Mike Lee Breaks Down His Federal Lands Legislation

[00:00] Joining us now is Senator Mike Lee.

[00:02] Senator, thank you for taking the time.

[00:04] Senator, uh, you have a component of the

[00:06] big, beautiful bill that is about

[00:08] federal lands. There's been a lot of

[00:10] misinformation and propaganda about it.

[00:12] I love what you're trying to do here,

[00:14] and some people are against it because

[00:16] they're actually not understanding what

[00:18] it is, and I would be against it if it's

[00:20] what they thought it was. But, Senator,

[00:21] what is in the bill? And what what are

[00:23] you trying to accomplish here?

[00:25] The whole idea

[00:27] behind the need for what we're we're

[00:30] starting to call the the freedom zone

[00:32] housing plan is that we've got a

[00:34] nationwide shortage of homes,

[00:37] particularly in the western United

[00:38] States, and that's not acceptable in

[00:41] America. Americans need and deserve the

[00:43] chance to buy a home. Now,

[00:45] coincidentally, the US government owns

[00:47] about 640 million acres of land, nearly

[00:50] a third of all land mass in the US. uh

[00:54] and a lot of that goes unused and and

[00:56] mismanaged by the US government. The

[00:59] vast majority of it has zero

[01:00] recreational value. A lot of it doesn't

[01:03] have any conservation value. So what I'm

[01:06] proposing is that we take just a a

[01:08] fraction just a fraction of 1% of that

[01:11] land. We're talking like less than half

[01:13] of a percent of federal land. That's a

[01:16] and make it available to Americans who

[01:19] simply need a roof over their heads. And

[01:22] you know, contrary to to to a lot of the

[01:24] alarmist rhetoric that's out here on

[01:26] this bill, the bill explicitly exempts

[01:29] all federally protected lands from

[01:31] eligibility uh uh for sale. Uh and that

[01:34] includes like 15 different categories

[01:36] from wilderness to national monuments,

[01:38] national forests, recreation areas, and

[01:40] so on and so forth. Uh, but there's been

[01:43] this massive misinformation campaign, I

[01:46] I believe funded ultimately by people on

[01:48] the left who are trying to dupe

[01:50] conservatives into believing that it'll

[01:51] somehow endanger the beautiful scenic

[01:54] landscapes that make the West so special

[01:56] and somehow threaten the rights of uh uh

[02:00] ranchers, of farmers, of u hunters and

[02:05] uh other recreation enthusiasts and

[02:08] we've accommodated those concerns. We've

[02:10] made recent changes just in the last few

[02:12] days to narrow the scope and to make

[02:15] even clearer that this would apply only

[02:17] with respect to land that is in or

[02:22] immediately adjacent to existing

[02:24] residential communities. So, this isn't

[02:26] the stuff that's that's out there that's

[02:28] protected land. This is um just

[02:32] basically surplus land that's suitable

[02:33] for housing because it's right next to

[02:35] where people live. Well, I I I want to

[02:36] address the propaganda head on. So,

[02:38] actually, I'm glad the studio did this

[02:39] stu. Can you guys put up the the

[02:42] pictures again? So, we're the studio

[02:44] senator showing like pictures of Yoseite

[02:46] and Yellowstone. By the way, I'm like a

[02:47] national park junkie just so we're

[02:50] clear. Uh, so I think that right there

[02:52] is Yusede National Park. I'm pretty

[02:53] clear. Uh, sure. That is I think the

[02:55] Grand Canyon. Uh, so just keep going.

[02:58] So, this is We have the greatest

[02:59] national parks ever. I think that's Zion

[03:01] National Park if I'm not mistaken.

[03:02] Usually, if you're looking up, it's

[03:03] Zion. Go one more. Let me see. It's like

[03:05] a pop quiz. And that's Sawarro National

[03:08] Park uh in um right outside of Tucson.

[03:11] That is probably Yusede if I'm not

[03:14] mistaken. Uh and that there is also

[03:17] Yusede and or or Yellowstone. One of

[03:19] those is Yellowstone. Okay. So, Senator

[03:21] and then there that's the Redwoods.

[03:22] Senator, just to be clear, you're not

[03:24] talking about these national parks,

[03:26] right? Cuz that's the propaganda that is

[03:28] being used. Okay. So, please just throw

[03:30] it down and separate fact from fiction

[03:32] here.

[03:35] Exactly. And so we've specifically

[03:38] exempted that category of protected land

[03:40] and like 15 others from it. Moreover, I

[03:43] would add, Charlie, even if that weren't

[03:45] in there, and that is it's a categorical

[03:48] exclusion, that land still wouldn't be

[03:51] appropriate for use with housing. And

[03:54] so, um, again, we're talking about a

[03:56] tiny subset of the federal land

[03:58] footprint. And if you boil all this down

[04:01] and you look at those who are most

[04:02] fervently opposed to this bill, you you

[04:06] ultimately come away with an absolutist

[04:08] message. A message that says basically

[04:11] the federal government may not reduce

[04:12] its federal land footprint by even uh a

[04:17] fraction of 1% or even a few acres

[04:20] because to do so would just be horrible.

[04:23] That cannot be the case. That must not

[04:26] be the case. This land is owned by the

[04:28] US government. Not all of it is

[04:30] appropriate for conservation, for

[04:31] hiking, for recreation, for hunting. And

[04:34] some of it really is most appropriate or

[04:36] only appropriate for use uh in the

[04:39] housing area. There's no reason not to

[04:41] allow a process by which people can gain

[04:44] access to that and have a review done as

[04:47] to whether the land in question is

[04:48] appropriate for housing. If your

[04:50] portfolio is over $250,000 and you

[04:52] aren't hedged, you are sitting on a

[04:54] ticking time bomb. Markets at all-time

[04:56] highs, but history shows you know what

[04:58] comes next. Volatility and increased

[04:59] risk. A 10% allocation to gold and

[05:02] silver can help hedge uncertainty and

[05:04] protect your wealth. Noble Gold

[05:06] Investments makes it easy to hedge your

[05:08] portfolio with institutional-grade gold

[05:10] and silver. Right now, every qualified

[05:12] investment will receive a free 10 ounce

[05:14] gold coin and protect your portfolio

[05:16] today. Visit noble goldinvestments.com.

[05:20] Some some hunters are pushing back

[05:22] against this. Can you uh you added

[05:25] recently I hear you hunting nation we're

[05:26] making changes can we put 445 up though

[05:29] the B-roll so this is the land that is

[05:31] more likely I know you can't see any of

[05:32] this senator but okay largely barren

[05:36] kind of flat we're not talking about

[05:38] we're not talking about Grand Teton

[05:40] right so and you said it has to be to

[05:43] adjacent residential communities if I'm

[05:45] not mistaken right so it's only making

[05:48] the residential communities more

[05:50] contiguous this is not a new community

[05:53] in the middle of Yellowstone. We're not

[05:56] getting condos in Yellowstone.

[05:58] No, that that's that's exactly right.

[06:00] For about 10 independent regions, you're

[06:02] not getting condos in in Yellowstone.

[06:04] And it also prioritizes single family

[06:07] housing, by the way. But the most recent

[06:09] changes in moving involve removing all

[06:11] forest service land. Uh we're not

[06:14] selling off uh forest. Uh the the the

[06:16] most recent changes also include

[06:18] significantly reducing the total amount

[06:20] of of BLM Bureau of Land Management uh

[06:24] managed land that's in the bill and it

[06:26] would be limited to its only land within

[06:28] 5 miles of an existing population center

[06:31] that would even be eligible. Uh and then

[06:34] you know we the idea here is to

[06:36] establish these freedom zones and

[06:38] housing within those to ensure that the

[06:39] lands benefit uh American families and

[06:42] they protect our farmers, our ranchers

[06:44] and our recreational users. This is what

[06:48] we need. Uh uh we need for this to

[06:50] happen and we need to dispel once and

[06:52] for all the myth that the federal land

[06:55] footprint occupying nearly a third of

[06:57] all land mass in the United States,

[06:59] including some things that really aren't

[07:00] suitable for anything other than

[07:02] housing. We got to dispel that myth.

[07:05] So, Senator, I I think some of the

[07:07] criticism is well intended. Some of it

[07:09] from the left is not well intended. Can

[07:12] you talk about the Democrats war on

[07:14] single family housing, please?

[07:17] Sure. Look, um, they of course will have

[07:20] to speak for themselves, but what I have

[07:22] seen and what I've heard is that people

[07:24] on the left generally want people moving

[07:27] from rural areas into urban areas, more

[07:30] suburban areas to more urban areas and

[07:33] from single family housing into multif

[07:35] family housing, higher density housing

[07:38] units. They believe that that's good for

[07:39] them for uh perhaps for mother earth or

[07:43] whatever the reasons might be. Uh,

[07:46] conservatives tend to want Americans to

[07:48] be able to pursue the American dream, to

[07:50] make sure that they at least have a

[07:51] fighting chance in the race of life, a

[07:54] fighting chance to enter the American

[07:56] dream path of acquiring ownership of a

[08:00] single family dwelling unit. And so that

[08:03] that is a fundamental difference between

[08:05] the two parties. It's a fundamental

[08:06] difference certainly between

[08:08] conservatives and far-left radicals who

[08:10] mainly who are a lot of the people

[08:13] opposing this. Now, you're right. There

[08:14] are some people on the right who are

[08:16] also opposing it. But I I believe many

[08:18] of them have been armed with information

[08:20] that's caused them to be mistaken about

[08:22] what the bill does and more importantly

[08:24] what it doesn't do. The left has been

[08:26] very creative and effective at how

[08:28] they've beated the field with this

[08:30] information. Putting out maps, putting

[08:32] out maps that misstate uh misrepresent

[08:35] and dramatically overstate what the bill

[08:38] would do. We haven't put out maps

[08:40] because there are a whole bunch of

[08:41] criteria established by the legislation

[08:44] and those criteria are are very

[08:46] difficult to reduce to a map and putting

[08:48] out the maps that the left has on this

[08:51] suggest a massive amount of land that

[08:54] would never could never be sold in part

[08:55] because it wouldn't be suitable for

[08:57] housing.

[08:59] And so and so Senator in closing let me

[09:00] just put these maps up on screen. So

[09:02] let's say let's what what is it? Uh

[09:05] fearmongers are 444. Let's put fear 444

[09:07] uh 444 up on on screen here. So that's

[09:10] what they're are fear-mongering about,

[09:12] but it's really 443. Put 443 up on

[09:14] screen. That's how small of the land I

[09:18] can't even see it. It's so small. How

[09:20] many new houses would this potentially

[09:22] result in? Senator,

[09:24] in a number of western states where this

[09:26] would apply, you could potentially

[09:28] double over a number of years a single

[09:32] family um the supply of single family

[09:34] homes, but do so on a footprint of less

[09:39] than one a fraction of 1% less than half

[09:42] a percent of all federal land owned.

[09:45] That's what we're talking about here.

[09:47] And the these are these are not

[09:49] sensitive lands. They are not lands that

[09:51] are out there that are part of an

[09:53] environment that's appropriate uh for

[09:55] hunting, for hiking, uh for fishing,

[09:57] etc. These are things that are in or

[10:00] immediately adjacent to established

[10:03] residential inhabited communities. Uh

[10:06] that's all we're dealing with. And u I

[10:08] really appreciate you letting me come on

[10:09] your show to explain what the bill does

[10:11] and what it doesn't do. Really, really

[10:13] quick, son. I know you got a dash. Do

[10:14] you think the big beautiful bill is

[10:16] going to pass sometime soon? If yes,

[10:17] walk us through the timing.

[10:20] I believe that this bill, the big

[10:23] beautiful bill, some version of it is

[10:25] going to pass. There is still a lot of

[10:27] um moving parts to it. I continue to

[10:30] believe that we need more aggressive

[10:32] deficit reduction that then can be found

[10:35] either in the House bill or in the

[10:37] current iteration such as it is uh in

[10:40] the Senate. Uh among other things, we we

[10:43] need a full repeal of the Inflation

[10:46] Reduction Act subsidies. Those subsidies

[10:48] were put in place exclusively by

[10:51] Democrat votes. Not a single Republican

[10:53] in the House, not a single Republican in

[10:54] the Senate voted for any of those. I

[10:56] think those all need to go away and they

[10:59] need to be terminated completely during

[11:01] this president's term in office. We can

[11:03] achieve additional uh deficit reduction

[11:06] through that. If we get that done and

[11:09] tighten up some other conditions, I

[11:10] think this passes and I think it passes

[11:12] between now and July 4th in the Senate

[11:16] and either within that time or shortly

[11:18] thereafter in the House. Very good. Uh,

[11:20] Senator, thank you so much. We'll keep

[11:22] our eyes on it. Thank you for your time.

[11:23] Really appreciate it. Talk to you soon.

[11:25] Thank you.