Bush team seeks to sell public land.
So President Bush is looking to make some cash for an ailing economy that's been deficit spending for something like 70 years? Well I suppose selling expensive public land would help, but I don't think it's going to make a huge difference. The land selected for sale is apparently not important pieces of national parks or wildlife preserves, but simply the idea of selling land to private consumers that was once that of a national park makes it seem like an act of desperation. The money that is made and will be made from the maintenance savings is substantial, but when you play it beside the national deficict and the great amount of spending on things like the war in Iraq, it doesn't seem like it will matter much. Another thing to consider, could this be considered a step toward an even greater level of privatization in the United States? How much public land is the United States government willing to give up in the next 20-50 years? No one wants to see national parks disappear to private landholders, but who should really decide how much public land is enough?
2 comments:
The US government has plenty of land…that isn’t even a national park….that could be used for a substantial amount of money as well as other benefits. One way the United States can strengthen the economy is by allowing exploration and production in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR). Predictions for the oil fields in the ANWR place a total of 9 to 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil. This equates to a reliable production of one million barrels every day for 25 years. That’s enough oil to replace the import of Iraqi oil for 25 years. Production of oil from within the ANWR would create new jobs, improve the economy, and have long-term monetary benefits for the United States. The three phases of using the reserve would each create opportunities for employment. All together the research, drilling, and continued production phases could provide employment opportunities reaching a quarter of a million jobs. The Alaskan and US governments would receive lease rentals, royalties and tax money from the corporations allowed to explore and produce from the region. Some of this financial impact would come very quickly, including bonus bids for access to ANWR. According to the Department of the Interior, current bids for the first 5 years of production following congressional approval are over 4 billion dollars. The petroleum production would also provide a steady economic benefit to the United States economy. The entire ANWR spans only 19 million acres of the entire state of Alaska, the equivalent of five percent of the state area. The area being considered for exploration and production in the ANWR is only 1.5 million acres or 8% along the northern coast. As if the amount of land being considered was not insignificant enough, the area that would actually be affected by production would only cover 1500 acres. Overall the area affected by production would be less than one half of one percent of the ANWR. Why the United States would sell off National Park lands, when they have a perfectly viable yet unused option, is beyond me.
I do agree with you, I believe that the sale of land would not greatly affect the government deficits. The national parks should stay as they are, National.
Post a Comment