Selling Public Land for Budget Reconciliatory Bill

[Alpine01]

Huh? I didn't say that.

To quote you - "The big stuff largely hasn't been touched, and the reason for that is because the House has elections every two years and a lot of new Republican voters are on medicaid."

Hence, if I take you at your word, entitlement spending isn't being looked at or cut (at least not yet) because of the Republican House that was (re)elected by a bunch of new geriatric voters intent only on getting their share of the Medicaid pig trough.

Also to note, based on post-election results, it was by and large younger men that moved into the Republican camp for the first time that really made the difference. Are these new Republican voters on Medicaid?

 

[jryoung]

MediCARE - Care for the elderly, over 65
MedicAID - Aid the poor.

 

[Alpine01]

MediCARE - Care for the elderly, over 65
MedicAID - Aid the poor.

Correct. Mostly. Medicare also covers those under 65 with disabilities.

The conversation was about Boomers and how they are the ones who have driven the debt crisis. My point has been it is not a generational thing but a political one. And to say the lack of effort to reign in entitlement spending is due to a conscious decision of quid pro quo by the most recently elected House to those that elected them ignores 40+ yrs of kicking the can down the road by both political parties, and mostly the Democrats in terms of the House given their overwhelming history of House control.

 

[SAJ-99]

To quote you - "The big stuff largely hasn't been touched, and the reason for that is because the House has elections every two years and a lot of new Republican voters are on medicaid."

Hence, if I take you at your word, entitlement spending isn't being looked at or cut (at least not yet) because of the Republican House that was (re)elected by a bunch of new geriatric voters intent only on getting their share of the Medicaid pig trough.

There is a long history of not touching the big stuff. I am not blaming the last election on this. I am saying there is a nervousness about touching it now. And see @jryoung post.

Also to note, based on post-election results, it was by and large younger men that moved into the Republican camp for the first time that really made the difference. Are these new Republican voters on Medicaid?

Well, yes. I mean, not all of them, obviously, but enough. Look at demographics on voter education, look at the promise to not tax tips or overtime, look at the states with highest medicaid enrollment, etc. Follow the dots.

I'm not saying Medicaid shouldn't see major changes...AT ALL! I'm just pointing out why they are trying to stick public land sales in the budget reconciliation so they don't have to piss off a bunch of voters. The margin of error in the current political environment is very slim.

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/04/29/congress/medicaid-per-capita-caps-house-republicans-reconciliation-00315230

 

[Alpine01]

There is a long history of not touching the big stuff. I am not blaming the last election on this. I am saying there is a nervousness about touching it now.

It's been a third rail for decades.

Well, yes. I mean, not all of them, obviously, but enough.

Define "enough". And what is the nationally accepted value of "enough"?

Look at demographics on voter education,

Really. That's awfully elitist. So only people who stopped formal education after high school (i.e., the dumb ones) voted for Republicans and only dumb people are poor? And it's their fault we are where we are today? And this was all motivated by getting a Medicaid payout? I guess all of the highly educated college grads that are in debt up to their eyeballs and are living paycheck to paycheck (if that) wouldn't think of debasing themselves by taking government aid; like student loan forgiveness. Sorry, I can't accept that logic. I guess we agree to disagree.

look at the promise to not tax tips or overtime,

Which is an awfully "progressive" tax stance. But somehow that is a gift to the wealthy.

I'm just pointing out why they are trying to stick public land sales in the budget reconciliation so they don't have to piss off a bunch of voters.

LoL - I doubt most voters have that issue on their radar in terms of what might piss them off. Not closing the border to illegal immigration and failing to bring back blue collar industrial jobs (manufacturing, mining, etc.) so they can raise their standard of living will cause a much greater uproar by recent Trump voters that left the Democrat party than not selling off public lands.

To be clear, I am 100% opposed to public land sales for all of the reasons that Randy has pointed out. It is not a fix to the problem in and of itself. But I can recognize and appreciate the view that turning over Federal lands to private industry that is likely better at extracting maximum value out of that asset than the Federal government is one of many 'means to an end' of increasing overall US GDP and reducing reliance on outside trading partners like China, Mexico, et. al. From my perspective, the cost of taking that route is more than I am willing to accept for the minimal gain realized. I would rather see a tax increase than selling off public lands and have made that position clear to my State Reps along with Reps in the broader western states.

 

[SAJ-99]

Define "enough".

Enough is an amount large enough that could change the results of an election.

That's awfully elitist. So only people who stopped formal education after high school (i.e., the dumb ones) voted for Republicans and only dumb people are poor? And it's their fault we are where we are today? And this was all motivated by getting a Medicaid payout? I guess all of the highly educated college grads that are in debt up to their eyeballs and are living paycheck to paycheck (if that) wouldn't think of debasing themselves by taking government aid; like student loan forgiveness. Sorry, I can't accept that logic. I guess we agree to disagree.

Wow. You took a hard right turn down a rabbit hole on that one. (EDIT: You might be surprised by the number of college students on medicaid. But generally, HS education and below makes a person much higher to need the program.). We will agree to disagree, I guess.

Which is an awfully "progressive" tax stance. But somehow that is a gift to the wealthy.

You obviously are not good with numbers.

I would rather see a tax increase than selling off public lands and have made that position clear to my State Reps along with Reps in the broader western states.

Excellent. Something we agree on.

 

[Alpine01]

You obviously are not good with numbers.

LoL - Good enough to successfully manage multiple $600M to $1.4B aerospace programs with 300+ people working for me along with several hundred subcontractors and hit target costs and schedules to within 4% of estimates at the start of the program. But thanks for playing along.

Excellent. Something we agree on.

Yep.

 

[SAJ-99]

LoL - Good enough to successfully manage multiple $600M to $1.4B aerospace programs with 300+ people working for me along with several hundred subcontractors and hit target costs and schedules to within 4% of estimates at the start of the program. But thanks for playing along.

I guess you fooled me. Nice work.

 

[ismith]

I guess you fooled me. Nice work.

Is that really noteworthy?