Interior Department staff on Monday tweeted this photo of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke presenting a check representing President Trump's first three months' salary to the National Park Service.
President Trump on Monday donated his salary for the first three months of the year to the National Park Service, a move quickly ridiculed as a publicity stunt by some groups.
The donation, of $78,333, pales in comparison to the estimated $12 billion maintenance backlog facing the National Park System, and comes in the wake of a $1.5 billion budget cut the president is proposing for the Interior Department, which oversees the national parks.
“If Donald Trump is actually interested in helping our parks, he should stop trying to slash their budgets to historically low levels. This publicity stunt is a sad consolation prize as Trump tries to stifle America’s best idea," said Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club.
"It's a distraction that falls far short of the $12 billion needed to address the current backlog of park maintenance and does nothing to offset the almost $2 billion Trump asked Congress to cut from the Department of the Interior in his budget. America’s parks, and the people and economies they support, need real funding, not a giant fake check. Parks are a good investment and we must invest now if we want them to be around for our kids.”
At the Center for Western Priorities, Deputy Director Greg Zimmerman said, "President Trump and Secretary (Ryan) Zinke should be embarrassed by today’s publicity stunt. You can’t propose $1.6 billion in cuts to our public lands, then pretend a $78,000 donation makes it better. The White House needs to protect America’s parks and public lands, not pay lip service to them."
Interior Secretary Zinke said the $78,333 would go to maintaining historic battlefield properties in the National Park System. The Interior secretary's tweet of the donation included a note stating that after the president made his donation, an anonymous donor contributed $22,000 to the National Park Foundation.
Comments
KL - would I like the President to stay in Washington and not incur those travel expenses - yes. On the otherhand, he has already implemented policies that are saving the American tax payer and consumer tens or even hundreds of Billions of dollars. On a net basis, he is far ahead of the game in my book. But for some of you, he could invent the cure for cancer and your response would be, 'what about diabetes, heart disease, alzheimer's & AIDS"
EC, I missed the memo. What has he done to save us tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars??
And don't forget, KL, how Trump also personally profits from the trips to Mar-a-Lago, as the GAO has noted.
http://www.npr.org/2017/03/28/521823473/gao-agrees-to-review-costs-of-tr...
Here is one report Kurt.
http://freebeacon.com/issues/report-trump-halted-181-billion-regulatory-...
According to Senator Cory Gardner, regulatory savings alone have been around $60 billion.
So if they've saved between $60 billion and "hundreds" of billions, does that mean the Park Service backlog can be wiped out? They'd still be ahead, right? (rhetorical questions).
If those folks that are saving the money want to donate it to the NPS, like Trump did, yes.
What about the people that will die from his new policies with filthy air and water, no health care, further wage gaps, and don't forget climate change and the continued use of dangerous chemicals on our crops? Is money all we care about?
I don't see his policies leading to filthy air and water much less their resulting in deaths. Nor to I see actual "health care" under threat. Further wage gaps? could care less about the gaps, I care about the absolute level. Trump's policies will raise all boats, or at least all boats that are willing to put an oar in the water. What "dangerous chemicals" are on our crops? Money is not all we care about but it has an amazing way of driving the right decisions.