Showing posts with label Blog Mirror. Show all posts

Lex Anteinternet: Monday, July 28, 1975. Donald Mattison

Lex Anteinternet: Monday, July 28, 1975. Turkey acts.: American illustrator Donald Mattison died at age 70.

Study for Martinson mural Indiana Farming (1937).

Last edition:

Sunday, July 27, 1975. Thailand gives the US military the door.

Labels: 1970s, 1975, It was because of the Vietnam War, Military, Thailand, United States

Lex Anteinternet: Tuesday, July 28, 1925. Léon Augustin Lhermitte

Lex Anteinternet: Tuesday, July 28, 1925. Léon Augustin Lhermitte:

Tuesday, July 28, 1925. Léon Augustin Lhermitte

French naturalist painter Léon Augustin Lhermitte passed away at age 80.

The Gleaners, 1887.

Last edition:

I hope you don’t have friends who recommend Ayn Rand to you.

I hope you don’t have friends who recommend Ayn Rand to you. The fiction of Ayn Rand is as low as you can get re fiction. I hope you picked it up off the floor of the subway and threw it in the nearest garbage pail. She makes Mickey Spillane look like Dostoevsky.

Flannery O'Connor

Lex Anteinternet: Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week...

Lex Anteinternet: Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week...:

Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week to convince SCOTUS to hear corner crossing case

Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week to convince SCOTUS to hear corner crossing case: Eshelman has until July 16 to state why the court should consider the corner-crossing conflict between public access to public land and private property rights.

Rancher owner?

Well, yes, he owns a ranch. But a working owner he is not. He's a pharmaceutical industry titan.

In a more just society, frankly, he wouldn't own the ranch at all. It'd be owned by those who actually derived a living from it.

Also of interest, Iron Bar Holdings, the petitioner, is represented by Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP of Denver, with Robert Reeves Anderson as counsel of record. The respondent is represented by a local Wyoming firm. I note this as there's no reason that the common attorney bullshit claim "I'm only doing my job" really ought to hold, for civil litigation. If you run into a Colorado attorney in Wyoming, ask them who they work for. if they work for this outfit, tell them to go home, we don't want them here.

For that matter, if you are a Colorado user of public lands, as they want to take part of what you own, there's no reason to accommodate them with a seat at the table, literally. "Want a cup of coffee sir? Drive to Texas. . . ."

At the trial court level, Iron Bar had been represented by Gregory Weisz, who is a Wyoming attorney. He's left private practice and is with the AG now. A lawyer with his firm took his place, but the case was well developed by then, and in the appeal stage, so they really had no choice.

So, what am I saying. Well, I'm saying that people who don't derive their income principally form a ranch, ought not to own it. And I'm saying that by representing carpetbaggers, you are a carpetbagger. The old lawyer bromides about serving the system are BS. Regular people, including other lawyers, don't have to excuse your choice of clients when you are taking on a plaintiff. It's not like being assigned a defendant.

Lex Anteinternet: Hoping this is true.

Lex Anteinternet: Hoping this is true.:

Hoping this is true.

I'm really hoping this is true. Lee has shown a total disregard for the wishes of nationwide voter.

And Hageman, Barrasso and Lummis have shown a contempt for Wyoming's voters that the electorate should remember.

This is only one aspect of the Big Ugly Bill that will come back to haunt us in spades. But at least, if this is true, this is past us.

Hopefully Lee is too. Utah's voters should send him back to the private sector.

Public lands rally draws large, varied crowd to Wyoming statehouse

Lex Anteinternet: Teton County Wants Same Federal Land Sale Exemptio...

Lex Anteinternet: Teton County Wants Same Federal Land Sale Exemptio...:

Teton County Wants Same Federal Land Sale Exemption Montana Got

This is one of those areas which Mike Lee imagines will benefit from his land sale provision:

Teton County Wants Same Federal Land Sale Exemption Montana Got Teton County commissioners have sent a letter to Wyoming’s congressional delegation asking that federal lands in the county be exempt from any proposed sale. Montana got an exemption, and Teton

Wyomingites don't want this. Teton County, which has a housing problem (caused by the super wealthy) doesn't want it.

When will we see Hageman, Barrasso and Lummis begin to reflect what Wyoming wants?

Lex Anteinternet: Congress woman Hageman responds, and Sen. Lee reacts.

Lex Anteinternet: Congress woman Hageman responds, and Sen. Lee reacts.:

Congress woman Hageman responds, and Sen. Lee reacts.

Lee Offers Compromise On Public Land Sales Bill, Hunters Say No Deal

Sen. Lee is apparently offering something, but it's not clear what, and the opposition is saying no. I'm saying no as well. I adamantly opposed transferring public lands away from public hands.

Congressman Hageman responded, or somebody working for her did, to a letter I wrote. It may of course be a form letter.

Dear Mr. Yeoman

Congress is currently in the budget reconciliation process, which allows for expedited consideration of certain tax, spending, and debt limit legislation. The House recently passed its version of the bill, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which now awaits Senate consideration. Those Senate committees that received reconciliation instructions pursuant to H.Con.Res.14 have begun releasing legislative text for reconciliation consideration, but I want to note that such materials are not the final bill. These committee proposals must still be reviewed by the Senate parliamentarian for compliance with the Byrd rule and then pass the entire Senate to officially become part of the reconciliation bill. Such bill will then come back to the House for consideration in relation to what we passed earlier.
On June 11, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee released legislative text to be considered as part of Senate Republicans’ budget reconciliation bill. As you have noted, Subtitle C of the bill instructs the Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Chief of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to identify not less than 0.50 percent and not more than 0.75 percent of the lands managed by these agencies for disposal pursuant to the specific conditions set forth in the statutory instructions. This would amount to between two and three million acres of the roughly 640 million acres owned by the federal government, with such lands to be made available solely for the purpose of housing and community development.
There is an extensive amount of downright flagrantly incorrect information being circulated as to the intent of this proposal, what lands would qualify for disposal should this become law, and how the process would proceed. Most notably, the Wilderness Society has produced a map for the purpose of ginning up opposition, despite the fact that such map has nothing to do with Subtitle C in any way whatsoever. It is thus necessary to clarify the situation, starting with the readily confirmable observation that there are no specific parcels or areas designated under the bill, and the details of the bill itself show that this is a commonsense proposal to identify and dispose of those BLM and USFS lands that are hindering local communities from meeting their housing and infrastructure needs, an issue with which Wyoming is all too familiar.
First, the bill does not propose selling off all federal lands. As I mentioned, it would only make available two to three million acres within the jurisdiction of the BLM and USFS in eleven states, including Wyoming. All such lands that are subject to valid existing rights (including grazing permits, ski areas, etc.), and those that are not located in the eleven eligible states are not subject to the bill. Those “Federally Protected Lands” (for example, National Parks, National Monuments, the National Wilderness Preservation System, the National Wildlife Refuge System, and more as defined in the bill) are not eligible for sale. All the lands sold pursuant to this proposal must be used “for the development of housing or to address associated community needs,” limiting not only the number of buyers, but likely making state and local governments the primary advocates and purchasers.
Second, this legislation does not directly offer any parcels for sale but instead provides for a robust public identification and nomination process to evaluate those unused lands that are close to existing infrastructure (such as surrounding Kemmerer, Wyoming), that are ideal for addressing the affordable housing crisis.
Both the BLM and USFS must consult with the governor, local governments, and Indian tribes regarding the suitability of the particular parcel of land for disposal before the proposed sale. Both agencies must also give priority to those lands that are nominated by state and local governments, are adjacent to existing developed areas, have access to existing infrastructure, are suitable for residential housing, reduce checkerboard land patterns, or which are isolated and inefficient to manage. All sales are to be held at fair market value, must provide state and local governments the first right of refusal, limit individual persons in how many acres they can acquire, and share revenue of the sales with the local government to assist with housing development.
This legislative proposal is now pending in the Senate and is thus not something I am currently being asked to vote on as your representative. This proposal was not included in the OBBBA that I voted for and which passed the House. However, I want to reiterate that much of the maps and information circulating about the bill are incorrect and that the proposal as drafted is a much more targeted approach to answer the needs of our local communities, who are hampered from further development due to the oversized footprint of the federal government in our states.
I encourage you to read the bill itself to understand what it does, and as importantly, what it does not do, when considering the benefits of this legislation. Thank you for reaching out to us.
Sincerely,
Rep. Harriet Hageman
Member of Congress

Well, at least its a response.

A few things.

I've taken at look at the bill, and I had before I received this letter, contrary to Congressman Hageman's suggestion that I, and others opposing this didn't.

This proposal still sucks. I have no interest, for example, in reducing checkerboard land patterns, particularly if we are now able to corner cross, as it sees we can. This land just opened to the public and now

Nor do I have any interest in disposing of Federal lands for an alleged "housing crisis" that largely doesn't exist in the form these things suggest. There's no requirement in any of these proposals to restrict sales of land to those really in need of housing. A process already exists to transfer lands where such things really exist. Sales for "fair market value", in the areas where this would apply in Wyoming, would result in transfers of land in Wyoming for castles for the rich, which I do not support. There's nothing to suggest the land would go to state and local governments given that, and I don't want state in local governments in the housing business to start with.

More than anything, this is the wolf's nose in the door. Once its passed, it'll push its way into the house.

Trump appointee, a Jackson Hole consultant, ID’d pitfalls of Wyoming managing its federal land

Trump appointee, a Jackson Hole consultant, ID’d pitfalls of Wyoming managing its federal land: Tapped for Bureau of Land Management post, Brenda Younkin will report directly to agency’s acting director, Jon Raby.

Hageman’s stance on public land sales shows she doesn’t work for Wyoming

Here's Six Ways Trump’s Budget Will Hurt Rural Americans

Here's Six Ways Trump’s Budget Will Hurt Rural Americans: Right now, Congress is working on a giant, fast-track bill that would make historic cuts to basic needs programs to finance another round of tax breaks for the wealthy and...

Going Feral: Blog Mirror: Public Lands Victory: BHA Applauds R...

Going Feral: Blog Mirror: Public Lands Victory: BHA Applauds R...:

Blog Mirror: Public Lands Victory: BHA Applauds Removal of Public Land Sale Amendment from House Budget Reconciliation Bill

Very good news:

Public Lands Victory: BHA Applauds Removal of Public Land Sale Amendment from House Budget Reconciliation Bill

Voters need to remember who favored this horrific action to privatize public lands in 2026. All over the West there seems to be a view that you have to vote for Republicans. You don't, if they aren't voting for you. There are other options, or there can be if people consider what's being done and oppose it.