespassing signs. Hunters, campers, hikers, off-road machines are banned.

Game animals know they are safe on these ranches and go there away from hunters. Then these landowners charge $10000 for private hunters to come shoot trophy bucks and bulls.

It’s a rich man’s racket.

We need to get lands from the Feds to the states, but Mike’s plan isn’t it.


20 posted on 06/29/2025 5:49:20 AM PDT by lurk (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-44 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson