Moderator: HAZ - Moderators
I think what it's technically called is a "win-win".
If you feel that a land swap with a high mandatory minimum and no set maximum of "economically viable" land for "any" land decided by the profiteering party is a win-win then I definitely don't want you negotiating anything for me. Ever.in section 1493: "(iii) identify not less than 500,000 acres of economically viable Federal land, being managed by any Federal land management agency, in or outside the State that can be made available to CAC in exchange for any CAC land identified by CAC as available to the United States for exchange."
Are there some things in it that I would prefer not to see? Almost certainly. But that's exactly the point I was making above.Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune: "It’s rare to see Congress act in an overwhelmingly bipartisan manner, but today reminds everyone that the protection of our public lands isn’t a red or blue issue, it’s an American one