Hello all-
This is my first post on the forum after being a lurker for sometime and now energized by the wave of energy I am seeing both here and at BHA.
For all you legislative buffs on the forum, I have a question.
For proposed bills such as HR621 (sale of federal lands) and H622 (elimination of BLM and USFS law enforcement), What does it take to add poison pill riders or amendments that would make them impossible to pass? Is that even a tactic can be deployed in addition expressing blanket opposition to the bills via our senators/representatives?
When I read both of these bill summaries, all I can think about saying is "OK, you want to sell these federal lands and eliminate LEO functions of the federal government? If that's the case, lets also eliminate any and all federal wildlands firefighting resources for said lands"
I cant help but think that by adding on a rider that forces the states to pay for firefighting, these would die.
Thoughts?
This is my first post on the forum after being a lurker for sometime and now energized by the wave of energy I am seeing both here and at BHA.
For all you legislative buffs on the forum, I have a question.
For proposed bills such as HR621 (sale of federal lands) and H622 (elimination of BLM and USFS law enforcement), What does it take to add poison pill riders or amendments that would make them impossible to pass? Is that even a tactic can be deployed in addition expressing blanket opposition to the bills via our senators/representatives?
When I read both of these bill summaries, all I can think about saying is "OK, you want to sell these federal lands and eliminate LEO functions of the federal government? If that's the case, lets also eliminate any and all federal wildlands firefighting resources for said lands"
I cant help but think that by adding on a rider that forces the states to pay for firefighting, these would die.
Thoughts?
