SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Interior Dept. Secretary Ryan Zinke posing for a photo last month with his Ranger hat on backwards. (Photo: NPS)
Zinke and Lamar Alexander's Big Plan? We Must Kill the Planet to Save the National Parks
New joint op-ed touts legislation that would fund national parks' infrastructure repairs with leases for oil and gas drilling
May 02, 2018
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke joined with U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) to argue that the best way to fix the national parks is by pillaging public lands for fossil fuels.
Their CNN op-ed published Wednesday focuses on the $11.6 billion repair backlog the parks face--"our parks are being loved to death," they write. They say revenue to address the infrastructure repairs can come through their proposed legislation, the National Park Restoration Act (S.2509). Lamar is the sponsor of the bipartisan legislation, which he introduced at the behest of Zinke, and as the Interior Department noted in a press release, it "follows the blueprint laid out in Secretary Zinke and President Trump's budget proposal, the Public Lands Infrastructure Fund. "
As Zinke and Lamar, lay out:
These revenues will come from energy leases on all onshore and offshore sources of energy production on federal land: oil, gas, coal, renewables, and alternative energy. The fund would receive 50 percent of onshore and offshore revenues from energy production on federal lands over expected amounts that are not already allocated to other purposes.
Environmental groups have long cautioned against fueling the climate crisis with fossil fuel extraction on public lands--producton Zinke is pushing to make easier.
Responding to the joint op-ed, some on social media gave the Zinke-Alexander plan a resounding thumbs-down and pointed to the need to get off fossil fuels:
\u201cThese two idiots plan to sell off the parks, pollute them from the inside while giving profits to their fossil fuel masters. This must be oppossed. #Resist #ImpeachTrump #VoteThemOut Zinke and Alexander: How to protect America's 'best idea' @CNN https://t.co/Baw0e9Vxzf\u201d— Jerry McNutt (@Jerry McNutt) 1525290698
\u201c@SenAlexander @SecretaryZinke @NatlParkService Rather than listen to Zinke and Alexander's opinions in their article, I'll listen to scientists and their facts that climate change is real: we need to move away from burning fossil fuels and toward renewable energy. There has to be a better way to protect the parks!\u201d— Lamar Alexander (@Lamar Alexander) 1525284129
According to Randi Spivak, the public lands program director for the Center for Biological Diversity, "there appears to be no limit to the fossil fuel industry's appetite for extraction and the Trump administration's willingness to bend over backward for these polluting companies." She also noted an analysis (pdf) from her group that "shows there's been no meaningful environmental review, disclosure of harms, or public engagement regarding nearly 200,000 acres of public lands in six Western states scheduled to be auctioned off during the first half of 2018."
As for the $18 billion the Zinke-pushed plan would supposedly would generate, that's "a fantasy number," Aaron Weiss, media director for the Center for Western Priorities, told ThinkProgress. "The idea that you could spark a giant stampede of new production while oil prices are where they are today, it's just fantasy land.
Environmental groups including The Wilderness Society and National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) say that the infrastructure proposal put forth by Democrats is a far better option.
In the Democrat proposal, wrote NPCA's Ani Kame'enui, "None of these construction and maintenance projects would be paid for at the expense of public lands and waters. Instead, this plan funds infrastructure work by rolling back some of the controversial corporate tax cuts passed in December 2017. We don't need to sacrifice public lands and environmental protections to improve America's infrastructure."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke joined with U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) to argue that the best way to fix the national parks is by pillaging public lands for fossil fuels.
Their CNN op-ed published Wednesday focuses on the $11.6 billion repair backlog the parks face--"our parks are being loved to death," they write. They say revenue to address the infrastructure repairs can come through their proposed legislation, the National Park Restoration Act (S.2509). Lamar is the sponsor of the bipartisan legislation, which he introduced at the behest of Zinke, and as the Interior Department noted in a press release, it "follows the blueprint laid out in Secretary Zinke and President Trump's budget proposal, the Public Lands Infrastructure Fund. "
As Zinke and Lamar, lay out:
These revenues will come from energy leases on all onshore and offshore sources of energy production on federal land: oil, gas, coal, renewables, and alternative energy. The fund would receive 50 percent of onshore and offshore revenues from energy production on federal lands over expected amounts that are not already allocated to other purposes.
Environmental groups have long cautioned against fueling the climate crisis with fossil fuel extraction on public lands--producton Zinke is pushing to make easier.
Responding to the joint op-ed, some on social media gave the Zinke-Alexander plan a resounding thumbs-down and pointed to the need to get off fossil fuels:
\u201cThese two idiots plan to sell off the parks, pollute them from the inside while giving profits to their fossil fuel masters. This must be oppossed. #Resist #ImpeachTrump #VoteThemOut Zinke and Alexander: How to protect America's 'best idea' @CNN https://t.co/Baw0e9Vxzf\u201d— Jerry McNutt (@Jerry McNutt) 1525290698
\u201c@SenAlexander @SecretaryZinke @NatlParkService Rather than listen to Zinke and Alexander's opinions in their article, I'll listen to scientists and their facts that climate change is real: we need to move away from burning fossil fuels and toward renewable energy. There has to be a better way to protect the parks!\u201d— Lamar Alexander (@Lamar Alexander) 1525284129
According to Randi Spivak, the public lands program director for the Center for Biological Diversity, "there appears to be no limit to the fossil fuel industry's appetite for extraction and the Trump administration's willingness to bend over backward for these polluting companies." She also noted an analysis (pdf) from her group that "shows there's been no meaningful environmental review, disclosure of harms, or public engagement regarding nearly 200,000 acres of public lands in six Western states scheduled to be auctioned off during the first half of 2018."
As for the $18 billion the Zinke-pushed plan would supposedly would generate, that's "a fantasy number," Aaron Weiss, media director for the Center for Western Priorities, told ThinkProgress. "The idea that you could spark a giant stampede of new production while oil prices are where they are today, it's just fantasy land.
Environmental groups including The Wilderness Society and National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) say that the infrastructure proposal put forth by Democrats is a far better option.
In the Democrat proposal, wrote NPCA's Ani Kame'enui, "None of these construction and maintenance projects would be paid for at the expense of public lands and waters. Instead, this plan funds infrastructure work by rolling back some of the controversial corporate tax cuts passed in December 2017. We don't need to sacrifice public lands and environmental protections to improve America's infrastructure."
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke joined with U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) to argue that the best way to fix the national parks is by pillaging public lands for fossil fuels.
Their CNN op-ed published Wednesday focuses on the $11.6 billion repair backlog the parks face--"our parks are being loved to death," they write. They say revenue to address the infrastructure repairs can come through their proposed legislation, the National Park Restoration Act (S.2509). Lamar is the sponsor of the bipartisan legislation, which he introduced at the behest of Zinke, and as the Interior Department noted in a press release, it "follows the blueprint laid out in Secretary Zinke and President Trump's budget proposal, the Public Lands Infrastructure Fund. "
As Zinke and Lamar, lay out:
These revenues will come from energy leases on all onshore and offshore sources of energy production on federal land: oil, gas, coal, renewables, and alternative energy. The fund would receive 50 percent of onshore and offshore revenues from energy production on federal lands over expected amounts that are not already allocated to other purposes.
Environmental groups have long cautioned against fueling the climate crisis with fossil fuel extraction on public lands--producton Zinke is pushing to make easier.
Responding to the joint op-ed, some on social media gave the Zinke-Alexander plan a resounding thumbs-down and pointed to the need to get off fossil fuels:
\u201cThese two idiots plan to sell off the parks, pollute them from the inside while giving profits to their fossil fuel masters. This must be oppossed. #Resist #ImpeachTrump #VoteThemOut Zinke and Alexander: How to protect America's 'best idea' @CNN https://t.co/Baw0e9Vxzf\u201d— Jerry McNutt (@Jerry McNutt) 1525290698
\u201c@SenAlexander @SecretaryZinke @NatlParkService Rather than listen to Zinke and Alexander's opinions in their article, I'll listen to scientists and their facts that climate change is real: we need to move away from burning fossil fuels and toward renewable energy. There has to be a better way to protect the parks!\u201d— Lamar Alexander (@Lamar Alexander) 1525284129
According to Randi Spivak, the public lands program director for the Center for Biological Diversity, "there appears to be no limit to the fossil fuel industry's appetite for extraction and the Trump administration's willingness to bend over backward for these polluting companies." She also noted an analysis (pdf) from her group that "shows there's been no meaningful environmental review, disclosure of harms, or public engagement regarding nearly 200,000 acres of public lands in six Western states scheduled to be auctioned off during the first half of 2018."
As for the $18 billion the Zinke-pushed plan would supposedly would generate, that's "a fantasy number," Aaron Weiss, media director for the Center for Western Priorities, told ThinkProgress. "The idea that you could spark a giant stampede of new production while oil prices are where they are today, it's just fantasy land.
Environmental groups including The Wilderness Society and National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) say that the infrastructure proposal put forth by Democrats is a far better option.
In the Democrat proposal, wrote NPCA's Ani Kame'enui, "None of these construction and maintenance projects would be paid for at the expense of public lands and waters. Instead, this plan funds infrastructure work by rolling back some of the controversial corporate tax cuts passed in December 2017. We don't need to sacrifice public lands and environmental protections to improve America's infrastructure."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.