is this uh illegal order? should national park troops resist and refuse to charge more ?

National parks and Smithsonians should definitely have surcharges for people who are not legal residents of the US. I don’t see anything controversial about this and it’s on par with other countries anyway.

Anonymous wrote:
It says American residents (not just citizens) so I think all that will be required is a driver's license or other ID.

TBH, this is not that unusual. Many countries have already adopted a two-tier system or surcharges for international tourists.

Frankly, after seeing busloads of foreign tourists overcrowding our National Parks, I don't really have an objection to it.

Same here. I’m totally fine with it. Same for the Smithsonians.

Anonymous wrote:Reading the comments on this thread is so enlightening. Here we are, discussing a proposal that will make our national parks more enjoyable for Americans, and predictably, the leftists here hate it. Typical!

What makes you think anonymous is leftist?

Anonymous wrote:Louvre Raising Ticket Prices for Non-European Visitors - The New York Times https://share.google/7WALgYyEdy9UMJ6su

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/30/1303257.page#31215897

Anonymous wrote:I mean, we as American residents pay taxes that directly fund the NPS. Foreign visitors do not. I've always felt it would be right and fair to upcharge non-residents.

+1

Louvre Raising Ticket Prices for Non-European Visitors - The New York Times https://share.google/7WALgYyEdy9UMJ6su

Anonymous wrote:My concern with this is a) how does one prove citizenship and b) doesn't this effectively tax those of us who prefer to travel anonymously? It seems like a bit of a tracking scam in disguise, and a potential sign of things to come ("discounts for citizens" as a means of domestic spying). It also seems likely to keep foreign tourists away and be generally bad for the tourism industry in the US. It is not as if this will meaningfully resolve the budget deficit.

It's U.S. RESIDENTS, not citizens. So any legitimate form of ID like a driver's license with your address on it would be acceptable, I think.

My concern with this is a) how does one prove citizenship and b) doesn't this effectively tax those of us who prefer to travel anonymously? It seems like a bit of a tracking scam in disguise, and a potential sign of things to come ("discounts for citizens" as a means of domestic spying). It also seems likely to keep foreign tourists away and be generally bad for the tourism industry in the US. It is not as if this will meaningfully resolve the budget deficit.

Anonymous wrote:I mean, we as American residents pay taxes that directly fund the NPS. Foreign visitors do not. I've always felt it would be right and fair to upcharge non-residents.

You are not wrong in that regard. However, the NPS budget is tiny and tourists spend thousands of dollars here on their vacation, which helps the economy and generates taxable income for local and national business. It's only upside economically, but the crowds piece of it is a legit concern as well. Though specifically for NPS foreign visitation is about 4 or 5%, not a a whole lot. But if you are unlucky enough to get stuck behind a bus-full of 60 of them you might feel disgruntled.

I mean, we as American residents pay taxes that directly fund the NPS. Foreign visitors do not. I've always felt it would be right and fair to upcharge non-residents.

Anonymous wrote:how many foreigners are choosing the US for their vacations this year?

Tons of foreigners in Orlando. So many Brits, I don't understand their behavior. So weird as they're passed out, red-faced on the ground in August.

Anonymous wrote:This is the norm in Europe.

The typical discount in the EU is for young adults 25 or 26 and under. So a much more narrow application.

This is the norm in Europe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading the comments on this thread is so enlightening. Here we are, discussing a proposal that will make our national parks more enjoyable for Americans, and predictably, the leftists here hate it. Typical!

Exactly

Similar to arguments about immigration

It is like they are bearing the weight of tremendous guilt

Any discussion about immigration limits is met with indignation and screams of RACIST !

And only a generation ago it was not like this

I don't agree with the policy, but don't think it's something abhorrent either. A surcharge is completely reasonable, such as the one recently announced for the Louvre. I believe the NPS one to be excessive and purposely meant to deter foreign visitors (but not racist).