[DoughtyOne]

Name one candidate running on a pro state ownership of all federal land policy.

Here’s the list of those who are.:

.
.
.

End of list

In good conscience, you won’t be voting in the primaries.

[phothus]

You’re setting up a straw man. There is a middle ground between ALL state ownership and what there is now.

http://bigthink.com/strange-maps/291-federal-lands-in-the-us

Does anyone think the Feds should own as much of the western states as they do?

In any case, protections could certainly be built into sales/divesting back to the states to accomplish specific goals around wildlife and usage

Finally, reigning in the BLM should be a primary goal of any Republican candidate. Trump gave a speech about that in another forum, but it doesn’t look to me like he internalized the message of that speech enough to draw the obvious connection to his answer here.

[vbmoneyspender]

That’s a strawman argument. No one is saying the feds shouldn’t own some land. What people are saying is they own too much right now. And tying that into Trump, he doesn’t seem to understand that if a state screws up something, you can move to a different state. But if the feds screw up something, you can’t just move to a different country. And everyone time the feds get their paws on something, they NEVER let go. Trump doesn’t seem to have an intuitive understanding of that like I would argue Cruz does.

[vbmoneyspender]

Name one candidate running on a pro state ownership of all federal land policy.

Here you go:

On Tuesday, Cruz filed an amendment to the Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act of 2014 (S. 2363) to force the federal government to sell off a significant portion of the country’s most prized lands in the West. The amendment would prohibit the federal government from owning more than 50 percent of any land within one state, and requires the government to transfer the excess land to the states or sell it to the highest bidder.