Sale Federal Land, Minerals and Buildings

Fiscal responsibility can begin with the sale of federal land and buildings. The federal government holds ownership of millions of acres of land, especially in the central and western states. Sold land would likely spur economic development. Minerals from federal lands could be drilled, mined, and sold to resupply the depleted federal savings. The government is also title holder for thousands of both used and unused buildings across the United States but especially in greater Washington, DC. As departments are returned to state control, decommissioned, or relocated to other locations, buildings could be sold to private businesses or used to create Enterprise Zones for underserved areas. All proceeds from sale of federal land and property should be applied to the national debt. Reducing the national debt would result in greater economic health and stabilty.

1 Like

This can be done with care and precision and respect for our heritage. We need to leverage all of our assets. This will include selling buildings in DC once they are no longer needed.

1 Like

Selling off our public land would be a tragic waste of a treasured asset. However; we are underutilizing valuable resources by placing regulations and outright moratoriums on grazing, mining, and drilling permits and leases on these lands. Selling public land will not fix our debt crisis, in fact, the influx in private property valuations will lead to inflation and spending disruptions while simultaneously closing millions of acres of land to public use. Increase usage of resources, stimulate the economy, drive manufacturing, and give the proceeds from the usage back to the people who own them in the first place… the American public(as a form of medicare or social security for instance).

Does this include national forests?

I’ll be honest, I live in Nevada, which is like 90% BLM land, and I love how unregulated and free it is. I was disappointed in South Dakota where everything is privately owned and fenced off.

1 Like

Not an advocate for total sale… but how much is controlled by Washington bureaucrats rather than individuals or localities?

I’m not advocating sale of all Federal lands…but how many are not accessible or available for economic development? How much do we spend maintaining all of the properties. My biggest concern is that its extra constitutional for the government to own and operate properties.

I am wondering if this includes Federal Parks? If so can we give them to the Indigenous Indian’s to control? They do this at the Grand Canyon and it gives them jobs and helps their communities to grow.