Call your people in Congress today and inform them you are opposed.
If you live in Wyoming, inform them that they better start putting in their resumes for post Congressional punditry right now, as you'll not vote for them for anything ever again. They aren't representing you if they vote for this.
From the CST:
Barrasso and Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyoming, did not oppose the original proposal, though Republican senators from Montana and Idaho did. But Wyoming’s congressional delegation heard concerns from a range of constituents. State Rep. Andrew Byron, R-Hoback, is among the Teton County residents making their voices heard opposing the proposed federal public lands sale.
Byron overnighted two letters to Barrasso and Lummis on Friday and emailed their chiefs of staff . By Saturday afternoon, he was on the phone with Barrasso. He said he has yet to receive a response from Lummis and her office.
Byron said Tuesday that he and Barrasso had a productive conversation, but the senator “downplayed” the concerns brought to him. Although Barrasso didn’t reveal his position on the public lands sale, Byron said Barrasso didn’t share his sense of urgency.
They're disregarding the voters.
Send them home if they don't correct this.
They're counting on us forgetting this, and there's some outside incentive, or fear, for them ignoring us. We need to be the bigger incentive, and they need to fear for their positions and reputations.
Related threads:
Mike Lee is like the cook who keeps putting nuts in fudge. You tell them it's an infamnia, but they insist on doing it anyway, and telling you that you'll like it.
"It's only a few. . . ". "They're not peanuts, they're walnuts. . . " "You can pick them out. . . ".
It's disgusting, and you don't want it.
Lee went from aggressively trying to get a public land sales provision in the Big Ugly Bill only to meat a firestorm of opposition, from the right and left, about it. Ultimately he started scaling it back before the Senate Parliamentarian pulled it, either because it was genuinely against Senate Rules or in order to keep people like John Barrasso from having to commit on it.
Lee, however, hasn't give up. He's telling his opponents, which includes nearly everyone (but not Wyoming Congress woman Harriet Hageman) that he's "listened" and is coming back with a bill we'll all like.
Nobody is going to like this.
This is really bizarre at this point. Lee is choosing a massively unpopular bill as his hill to die on, and politically, it might do that. A former Utah Congressman went down in flames and had to resign over similar efforts a decade ago.
What's up with Lee?
Well, I have one theory I'll write another post on, on Lex Anteinternet.
But all the reasons given for this are, well, crap.
Things are changing, albeit slowly, in Utah. Lee's seat is probably safe, but maybe not as safe as he thinks. The seats of other Republicans supporting this idea are not safe. Barrasso has laid low during the storm, Lummis came out for it early on, and Hageman is all in. Hageman may very well have ended her political career by going so.
Suffice it to say, however, until the nut fudge gets thrown up against the wall and the cook loose cooking privildges, somebody is going to try to keep serving it.
You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.
You can't say civilization don't advance... in every war they kill you in a new way.
We will measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Israel claimed Tuesday to have killed a top Iranian general as it traded more strikes with its longtime foe, and U.S. President Donald Trump warned residents of Tehran to evacuate while demanding that Iran surrender without conditions.
Thank you very much.A short time ago, the U.S. military carried out massive, precision strikes on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime. Fordo, Natanz and Esfahan. Everybody heard those names for years as they built this horribly destructive enterprise.Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one state sponsor of terror.Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not. Future attacks would be far greater and a lot easier.For 40 years, Iran has been saying. Death to America, death to Israel. They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs, with roadside bombs. That was their specialty. We lost over 1,000 people and hundreds of thousands throughout the Middle East, and around the world have died as a direct result of their hate in particular. So many were killed by their general, Qassim Soleimani. I decided a long time ago that I would not let this happen. It will not continue.I want to thank and congratulate Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. We worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before, and we've gone a long way to erasing this horrible threat to Israel. I want to thank the Israeli military for the wonderful job they've done. And most importantly, I want to congratulate the great American patriots who flew those magnificent machines tonight, and all of the United States military on an operation the likes of which the world has not seen in many, many decades.Hopefully, we will no longer need their services in this capacity. I hope that's so. I also want to congratulate the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan 'Razin' Caine, spectacular general, and all of the brilliant military minds involved in this attack.With all of that being said, this cannot continue. There will be either peace, or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes. There's no military in the world that could have done what we did tonight. Not even close. There has never been a military that could do what took place just a little while ago.And I want to just thank everybody. And, in particular, God. I want to just say, we love you, God, and we love our great military. Protect them. God bless the Middle East. God bless Israel and God bless America. Thank you very much. Thank you.
The legality of this is really questionable, as is the wisdom, and effectiveness, of it. And the development of the US openly taking a part in a Middle Eastern War, started by Israel, on behalf of Israel, is a dangerous development. The US has never done that before.
As war is an extension of politics by other means, and all politics is local:
June 23, 2025
The United States and Israel v Iran
Since the US B-2 missions (which were impressively flown out of Missouri in the longest bombing mission of all time), there have global reactions to the strike, some of which praised it. It's clear that European nations generally support them.
Russia issued a statement in which it condemned them and indicated that now other nations may transfer nuclear weapons to Iran. How much Russia can be trusted in regard to anything it states is a clearly open question, but being concerned about this possibility, particularly as Pakistan is nearby, is perhaps merited. Likewise, being concerned about what rogue state North Korea may do is also warranted.
Iran itself has indicated that it will close the Straits of Hormuz and that it will otherwise retaliate.
The morality of this action is debatable and interesting. It's clearly an act of war with no clear exist strategy based on the hope of Iranian concession. However, the argument can be made that waiting until Iran had a nuclear weapon, which they are clearly working on, would put the world in an untenable position.
That it is an act of war was interestingly noted when a Congressman on This Week said Iran could "sue for peace". You only sue for peace in a declared war, which this is not.
A group of Congressmen have put together a war powers resolution seeking to limit further US action. It's all Democrats save for one Republican. If history is our guide, politically most Americans will support action against Iran, at least at first. If things drag on, they'll be discontented. In the short term condemning the strike is probably a bad political move, but in the long term it might not be. If Iran is not cowed into submission, and perhaps its regime can't afford to be, we'll either have to materially support an ongoing Iranian air war indefinitely or become more involved in it. People repeatedly are noting that there will not be "boots on the ground", and there very likely won't be on a largescale, but on a small scale there may very well be. If Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz the U.S. Navy will have to reopen them, and that will be a major task.
cont:
Yeoman's Fourth Law of History at work, and Donald Trump demonstrating that he doesn't know how economies work.
June 24, 2025
The United States and Israel v Iran
On the Iranian retaliation, which was muted:
Apparently a cease fire has been agreed to, although there may have been some post agreement fighting.
A ceasefire isn't a peace agreement. What's going on, and what was achieved, are the real questions.
And of course, Trump is acting weird.
And this:
We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the fuck they’re doing.
Donald Trump.
June 24, 2024
United States and Israel v. Iran.
An early assessment holds that Iran's nuclear facilities were not destroyed, only damages, and they're merely set back in the production of an atomic weapon a few months.
Can't say I'm surprised.
So the US attack may have simply reinforced the Iranian desire for a nuclear weapon.
cont:
A report by an expert on NPR Politics holds that there's no way that Iran's nuclear program was destroyed.
Last edition:
Provenza is a Democratic legislator, one of Wyoming's few, who used blaze orange t-shirts recalling big game hunting for her campaign last year. She names names in this article, which is very much worth reading.
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?
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.
The best posts of the week of June 15, 2025, a week dominated by the news on the reprehensible inclusion of public land sales in the budget reconciliation bill.
Back at least a decade ago I had a conversation with a high ranking member of the Wyoming Republican Party about some really odd going ons down at Cheyenne. He stated, broken hearted, that Wyoming politicians had been "bought".
That's a pretty broad accusation. What he likely really meant is that right about that time the state started to be flooded by out of state political money, and it often went right into the most radical right wing politicians. Wealthy people moving into the state brought their politics with them, and in a few cases if was radically far right. That gave us, for example, the absurd example of Foster Friess and his goofball Dukes of Hazzard campaign for governor.
It also gave us, however, some people who moved in specifically for political reason. Chuck Gray, the family money backed son of a wealthy Republican, who was born in California and went to school at Wharton, like Trump, moved into the state and ran for office nearly immediately. Living in a district in which the long time occupant of a legislative seat died, he managed to leverage a position at his father's radio station into a legislative seat, and then captured the office of the Secretary of State in spite of having very little connection with the state in which he sits. He's been a constant stream of Trump like invective. His seat was taken over by Jeanette Ward, who was if anything even further to the far right. Ward, from Illinois, came to Wyoming as a "political refugee" and had been here so briefly that she barely qualified for her seat when she ran. Her politics were too far to the right for even that district, which booted her after one embarrassing term in Cheyenne where she espoused far right populist, far right Evangelical, positions.
The state GOP was likewise taken over by far right populists, about whom we hear less now, but who went to war with the traditional GOP. They were largely successful, duping, although I expect only temporarily, a large number of Wyoming voters into believing the sh** sandwiches which Trump and his allies serve up as alleged filet mignon.
That they can be duped is because the state is in economic distress, and regular people don't know what to do about it. Global Warming is real, not some sort of fib, and long term coal and oil are doomed. A large number of workers who relocated form Texas and Oklahoma, and the like, are fairly poorly educated on top of it and are relatively easy to lead by being told that what they want to be true, is true. The agricultural sector, which has deeply ingrained conservative tendencies, is rolling over from a generation that basically stopped its education at high school to one which is now college educated, but in the meantime the older agriculturalist who control the operations deeply want to believe that operations can be run the way they were in the 1970s, and that threats they need to deal with, which include Global Warming and the buying power of the Super Rich, really don't.
Basically, Wyoming's current politics can be explained by people voting for what they want to believe, over reality. Coal and oil are never going way. You'll always be able to get a job in the extractive industries, or as a truck driver, with a high school diploma, or even without one. There are no deep existential problems with the economy here that aren't the result of a conspiracy against us.
It can't be us.
But it can be.
And right now, it is.
A further part of the problem, however, is that the Democratic Party in the state has displayed a level of intellectual denseness that would suck light out of a black hole It's stunning.
It wasn't all that time that Wyoming had a viable Democratic Party that could serious contend for statewide and national seats. That started to change, however, during the Clinton Administration for reasons that are now hard to discern, although the decline of unionized mining jobs in Wyoming are likely part of that problem. Even after that, however, we had a Democratic Governor.
As the Democratic Party in the state declined it took on a lot of the same trend lines that the national Democratic Party did, which has helped explain the rise of Trump. In a state that was both sort of conservative and sort of libertarian, they became goofball left wing as an organization, although not all of their candidates reflected that. Over time, the Democrats never saw a fetus in the womb that they didn't' want to kill, or a brand new perversion that they didn't want to celebrate. A party which at one time was lead by burly miners or grumpy rural lawyers is now lead by a guy who has the appearance of a bow tie wearing nerd.
In fairness, however, the last two chairmen of the Wyoming GOP don't win high marks either. The current one, Bryan Miller, is another of the "I spent my life in the military and hate the government" Republicans. After decades of drawing on the government tit, they claim to know what's wrong in a state where most people don't, or at least not openly.
We may, just might, be at a turning point, however.
We are certainly at a point where Republican office holders ignoring the real views of the state can be exploited.
Wyomingites are overwhelmingly opposed to public lands being transferred out of government control. In spite of that, Dr. John Barrasso supported Federal lands being transferred to the states in the 2016 GOP platform. That didn't happen in part because Eric Trump is a hunter. Barrasso darned well knew that Wyomingites didn't support that, but somebody he was listening to did, as he supported it against the wishes of his constituents.
72 year old Barrasso is in that class of politicians who desperately seem to want to hang on to their jobs in spite of their advancing old age. At 72 he ought to be retired, but he hung on and is how the Senate Whip. Once a Republican moderate, he became a Trumpite by necessity. That means he could become a moderate again, and if the political winds shifted, he would.
This issue is one in which he's hearing from hundreds of Wyomingites per day. He's heard from me twice.
He hasn't responded, but he hasn't said what his position is.
If the proposals to transfer public lands advance, he ought to be sent packing.
70 year old Cynthia Lummis is likewise in the age group that ought to be out of politics. She actually returned to it, however, to take her current Senate seat. Lummis condescendingly stated that all Federal lands didn't need to remain in Federal lands forever, which is intellectually the same as maintaining that all privately held lands don't either, something she'd be in horror about as she comes from a ranching family. She's also shown an ability to tack into the wind, however, as she was once a Trump opponent and now is a Trump backer.
Lummis is making sort of a big deal right now about her cryptocurrency bill which just passed the Senate, and nickname Crypto Queen she's been tagged with. The truth is, however, that the overwhelming majority of Wyomingites don't give a rusty rats ass about this topic and aren't going to remember diddly squat about this bill. It'll soon be a "what?" sort of topic.
The public lands vote, however won't be.
Harriet Hageman is on her first time as Congresswoman, having been able to take advantage of her former friend Liz Cheney's downfall. Hageman is the only one of Wyoming's Washington delegation who probably comes by her public land vote, which was in favor of the Federal sales bill, honestly. Daughter of Jim Hageman, who spent 23 years in the Wyoming House of Representatives, Hageman is from a farming family from Southeastern Wyoming where there is very little public land. Jim Hageman was one of the backers of a proposal to allow for the privatization of wildlife in Wyoming, which almost destroyed the GOP during its go around.
This issue could be a similar one.
Wyomingites should make it.
At the top of this page is a portrait of Francis E. Warren. Warren had been territorial governor, and then the first governor, of the State of Wyoming.
I don't admire him.
But his ability to read the political winds is admirable.
The state Republican Party was complicit in the invasion as so many of those in it were connected with Republican politics. Planned at the Cheyenne Club, people kne what was going on. Republican Governor Amos Barber did and had arranged to activate the National Guard in order to keep it from being deployed to Central Wyoming to stop the invasion.
Barber lost his seat following the event.
The Republicans lost the legislature.
Warren kept his.
There's a lesson there for those currently in office. . . and those who wish to be.
Wyoming legislators begin to weigh in, with lukewarm Republicans, some man Republicans, and an absolute no from the Democrats.
Democrats do have an opportunity here, I might add. One long time and very conservative Republican I know is re-registering in the Democratic Party.
One Republican who is predictably all in, is Harriet Hageman.
The "silly" reaction sparked some rage on facebook. My prediction is that this is the end of Hageman's political career in Wyoming.
Back at least a decade ago I had a conversation with a high ranking member of the Wyoming Republican Party about some really odd going ons down at Cheyenne. He stated, broken hearted, that Wyoming politicians had been "bought".
That's a pretty broad accusation. What he likely really meant is that right about that time the state started to be flooded by out of state political money, and it often went right into the most radical right wing politicians. Wealthy people moving into the state brought their politics with them, and in a few cases if was radically far right. That gave us, for example, the absurd example of Foster Friess and his goofball Dukes of Hazzard campaign for governor.
It also gave us, however, some people who moved in specifically for political reason. Chuck Gray, the family money backed son of a wealthy Republican, who was born in California and went to school at Wharton, like Trump, moved into the state and ran for office nearly immediately. Living in a district in which the long time occupant of a legislative seat died, he managed to leverage a position at his father's radio station into a legislative seat, and then captured the office of the Secretary of State in spite of having very little connection with the state in which he sits. He's been a constant stream of Trump like invective. His seat was taken over by Jeanette Ward, who was if anything even further to the far right. Ward, from Illinois, came to Wyoming as a "political refugee" and had been here so briefly that she barely qualified for her seat when she ran. Her politics were too far to the right for even that district, which booted her after one embarrassing term in Cheyenne where she espoused far right populist, far right Evangelical, positions.
The state GOP was likewise taken over by far right populists, about whom we hear less now, but who went to war with the traditional GOP. They were largely successful, duping, although I expect only temporarily, a large number of Wyoming voters into believing the sh** sandwiches which Trump and his allies serve up as alleged filet mignon.
That they can be duped is because the state is in economic distress, and regular people don't know what to do about it. Global Warming is real, not some sort of fib, and long term coal and oil are doomed. A large number of workers who relocated form Texas and Oklahoma, and the like, are fairly poorly educated on top of it and are relatively easy to lead by being told that what they want to be true, is true. The agricultural sector, which has deeply ingrained conservative tendencies, is rolling over from a generation that basically stopped its education at high school to one which is now college educated, but in the meantime the older agriculturalist who control the operations deeply want to believe that operations can be run the way they were in the 1970s, and that threats they need to deal with, which include Global Warming and the buying power of the Super Rich, really don't.
Basically, Wyoming's current politics can be explained by people voting for what they want to believe, over reality. Coal and oil are never going way. You'll always be able to get a job in the extractive industries, or as a truck driver, with a high school diploma, or even without one. There are no deep existential problems with the economy here that aren't the result of a conspiracy against us.
It can't be us.
But it can be.
And right now, it is.
A further part of the problem, however, is that the Democratic Party in the state has displayed a level of intellectual denseness that would suck light out of a black hole It's stunning.
It wasn't all that time that Wyoming had a viable Democratic Party that could serious contend for statewide and national seats. That started to change, however, during the Clinton Administration for reasons that are now hard to discern, although the decline of unionized mining jobs in Wyoming are likely part of that problem. Even after that, however, we had a Democratic Governor.
As the Democratic Party in the state declined it took on a lot of the same trend lines that the national Democratic Party did, which has helped explain the rise of Trump. In a state that was both sort of conservative and sort of libertarian, they became goofball left wing as an organization, although not all of their candidates reflected that. Over time, the Democrats never saw a fetus in the womb that they didn't' want to kill, or a brand new perversion that they didn't want to celebrate. A party which at one time was lead by burly miners or grumpy rural lawyers is now lead by a guy who has the appearance of a bow tie wearing nerd.
In fairness, however, the last two chairmen of the Wyoming GOP don't win high marks either. The current one, Bryan Miller, is another of the "I spent my life in the military and hate the government" Republicans. After decades of drawing on the government tit, they claim to know what's wrong in a state where most people don't, or at least not openly.
We may, just might, be at a turning point, however.
We are certainly at a point where Republican office holders ignoring the real views of the state can be exploited.
Wyomingites are overwhelmingly opposed to public lands being transferred out of government control. In spite of that, Dr. John Barrasso supported Federal lands being transferred to the states in the 2016 GOP platform. That didn't happen in part because Eric Trump is a hunter. Barrasso darned well knew that Wyomingites didn't support that, but somebody he was listening to did, as he supported it against the wishes of his constituents.
72 year old Barrasso is in that class of politicians who desperately seem to want to hang on to their jobs in spite of their advancing old age. At 72 he ought to be retired, but he hung on and is how the Senate Whip. Once a Republican moderate, he became a Trumpite by necessity. That means he could become a moderate again, and if the political winds shifted, he would.
This issue is one in which he's hearing from hundreds of Wyomingites per day. He's heard from me twice.
He hasn't responded, but he hasn't said what his position is.
If the proposals to transfer public lands advance, he ought to be sent packing.
70 year old Cynthia Lummis is likewise in the age group that ought to be out of politics. She actually returned to it, however, to take her current Senate seat. Lummis condescendingly stated that all Federal lands didn't need to remain in Federal lands forever, which is intellectually the same as maintaining that all privately held lands don't either, something she'd be in horror about as she comes from a ranching family. She's also shown an ability to tack into the wind, however, as she was once a Trump opponent and now is a Trump backer.
Lummis is making sort of a big deal right now about her cryptocurrency bill which just passed the Senate, and nickname Crypto Queen she's been tagged with. The truth is, however, that the overwhelming majority of Wyomingites don't give a rusty rats ass about this topic and aren't going to remember diddly squat about this bill. It'll soon be a "what?" sort of topic.
The public lands vote, however won't be.
Harriet Hageman is on her first time as Congresswoman, having been able to take advantage of her former friend Liz Cheney's downfall. Hageman is the only one of Wyoming's Washington delegation who probably comes by her public land vote, which was in favor of the Federal sales bill, honestly. Daughter of Jim Hageman, who spent 23 years in the Wyoming House of Representatives, Hageman is from a farming family from Southeastern Wyoming where there is very little public land. Jim Hageman was one of the backers of a proposal to allow for the privatization of wildlife in Wyoming, which almost destroyed the GOP during its go around.
This issue could be a similar one.
Wyomingites should make it.
At the top of this page is a portrait of Francis E. Warren. Warren had been territorial governor, and then the first governor, of the State of Wyoming.
I don't admire him.
But his ability to read the political winds is admirable.
The state Republican Party was complicit in the invasion as so many of those in it were connected with Republican politics. Planned at the Cheyenne Club, people kne what was going on. Republican Governor Amos Barber did and had arranged to activate the National Guard in order to keep it from being deployed to Central Wyoming to stop the invasion.
Barber lost his seat following the event.
The Republicans lost the legislature.
Warren kept his.
There's a lesson there for those currently in office. . . and those who wish to be.
