Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: Protesting Too Much: Lex Antein...: Well the bill discussed here: Lex Anteinternet: Protesting Too Much: Lex Anteinternet: The return... : I've commented several tim...That bill passed the Wyoming legislature, but of course, in spite of what Wyoming may think, the Federal government isn't going to pay much attention to a bill of this type from us. More signficantly, similar bills died in Colorado and Idaho, and they've now become deeply unpopular with Westerners and sportsmen. 65% of the Western population opposes this idea.
But apparently what ever is going on is strong enough that the U.S. Senate feels that it can ignore the feelings of the country. They recently passed an amendment to a budget bill supporting such a proposal.
Supposedly the passage of the bill, introduced by a comittee chairman from Alaska, is non binding, but this almost surely signals that such an attempt will be made later in the year in an actual bill. The bill passed the Senate on a straight party vote, with one Republican voting against it.
It's already had repercussions. Idaho sportsmen blasted their Senator who is now trying to defend his action and residents of Montana likewise did the same to one of their Senators. No outcry has been heard in Wyoming yet, but in a state where the majority of the residents use the public lands, they will. I know that I am strongly displeased with at least Mike Enzi, one of our two Senators, whom I formerly held a generally favorable view of. I imagine I'm not alone, and I know that our other Senator already had a dedicated body of some who didn't think much of him. Senators in the West that thought they had safe seats might find that this will not sit well with some who traditionally supported them. The other Senator, who seems to be perpetually on the same flight back to Casper that I routinely am, is going to get an earful from me next time I see him, if I have the chance to talk to him. I'm not pleased.
The excuse for this nonsense is that the Federal government is slow to permit oil exploration, and that's hindering the oil producing state's economies. That's nonsense. There was never a time during the recent boom with oil exploration was occurring on all of the leased lands. There was always a backlog, and the hold ups in drilling were largely attributable to infrastructure and lack of equipment, not leasing. Now, with oil down consistently around $50 bbl, the hold up is that American oil can not be produced at a profit, and with Saudi Arabia dedicated to keeping it that way, and with some suggestion that the price might decline to half of the present price, giving leases away wouldn't make a difference.
A broader thesis is that Westerners are oppressed by Federal regulations and actions, and in some ways that is somewhat true, but a land transfer will not impact that at all. Focusing in on the land aspect of this focuses attention in the wrong area, where regional complaints are not really found. Indeed, the one thing that Westerners really like about the Federal government is the free access to the public domain, something states have not been quite as generous with, at least as concerns our state.
Indeed, something that people miss here, if they're worried about government, is that a state government can be just as burdensome as a national one, and there are plenty of examples of the Federal government being the entity that imposes freedom on an area, rather than a state. States react to their population more directly, to be sure, and part of that reaction is pushing certain sections of that population around from time to time.
People should make no mistake. What such a transfer would do is fairly simple. It would transfer land to the States, no doubt for gratis or nearly so, and the states would transfer it to existing lease holders sooner or later, who would then find themselves selling to out of state interests, and the entire culture that has existed here for over a century will be gone.
Critics of Wyoming's economy, and there are quite a few, have long held that Wyoming has a third world economy. I dispute that, but those who maintain that hold that the land is agricultural and the industry is both foreign and exploitative. Again, I think that's a bit much, but I do think that the effect of this bill would be to give us a colonial economy. The land will belong to somebody else and all the wealth derived from it will go either to the government our out of state interests. Locals will be mere landless peasants, not even able to go on what was formerly theirs.
Enough is enough on this idea. It's time to let our leadership, or rather our representation, know we're not having it.
No comments:
Post a Comment