Newest US Senate Land Sale Amendment

[SmokedTrout]

Thanks for your hard work Randy, it is appreciated. I am still going to remind Daines and Sheehey they need to do all they can to stop this.

 

[nrpate05]

It appears the amount of available public land has grown from 120 million to over 250 million acres. My understanding is that grazing lease areas originally fell into the 'valid existing rights' category, but, the Taylor Grazing Act states,

"So far as consistent with the purposes andprovisions of this Act, grazing privileges recognized andacknowledged shall be adequately safeguarded, but the creation of a grazing district or the issuance of a permit pursuant to the provisions of this Act shall not create any right,title, interest, or estate in or to the lands."'

So it appears areas currently leased for grazing would be on the table for disposal. I wonder where the Ag community is on this? I'm sure they have to power to move some folks.

 

[whatnot]

Mike Lee grew up in DC where his neighbior was Harry Reid. Hes as Utahn as Mitt Romey was, and as such, has zero attatchment to the land. He came to office with the Tea party revolution.

Furter, hes going nowhere, hes around til 28'.

Hes real good on taking the very natural distrust of the fed gov(for very legitimate reasons) in Utah and pushing that towards this issue.

Our governor is useless and spineless. But, all of the rest of the political power in the state, are land developers, from the speaker to the senate pres.

You are wasting time emailing Lee. Hes an idealist, he doesnt bend to pressure. Hopefully, in 28, this same furvor shows up here. But for todays fight, your better to focus on John Curtis, than Lee.

801-524-4380, his slc line

 

[Big Fin]

It appears the amount of available public land has grown from 120 million to over 250 million acres. My understanding is that grazing lease areas originally fell into the 'valid existing rights' category, but, the Taylor Grazing Act states,

"So far as consistent with the purposes andprovisions of this Act, grazing privileges recognized andacknowledged shall be adequately safeguarded, but the creation of a grazing district or the issuance of a permit pursuant to the provisions of this Act shall not create any right,title, interest, or estate in or to the lands."'

So it appears areas currently leased for grazing would be on the table for disposal. I wonder where the Ag community is on this? I'm sure they have to power to move some folks.

You are correct about that original language.

That was pointed out to the Wyoming delegation who got inundated with calls from the Ag industry. As of today, it appears Lee is amending his language, as it relates to grazing leases, to make sure the Wyoming delegation is satisfied. Lee has given Wyoming pretty much everything they want in this deal. Unfortunately, the Wyoming delegation is not going to make any waves over public lands when they got all they asked for in his proposal.

 

[JLDemo]

Emailed all in Wyoming. Not a peep.

 

[Southern Elk]

They are all getting hammered to not kill the BBB. I know three of them are willing to fight for removing that provision if it gets to the House. The unknown is whether or not the others are willing to do so.

For all of them, the cards are being stacked to try make it hard for anyone to make public lands the hill they will die on. Our issue has very little priority compared to other issues that could derail this bill.

If any of those seven House members are your Representative, please contact them and get as many of your hunting friends to contact them.

They/we need to flip that on Lee. He is the reason that the BBB could be killed. His provision should have never been added.

 

[rogerthat]

I think we better start ringing the phones in the house again. I called Sheehy, Daines, and Lee’s office this morning. I can’t believe we are going to be down to hoping the Republican controlled house can stop a public land sale. Wild times. If Zinke can stop this garbage I will give him all the credit he deserves from here on out.

 

[Big Fin]

Taking time for lunch. Here's a bit more clarity, as to where it stands right now.

Daines wants to provide an amendment when the bill gets to the Senate floor. His staff is working to find other Rs who would vote for it. The other Rs needed are not likely to vote for an amendment that strips everything an R chairman, such as Lee, requested. So, can an amendment be crafted to get enough Rs? Not sure.

Lee looks at the Southern Nevada Land Policy Management Act, and FLPMA/FLTFA, as a waste of time. They are on the books as a way to do Federal land disposals and use the proceeds for replacement. Not much has been sold/exchanged off the FLTFA list. The Southern Nevada Act has sold 17,000 of the authorized 66,000 acres. Whether those programs are bogged down for good reasons or not, it is the basis for some claiming FLTFA/FLPMA doesn't work, and therefore the need for language in Lee's bill to legislatively claim any disposal complies with FLPMA.

There are some R senators who are getting plenty of calls on this. Yet, for reasons that are hard to grasp, they will not go so far as to demand anything changed. More calls to all R senators must happen.

From a bigger strategy standpoint, Sen. Thune is in charge of getting this to the House in a manner that won't cause a huge change when it gets back to the House. Sen. Thune works with Speaker Johnson to make sure their bills are very similar and that they have the votes to pass whatever is the final reconciled version.

With Zinke having drawn a line in the sand in the House, he is providing some cover for other Rs who oppose this. That has Johnson worried that he might not have the votes in the House if the Lee language is contained. If so, he will tell Thune of the vote count. Thune then has to go to Lee and ask what he needs, as a minimum, to be satisfied.

Without enough R Senators to back him, Daines doesn't have the cards to pull it off in the Senate. Zinke likely has the votes to pull it off in the House. This is really coming down to a Lee v. Zinke outcome.

Based on what I know right now, my guess is it unfolds something like this:

-->Lee tells the world to piss off.
-->Daines offers an amendment on the Senate floor that falls short by one or two votes.
-->It goes to the House and Zinke leads a group that amends the land sale provision to something very concise, possibly restricting land sales to Utah and maybe a couple other states who privately want in on it.
-->Bill goes to the President and is signed into law.

Given how quickly things change here, I might have a completely different prediction when I finish meetings tomorrow.

In all cases, calls and emails to Rs in key states is the most important thing right now. Keep doing that. Recruit some of your hunting friends to do the same, even if they "don't do politics." If they "don't do politics," THIS MAP shows where they might not be "doing hunting."

 

[Elky Welky]

Taking time for lunch. Here's a bit more clarity, as to where it stands right now.

Daines wants to provide an amendment when the bill gets to the Senate floor. His staff is working to find other Rs who would vote for it. The other Rs needed are not likely to vote for an amendment that strips everything an R chairman, such as Lee, requested. So, can an amendment be crafted to get enough Rs? Not sure.

Lee looks at the Southern Nevada Land Policy Management Act, and FLPMA/FLTFA, as a waste of time. They are on the books as a way to do Federal land disposals and use the proceeds for replacement. Not much has been sold/exchanged off the FLTFA list. The Southern Nevada Act has sold 17,000 of the authorized 66,000 acres. Whether those programs are bogged down for good reasons or not, it is the basis for some claiming FLTFA/FLPMA doesn't work, and therefore the need for language in Lee's bill to legislatively claim any disposal complies with FLPMA.

There are some R senators who are getting plenty of calls on this. Yet, for reasons that are hard to grasp, they will not go so far as to demand anything changed. More calls to all R senators must happen.

From a bigger strategy standpoint, Sen. Thune is in charge of getting this to the House in a manner that won't cause a huge change when it gets back to the House. Sen. Thune works with Speaker Johnson to make sure their bills are very similar and that they have the votes to pass whatever is the final reconciled version.

With Zinke having drawn a line in the sand in the House, he is providing some cover for other Rs who oppose this. That has Johnson worried that he might not have the votes in the House if the Lee language is contained. If so, he will tell Thune of the vote count. Thune then has to go to Lee and ask what he needs, as a minimum, to be satisfied.

Without enough R Senators to back him, Daines doesn't have the cards to pull it off in the Senate. Zinke likely has the votes to pull it off in the House. This is really coming down to a Lee v. Zinke outcome.

Based on what I know right now, my guess is it unfolds something like this:

-->Lee tells the world to piss off.
-->Daines offers an amendment on the Senate floor that falls short by one or two votes.
-->It goes to the House and Zinke leads a group that amends the land sale provision to something very concise, possibly restricting land sales to Utah and maybe a couple other states who privately want in on it.
-->Bill goes to the President and is signed into law.

Given how quickly things change here, I might have a completely different prediction when I finish meetings tomorrow.

In all cases, calls and emails to Rs in key states is the most important thing right now. Keep doing that. Recruit some of your hunting friends to do the same, even if they "don't do politics." If they "don't do politics," THIS MAP shows where they might not be "doing hunting."

Thanks @Big Fin!

Lee isn't very popular nationwide right now for his comments over the weekend about the shooting in Minnesota. Does his lack of popularity right now give the Republicans any cover for defying him? Can that be leveraged at all?

 

[KMO385]

If it goes through, we need to make sure the Rs know how wrong they were on this at ballot box. Hopefully the idea of selling public land will be so toxic l, Mike Lee will get some of blame for loosing seats in congress, and will get told to shut up about public lands.

 

[Oak]

In all cases, calls and emails to Rs in key states is the most important thing right now. Keep doing that. Recruit some of your hunting friends to do the same, even if they "don't do politics." If they "don't do politics," THIS MAP shows where they might not be "doing hunting."

Thanks for all of your work on this, Randy, and for keeping us informed.

 

[JLDemo]

Trying a different approach, emailing our VFW and American Legion congressional contacts, not sure it'll go anywhere. But some pressure is better than none.

Thanks Randy for the info.

 

[Sheltowee]

So it appears areas currently leased for grazing would be on the table for disposal. I wonder where the Ag community is on this? I'm sure they have to power to move some folks.

Thought about this yesterday. Where are the cattlemens' associations on this? If these lands are sold off, ranchers aren't going to be getting them for the subsidized song that they have been leasing them for over the last 150 years.

 

[TheTone]

If it goes through, we need to make sure the Rs know how wrong they were on this at ballot box. Hopefully the idea of selling public land will be so toxic l, Mike Lee will get some of blame for loosing seats in congress, and will get told to shut up about public lands.

In the decade or so that public land transfer and sales have been a political hot topic this has yet to occur. As much as people want to say this will hurt R’s at the polls it really hasn’t

 

[Oak]

Interesting development....

 

[elkduds]

People should send messages to those Reps even if they aren't their own.
Those in the East should try to get a higher SALT. Deficit hawks should grow a pair and be deficit hawks. There are multiple ways to throw a wrench into this POS.

Call them.

 

[mevertsen]

From Amodei

 

[44hunter45]

Here's my current assessment, after the first day of meetings, all meetings on the House side and with lobbyists who focus on public land issues:

1. Lee has the votes to keep Daines from passing a floor amendment on the Senate that would drop the land sale provision. There will be no Committee votes. The markup made by each Committee Chair is what will be in the Senate version that gets a full floor vote. They aim to have that done in the next week (optimistic).

2. Our issues of public lands are so far down the list here in Congress that finding people who actually care about public lands, on both sides, is like finding a 400" bull elk in a general unit - a few exist, but you have to work your ass off to locate them. And even when you find one, getting them to vote on public lands as a priority issue is the challenge.

3. The Lee provision has a better than 50% chance of getting included in the final Senate bill that goes back to the House.

4. When the Big Beautiful Bill goes back to the House, the Lee provision can be stripped out by the House, if enough votes can be found. I think there are three reliable R votes in the House. To strip it, it would take four R votes and every single Democrat that is currently alive (3 Dems have died). A few of us are searching for a couple more R votes.

The Public Lands Caucus in the House has some who have publicly stated their support for public lands. Here is the list. If any of them are your Rep, please contact them and have as many of your local hunting friends contact them. Link - https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/public-land-caucus-to-the-rescue.329101/

5. When this leaves the Senate, it will be a quick turnaround in the House. The President wants his BBB by July 4th. Seems leadership is both chambers are intent on meeting that, regardless of the carnage along the way. No time to waste.

More meetings today, on the Senate side. I hope when I'm done with those meetings I can change/improve my probability stated in #3 above.

I'll report back this evening.

Thanks for all this personal sacrifice, BF.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Lee’s bill mandates selling 2.2-3.3 million acres of BLM and Forest Service land under the guise of “housing needs”—but Section 3(c) allows state/local govs to flip parcels for luxury developments after 10 years. This isn’t about affordability; it’s a land grab for speculators. The feds already mismanage public assets, and this accelerates the fire sale of America’s heritage to fund D.C.’s addiction to reckless spending.

Classic bureaucratic shell game: Torch irreplaceable land, claim it’s “underused,” then funnel profits into the same broken system.

Real reform starts with auditing existing holdings, not liquidating them to paper over failures.

 

[elkduds]

Randy, include me among others here who are entirely impressed and grateful for you leadership (always) and timely information (often and especially this week). A broad reminder to all on HT, this public land fight is the chief reason HT exists. If you can't find another reason to call these legislators, do it for HT and @Big Fin 's advocacy. This land is your land. . .