- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Montana Libertarian candidate says don't transfer federal lands to the state
Posted on 10/7/14 at 3:24 pm
Posted on 10/7/14 at 3:24 pm
Interesting take, and one I agree with. As awful as the Feds are, I have even less faith in local ability and willingness to protect the enviroment. Sure, local input is necessary, and the Feds often don't do a good job of listening to local concerns. But I'm skeptical of letting State Senator Billy Bob have the final say in whether to relax air quality standards or open a wilderness area to mineral exploration.
LINK
LINK
quote:
Public lands: There’s been talk about whether management of federal lands in Montana should be transferred to the state. Would you support the idea? Why or why not?
I think Glacier National Park ought to remain as it – a national park, not a state park. Same with the Bob Marshall, the Great Bear and other wilderness areas. Quality of the environment is crucial to the future of my district. That being said, I think the sate park and state forest system are pretty good, too. As for USFS and BLM, I’d support more local decision-making. In the case of those in my district, I think we ought to be able to encourage selective logging, fire management and water management over fire-fighting as forest management strategy, to create jobs. I think I’d vote “no” for the state to take over federal lands, because industry knows its cheaper and easier to corrupt Montana politicians than U.S. ones, and our land is our future.
6
Posted on 10/7/14 at 3:27 pm to Jim Rockford
There should be no federal or state lands.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 3:31 pm to Jim Rockford
From what I can read he is at odds with libertarian philosophy. He assumes that private property ownership = destruction. That's a statist position.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 3:46 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
Montana Libertarian candidate says don't transfer federal lands to the state
Both the Republican candidate and the Democratic candidate for that seat are also on record as being opposed to transferring public lands to the state.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 3:46 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
because industry knows its cheaper and easier to corrupt Montana politicians than U.S. ones, and our land is our future.
A Libertarian who thinks this is bad? Might get kicked out of the Party for that.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 5:28 pm to Jim Rockford
Posted on 10/7/14 at 9:57 pm to Jim Rockford
Protect the environment from what? Evil Man??? Are you kidding me? The whole green thing is total fabrication from UN Agenda 21. Look up the biggest left leaning lib, lesbo on earth... Rosa Koire... She is even fighting the UN Green Agenda... She has exposed it all over for what it is... Also read and watch anything done by Lord Christopher Moncton who chased Al Gore off the stage when he started hitting him with facts... GORE in "Inconvenient load of BS" film that somehow won him the Nobel Peace Prize, "The polar ice cap will be completely gone by 2014." The latest report is the ice cap is 40% larger than when Gore made that doomsday prediction.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News