rtraverdavis
Well-known member
Just got the email announcement from RMEF. That's terrific!
Wait for it...Wait....Wait
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
Irrelevant
Well-known member
The roll call isn't super useful, but you can see the last names of everyone who voted against it. The only one that I recognized was Cheney from WY. 
ashersdad
Well-known member
Finally some good news!
This bill will do a ton of good for public access in Wyoming. Both Wyoming Senators voted in favor. Liz Cheney is the lapdog of the anti-public land movement and she is happy to do their bidding for them. Hard to understand in a state with such a great outdoor and public land heritage as Wyoming.
Hell, even some of the Utah delegation voted in favor of it. That tells you how far out in the weeds Cheney is on public lands.
Hell, even some of the Utah delegation voted in favor of it. That tells you how far out in the weeds Cheney is on public lands.
antlerradar
Well-known member
Not hard to understand at all. I may have spent more time in WY than Cheney has in the last 20 years
Last edited:
smarandr
Well-known member
I see Fulcher has picked up right where Labrador left off, which should surprise no one.
dcopas78
Well-known member
Not surprised that my reps voted against it, both Chabot and Wenstrup. They have never shown much support of public lands. I'm glad this is passed and ready for the president. LWCF just opened up some prime land for the public not 10 minutes from my house. I can't wait until it formally opens next fall. I can already see my trapline on the creek, full of beaver and mink and my son plinking squirrel with the 22.
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
Finally something to cheer about!
(If you are following the Idaho house and Senate....)
(If you are following the Idaho house and Senate....)
Bambistew
Well-known member
I'm just curious why so many are so giddy over this bill?
I didn't read the entire thing, but pulled out a few sections.
Section 1113 = is transfer of mineral or surface ownership of federal lands to a native corporation in Alaska so they are not confused as to who owns what...
Section 1119 = the transfer of unoccupied federal lands in Alaska to private ownership of qualified Vietnam veterans Alaskan Natives. The last count I heard, this could be upwards of 450,000 acres
Section 4103 + allows the Secretary to close any federal lands to hunting, fishing etc as they see fit.
I may be out in left field here, but getting what you want at the expense of half a million acres of public lands lost is not something I'd be all excited about. I'm sure there are lots more nuggets in there that I missed, there is a pile of pet projects included. But hey, I guess if BHA wants it, it must be good?
I didn't read the entire thing, but pulled out a few sections.
Section 1113 = is transfer of mineral or surface ownership of federal lands to a native corporation in Alaska so they are not confused as to who owns what...
Section 1119 = the transfer of unoccupied federal lands in Alaska to private ownership of qualified Vietnam veterans Alaskan Natives. The last count I heard, this could be upwards of 450,000 acres
Section 4103 + allows the Secretary to close any federal lands to hunting, fishing etc as they see fit.
I may be out in left field here, but getting what you want at the expense of half a million acres of public lands lost is not something I'd be all excited about. I'm sure there are lots more nuggets in there that I missed, there is a pile of pet projects included. But hey, I guess if BHA wants it, it must be good?
There's good and bad in the bill. MT came out well with the Paradise Valley mining withdrawal and permanent reauthorization of LWCF, but Alaska's political machine wanted those concessions.
So don't vote for Senator Murkowski anymore if you don't like this.
Personally, this is a bill that should have had elements passed years ago, but it took historic losses in the 18 election to finally spur the senate into acting.
So, while I celebrate the successes, and I give huge high-fives to the folks who worked so hard to get the good things done, I still see a broken congress that has allowed the signature access program to expire while they play politics over stupid things like walls and spending more of China's money.
So don't vote for Senator Murkowski anymore if you don't like this.
Personally, this is a bill that should have had elements passed years ago, but it took historic losses in the 18 election to finally spur the senate into acting.
So, while I celebrate the successes, and I give huge high-fives to the folks who worked so hard to get the good things done, I still see a broken congress that has allowed the signature access program to expire while they play politics over stupid things like walls and spending more of China's money.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Is it perfect no, but perfect bills don't pass. Sorry if AK got hosed on the deal. The LWCF has conserved more land than was just given away and will continue to conserve more going forward. Considering all the other news the last two year, yeah, I think I'll celebrate a little.
Take that back. We got all but one, the grand champion pinhead Lee.
I called Rob Bishops office this morning, yup he's mine. Told the lady whobi was and that as a member of RMEF and BHA I sure appreciated his yay vote. She was a little speechless. Told her I was sure we would talk again soon, seems we do 30 or 40 times a year. Would have loved to see her face.
Cool to see the group's and the companies that joined together on this one.
I agree that those are bad provisions. I don't know anyone who was lobbying for them outside of Alaska; namely the two Alaska Senators, Murkowski and Sullivan, and their supporters. Unfortunate reality is that this bill was crafted in the Senate, as without the Republican Senate pushing it, it was a waste of time. And further misfortune is the Senator Murkowski Chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which carries a lot of clout. She was the one who demanded these items, a bad as they are. No Murkowski, no bill to the Senate floor for a vote.
Wish it was different. She has been there a long time and knows how the game is played. She knew how to get these terrible items, and she got them. As former MT Senator Conrad Burns told the folks back home, "It's only pork if it goes to another state." Everyone working on the bill wished these provisions weren't in there, but if that is what the Alaska delegation wanted for their state/citizens and it was what would allow the bill to pass the Senate, the assessment was made to let them do these Alaska-specific items and move forward.
TexAg09
Active member
Yup, this is good overall, but Texas lost some public hunting land with this thanks to the help of !@#$%^&*%$!!! Ted Cruz. He's a real piece of...work. I'll just leave it at that.
widnert
Active member
Big Fin - I heard through a little birdie that you might be interviewing Sen. Daines on one of your podcasts soon regarding this and other legislation. Are you able to share when that might be happening?
Besides Cheney, the other names that pop are McCarthy, Scalise, and Palmer. House minority leadership went 4/4 the wrong way.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Where are they from?
Dang, there are a lot of "little birdies" in the DC universe. Yes, Senator Daines and I are recording a podcast when I get back in town next week.
There are some facts of how this happened and I want to make sure folks know some of those facts, very few of which you would get by reading/listening to conventional news outlets. The Senate is controlled by Republicans, with McConnell as Majority Leader setting much of the agenda for the Senate. Without a Republican pushing this public land agenda in the Senate and lobbying McConnell, it doesn't even get started. If it doesn't get started, we have no bill, we have no Senate vote, we have no House vote.
And when the Mike Lee/Rand Paul types try to fill it with poison pill amendments, the only way those get stopped is if a Republican lines up the support necessary to defeat those amendments. Daines enlisted the help of Gardner, Burr, Murkowski, Sullivan, and some other Republican Senators to make sure those poison pill amendments failed. As you can imagine, that doesn't make the anti-public landers in the Senate happy.
Daines didn't do it all by himself and he is quick to shower praise on others from both sides. He did lead the effort on the side that could have derailed it, the Republican side. He also was astute enough to work with important Democrats and he gives a lot of credit to Democratic Senators Martin Heinrich and Jon Tester for their help in convincing Schumer to not be a problem. As we all know, some good ideas can get killed, just because they were supported by the other side. If not for Heinrich and Tester giving the instructions to Schumer, that could have happened with this bill.
As it relates to Montana media reporting, their coverage of this legislation was disappointing; shallow and superficial, bordering on cut/paste laziness. I am lucky that I get to sit in a position that allows me to see and hear a lot of what goes on behind the scenes. Being in a position to observe the DC discussions of this public land issue for a long time, it has been interesting to watch how it has unfolded, how the points of power have shifted very slowly, and the calculations being made on each side of the political aisle. You would never hear or know of any of that if you only read Montana news sources.
I want to talk about this in a podcast setting where Senator Daines doesn't have to worry about a "gotcha moment." I want people to have a bit more of an inside look of how it happened, beyond the predictable reporting that was provided in the Lee Newspapers, the company who owns most the Montana newspapers.
Senator Daines did a lot of work on this. He deserves a lot more credit than what he got. It is easy to be the opposition to good ideas and criticize the efforts to of those trying craft solutions. Senator Daines made the case to his leadership that this legislation was important and he put together the coalition of Republicans to get that done in the Senate, also securing a promise from the President that it would be signed if it got to his desk as passed. Without that, we don't have this bill. And it was not the most friendly of environments to do that in.
To not give credit when folks do good things is a long-term disaster for public lands and conservation. I gave credit to Senator Tester for his good public land work when he was on my podcast in August. Senator Daines deserves as much, possibly more credit, given he and a few others were able to get this accomplished in a partisan world where many of the partisans he has to work with each day are devout anti-public landers.
In the last six months, public lands and conservation has had a new awakening in DC. It is the culmination of work by so many for so long. With that tide changing, the last thing we can do is let media laziness/pettiness stop what I see as real progress. Even worse is we make it strictly a party-line divide for when we compliment or when we criticize. I've always said that I have no use for parties, and I don't. That is part of what drives me to do this podcast with Senator Daines. If you want someone to do good deeds, don't ignore or neglect them when they do those good deeds. To make it a partisan discussion, as some in the media do, will eventually result in a self-fulling outcome.
So, it will be a fun podcast. I'm glad he felt comfortable to accept my invitation. I've spoke with the Senator and his staff on many occasions, more so over the last six months. Contrary to what might be painted in the media, Senator Daines ranks as one of the most avid hunters and outdoors people in all of Congress. He has a lot in common with our audience and I hope the podcast is a chance for him to show that.
There are some facts of how this happened and I want to make sure folks know some of those facts, very few of which you would get by reading/listening to conventional news outlets. The Senate is controlled by Republicans, with McConnell as Majority Leader setting much of the agenda for the Senate. Without a Republican pushing this public land agenda in the Senate and lobbying McConnell, it doesn't even get started. If it doesn't get started, we have no bill, we have no Senate vote, we have no House vote.
And when the Mike Lee/Rand Paul types try to fill it with poison pill amendments, the only way those get stopped is if a Republican lines up the support necessary to defeat those amendments. Daines enlisted the help of Gardner, Burr, Murkowski, Sullivan, and some other Republican Senators to make sure those poison pill amendments failed. As you can imagine, that doesn't make the anti-public landers in the Senate happy.
Daines didn't do it all by himself and he is quick to shower praise on others from both sides. He did lead the effort on the side that could have derailed it, the Republican side. He also was astute enough to work with important Democrats and he gives a lot of credit to Democratic Senators Martin Heinrich and Jon Tester for their help in convincing Schumer to not be a problem. As we all know, some good ideas can get killed, just because they were supported by the other side. If not for Heinrich and Tester giving the instructions to Schumer, that could have happened with this bill.
As it relates to Montana media reporting, their coverage of this legislation was disappointing; shallow and superficial, bordering on cut/paste laziness. I am lucky that I get to sit in a position that allows me to see and hear a lot of what goes on behind the scenes. Being in a position to observe the DC discussions of this public land issue for a long time, it has been interesting to watch how it has unfolded, how the points of power have shifted very slowly, and the calculations being made on each side of the political aisle. You would never hear or know of any of that if you only read Montana news sources.
I want to talk about this in a podcast setting where Senator Daines doesn't have to worry about a "gotcha moment." I want people to have a bit more of an inside look of how it happened, beyond the predictable reporting that was provided in the Lee Newspapers, the company who owns most the Montana newspapers.
Senator Daines did a lot of work on this. He deserves a lot more credit than what he got. It is easy to be the opposition to good ideas and criticize the efforts to of those trying craft solutions. Senator Daines made the case to his leadership that this legislation was important and he put together the coalition of Republicans to get that done in the Senate, also securing a promise from the President that it would be signed if it got to his desk as passed. Without that, we don't have this bill. And it was not the most friendly of environments to do that in.
To not give credit when folks do good things is a long-term disaster for public lands and conservation. I gave credit to Senator Tester for his good public land work when he was on my podcast in August. Senator Daines deserves as much, possibly more credit, given he and a few others were able to get this accomplished in a partisan world where many of the partisans he has to work with each day are devout anti-public landers.
In the last six months, public lands and conservation has had a new awakening in DC. It is the culmination of work by so many for so long. With that tide changing, the last thing we can do is let media laziness/pettiness stop what I see as real progress. Even worse is we make it strictly a party-line divide for when we compliment or when we criticize. I've always said that I have no use for parties, and I don't. That is part of what drives me to do this podcast with Senator Daines. If you want someone to do good deeds, don't ignore or neglect them when they do those good deeds. To make it a partisan discussion, as some in the media do, will eventually result in a self-fulling outcome.
So, it will be a fun podcast. I'm glad he felt comfortable to accept my invitation. I've spoke with the Senator and his staff on many occasions, more so over the last six months. Contrary to what might be painted in the media, Senator Daines ranks as one of the most avid hunters and outdoors people in all of Congress. He has a lot in common with our audience and I hope the podcast is a chance for him to show that.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I hope this doesn't come back to bite him come the next election. It would be nice if it in fact emboldened him (and some of his colleagues) to take up the public land torch and preach the public land gospel, despite the general party stance. Maybe at some point the anti-public lands sentiment can be removed or altered entirely from the national R platform.
