AMONG A FLURRY OF OTHER RULES CHANGES HOUSE REPUBLICANS HAVE
PUT INTO EFFECT ON BASICALLY THE FIRST AND SECOND DAY OF THE NEW
YEAR IS ONE THAT WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR THEM TO LITERALLY
SELL OFF FEDERAL LAND, HANDING IT OFF EITHER TO STATES OR
THEORETICALLY TO CORPORATIONS OR INDIVIDUALS --
THE REASON FOR THAT IS
BECAUSE THEY ARE LITERALLY
LOSING MONEY.
THIS ISN'T COMPLICATED, THEY MAKE MONEY OFF
OF THAT THING, IF YOU HAND IT OFF AND NO LONGER MAKE MONEY YOU
NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT FOR BUDGETARY PURPOSES.
IF YOU ARE
BEING RESPONSIBLE.
THEY DON'T FEEL THE NEED TO DO
THAT --
WHICH IS INTERESTING BECAUSE YOU CAN WRITE THE LITERAL WORDS
IT SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE DECREASING REVENUES, BUT REALITY
DOESN'T AGREE AND IT WILL BE DECREASING REVENUES.
SO IN THE
SAME WAY WE TALKED ABOUT YESTERDAY WHEN CENK WAS ON THE
FIRST HOUR THAT THEY HAVE TAKEN AWAY THE LIMITATION ON HOW MUCH
LEGISLATION CAN INCREASE THE DEFICIT, SO THEY CAN DO AWAY
WITH OBAMACARE, ONCE AGAIN WE WANT TO DO THIS, WHAT DO WE CARE
WHAT IT COSTS?
WE WON'T EVEN CONSIDER IT AS DECREASING REVENUE.
WHAT IS UNCLEAR TO ME IS HOW MUCH OF AN IMPACT THIS WILL HAVE
ON FEDERAL LAND THAT IS USED FOR CONSERVATION.
WILL THAT ALSO
HAVE AN IMPACT, OR NO?
SOME FEDERAL LANDS ARE LITERALLY SET UP AS MONUMENTS,
WE GAVE PRESIDENT OBAMA A TON OF CREDIT A WEEK OR TWO AGO WHEN HE
MADE SOME MORE BIG MONUMENTS, THOSE ARE STILL RELATIVELY
PROTECTED.
IT'S NOT IMPOSSIBLE THAT THEY COULD REMOVE THAT
STATUS AND THEN SELL THEM, BUT AS OF NOW THEY CAN'T SIMPLY SELL
THEM TO EXXON OR WHATEVER.
BUT THERE ARE LARGE AMOUNTS OF LAND
THAT STILL HAVE EITHER NATURAL BEAUTY OR ARE USED FOR TOURISM
OR GRAZING OR WHATEVER.
THOSE COULD THEORETICALLY BE HANDED
OVER.
WHEN REPUBLICANS TALK ABOUT WHY THEY WOULD WANT TO DO
THIS, THE EXCUSES THAT USUALLY GIVE OUR SOME OF THOSE ARE
LAYING DORMANT OR TOO EXPENSIVE TO MAINTAIN, OR IT WOULD BE
BETTER IF STATES MANAGED TO THEM.
AND I BET YOU COULD FIND
EXAMPLE FOR THAT IS THE CASE.
BUT IN A LOT OF CASES THEY WANT
TO HAND THEM OVER TO STATES SO STATES CAN SELL OFF MINING
RIGHTS AND OIL-PRODUCING RIGHTS AND ALL THAT.
SO AREAS THAT ARE
NOW TECHNICALLY YOURS, THAT IN A LOT OF CASES CAN BE USED BY YOU
AS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, WILL NOT NECESSARILY BE ABLE TO IN THE
FUTURE.
SOME COMPANY WILL DIG THE COPPER OUT OF THEM OR PUT UP OIL
WELLS AND THEY WILL BENEFIT AND WE WILL PRETEND IT NEVER
EVEN COST US ANYTHING.
AND OF COURSE IT WILL HAVE A TERRIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT AS WELL.
ALMOST CERTAINLY.
THESE COULD BE GIGANTIC NEW SITES FOR
FRACKING.
AND THE REASON IT BOTHERS ME IS, AGAIN, WE WERE
TALKING ABOUT THIS YESTERDAY, THEY ARE NOT HIDING THEIR
PRIORITIES.
THEY SEE AMERICA AS A GIGANTIC PIGGY BANK AND THEY
ARE READY TO SMASH IT OPEN AND PROFIT.
WE ARE SO LAX ON
CAMPAIGN FINANCE THAT IN TERMS OF THEIR POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS
THEY HAVE BEEN PROFITING FOR A LONG TIME, AND WE TURN A BLIND
EYE TO MOST OF THEIR LOBBYING SO THEM BECOMING RICH AFTER THEY
LEAVE OFFICE, WE'VE ALLOWED THAT TOO.
BASICALLY THE LAST THING WE
WERE STOPPING WAS THEM, IN THE STYLE OF RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS,
SIMPLY TAKING ALL OF OUR SHARED RESOURCES AND TURNING IT INTO
MONEY FOR THEMSELVES AND CAMPAIGN DONORS.
AND THEY ARE
NOT EVEN WAITING A FULL WEEK TO DO THAT.
HUGE SWATHS OF LAND
THAT YOU CAN LITERALLY NOT GET BACK AFTER YOU DESPOILED THEM
JUST BEHEADED OFF THE RESPONSIBLE ACTORS AROUND THE
COUNTRY OR THEORETICALLY TO COMPANIES AS WELL.
THIS IS THE
STUFF THAT CENK AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT, THESE RULES
CHANGES THAT MIGHT SEEM BORING, BUT ARE OF MASSIVE CONSEQUENCE,
AND AS FAR AS I'VE SEEN ARE RECEIVING ALMOST NO COVERAGE IN
THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.
THE ETHICS COMMISSION, THANKFULLY, THEY
TALKED ABOUT, BUT THINGS LIKE THIS IN THE LONG RUN COULD
ACTUALLY BE MORE IMPORTANT TO COVER, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T BE
INVESTIGATED FOR CORRUPTION IF YOU HAVE LEGALIZED THE
CORRUPTION SO YOU CAN SIMPLY SELL FEDERAL LANDS.
EXACTLY.