ALERT - Harry Reid to Force Vote On Omnibus Land Grab This Weekend - 09 Jan 2009

[SinCityFJC]

Valid point...both on the parts getting consideration & the lack of protection.
I just wish there was a way to know what had gotten consideration and what hadn't.

Somone made an excellent point in another thread...it is a full time job trying to keep up with the ascepts of each hobby as related to legislation on the local, state & fed level.

I know the "good ol' days" weren't really that good but they did seem simpler (or I was less aware which is more likely the case).

If nothing else we are getting people involved and no matter what your position at least having one counts for something!

Hi Lance

Lots of good points - some of us may differ in our viewpoints but at least we are involved and might be having a better debate of this issue on ExPo than our congress is allowed to.


Can't remember were I posted this besides JGT two months ago but brings up concerns I have & had experienced in the past.

"A FYI from the blog of Don Amador recreation consultant and also serves as the Western Representative for the Blue Ribbon Coalition .

Wednesday, January 14, 2009
The General's Thoughts on Omnibus Land Bill S22
Thoughts on Omnibus Federal Lands Bill – S. 22

I think a lot of recreationists who voted for “Change” in 2008 are disappointed by the Senate's recent action to move S22 in the “dark of night” last weekend. Many OHVers in Nevada are still stinging from Harry Reid's Black Rock Desert Wilderness Bill which he inserted into a non-related appropriations or defense spending bill at the 11th hour some 8-9 years ago.

I understand there were some Wilderness bills in S22 that had buy-in from local OHVers, counties, and other access interests, but those access provisions are jeopardized by the Senate's late night maneuvers.

Many access and resource interests worked hard on the 2006 North Coast Wild Heritage Wilderness Bill (HR233) for a number of guaranteed access tenets and also some local economic relief in the form of grand-fathering historic commercial surf fishing permits in the Orick area - http://www.klamathforestalliance.org/Newsarticles/newsarticle20060930.html

Those victories came about by vigorous debate in an open forum, not crafted or deleted behind closed doors.

I can almost guarantee that many access tenets that users and pro-recreation Republicans
and Democrats fought for in the proposed Wilderness Bills in S22 will be penciled out or somehow compromised.

# # #
Posted by The General at 11:39 AM
Labels: Don Amador, Omnibus Bill, Reid, S22, Wilderness
2 comments:

jeepndel said...
Don, thanks so much for your insight. What would you say in your experience is the best thing the average Joe the Plumber can do to help with issues like this?
thanks, Del

January 14, 2009 1:54 PM
The General said...
Del,

As things shake out in DC, I would suggest that recreationists start by doing the following:

1 - Join BRC
2 - Join a local (and active) OHV club
3 - Sign up with your local land manager (FS, BLM, State Parks, etc) to get posting and updates on their planning efforts and projects.

Those 3 items are a good place to start!

The General

January 14, 2009 3:20 PM

Link to blog post - http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2009/01/generals-thoughts-on-omnibus-land-bill.html "

 

[SinCityFJC]

Well core group should be thrilled looks like there is no stopping HR 146/S.22

From Pirate 4x4 - http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=9566718#post9566718

Cloture passes. So H.R. 146 now will be the text of S.22 plus whatever the power structure did to it.
I doubt we will see the actual text of the bill until after the Senate vote tomorrow (little doubt it passes since it will be a simple majority vote). The NRA will apparently be appeased by the inclusion of language that Bingaman read on C-Span today.

#######

H.R. 146 then goes back to House. It is going to take a huge effort to try to stop it in the House without the NRA.

Question: On the Cloture Motion (Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Proceed to Consider H.R. 146 )

Vote Number: 99 Vote Date: March 16, 2009, 05:31 PM

Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Cloture Motion Agreed to

Measure Number: H.R. 146 (Revolutionary War and War of 1812 Battlefield Protection Act )

Measure Title: A bill to establish a battlefield acquisition grant program for the acquisition and protection of nationally significant battlefields and associated sites of the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, and for other purposes.

Vote Counts: YEAs 73
NAYs 21
Not Voting 5

Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State


Alphabetical by Senator Name
Akaka (D-HI), Yea
Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Begich (D-AK), Yea
Bennet (D-CO), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Brown (D-OH), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Nay
Bunning (R-KY), Nay
Burr (R-NC), Nay
Burris (D-IL), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Casey (D-PA), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Not Voting
Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Corker (R-TN), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
DeMint (R-SC), Nay
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Nay
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Gregg (R-NH), Nay
Hagan (D-NC), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Johanns (R-NE), Not Voting
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kaufman (D-DE), Yea
Kennedy (D-MA), Not Voting
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Not Voting
McCain (R-AZ), Nay
McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
Merkley (D-OR), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Risch (R-ID), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Yea
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Udall (D-CO), Yea
Udall (D-NM), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Not Voting
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (D-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Yea
Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
Wicker (R-MS), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Yea

Information from http://www.thomas.gov on H.R. 146:

H.R.146
Title: A bill to establish a battlefield acquisition grant program for the acquisition and protection of nationally significant battlefields and associated sites of the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, and for other purposes.

Sponsor: Rep Holt, Rush D. [NJ-12] (introduced 1/6/2009) Cosponsors (10)
Latest Major Action: 3/12/2009 Senate floor actions. Status: Cloture motion on the motion to proceed to the bill presented in Senate.

Note: On 3/16/2009, the Senate will consider the motion to proceed to H.R.146 as the vehicle for the Omnibus Lands bill. (Source: Senate.gov)

 

[paulj]

Vote Counts: YEAs 73
NAYs 21
Not Voting 5

Of these 21 Nays, states represented by both senators are:
AL, KS, KY, OK, SC, TN, TX
and one from these:
AZ, GA, IA, NC, NH, NV, SD

None of the wilderness bills apply to these states. Of these, only SC, TX, GA, NC have significant coastal areas which might be affected by the oceanic parts of the bill.

So what are these senators voting against, or how does a Nay benefit their residents more than a yea?

 

[SinCityFJC]

Might get to see what's really in it after Obama signs it. I think Senator Coburn is the only senator who has actually read the bill.

Good example of discovery after a bill has become law is the current fiasco/dog and pony act of the AIG bonus's

A must watch video by Senator Coburn - Insists on Debate for Anti-Stimulus Lands Bill - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33ctj4CH5UE

And looking long term at were I believe this movement is going to achieve is UN agenda 21. - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVTGK1uYqJo&feature=channel_page

A long video on HR146/S22 posted today by Coburn that has a lot of info in it that I agree with. Yes his viewpoint is pro energy but still a lot of good points.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khmerIQmzcA

Cheers
N7COF - Brian

 

[Jonathan Hanson]

Well, I wouldn't put AIG bonuses and saving America's natural heritage in the same class, but . . .

 

[SinCityFJC]

Well, I wouldn't put AIG bonuses and saving America's natural heritage in the same class, but . . .

Ooops I guess it could be read that way, I was commenting on the legislative process.

 

[paulj]

An Oregon perspective on Coburn from last November

http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2008/11/oklahoma_senator_once_again_ho.html

"The one conspicuous problem is why a Republican senator from Oklahoma has held everything up," said Steve Pedery of Oregon Wild. "His real problem with it, I think, is that it's a wilderness bill."

 

[SinCityFJC]

Well H.R. 146 passed through the senate & is headed back to the house. Vote was 77 yea 20 nea, final vote tally might change but passed simple majority with a large margin.

 

[paulj]

It passed the House

Oregonian article
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2009/03/conservationists_hail_new_era.html#more

more directly related to access is this announced plan for forests in SW Oregon
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/03/medford_ore_the_us.html#more
The Big Windy picture illustrating the article is where James Kim died several years ago.

 

[Jonathan Hanson]

I'm happy this bill passed, because I think our grandchildren will thank us for preserving open space and habitat for them and their grandchildren, and for wildlife.

However, I can't say I'm happy with the way it was done. I don't like sneaking bills into other bills to get them passed. I don't like it when extractive resource industries have it done for them, and I don't like it when conservationists have it done for them. We should be better.

 

[paulj]

How's this for a 'land grab'?
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/fp/over+Great+Bear+Rainforest+plan+reached/1449409/story.html
New protections for rainforest (and bears) on the BC central and north coast.

The 6.4-million-hectare area is roughly the size of Ireland. The plan sets aside 2.1 million hectares of land as parks and conservancies. Over the rest of the land, resource development, specifically logging, is to be based on ecosystem-based management.

 

[gabepari]

(lifts hood of flamesuit)...

I haven't read enough to have an opinion one way or the other. But I always hear the "our grandchildren and their children" line; does that mean that when my grandchildren are old enough the land will be reopened for them to enjoy? Or will they just be content knowing that it is there for "their grandchildren"?

...(flamesuit back on)