National Parks For Sale?
The state of Wyoming is threatening to sell off some of its park land as a result of what they say is the federal government's refusal to provide more education funding.
Selling off a state treasure should be considered in some cases, but only as a last resort.
Has Wyoming reviewed its contracts with public employees to ensure the salaries and post-retirement benefits are reasonable? If not, fixing that should be the first step before any irreplaceable assets are sold.
Has Wyoming reviewed whether the number of state employees exceeds the amount that they actually need? Are there any state services currently being performed that are obsolete and could be shut down, thereby eliminating some costs?
Has the state considered nullification, in which intrusive and unconstitutional federal laws are ignored (such as in this case, where the governor likely is objecting to federally-mandated standards for education, which come with no funding).
Until all other avenues have been exhausted, asset sales should not be considered. But ultimately if the people of Wyoming demonstrate (through their actions at the ballot box) that they want all of the current state-funded services and aren't willing to pony up the tax revenues to finance them, then asset sales will have to be on the table.
It would be an extremely short-sighted and foolish trade-off from my standpoint, but then again that's the type of thinking that has states like Wyoming in this bind to begin with.
"Some might call it blackmail. The governor of Wyoming calls it desperation.Seems to me that the Governor of Wyoming is simply trying to get an edge in negotiations with the federal government, rather than actually committing to selling the park land.Governor Dave Freudenthal is threatening to sell off a chunk of one of America's most beautiful national parks unless the Obama administration comes up with more money to pay for education in the financially beleaguered state.
He says he will auction land valued at $125m (£80m) in the Grand Teton national park, one of the country's most stunning wildernesses. Part of the park was donated by John Rockefeller Jr."
Selling off a state treasure should be considered in some cases, but only as a last resort.
Has Wyoming reviewed its contracts with public employees to ensure the salaries and post-retirement benefits are reasonable? If not, fixing that should be the first step before any irreplaceable assets are sold.
Has Wyoming reviewed whether the number of state employees exceeds the amount that they actually need? Are there any state services currently being performed that are obsolete and could be shut down, thereby eliminating some costs?
Has the state considered nullification, in which intrusive and unconstitutional federal laws are ignored (such as in this case, where the governor likely is objecting to federally-mandated standards for education, which come with no funding).
Until all other avenues have been exhausted, asset sales should not be considered. But ultimately if the people of Wyoming demonstrate (through their actions at the ballot box) that they want all of the current state-funded services and aren't willing to pony up the tax revenues to finance them, then asset sales will have to be on the table.
It would be an extremely short-sighted and foolish trade-off from my standpoint, but then again that's the type of thinking that has states like Wyoming in this bind to begin with.
Labels: federal funding, Wyoming
posted by Tom at
6:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home