Republican Bill Proposes Sale of 3,125 Square Miles of Federal Land

Republican lawmakers have proposed a bill that would require the sale of over 3,125 square miles of federal public land, a move that has sparked debate among Western state governors. The proposal, introduced by Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee, is part of a broader tax cut package and aims to transfer these lands to state or other entities.

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham expressed reservations about the plan, citing the strong emotional and practical ties that residents have with these public lands. She emphasized that selling these lands to private entities without a thorough process and without prioritizing the interests of New Mexicans would be problematic. Lujan Grisham, who is a Democrat, was presenting recommendations on affordable housing strategies from the Western Governors’ Association at the time.

Interior Department Secretary Doug Burgum, who attended the governors' summit, highlighted the potential benefits of utilizing public lands for various purposes, including recreation, logging, and oil and gas production. He argued that such uses could stimulate local economies. However, several hundred protesters in downtown Santa Fe voiced their opposition to any efforts that might lead to the privatization of federal public lands, carrying signs that read “not for sale” and “keep our public land free for future generations.”

Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon offered conditional support for the idea of developing federal lands, suggesting that a piece-by-piece approach could allow for responsible growth in areas where communities are landlocked. He acknowledged that there could be value in such developments but emphasized the need for careful planning.

Sen. Lee clarified that the proposed land sales would focus on “isolated parcels” that could be used for housing or infrastructure, and would exclude national parks, national monuments, and wilderness areas. The lands eligible for sale are located in 11 Western states, from Alaska to New Mexico, with Montana being excluded from the proposal after objections from its lawmakers.

In states like Utah and Nevada, where the government controls a significant portion of the land, the proposal could have mixed implications. While it could protect these lands from exploitation, it might also hinder economic growth and development in these regions.