The federal government’s budget for fiscal year 2018 includes $1.4 billion for tourism tourism, a small increase from the previous year.
But the amount of money dedicated to this critical sector has been cut.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, tourism contributed only 3 percent of total federal revenue in fiscal year 2019.
So what’s the problem?
A lot of the money is spent on hotels, motels, restaurants, and other attractions that cater to the nation’s tourist economy.
For example, the U-Haul Museum in New Orleans charges $250 per night for a one-way ticket, which covers a typical weeklong stay.
But a one person stay for the entire month of September would run $7,400.
The National Park Service, which manages national parks, also charges an additional $200 for a single-day pass.
The U.K. Department of Energy charges a $5 per person fee for the first 30 minutes of a three-day tour of the Great Barrier Reef.
And the state of Idaho charges a fee of $45 for an overnight stay at the Idaho Falls Visitor Center, which has the most popular hotel in the state.
In New York, the state has cut its annual tourism tax by $2 million.
State officials say the increase in state funding for tourism is necessary to protect the state’s environment and tourism infrastructure, as well as to combat the economic downturn that has hit tourism.
A spokesperson for the U, Haul Museum told Fox News that the museum will likely reduce the number of trips that will be booked, but it will not increase the amount charged for accommodations.
She said the changes will only affect some of the state-run tourist sites in New York.
But some experts say the state could have done more to protect these sites, which are under federal protection.
“These are sites that have been identified by the Department of the Interior as vulnerable to habitat loss, or are threatened by habitat loss,” said Steve Gannaway, a senior conservation scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
“It’s important to remember that the parks that are in the process of being protected, or in the planning stages, aren’t necessarily the ones that have the highest numbers of visitors, the highest revenues.”
For example the National Park Foundation, which is responsible for preserving national parks and forests, said it’s unlikely the number would have risen with the increase.
“There’s no way that we can get to the point where the number [of visitors] will be in the 2020s that we need to raise the price on the parks,” said Mark McVey, NPGF’s president and CEO.
The organization has argued that the increased state funding could help to offset the cost of maintaining parks, as opposed to the more traditional, private companies that provide the services that allow visitors to visit them.
But McVy said that this increase could have made it difficult for private operators to maintain parks in the future.
“When the federal government funds parks, it also funds private companies,” he said.
“That means you can’t say that the park that we’re in charge of, the park of our heritage, is not the same park that’s going to be in private hands.
That’s not true.”
Some states also are trying to protect their tourism infrastructure and tourism dollars.
Alaska is currently considering a proposal that would require that all of its hotels, restaurants and other tourist attractions be subject to a state law.
That law, which would allow hotel chains to charge visitors the same price for the same type of lodging as they charge a hotel or restaurant, was proposed in 2015 and is scheduled to be passed by lawmakers in the next few weeks.
But it faces a number of obstacles in its current form, according to a press release from the Alaska Hotel Association.
The state will likely need to pass a new hotel tax to cover the cost.
And if the legislation is passed, it would have to be approved by the Alaska Legislature.
However, it may not be possible to pass the law because the Alaska legislature does not have the power to enact laws, said Alaskan Rep. Don Benton, D-Alaska.
“We can’t pass it on to the governor, and it’s a very complicated process,” Benton said.
Bill Walker told Fox that he is concerned about the state budget’s proposed increase to tourism tax.
“The federal government is paying the same amount of tax on hotels as they are on gasoline,” Walker said.
He said he would like to see more state funds devoted to tourism, but the budget proposal does not address that.
“I want to make sure that the money goes to the states that are doing a good job, and not to the federal governments,” Walker added.
He also told Fox, “I think the people in the hotel industry are saying, ‘Look, we have a $30 billion industry