Import The 3rd World, Become The 3rd World
41:33 Share

I want to take a second to remind you to sign up for the post. So daily brief, it is completely free. It'll be one email that's sent to you every day. You can stop the endless scrolling, trying to find out what's going on in your world. We will have this delivered directly to you totally for free. Go to human events.com slash post. So sign up today. It's called the post. So daily brief read what I read for show prep. You will not regret it. Human events.com slash post. So totally free. The post. So daily brief.

This is what happens when the fourth turning meets fifth generation warfare.

A commentator, international social media sensation, and former Navy intelligence veteran. This is Human Events with your host, Jack Posobiec. Christ is King. Look, we just ended a war in 12 days that was simmering for 30 years. We ended Rwanda and the Congo. It's coming to sign the documents. We ended Serbia was going to go at it. But maybe the most important of all, India and Pakistan.

And that wasn't whether or not they may someday have nukes like we're talking about in the Middle East, like we're talking about with Israel and Iran. It's just they have nuclear weapons. I ended that with a...

series of phone calls on trade. The Supreme Court has ruled the Trump administration can deport migrants to countries other than their own. It's the latest ruling in favor of the president's push for mass deportations. Zoran Mamdani coming out on top over a career politician. Governor Andrew Cuomo conceding last night. Tonight, we made history. In the words of Nelson Mandela, it always seems impossible until it is done.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard today's edition of Human Events Daily here live in Washington, D.C. It's another hot day, a scorcher in Washington, D.C. Today is June 25th, 2025. I know, Dominique. Folks, I've got a new piece up at humanevents.com, and I highly encourage everyone to go and check that out. We're going to be going through this right now. It's an op-ed. This is white hot.

And this is actually an issue that directly affects every single American citizen. I'm going to explain why through this. But today's op-ed is 24 years after 9-11, a radical Muslim mayor may be elected to New York City. And it's thanks to mass immigration. Mass immigration. New York City. Heartbeat of America.

Last night, it witnessed a seismic shift that should send a wake-up call to everyone in America. Last night, Zoran Mamdani, a foreign-born Muslim cultural Marxist, clinched the Democratic primary for Mayors setting the stage

for what could be a radical transformation of the city we once knew. A city that was at one point synonymous with America. And it's not just happening in New York, it's happening all over the country. Our demographics are shifting as we import more and more of the third world. And as we import more of the third world, we become more of the third world. It's not just policies, understand. It's the people who believe in those policies

being increased here and that number increasing their support levels and you see this across government ilhan omar alejandro mayorkas tanya chutkin ahmed meta right alejandro mayorkas the guy who oversaw this massive border invasion was himself a foreign-born politician

I want to bring on now Libby Emmons, the editor-in-chief of the Postmillennial and HumanEvents.com, herself a New Yorker, I should say former New Yorker. Libby, we're going to the break here for a minute, but can I just get your quick reaction to all of this?

Yeah, I'm absolutely horrified that the people of New York would go so far as to elect a communist who plans to completely destroy the city by depleting the tax base and getting rid of all of the things that make the city worthwhile. It's absolutely crazy to me. The working class, people who make under $50,000, they voted for Cuomo. And the people who can afford to sit on their laptops and have everything delivered to them and don't have to take the subways, they voted for Mamdani.

Mom Donnie, it was queer liberation, defund the police, free food, free stuff everywhere. That's what these people voted for. And you're right in the sense that you have the...

You have this mass, I saw 80-20 in terms of South Asian immigrants, the South Asian community voting for Mamdani. But you also saw Hispanics and blacks voting against Mamdani as well as working class whites. And so suddenly people are realizing, wait a minute, this is an ethnic shift that's playing out in a class shift in terms of the politics. We're going to break down more of Libyan as we return.

What America first truly means. Welcome to the second American revolution.

all right jack pasopic here we are back live human events daily washington dc we're on with libby emmons and we're talking about this victory which has come as a shock to many but for those of us who have been focused on the mass immigration and the mass migration tactics of the left over the last 15 to 20 years it doesn't come as a shock at all if you look

At New York City, in the New York City metro area's demographic shift, the skyrocketing numbers

South Asians, Middle Easterners, now representing over a million in this area. It doesn't come as a shock at all that the recent immigrants are voting for one of their own, that there are progressive college-educated liberals who are joining them, and Gen Z who are totally going on board with this as well. And what you do see are ethnic whites, working-class whites, as well as Hispanics and blacks voting against Mamdani

And Libby, I think a lot of this is being driven by some of it is a lot of it, of course, is immigration. It can't be talked about the effect of immigration on all of our politics nationwide. But what we're also seeing here is that it's a class shift that's playing out. Isn't that right?

Yes, that's 100% true. I lived in Bay Ridge for about 10 years, which is a section of Brooklyn that is historically an immigrant community. It was Norwegian, it was Greek, it was Italian, it was Chinese, now it's primarily Arab. And the biggest difference, I think, between previous...

groups of immigrants and the current groups of immigrants is that the previous groups of immigrants were interested in assimilating. When my great-grandparents came here from Naples and from Sicily and also from Norway, they were interested in becoming American. You could not say a word against America to them and have them be quiet about it. There was absolutely no way. My great-grandmother taught herself to read by reading the New York Times in the 1920s, not by watching TikTok and hearing about how

Osama bin Laden is the greatest guy ever. I mean, it's just a totally different kind of cultural immersion that they're getting now. People are coming to this country and they're hearing that America sucks and that has got to stop. That's absolutely insane.

immigration during the height of Ellis Island. You had, I think, 12 million people over 60 years come in. That's 200,000 people a year, and that's legal immigration. Under Joe Biden, we had 200,000 illegal immigrants coming in every month. And what you have here is a situation where the wealthy people in New York City, the laptop class, the people who get delivery, the people who can afford to take taxis, primarily Asians and whites, they were voting for Mom Donnie when you had pretty

essentially blacks and Hispanics and people who had been in the city for a long time and are working class people saying, no, please don't make the city worse. And what everyone forgets is that once you start voting in communist policies, you can't vote them out. Look at a lot of the communist policies that came into the U.S., like the ACA, for example. There's no way to get Obamacare out at this point, despite how

poorly it has really done or the welfare state or any of these things. And you look at Mamdani and he is one of these laptop class people. He went to a liberal arts college, went to Bowdoin. His dad teaches anti-colonialism at Columbia University.

He absolutely is not representative of the people of New York. He's representative of luxury values that have absolutely no place in reality. And the things that he wants to do the city, he plans to do, as you said before, free buses, free childcare, city run grocery stores. He wants to replace the subway patrols with community policing. He wants all this healthcare stuff for illegal immigrants

And he also wants to take over vacant commercial spaces and turn them into health clinics. And he is opposed to the Trump administration entirely. He wants to create a legal fund a la California and Gavin Newsom to fight Trump, to fight ICE and all of this other stuff. And how is he planning to do it? He wants to take a page from Joe Biden's book and tax the 1%. He wants to tax the millionaires and the excessive...

the corporations that are making lots of money. But the only problem is, as I looked up this morning, there are 345,000 millionaires in the city of New York. Now, that may seem like a lot of people, but you have to remember that the population is something like 8.5. And you also have to remember...

that during COVID, 400,000 people, I think, left New York City. Does he really think that 345,000 people aren't capable of picking up, taking their money bags and getting out? And then what happens? The whole thing collapses.

It is complete and utter destruction of one of the greatest cities, probably the greatest city in American history, New York City. I say this as a guy from the Philly area, so I always have to, you know, it pains me. And even though Philadelphia is, of course, America's most historic city.

We know that, of course, New York City is or was the new Rome. And in the same way that Rome was overrun, well, it seems as though New York City is being overrun as well, as America seems totally focused on things going on far beyond our borders and totally ignorant about

of the things that are happening domestically, or at least they are if you listen to the mainstream media narrative on all of this. Libby, one final minute from you. Do you think New York still has the wherewithal to reject this?

Yes, I do. The general mayoral election is in November and the current mayor, Eric Adams, is running out of the independent ticket. So, you know, people should probably go out and vote for the mayor because he is much less bad than what we've got going on with.

Mamdani and Mayor Adams is willing to work with ICE. He's willing to clean up the situation with illegal immigration. He's willing to clean up the crime. He's working on subways, all of that stuff. And Mamdani is just going to destroy it all. You also have Curtis Lewa who is running. This is, I think, his second time running for mayor. He's running on the GOP ticket. And last night he ran uncontested. And I would, I

I would entreat, I would implore, rather, the GOP to not abandon New York City. New York City's two best mayors in the modern memory were Rudy Giuliani, who of course was a Republican, and also Michael Bloomberg, who ran as a Republican when he first took office, despite his weird soda tax thing. So I...

would ask the GOP respectfully to get back into New York City, fund some candidates and get that city back on track because the city works best with conservative local leadership. Well, I'll certainly always say that I definitely think that Bloomberg did the right thing when it came to police. Libby, it's humanevents.com and thepostmillennial.com. Thank you so much for joining us. Thanks. All right, I want to bring on now as well,

We've got Sean Davis, the CEO and co-founder of The Federalist, joining us. Sean, let me ask you, you know, having obviously written about these issues for a long time, does the New York City mayoral primary actually surprise you?

It does surprise me. It disappoints me a lot. I was having a conversation with a colleague this morning, and there's a little bit of debate on the right. Should we be cheering what appears to be the impending demise of New York City with this candidate coming in, or should we be lamenting it? And I'm kind of of both minds on it. A part of it is,

when you see these leftist policies and these leftist voters, you kind of want to tell them, you've sown and now you're going to reap. And you can kind of pat yourself on the back and get a certain amount of satisfaction about that. But like you said in the earlier segment, New York City is the crown jewel of

of America. It's the symbol of the American empire. It's the greatest city that America ever created. And to see it go in this direction, you know, nations follow the trajectory of their great cities. So when you see what's happened to Detroit, what's happened to Chicago, what's happened to New Orleans, what happened to Philly and Baltimore, and then you see it now happening to New York,

I think it is a moment for sadness and grief. I don't think it's good. And I hope the people of New York understand this. And maybe it's going to take some really bad government happening and even more chaos and crime for them to realize. But I lament the loss of New York City. I want it to be saved. I want it to be a great city once again, because you can't be a great country without great cities.

No, you can't. You really can't. And that's something where, you know, I've been to different parts of the world. People go to Japan, right? People go to Japan and it's become a meme at this point. They go and they say, wow, look at all the cities and Tokyo and it's so nice and all of these areas. You know why? Because they actually take care of their crime. They actually don't put up with any of the crap that goes on out there. They clean it up.

They're patriotic. They're nationalistic. They want to actually put their best face forward. And if you break the law, they actually punish you. What a concept. They don't go all in for these crazy ideas. And what do they also not have in Japan? Mass immigration. Because they keep the country full of people who love their country. It can be done and it will be done here in the United States of America. Quick break. Right back. Dak Pasovic. Real America's Voice with Sean Davison.

Today, you know, they talk about influencers. These are influencers. And they're friends of mine. Jack Posobiec. Where's Jack? Jack? He's done a great job.

All right, Jack, so we are back live, Human Events Daily, Washington, D.C. We're on with CEO and co-founder of The Federalist, Sean Davis. Sean, we're talking about these New York City results, and they come as a shock, but a lot of people are pointing out that, you know, it may not be a surprise or it may not be as unexpected as people were thinking because this has been the warning of a lot of people who,

let's just say it faced a lot of crap for talking about the impacts of mass immigration and saying, look, it's really simple that when you import people from parts of the world that don't have this

Jeffersonian idea of a republic and the Constitution and what the social contract is and all of these different ideals and instead look at government as simply a way to redistribute resources, then that's eventually what you're going to get in terms of your own politicians. And it shouldn't really surprise us when one of their own is elected or in this case at least nominated

as the leader of a major area. In this case, New York City, not only our greatest city, but in a sense, economically speaking, far above, you know, it's almost like a governor in a sense, and a very important one as well. So, Sean, what are some of the ways that Americans should be thinking about this? And when we talk about this immigration issue, I mean, I'm just going to say it.

I think the most important thing is to admit it, right? It's like we're addicted to cheap labor and the Democrats are addicted to cheap votes. So the first step is admitting you have a problem. - It is, and I think this is a wake-up call for a lot of people, and it shows what a lie so much of the propaganda surrounding mass immigration was. And it's been that way for 30, 40, 50 years. This isn't something that happens overnight.

We were told that mass immigration made America richer, culturally more healthy. It was better for everyone. And what we're finding out is that actually mass immigration, especially when it includes people from countries and cultures with beliefs that are really antithetical to our way of life, it makes assimilation impossible. So rather than bringing in people who can become great Americans, we're

We're allowing to come in people who really don't like America. They don't like what we stand for. They want to deconstruct it and tear it down. And, you know, it's showing what a problem it is when you treat a country as if it's just an international Costco. Anyone can be a member. You just got to come in, get all the cheap stuff you want, leave whenever you like. And that's the sole extent of your obligation. That's a total lie. And America is not a business park.

It's not a warehouse store. It's not an economic zone. And as soon as you adopt this lie that it is that, as soon as you adopt the lie that America is not a unique culture with its own language, with its own history and traditions, if you reject that, you are rejecting the entire purpose of America. And you shouldn't be surprised when people who come in who don't believe in America or ideals begin to radically transform it deliberately as soon as they get here.

And this is what so many people have been warning about. I totally love that line, International Costco, by the way, that it's, you know, we're not just a place that's completely defined by our GDP. And, you know, one of my favorite moments of, and I think it's not talked about as much, my favorite moments of all of 2024 was J.D. Vance and his, not his nomination speech at the RNC, where he talked about his family,

He talked about the grave on the hillside that his family has, this plot in Kentucky where his ancestors are buried and where one day he too knows that he himself will be buried.

buried that means something that means and then his whole family came out on stage around his extended cousins and have his mom and everyone come out and that that means something and that means something to i think a group of people that really has gotten the raw end of the deal and has been totally overlooked for so many years prior to trump and vance getting back in the office last minute before we have to go to you sean davis

Yeah, you know, my family's been here 400 years. America is not just a place where we go shop. It's in our blood and it's in our bones and it's in every fiber of our being. I very much want other people to be able to experience that same thing. But the reality is that having a card that says you're a citizen, it may entitle you to the same rights and privileges.

But there is a real difference between someone who is American and understands and love this culture and her people and our land and someone who just has a piece of paper. And I wish we would get back to understanding and inculcating in people that America is not just a piece of paper. America is the greatest civilization in history and it's something to be preserved and loved. And as soon as we get back to that, we can actually get back to restoring America. And if we don't get back to that, America is just going to continue to decline.

Having a country that people care about and a country that people actually feel, literally feel that connection to. Sean, where can people go to follow you and everything you're putting up? I may have lost him, folks. Go follow Sean Davis. And of course, check out The Federalist online. We'll be right back. Jack Tosobic, Human Events Daily, Real American Point. And Jack, where is Jack? Where is Jack? Where is he? Jack, I want to see you.

Great job, Jack. Thank you. What a job you do. You know, we have an incredible thing. We're always talking about the fake news and the bad, but we have guys and these are the guys who should be getting policies.

All right, Jack Posobiec, here we are back, live, human events, daily, real America's voice. We are here in Washington, D.C., and we are once again honored to have on the program Senator Mike Lee from the great state of Utah. Senator, thank you for joining us. Thank you, Jack. Good to be with you.

Thank you, Senator. Now, Senator, all of last week, there was this raging debate online on X. I'm there all the time. You're there all the time. But I noticed that while I was focused, you know, very much so on on Iran and these military strikes and what was going to come left and regime change and all this other stuff.

You were embroiled in a totally separate conversation that I'll admit I wasn't able to plug in as much on that given everything that was going on during, I guess we're calling it the 12-day war now. And so I wanted to...

my attention to this now. And we wanted to bring you on because I had so many people reaching out to me saying so many of our viewers and listeners saying, you got to get the Senator on. You got to talk about this public lands bill. I understand the bill as of right now has been essentially taken off the shelf or I should say put back on the shelf because of the parliamentarian and the reconciliation, but the debate is still ongoing. So I wanted to get bring you on to give us your side of it as well as sort

sort of an overall view of how this got started and then where it stands now. Thanks so much, Jack. And thanks for letting me talk about this. The debate is ongoing, by the way, in part because the parliamentarian is revisiting the issue today in light of some new information that she didn't have and some new language that we've added. But let me summarize the problem that we're addressing here, and then I'll describe the solution.

There's a nationwide shortage that some estimate to be about 7 million homes. It's not acceptable in America. The Americans deserve the chance to be able to buy a home and they need land to do so. Now, coincidentally, the U.S. government happens to own about 640 million acres.

Nearly a third, between a fourth and a third of all the land in the United States, most of which goes unused and is often mismanaged badly by the government. There are a number of pieces of that land, that portfolio of real estate.

that has zero recreational value. It doesn't have significant conservation value, value for hunting, fishing, grazing, hiking, and so forth. And for that specific land and the land I'm talking about here, think vacant lots next to existing residential developments, not national parks. In fact, you can't even have it considered for sale under these provisions.

If you fit into any of the 15 or so categories of protected federal land from national monuments, national forest, wilderness areas, national recreation areas, wild and scenic rivers, trails, conservation areas, and so forth.

So what's the solution? The solution involves allowing the U.S. government to sell off a limited number of these parcels of land at an affordable price to allow people to build homes with preference toward single-family homes. And this has all kinds of protections in it that make sure that we're not selling off the crown jewels, nothing in any protected status. Again, think vacant lots next to existing residential neighborhoods, and that's what we're talking about.

There has been associated with this effort a lot of attempts to provide misinformation. There have been maps that have been put out there that are badly misleading about what this bill actually does, suggesting that it would sell all the land listed on a map.

The maps aren't authentic. They're not legitimate. Why? Well, because there's a process. There are criteria. It's impossible to come up with a map that describes what is going to be sold, what could be sold under it. There's no way of communicating that accurately. There are instead criteria and a number of processes that people would have to follow. I would note also that a lot of the housing shortage that we're trying to address exists in the Western United States. Remember, the U.S. government owns

Less than 15% of every state to the east of Colorado

from Colorado's eastern slope to the west. The U.S. government owns at least 15% of the land of every state. In most cases, it's a lot more than that. In my state, it's more like two-thirds of the land that's owned by the U.S. government. That's where a lot of our housing shortages tend to be the most acute. And that's where we have a lot of existing residential neighborhoods where there are vacant federal lots right next door in places people already live

next to utility hookups where people could buy homes. We should allow that and do so understanding that we would cap this at no more than a fraction of 1%, less than one half of 1% of federal land could even be considered for this.

One, Senator, I did actually pull, I was doing a little bit of research. I try to do my job around here because actual journalists don't do any work. So in Nevada, that's the largest one. I think people have heard about this before. It's something a lot of conservatives have talked about for years. 80% is owned by the federal government. You mentioned Utah, your state, 63%, the two-thirds.

Idaho 61%, Alaska 62%. President Trump has talked about drilling in Alaska, Anwar for a long, long time. I've been to Anwar, by the way, something that a lot of people can say. I actually had the opportunity to go there. It is not a national park. It is not a place where it is very, it's muddy, it's oily, which makes sense because there's

Why do you want to drill there because there's so much oil? And so, and the wildlife is very, very sparse. And so, Senator,

What would be, I suppose, your response to some of the claims that I've seen out there where people are saying that, well, hold on a second, isn't this just a backdoor way for BlackRock and Blackstone and the World Economic Forum type organizations to come in and buy up all this land and then rent it back to people if they can't afford it to mass ownership from private equity?

and then get to that WEF slogan of you'll own nothing and you'll be happy. Are there provisions that would prevent things like that from happening? Is that separate from what's going on here? What do you say to those folks? Yeah, it's one of the most commonly raised arguments, one being that entities like BlackRock will buy up all this land and another being that the Chinese Communist Party and...

business enterprises associated with it or owned by it will gobble all this up. We're working on solutions right now to make sure that that never happens. I don't believe that it would happen under the language. We're also working on additional solutions to make sure that it doesn't happen, that it can't happen.

And there are all kinds of existing protections in existing law, some state law, some federal that would discourage that. We're going to even go even further than that to make sure that people understand this is not going to be a boondoggle for anyone. It's not going to be an opportunity for anyone other than individual families who want a place to live. We're going to keep out CCP ownership and we're going to keep out BlackRock ownership, large institutional acquisition.

And so what would you say then, I guess, I'm actually reading some of the comments as they come in. What would you say to the hunter in Idaho who grew up hunting on this land and is worried that his land might qualify for one of these sales?

If you're hunting on land, if you've got any activity like that, hunting, grazing, fishing, this land isn't going to be appropriate. It's not going to be deemed suitable for housing. And in all probability, in fact, with a virtual certainty, if there's land on which you've hunted, it's not going to be adjacent to existing residential developments, nor will it be suitable for housing. So this is not going to be part of that.

Look, you can always identify some theoretical basis on which bad decisions could be made under any piece of legislation. But you can't just go throwing that around without looking at what the law actually says and looking at what the proposed legislative text that's before the Senate parliamentarian right now being reviewed actually says. When you read the text and understand the existing law behind that,

These things are not legitimate concerns. Many of the people, not all of them, but many of the people making these arguments are the same people who, when pushed, will push back on any effort to reduce the federal land footprint by even one hundredth of one percent or even an acre. They're absolutists in this regard, and that's folly to assume.

that a U.S. government that owns between a fourth and a third of all land mass in the United States cannot shed even a single lot or two to allow hardworking Americans, families, to build their family home.

And this is something that I've been considering as well. I've spent a lot of time out there, either just traveling or for various military trainings that I've done. And there's huge swaths of the West that are really, they're just not, we're not talking about the national parks, but it's just huge swaths of kind of nothing, where there's just really nothing there. And

you know, call me whatever you want for saying that, but it's just true where it could be put. It seems like it could be put to better use. And it seems as though there are ways that this could be used. And I've done hours and hours driving, you know, through this area for various things. And so when it comes down to this, you know, I think you do hear a lot of people and it does become emotional because of, and by the way, this comes up in the context of the Alaska debate so much,

where people have this image of Alaska that it's just this massive national park that people might want to visit one day. And there are incredible glaciers in the national park. It's amazing. It's absolutely amazing. By the way, we are Mount McKinley users around here, not Mount Denali. And so people miss the fact, though, that there are also vast swaths of Alaska that are completely untouched.

They have drilling under them and it wouldn't affect anything but the environmentalists or other lobbies use that to prevent access to those resources. Exactly. And look, if you've spent any time in Utah, I would encourage you to consider a drive between St. George in the south up to Ogden in the north on I-15. Now driving on I-15 during that expanse, you'll travel most of the length of the state.

You'll drive through a number of cities and towns. You won't drive through any wilderness areas or national parks because that's not how the interstate works. But you will drive through countless cities and towns, countless neighborhoods, communities where people live.

Immediately next to those will be countless vacant lots, many of which are owned by the U.S. government. Those lots are not national parks. They're not suitable for wilderness area. They're not part of a national forest or any other protected federal land status category. They are most naturally and most beneficially used by the American people as housing because they're right next to housing and should be available for consideration for the construction of housing.

We've got a quick break coming up here. By the way, I was trying to think of what the name of it was. Pebble Mine. Pebble Mine up in Alaska is one of these great deposits that I've talked about where it's just, you go there and they flew us out on a helicopter and we landed right out and they said, well, you know, Belize, our feet is a trillion dollars in copper. I said, did you bring a shovel? And you look around, there's just nothing. There's just nothing around. It's just open rocks and scrub grass and

That's about it. And what's preventing it is a lot of this red tape. So there are instances where I could find myself in agreement. But I also think that there are serious questions and serious concerns as well, because we do want to keep our public lands beautiful when they are. We'll be right back. Jack Posobiec, Human Events.

They said Gen Z would stay silent, that we'd back down, that we'd forget what's worth fighting for. But this generation remembers. We remember truth. We remember freedom. And now, we rise.

This is more than a conference. It's a call to action to reclaim the future.

to ignite a movement that cannot be ignored. Student Action Summit 2025, featuring the boldest voices in the fight. Charlie Kirk, Secretary Pete Hegseth, Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon, Brett Cooper, Secretary Kristi Noem, Riley Gantz, Brandon Tatum, Jack Posobiec, Laura Ingraham, Megan Kelly, Greg Gutfeld, Tom Homan, Congressman Byron Donalds, Russell Brand, Savannah Chrisley. Join thousands of students, future leaders, and freedom fighters

This is the battleground of ideas. This is the Student Action Summit.

Register now at SAS 2025. All right, Jack, what's up? We're back. Human Events Daily. We're continuing our interview with Senator Mike Lee. And we're asking questions about this public land deal, this public land bill, which the current status of which is that it's not going to be in the reconciliation or potentially not in the reconciliation bill because the Senate parliamentarian has put the brakes on it.

However, that might be reopened or revisited at another time. And, you know, I'm looking at the chat and I see people in the chat and Senator, I'm sure you've seen it online as well. I know you've seen it online as well, that there are some people who say, I like it because it helps with the debt, helps with the housing issue. I see a lot of other people saying, hey, wait a minute. I don't want to lose our public lands. I don't want to lose our national parks.

This land is there for, you know, throwing Teddy Roosevelt quotes in that, you know, this is for our posterity. This is for our beautiful lands, for hunting and fishing and hiking and selling it off to developers, et cetera, et cetera. I'm sure you've heard all of these criticisms as well. Walk me through how these federal plots that you're talking about are different from these national park areas that people are so concerned about.

Yeah, very, very different. National parks, national wilderness areas, forests, things like that, they've been designated and set aside for non-use. In the case of wilderness areas and national parks, for example, normally they have some type of unique quality that makes them especially beautiful, and they tend to be remote and detached from where people are living.

Nothing like that, nothing included within that could even be considered under this proposal. This proposal deals with, again, it's best to think of these as vacant lots next to existing established residential neighborhoods. And so an individual, anyone could nominate this. It's patterned after a law that's been around for decades called the Recreation and Public Purposes Act.

that allows for purposes of establishing a trail or anything else deemed to be a public purpose, you can sell some federal land as appropriate for those purposes. In this circumstance, when somebody nominates a parcel, it initiates a review process within the U.S. Department of the Interior.

And if the land is deemed suitable and appropriate for housing, and it doesn't run afoul of any of the many exemptions and protections that are in there, then it could ultimately be placed for sale and could be transferred to a unit of local government in that area, which would in turn oversee the process by which that could be developed into single family residential housing would be the preference under the bill.

And they could do so at what we sometimes refer to as an affordable rate. And it would allow individual families to purchase land for purposes of building a home.

So when we look at what this does, rather than just listen to the scare monitoring tactics of those who say you're going to destroy the national park system, look at the facts. This doesn't hit national parks or any of the other protected areas. These are vacant lots next to where people already live, next to utility hookups and connections.

places where there are already roads. This is not something that you should worry about in terms of destroying the legacy of Theodore Roosevelt. Now, look, if you're one of those people who believes as if a matter of first principles, as if an article of faith, that the current land footprint of the United States government

is somehow written onto stone tablets and handed down from on high and designated to be perpetually in federal ownership, you're not going to like this bill if that's what you believe. But if you do believe that, I think that is a mistake. If, on the other hand, you believe that it could be good for housing to allow families to be able to afford housing, to have a greater supply, particularly in areas where the federal government owns most of the state, as is the case in my state, then you'll feel people are going to...

Would that be codified into the bill, this maybe preferential treatment for families going along with some of the family policies that President Trump and J.D. Vance have put out there as well? Yes. And in that respect, it's good to think of these as freedom zone housing opportunities for families because of this preference built into the text for single family housing.

Well, I think built into the text, that's something that a lot of people and I can see are asking for. And people remember 40 acres and a mule. And this is sort of how the West was founded, how the West was won. And I think that people understandably have concerns whenever the federal government is talking about doing something like this. But I appreciate you coming on. I appreciate you sharing with us. Where can people go to follow you and get all the information that you're putting out from your side of this as well?

They can always go to lee.senate.gov, where we have up-to-date information on this bill and what it does and where it's going. lee.senate.gov. Senator, thank you so much for joining us once again, Human Events Daily. Thank you. All right, folks. And ladies and gentlemen, as always, you have my permission to lay ashore.