There is the Sportsmen’s Caucus in the Senate. The Republicans in that caucus may be against the land sales but they will vote for the bill if the land sales provision stays intact. There is more fact to my post than you are willing to admit. The bottom line is that if it comes down to a tie, JD will never vote against the Bill no matter what.
Senate vote public lands sale
- Thread starter Jason Snyder
- Start date
If you live in Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wisconsin, West Virginia, or Wyoming, you better call your senators!
My guys are bootlickers but sent an email anyways.
This is what Lummis sent me back.....
Thank you for contacting me about public lands.
Wyoming and other western states are blessed with beautiful public lands that offer endless opportunity for outdoor enthusiasts. The outdoor recreation industry also generates thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in revenue for our state.
As you know, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is responsible for administering federal lands to support a range of uses, including for commercial, recreation, and conservation activities. Currently, BLM manages over 245 million acres of land, primarily in the 11 westerns states. In Wyoming alone, the BLM manages over 18.5 million acres, or 48% of the state’s land.
While the BLM is generally mandated by Congress to retain public lands in public ownership, under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), the agency may dispose of lands on a case-by-case basis and deemed in the public interest. FLPMA outlines the criteria for these land dispositions, allowing the sale of lands that are difficult and uneconomic for BLM or other agencies to manage, are no longer needed for the purpose it was acquired for, or would serve important public objectives, such as establishing parks or schools.
Recently, Democrats have put forward bad faith efforts aimed at obstructing President Trump’s agenda, rather than protecting our federal lands as they claim. One example is a proposed amendment to the Fiscal Year 2025 budget resolution by Senator John Hickenlooper (D-CO), that did not ban the sale of public lands as claimed, but simply prohibited the proceeds received from routine land sales to be used to reduce our national deficit.
Additionally, a proposed amendment to the budget reconciliation package from the U.S. House Natural Resource Committee to allow the sale of 500,000 acres of BLM-managed land, less than 1% of federal lands in Utah and Nevada, has been mischaracterized by Democrats as an attempt to privatize land. In reality, it would allow those states to utilize underused parcels for economic development, mining, infrastructure projects, and the expansion of an airport and reservoir. This amendment was ultimately removed by U.S. House of Representatives before passing the budget reconciliation package.
Please be assured, it is one of my top priorities to maintain and improve public access on public lands for activities such as hunting, fishing, snowmobiling, hiking and biking. However, I believe that the people of Wyoming are the best stewards of the land, not unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. Time and time again, we have seen Wyoming and other western states targeted by misguided government regulations that ignore, at our state’s expense, more than a decade of thoughtful systems designed by local experts and Wyoming-based stakeholders.
I welcome the opportunity to communicate with you regarding issues impacting Wyoming. Please do not hesitate to contact my office if I can ever be of any assistance.
Thank you for contacting me about public lands.
Wyoming and other western states are blessed with beautiful public lands that offer endless opportunity for outdoor enthusiasts. The outdoor recreation industry also generates thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in revenue for our state.
As you know, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is responsible for administering federal lands to support a range of uses, including for commercial, recreation, and conservation activities. Currently, BLM manages over 245 million acres of land, primarily in the 11 westerns states. In Wyoming alone, the BLM manages over 18.5 million acres, or 48% of the state’s land.
While the BLM is generally mandated by Congress to retain public lands in public ownership, under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), the agency may dispose of lands on a case-by-case basis and deemed in the public interest. FLPMA outlines the criteria for these land dispositions, allowing the sale of lands that are difficult and uneconomic for BLM or other agencies to manage, are no longer needed for the purpose it was acquired for, or would serve important public objectives, such as establishing parks or schools.
Recently, Democrats have put forward bad faith efforts aimed at obstructing President Trump’s agenda, rather than protecting our federal lands as they claim. One example is a proposed amendment to the Fiscal Year 2025 budget resolution by Senator John Hickenlooper (D-CO), that did not ban the sale of public lands as claimed, but simply prohibited the proceeds received from routine land sales to be used to reduce our national deficit.
Additionally, a proposed amendment to the budget reconciliation package from the U.S. House Natural Resource Committee to allow the sale of 500,000 acres of BLM-managed land, less than 1% of federal lands in Utah and Nevada, has been mischaracterized by Democrats as an attempt to privatize land. In reality, it would allow those states to utilize underused parcels for economic development, mining, infrastructure projects, and the expansion of an airport and reservoir. This amendment was ultimately removed by U.S. House of Representatives before passing the budget reconciliation package.
Please be assured, it is one of my top priorities to maintain and improve public access on public lands for activities such as hunting, fishing, snowmobiling, hiking and biking. However, I believe that the people of Wyoming are the best stewards of the land, not unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. Time and time again, we have seen Wyoming and other western states targeted by misguided government regulations that ignore, at our state’s expense, more than a decade of thoughtful systems designed by local experts and Wyoming-based stakeholders.
I welcome the opportunity to communicate with you regarding issues impacting Wyoming. Please do not hesitate to contact my office if I can ever be of any assistance.
Posted this in another thread. Could someone please post the SPECIFIC Sections of the Bill that we would like to see removed from the resolution?
Elected officials and staffers like it to be tee’d up for them.
“Senator Moody, please move to strike Sections XXX.1234 and YYYY.4321 from HR.1”
Works a lot better than
“Please don’t let them take our land! And vote No on the whole thing! I know you’re risking getting primaried!”
Thanks in advance
Elected officials and staffers like it to be tee’d up for them.
“Senator Moody, please move to strike Sections XXX.1234 and YYYY.4321 from HR.1”
Works a lot better than
“Please don’t let them take our land! And vote No on the whole thing! I know you’re risking getting primaried!”
Thanks in advance
elkhunter505
WKR
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2018
- Messages
- 701
If they think the states are so much better at stewarding that land, why is it shown to be sold to the highest bidder rather than mandating it be sold directly to the states as state trust land? If they’re marketing this as a way to close the deficit then they would do a hell if a lot better without the affordable housing farce and allowing it to go to the highest bidder which will probably end up being some out of state entity like the Wilks.
Not all Democrats are against the public lands sales. The petroleum industry founded the Nature Conservancy to put 120 million acres off-line to avoid cheap oil. American Prairie Reserve is trying to get 1 million acres of wildlife refuge to incorporate into their private wildlife preserve where grizzlies and wolves do all of the hunting. ARPs vision is to grow to 3 million acres. But you may find that those Democrat Senators will vote against the bill for other reasons.
This is a canned response drafted by GOP staffers.
The reality is States have a hard time managing their own land for hunting and fishing as is. Giving the states more land is a mistake. Right now, the land is owned by the government and managed by the state. Why would the state owning it be any better unless they intend on monetizing it.
Housing is a private sector issue. If your representative is suggesting we sell of YOUR land to provide low cost housing, hit them with a Thank You Comrade!
wapitibob
WKR
Newberg is in DC, his comments...
"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."
"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."
Same here. One senator replied immediately with the expected answer. I intend to continue the discussion.
Our other senator is probably looking up some three syllable words I used in the email.
LFC911
WKR
My appeal is falling on deaf ears in KS...just got this from one of my state Senators...
With the passage of the President’s One Big, Beautiful Bill (OBBB), we will provide American families with unprecedented support and resources to thrive.
First, it will prevent the largest tax increase in American history by making the Trump tax cuts permanent – American families will save $1,000 per month.
It will increase the child tax credit to $2,200 per American family, providing significant financial relief to parents. If Congress fails to act, however, the current rate of $2,000 will be cut in half to $1,000, harming the ability of parents to cover essential expenses like education, healthcare, and extracurricular activities. We cannot fail – our kids are counting on us.
For newborns, we are going to create Trump Savings, establishing a dedicated savings mechanism to give every child a financial head start that will encourage long-term investment and savings. When it’s time for college, trade school, home ownership, or starting their own family, these accounts will provide a much-needed boost.
We’re also going to extend and improve the paid family and medical leave tax credit so that small businesses can continue to provide paid leave to their workers.
The OBBB will also tackle the issue of access to childcare for hardworking American families. The budget will increase funding and availability of quality childcare options, particularly for single mothers and low-income households, by reducing childcare costs and enabling them to pursue career opportunities without sacrificing family needs.
Lastly, we’re going to strengthen and preserve SNAP for the families that rely on it most. This starts with eliminating blue-state efforts to abuse the program by manipulating SNAP payments and incentivizing them to play by the rules set by the federal government. We will also implement work requirements so that SNAP benefits are directed to those truly in need and promote self-sufficiency among able-bodied recipients in order to reduce participation in the program for the long run.
By passing the President’s ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill,’ we will not just build strong families and encourage responsibility – we will uplift communities, while also protecting and stewarding taxpayer resources.
Now that’s what I call good tax policy.
-Senator Doc Marshall
President Trump’s One Big, Beautiful Bill Will Give American Families More Support to Thrive
My colleagues and I in Congress are working hard to deliver on President Trump’s promises to the American people – preventing the largest tax increase in American history, securing our southern border, and reining in spending.With the passage of the President’s One Big, Beautiful Bill (OBBB), we will provide American families with unprecedented support and resources to thrive.
First, it will prevent the largest tax increase in American history by making the Trump tax cuts permanent – American families will save $1,000 per month.
It will increase the child tax credit to $2,200 per American family, providing significant financial relief to parents. If Congress fails to act, however, the current rate of $2,000 will be cut in half to $1,000, harming the ability of parents to cover essential expenses like education, healthcare, and extracurricular activities. We cannot fail – our kids are counting on us.
For newborns, we are going to create Trump Savings, establishing a dedicated savings mechanism to give every child a financial head start that will encourage long-term investment and savings. When it’s time for college, trade school, home ownership, or starting their own family, these accounts will provide a much-needed boost.
We’re also going to extend and improve the paid family and medical leave tax credit so that small businesses can continue to provide paid leave to their workers.
The OBBB will also tackle the issue of access to childcare for hardworking American families. The budget will increase funding and availability of quality childcare options, particularly for single mothers and low-income households, by reducing childcare costs and enabling them to pursue career opportunities without sacrificing family needs.
Lastly, we’re going to strengthen and preserve SNAP for the families that rely on it most. This starts with eliminating blue-state efforts to abuse the program by manipulating SNAP payments and incentivizing them to play by the rules set by the federal government. We will also implement work requirements so that SNAP benefits are directed to those truly in need and promote self-sufficiency among able-bodied recipients in order to reduce participation in the program for the long run.
By passing the President’s ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill,’ we will not just build strong families and encourage responsibility – we will uplift communities, while also protecting and stewarding taxpayer resources.
Now that’s what I call good tax policy.
-Senator Doc Marshall
RockAndSage
WKR
This is some of the most sinister private-land stuff out there, right up there with the Chinese buying large tracts of land near our military bases.
Listen to the podcast link that someone provided in here. In the Bill the governor of a state can nominate Fed land for sale. Also neighboring landowners can have the land…It doesn’t have to be put up for auction. According to Sen Lee’s provision, you could walk into Bergum’s office, plop your cash down and walk away with the land…
HighUintas
WKR
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,819
Are emails/calls to our state reps worthwhile in addition to our federal reps?
RockAndSage
WKR
This is critical - call your HOUSE Members too, tell them you oppose this in the Senate, and that you want it stripped out if it's in there when the bill gets to the House.
IdahoBeav
WKR
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2017
- Messages
- 1,318
What is the communist position, that the land goes to private hands or that the federal government retains ownership for the collective?
RockAndSage
WKR
Yes, but minimal, though calls to the Governor's office would be the place to start. It's a backdoor, but every drop contributes to the flood.
elkhunter505
WKR
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2018
- Messages
- 701
Well if Wilks and a small ranch border the same piece of public, who do you think is going to get it? I will go listen and see what I missed but I see this as a way to screw the small rancher. What’s cheaper? Buying the land or paying the tiny grazing fee that FS and BLM charge every year?
Rifleman86
WKR
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2018
- Messages
- 1,295
I wouldn’t argue against the fact that he will vote for the bill no matter what.
What I will argue is that he very much wants to be president in 2028, and as such he doesn’t want to be the deciding vote in selling our public lands to the highest bidder, something massively unpopular with the American electorate.
As said he holds heavy influence. I’m sure if he made some phone calls and demanded this be removed for the sake of political fallout, it would be.
chanson_roland
Lil-Rokslider
This. It's not enough to call Republican Senators, you have to lean on House members, who are much more nervous about being primaried in 2026. At least a few of them are weak enough that they will cave, and possibly reach out to the Senate side, saying their respective state is in danger of going blue if they're unseated.
I've already reached out to my Senators here in VA, but the bulk of the workload is going to fall on those in the West who have House/Senate representation in the affected states.
Similar threads
Featured Video
Latest Articles
- Battle of the 2.0s: Seek Outside Cimarron vs Redcliff Floorless Shelters
- Quiet Kat Ranger XR Review
- Shoot2Hunt A Female Perspective
- Goodbye 270 WSM, Hello 6UM
- 2025 Head-to-Head Bow Test
- Sitka Ascent Pants Review
- TT#59 Wesley Warner Stalking Big Mule Deer Bucks
- South Cox: Big Bucks Under 20 Yards
- TT#58 Scouting Mature Bucks with Brad Carter
- Allterra Carbon Hunter 3 Stock Review