Senate vote public lands sale

[ODB]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1939132778605388207

It’s over. As I predicted many pages ago this would have been political suicide for anyone who voted yes on this particular verbiage. It won’t have enough momentum to ever be passed if it’s outside of a big bill where no one knows it’s there. For the time being I’d consider this over with.

Furthermore I don’t buy that he was doing this “for President Trump”. He was doing this for his own good as such even though I am a life long republican I would suggest to all of you to get him out of there and elect someone else. This way I don’t have to spend my hour lunch for three weeks straight calling and emailing politicians.

Yes, but elect someone who you do not in turn have to fight on EVERY issue. I’ll gladly fraternize with the enemy on an issue or two to get my way, not interested in giving those same enemies so much power that the rest of the dozen issues I care about are all but lost…

Like it or not, this issue was a very healthy example of how it’s done. Conservative-minded people should take note and not let their involvement be an exception.

 

[P dog]

My reps are knob slobbers and sent me canned garbage responses.

They won't miss a second of sucking on the boot heel, I reached out to MN, SD, and MT reps.

Hoeven is a born and raised Dimocrap and Cramer is right behind him...spitting images of Conrad and Dorgan

 

[Zak406]

Yes, but elect someone who you do not in turn have to fight on EVERY issue. I’ll gladly fraternize with the enemy on an issue or two to get my way, not interested in giving those same enemies so much power that the rest of the dozen issues I care about are all but lost…

Like it or not, this issue was a very healthy example of how it’s done. Conservative-minded people should take note and not let their involvement be an exception.

I live far from Utah. Y’all going to have to help yourselves there

 

[cq0302]

Now get that dirt bag out of office next term, there is no chance there wasn’t corporate money involved. This stinks of large contractors paying him to get this to pass so they could make piles of money on the development. Probably would’ve been subsidies and tax credit bills to folllow for the developers in addition to what already exists.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I believe the R Senators that rallied enough votes to kill Lee’s amendment were Daines and Sheehy from MT and Crapo and Risch from ID.

Be sure to reach out and thank them.

 

[average]

Meh Sheehy was gonna vote yes regardless

 

[grainhog]

Meh Sheehy was gonna vote yes regardless

Absolutely no question. If he could figure out how, anyway.

 

[idahoelkhunter]

If Utah sportsmen and women dont make a statement and vote this out of office and run him out of the state we will be fighting him and others in the future.

 

[nettereo16]

Meh Sheehy was gonna vote yes regardless

Sheehy had a big part of getting this dropped - he came out against the public land sales and late today said he was putting together an amendment to drop the sale provision. That pressure along with the other 3 Rs from ID/MT definitely forced the issue.

 

[MuleDeerMike]

I believe the last big push for public land sales was during Trump's first term and it came from Congressman Jason Chaffetz. He resigned from Congress that same year, 2017. And like Mike Lee, he's also from Utah. What's going on with Utah politicians and public land sales? Seems like there's a super rich donor in UT that wants a very specific piece of public land in that state to go on sale to the public so he can buy it. Weird coincidence...

 

[HighUintas]

I believe the last big push for public land sales was during Trump's first term and it came from Congressman Jason Chaffetz. He resigned from Congress that same year, 2017. And like Mike Lee, he's also from Utah. What's going on with Utah politicians and public land sales? Seems like there's a super rich donor in UT that wants a very specific piece of public land in that state to go on sale to the public so he can buy it. Weird coincidence...

It is just Utah's history and culture. They've been fighting the federal government since before statehood and have loved money since.... Forever? Sagebrush rebellion a few decades ago never died. I'm not sure if there was ever any federal lands disputes prior to then. Usually, this just amounts to the desire for the feds to transfer the lands to the state. Mike Lee is just a special kind of retarded.

 

[go_deep]

Big thank you to @Jason Snyder!
Good job keeping the thread on topic and keeping the information up to date!

 

[buckrut42]

Good work all!

 

[Rotnguns]

I believe the R Senators that rallied enough votes to kill Lee’s amendment were Daines and Sheehy from MT and Crapo and Risch from ID.

Be sure to reach out and thank them.

And to add, representatives Ryan Zinke (Mont.), Mike Simpson (Idaho), Dan Newhouse (Wash.), Cliff Bentz (Ore.) and David Valadao (Calif.), who publicly stated that they would vote "no" on the BBB if it contained Lee's proposal. The House voted to remove the land-sale measure before it went to the Senate, so that was no idle threat.

 

[bherrondvm]

I believe the R Senators that rallied enough votes to kill Lee’s amendment were Daines and Sheehy from MT and Crapo and Risch from ID.

Be sure to reach out and thank them.

Glad they got that accomplished

 

[Mike1187]

It took 5 - GOPs to stand up and oppose the sale of public lands. @Rotnguns mention them above….if you are from those states, thank them, if you aren’t remember this when primary season comes.

Here is a quote from the 5, posted on yahoo News.
“We support the OB3 passed by the House and generally accept changes to the bill that may be made by the Senate. However, we cannot accept the sale of federal lands that Senator [Mike] Lee seeks,” wrote GOP Reps. Ryan Zinke (Mont.), Mike Simpson (Idaho), Dan Newhouse (Wash.), Cliff Bentz (Ore.) and David Valadao (Calif.).

“If a provision to sell public lands is in the bill that reaches the House floor, we will be forced to vote no,” they added.

5 House Republicans say they will vote against GOP megabill over public land sales

A group of five House Republicans says it will vote against the GOP’s tax and spending bill over provisions in the Senate version that would mandate the sale of land owned by the federal government. “We support the OB3 passed by the House and generally accept changes to the bill that may be made by…

www.yahoo.com

 

[chanson_roland]

I believe the last big push for public land sales was during Trump's first term and it came from Congressman Jason Chaffetz. He resigned from Congress that same year, 2017. And like Mike Lee, he's also from Utah. What's going on with Utah politicians and public land sales? Seems like there's a super rich donor in UT that wants a very specific piece of public land in that state to go on sale to the public so he can buy it. Weird coincidence...

I pointed this out in a previous thread. Chaffetz filed HR 621 as one of the very first bills in 2017. That was a massive warning shot that apparently the vast majority of people ignored. Add to this the ream of policy positions from organizations such as Heritage and Cato, along with the composition of megadonors (Citizens United), and it's clear that this is far from a dead issue. So, even though another tactical battle has been won, we have to face the fact that there is a long-term campaign to sell public land. Utah may appear to be ground zero for politicians filing bills, but it's evident from the vote count there are plenty of other reps/senators willing to vote yes on public land sales. So, Mike Lee might be cast as the new Jason Chaffetz, but stay frosty, as he's not the only one.

 

[ODB]

I pointed this out in a previous thread. Chaffetz filed HR 621 as one of the very first bills in 2017. That was a massive warning shot that apparently the vast majority of people ignored. Add to this the ream of policy positions from organizations such as Heritage and Cato, along with the composition of megadonors (Citizens United), and it's clear that this is far from a dead issue. So, even though another tactical battle has been won, we have to face the fact that there is a long-term campaign to sell public land. Utah may appear to be ground zero for politicians filing bills, but it's evident from the vote count there are plenty of other reps/senators willing to vote yes on public land sales. So, Mike Lee might be cast as the new Jason Chaffetz, but stay frosty, as he's not the only one.

The simple fact is that there may be a legitimate reason to sell SOME small portions of public land for example those that were unwisely checkerboarded. The problem is when you use an axe and not a scalpel to do it, you invite the criticism that Lee rightly deserved.

As much as people like rattling Roosevelt’s bones about protecting lands, he was also largely an imperialist who saw the US’s success and the prosperity of its citizens as paramount. Ressurrect him in 2025 and ask him how to handle this issue and his answer may not be what many would expect.

 

[chanson_roland]

The simple fact is that there may be a legitimate reason to sell SOME small portions of public land for example those that were unwisely checkerboarded. The problem is when you use an axe and not a scalpel to do it, you invite the criticism that Lee rightly deserved.

As much as people like rattling Roosevelt’s bones about protecting lands, he was also largely an imperialist who saw the US’s success and the prosperity of its citizens as paramount. Ressurrect him in 2025 and ask him how to handle this issue and his answer may not be what many would expect.

I think we agree on the lack of nuance. I agree that checkerboarded, essentially inaccessible federal land should be first in the list to go. My concern is that the people trying to sell the land have NO nuance. Their rhetoric seems to be "we have SO much, we should sell a lot of it", not "we have land the public isn't able to use, so let's sell that'.

Agreed that Teddy R. would probably do some things that would shock people. Hard to see him not wanting to develop ANWR for example.

My concern is that we as hunters and outdoors people shouldn't take a victory lap here. This is just a skirmish that we may have blunted in the short term, but we have got to grasp that this is a multi-decade long campaign we're up against. There's trillions of dollars in global investment assets looking for a home, and folks have to realize that public land looks like a great "buy" to those asset owners/managers. They ain't going away; they're just going to shift tactics.

This should be a litmus test in every election, not something we react to after the horses have left the barn.

 

[average]

Sheehy had a big part of getting this dropped - he came out against the public land sales and late today said he was putting together an amendment to drop the sale provision. That pressure along with the other 3 Rs from ID/MT definitely forced the issue.

View attachment 899620

He seems to have flip-flopped a couple times, apparently one needs X to find out which lie they finally decide to go with