Thankfully, there are just two weeks left to go in the 2016 general election. Which begs the question: Which nominee would be better for the National Park System and National Park Service?
While Democrat Hillary Clinton did put forth a statement outlining her intention to create a trust fund for the parks, not much has been heard from Republican Donald Trump on the parks specifically.
There have been reports that Mr. Trump would support the transfer of some federal lands in the West to states, a position the Republican Party adopted at its convention this past summer. And how would his proposal to build a wall along the U.S. - Mexico border impact border parks such as Big Bend National Park, Chamizal National Memorial, Coronado National Memorial, and Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument?
Which candidate do you think would be best for the park system and Park Service?
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
Kurt - with you until the FICA ceiling and means testing. That's nothing but income redistribution. But bottom line is, we need our fiscal house in order if we are ever to get our Parks properly funded. Conservative economic policies work. Unfortunately, Republcan policies haven't always been conservative.
After questioning whether comments should be allowed, you picked a live one, Kurt! Your re-framing gets close to the case -- we need to look at those folks and issues where we can have the most impact. Not to say that presidential or or party matters are unimportant, but look to local and state reps, congressfolk, and initiatives to make the real difference . . . while every vote matters, they are "bigger"in those cases. And, with regard to the National Parks, the intentions and actions on both parties are, for better or worse, influenced by . . .
I'd probably give the edge to Hillary not because I think she values the Parks at all but would tend to try to appease those who do for the sake of votes more than Trump. And not that I think my view on this topic will influence anyone in any way but I refuse to vote for either of these candidates.
Thanks, Kurt, for pointing out the role of the cesspool in governing our country and creating the mess we are in.
Unbelievable what many of you would accept. Geez, unbelievable! Maybe George Soros should run on a Pro-Environmental Platform. Big big supporter of Hillary and everything anarchy. How about someone that doesn't have their fingerprints on everything that is wrong with the world at present. Is there any connection to Parks by the Clinton Foundation or is it just their wealthy international friends buying access and an avenue to sweet deals. She got a Russian company 20% of our Uranium reserves for a bunch of millions. Okay fellows and gals kneel to the Hillary Throne. Sorry guys, you are oblivious as to the real threats before us.
Wow - what a blitzkrieg of rapid-fire Republican speaking points, paranoia, and falsehoods! We'd been doing fine and fairly politely here, TA.
Okay, explain the falsehoods, Rick.
Lots of very high quality Uraniumin deposits in the Grand Canyon vacinity (just outside the Park). What would she take to swing that?
Don't hold your breath Trail, this is about the time in the thread that Rick makes his accusations and runs. But then he is questioning the ethics of bankruptcy (which average over 1 million per year) but he supports Hillary in the face of this: http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/ethical-deficit-new-concerns-over...