Finding balance in addressing the housing crisis without sacrificing our way of life
Arguing over how to use the land in Nevada has defined the political conversation for a long time, starting with statehood, running through the Cliven Bundy saga, and up to the present moment with the debate over what role public lands should play in addressing the housing crisis. The availability of thriving natural places is a blessing that we need to manage carefully to make sure Nevada stays a great place to live and work as we also work to expand affordable housing for working families.
It's important to add some context to the current push to liquidate these places for development.
The 'Sagebrush Rebellion' kicked off in Nevada nearly half a century ago by special interests that wanted to gain control over public property for their own commercial gain. It continued on through Mr. Bundy's challenge to public ownership of land he refused to pay to use. And unfortunately, it's rearing its ugly head again in the conversation, this time under the pretext of mass disposal of public lands to create affordable housing.
Modern day sagebrush rebels have seized on the affordability crisis to create a narrow private gain from public resources. One proposal in Congress from Utah Sen. Mike Lee, a longtime opponent of public ownership of public lands, would create the broad liquidation of public lands under the deceptive guise of creating more housing. That legislation doesn't mention the word 'affordable' once, meaning that it could be sold to anyone from politically-connected billionaires to wealthy real estate developers who want to create high end housing for the super-rich.
There are frankly no details available to confirm that the latest Trump administration is much better. As they have done with so many other initiatives, the administration issued a press release before the policy, so there's no telling if the ultimate use of this land will be for Tesla server farms or places Nevadans can afford to rent or buy.
Public lands are supposed to benefit the public. Period. That's why any sales for the purposes of housing should truly create affordable options for working people.
Fortunately, there are already tools in place that accomplish this goal. Regulations currently in place at the Bureau of Land Management require such lands to be sold only when it benefits the 'national interest' – exactly what's at stake in the campaign for affordable housing. A bill recently passed with bipartisan support to make some administrative U.S. Forest Service lands available for lease for the purposes of affordable housing.
These measures are a better path for Nevada and other states with fast-growing communities across the West, and they've already been used to create more affordable housing right in our backyard.
Public lands conservation is an important tool for managing growth. They provide essential services like clean water filtration and and air purification—services that benefit everyone, not just those who live near them. Surging ahead without protecting these important resources will not benefit anyone in the long-run.
As the conversation continues around how to tackle the housing crisis, we urge decision-makers to consider policies that are not just focused on short-term solutions but that also preserve our public lands for the long term. With Lake Mead sitting at only one third of capacity we can't throw the baby out with the bathwater (if you'll pardon the expression) through a wholesale liquidation of public lands that includes no guarantees to protect the public interest.
If public lands are truly to benefit the public, then we must make sure any that are sold or leased are guaranteed to be used for affordable housing. And we must ensure that some other lands are protected for their water resources and the quality of life they create for our families.
The majority of people in Nevada and around the West want a balanced approach to public lands management, not a return to the tired old fights of the past. Our leaders have a chance to chart a new path. Let's hope they hear us.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Autonomous Vehicles Are Tangled Up In Red Tape, But There's No One Left To Cut It
As robotaxis come for a city near you, tech and car companies are looking for guidance on how to navigate a thicket of federal and state regulations on automated vehicle driving. There's only one problem: there's almost nobody left to offer that guidance. And that's because one very particular tech and car CEO fired them all, apparently thinking this would cut all the red tape in his way. Instead, he's gotten tangled in it, along with everyone else. As Politico details in a report, the Office of Automation Safety was set up by the Biden administration in order to regulate how autonomous vehicles would integrate onto public roads. Partly, that means setting and enforcing safety standards. Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who has run afoul of government oversight before, doesn't seem to have liked that idea, which is likely why his DOGE initiative slashed staff at the OAS by nearly half. No one to stop Tesla now, right? Well, turns out, that office was also meant to flash green lights, not just red ones. Because without someone setting federal standards for what AVs can and can't do, it becomes difficult for a company to actually put them on the road. In other words, DOGE cut the people who cut the red tape. Oops. Read more: These Are The Most Forgettable Cars Rules Of The Road, Circa Last Century The current regulatory framework was created in the 20th century, when cars were introduced to the world. For the U.S., the general idea was that the federal government, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Adminstration, would determine the criteria for what a car needed to have to drive on public roads. This is codified as the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. By contrast, state governments would individually determine who should actually get behind the wheel, issuing driver's licenses and setting driving laws. So what happens when the car is the driver? That's never actually been spelled out before. To really get the industry moving forward, it needs the government to help it out with the legal snarls. That was part of the Office of Automation Safety's job. It could also offer exemptions for the federal safety standards, literally making things easier for thos companies. Instead, after DOGE's cuts, it appears that most of the rest of the office has left, leaving the place empty. That has slowed the pace of exemptions to a crawl, and left the AV industry in the lurch for any assistance with the legal quandaries. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy did loosen safety requirements for AVs back in April, but that doesn't seem to have been enough. So now, a Senate Appropriations Committee report "highly encourages the Department [of Transportation] to prioritize hiring" in the OAS. Firing everyone, just to quietly admit you need to rehire them later? Surely not. Such things never happen. In any case, let's hope the government can fill up that office again, both for our safety and so that robotaxis can navigate the legal mazes a little better than they navigate the urban ones. Want more like this? Join the Jalopnik newsletter to get the latest auto news sent straight to your inbox... Read the original article on Jalopnik.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Explainer-Does Trump have the power to ban mail-in ballots in U.S. elections?
By Jack Queen (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump wants to ban mail-in ballots in federal elections, a form of voting popular with many Americans. About three in 10 ballots were cast through the mail in the 2024 general election, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. Trump, a Republican, does not have clear legal authority to do this, though his allies in Congress and state governments could enact policies barring the practice. Here is a look at Trump's authority and how the law could be changed. CAN TRUMP UNILATERALLY BAN MAIL-IN BALLOTS? Only states and the U.S. Congress can pass laws regulating elections. A unilateral ban by the president on mail-in ballots would likely exceed Trump's limited authority to enforce existing law. In a Monday social media post, Trump said mail-in ballots are susceptible to fraud and that he would lead a movement to ban them, beginning with an executive order bringing "honesty" to the November 2026 midterm elections. Republicans have filed scores of lawsuits seeking to end mail-in voting in recent years, citing possible fraud. Democrats generally support mail-in ballots as a way to expand access to voting. Voter fraud in the U.S. is extremely rare, multiple studies have shown. White House representatives provided a general statement about Trump's election policies but did not answer questions about his legal authority to ban mail-in ballots or what an executive order would say. COULD TRUMP'S ALLIES BAN MAIL-IN BALLOTS? States are responsible for administering their votes under the U.S. Constitution, and Republican-controlled legislatures could pass laws banning mail-in ballots so long as they do not conflict with federal law. Congress could ban the use of mail-in ballots in federal elections and override state laws protecting their use, but Trump's Republican Party has slim majorities in Congress and would face difficulty getting past opposition by Democrats. Republicans hold 53 Senate seats. To pass a mail-in ballot ban they would need to end the filibuster, a longstanding tradition requiring 60 of the chamber's 100 members to approve most legislation. State and federal laws banning mail-in voting could be challenged in court as unconstitutional impediments to voting. WHAT OTHER POWERS DO PRESIDENTS HAVE OVER ELECTIONS? Presidents in the U.S. have some discretion in enforcing election laws, and Trump could try to use those powers to end or restrict mail-in voting, though it is unclear how. In June, a federal judge blocked parts of an executive order by Trump requiring voters to prove they are U.S. citizens and attempting to prevent states from counting mail-in ballots received after Election Day. The Trump administration is appealing. "The Constitution does not grant the president any specific powers over elections," said U.S. District Judge Denise Casper, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Josh Hawley is ruffling GOP feathers as he stakes out his ground: From the Politics Desk
Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, a newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. In today's edition, we have a deep dive into Sen. Josh Hawley's effort to stake out ground for himself in the modern Republican Party. Plus, Adam Noboa breaks down how President Donald Trump's renewed campaign against mail voting intersects with the redistricting fight. Sign up to receive this newsletter in your inbox every weekday here. — Adam Wollner Josh Hawley irks fellow Republicans as he tries to carve out a lane By Allan Smith, Julie Tsirkin and Matt Dixon Since he took office in 2019, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., has sought to place himself on the front lines of orienting the Republican Party around a mix of economic populism and social conservatism to appeal to an increasingly working-class base. But now, with Republicans in full control of Congress for the first time since he arrived in Washington, Hawley's mission is coming into conflict with members of his party, who are frustrated with his tendency to follow the beat of his own drum as he grows more critical of some of their policy aims. Republicans, both in Congress and in the White House, are increasingly talking about Hawley's moves with the assumption that he is considering a presidential campaign, five people familiar with such discussions told NBC News. A senior Senate aide said it appeared that Hawley was 'trying to load up policy prescriptions to lay the groundwork for a 2028 presidential bid.' 'He's aligned himself with Democrats on most fiscal issues,' the aide added. 'Frankly, it has irked a lot of his Republican colleagues.' But Hawley's allies say no 2028 plotting is afoot. 'Josh believes we're at a critical inflection point in our history about where the party's realigning,' a person close to him said. 'He's been on the same mission, focusing on the same project since he first ran for office, believing that the Republican Party needs to become a party of working people. What he's done is consistent with that each year he's been in Congress.' Across the aisle: Hawley had been written off by Democrats after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack, when he was seen entering the Capitol raising a fist to protesters assembled outside and later moved forward with his objection to the electoral vote count. But this year alone, Hawley has teamed up with Sens., Gary Peters, D-Mich., on a bill to ban congressional stock trading; Cory Booker, D-N.J., on legislation to enhance child labor laws; Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., on a bill to bar artificial intelligence firms from training models on stolen, copyrighted materials; Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., on an effort to cap credit card interest rates; and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., on legislation to further regulate pharmacy benefit managers, among other measures. 'Well, Jan. 6 remains in the back of a lot of people's minds. At the same time, on issues where we can make progress stopping corporate greed or monopolistic control over markets, there's a need for allies,' Blumenthal said in an interview. 'The iconic Jan. 6 photo of him with a fist in the air can't be erased from memory. But if he can bring Republican support to the table for ideas that will help people, sometimes working together makes sense.' Read more → California's long ballot count may be Trump's next target in the war over voting By Adam Noboa The latest salvo in President Donald Trump's campaign against mail-in voting arrived Monday, as he announced he wants to 'lead a movement' against mail ballots and advocate instead for in-person and paper ballots, which he says are 'faster, and leaves NO DOUBT, at the end of the evening, as to who WON, and who LOST, the Election.' This push by Trump may also have the convenience of being the latest line of attack in the redistricting wars. In California, state Democrats are attempting their own mid-decade gerrymander to counter the Trump-led push by Republicans to draw more friendly districts in Texas. And California sticks out as one of the most prominent embracers of mail-in voting — and among the slowest to count them. Overall, mail-in voting accounted for 30% of the total vote nationwide in 2024, down from its 2020 peak of 43%. However, in California, the practice made up 81% of the total vote, according to a recent report from the Election Assistance Commission. Mail-in voting overall has proved to be a challenging process for many election administrators, with hurdles including voter and ballot verification and logistical issues like opening envelopes, keeping materials secure and, in many cases, hand-counting. Essentially, all of the processes that happen in person when someone votes at a polling place — especially checking in and verifying their registration — can pile up fast when it happens by mail. But California has had some of the greatest difficulties sorting through mail votes quickly. Of the states with the highest share of mail-in voting in the 2024 election, California set a benchmark for slowest progress the morning after the election. While Democrats have achieved steady success at the statewide level in recent years, California's prolonged vote counts left the nation in suspense over which party would win control of the House of Representatives for days after the 2022 and 2024 elections. Legislation was introduced this year requiring California counties to conclude a majority of their counting process 13 days after the election. The bill passed the state Assembly with bipartisan support and is in a state Senate committee seeking funding sign-off. Meanwhile, Trump faces high legal and political hurdles to changing mail-in laws on his own at the federal level. Without new federal laws, states have wide latitude to set their own election procedures. But it's also happening as California state legislators convened Monday to move forward on plans for a congressional map that, if approved by voters, would target five Republicans to lose their seats in the upcoming midterms. The effort was sparked by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom as a response to Texas Republicans' congressional redraw seeking to fortify their majority. It may put the redistricting wars and Trump's renewed crusade on mail-in votes on a political collision course in the Golden State. 🗞️ Today's other top stories 🇺🇦 The view from Ukraine: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's team was satisfied with yesterday's meeting at the White House, believing Trump now recognizes the importance of security guarantees for any peace agreement. Read more → 🇺🇲 The view from the U.S.: Trump pledged that the U.S. would not send troops to Ukraine as part of efforts to bring the conflict to an end. As for his relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump said, 'There's a warmth there.' 🇫🇷 The view from France: French President Emmanuel Macron said after the White House meeting that he did not believe Putin was 'very willing to get peace now' and that Russia should face additional sanctions if peace talks stall. Read more → 🇫🇮The view from Finland: Finnish President Alexander Stubb has proved pivotal in the efforts to end the war between Russia and Ukraine, taking on new importance after he bonded with Trump over their mutual love of golf. Read more → 🚓 D.C. crackdown: The Justice Department is investigating whether Washington, D.C., police manipulated data to make the crime rates appear lower. Read more → 🌃 Texas two-step: Texas Democratic state Rep. Nicole Collier spent last night in the state Capitol after refusing to sign off on a law enforcement escort to her home. A group of her colleagues plan to join her tonight ahead of the state House's plans to take up Republicans' redistricting proposal tomorrow. ↗️ Moving on up: Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has been hired to be co-deputy director of the FBI alongside Dan Bongino. Read more → 🗳️ 2026 watch: Graham Platner, a 40-year-old Army and Marine veteran who served four combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, joined the growing Democratic primary field seeking to take on Republican Sen. Susan Collins in Maine. Read more → 📱Getting technical: The Democratic National Committee is looking to refresh the technology it uses to help organize voters and volunteers. Read more → Follow live politics updates → That's all From the Politics Desk for now. Today's newsletter was compiled by Adam Wollner and Bridget Bowman. If you have feedback — likes or dislikes — email us at politicsnewsletter@ And if you're a fan, please share with everyone and anyone. They can sign up here. This article was originally published on
