Interior Dept. shutting down mining in 10 states
From the Congressional House Natural Resources Committee. This action by an Obama political appointee, the Secretary of the Interior, shows the importance of which party is in the White House regardless of what you think of the president himself. Democrats since Clinton-I have appointed radical viros to run the government.
According to Mark Levin there are almost 4,000 political appointees assigned by the president and those he appoints to do the radical appointing. That is in addition to those they hire to be entrenched in the protected civil service. It is also in addition to Federal judges, about 40% of which have now been appointed by Obama. Another eight years of this means a nearly complete loss of control over how the Federal government functions for what political purposes, regardless of what Congress does or what new laws are passed making it worse.
USGS Study Reveals Extensive Impacts of Obama Administration’s War on Mineral Development
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 7, 2016
CONTACT: Parish Braden, Elise Daniel or Molly Block (202) 226-9019
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Secretary of the Interior (DOI) Sally Jewell is developing controversial plans to cordon off approximately 10 million acres of federal lands located in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming from mineral development. The withdrawals are one plank of the Obama administration's broader regulatory scheme to create a de-facto Endangered Species Act listing for the sage grouse. Earlier this week, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) released an 800-page assessment of mineral potential within each state subject to potential future withdrawals.
House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT) issued the following statement:
“This assessment shows significant negative impacts for western states if these withdrawals proceed. But let’s not miss the forest for the trees. Despite successful species conservation efforts at the state level, and a finding last year that listing the bird under the Endangered Species Act is not warranted, the Obama administration wants total regulatory control and a much more permanent trophy for litigious environmental groups. Along with oppressive land use plans covering parts of 10 states—with restrictions for all types of economic activities—these withdrawals have the potential to be even more punitive and damaging to energy producers and rural economies than an endangered finding. This is a de-facto listing and then some. USGS’s report is small snapshot of the pain to come. This issue will require continued oversight even after the Obama administration is finally gone. Blocking mineral development by another executive fiat is inexcusable, and the Committee will be sure to keep a close eye on it.
“Secretary Salazar told the states they should adopt sage grouse protection plans and they would be accepted. States have spent time and money to create good plans. The current Secretary is now reneging on that promise. The state plans work and the department’s proposal does not. The department’s proposal hurts military preparedness and military ranges in the West, a fact that has never been taken into consideration.”
Background:
At a minimum, the USGS report suggests the withdrawal of such a massive area could have significant negative impacts to nearly 1.3 million acres of moderate to high resource potential. The withdrawal could also affect over 7,000 mining claims across several Western states, including Nevada, Idaho, Utah, Oregon, Wyoming and Montana.
###
According to Mark Levin there are almost 4,000 political appointees assigned by the president and those he appoints to do the radical appointing. That is in addition to those they hire to be entrenched in the protected civil service. It is also in addition to Federal judges, about 40% of which have now been appointed by Obama. Another eight years of this means a nearly complete loss of control over how the Federal government functions for what political purposes, regardless of what Congress does or what new laws are passed making it worse.
USGS Study Reveals Extensive Impacts of Obama Administration’s War on Mineral Development
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 7, 2016
CONTACT: Parish Braden, Elise Daniel or Molly Block (202) 226-9019
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Secretary of the Interior (DOI) Sally Jewell is developing controversial plans to cordon off approximately 10 million acres of federal lands located in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming from mineral development. The withdrawals are one plank of the Obama administration's broader regulatory scheme to create a de-facto Endangered Species Act listing for the sage grouse. Earlier this week, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) released an 800-page assessment of mineral potential within each state subject to potential future withdrawals.
House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT) issued the following statement:
“This assessment shows significant negative impacts for western states if these withdrawals proceed. But let’s not miss the forest for the trees. Despite successful species conservation efforts at the state level, and a finding last year that listing the bird under the Endangered Species Act is not warranted, the Obama administration wants total regulatory control and a much more permanent trophy for litigious environmental groups. Along with oppressive land use plans covering parts of 10 states—with restrictions for all types of economic activities—these withdrawals have the potential to be even more punitive and damaging to energy producers and rural economies than an endangered finding. This is a de-facto listing and then some. USGS’s report is small snapshot of the pain to come. This issue will require continued oversight even after the Obama administration is finally gone. Blocking mineral development by another executive fiat is inexcusable, and the Committee will be sure to keep a close eye on it.
“Secretary Salazar told the states they should adopt sage grouse protection plans and they would be accepted. States have spent time and money to create good plans. The current Secretary is now reneging on that promise. The state plans work and the department’s proposal does not. The department’s proposal hurts military preparedness and military ranges in the West, a fact that has never been taken into consideration.”
Background:
At a minimum, the USGS report suggests the withdrawal of such a massive area could have significant negative impacts to nearly 1.3 million acres of moderate to high resource potential. The withdrawal could also affect over 7,000 mining claims across several Western states, including Nevada, Idaho, Utah, Oregon, Wyoming and Montana.
###
Previous comments... You are currently on page 3.
Political reality is what we make of it, is it not? How many political changes started with a group of individuals taking a stand and then having others go in with them? The Rev Martin Luther King, Jr. didn't care what the political "reality" of the day was - he stood on principle and demanded change. I believe the same thing could happen in the States - if they had the will to. Does that will exist? It doesn't at a government-leadership level, I agree. But King wasn't a bureaucrat either.
One can choose to be pessimistic and call it reality, or one can choose to be optimistic and look to enact the reality they want to see.
Restoring liberty is accomplished by restoring our Constitution! Join other patriots to restore constitutional limits on the federal government by going to http://www.conventionofstates.com to view how.
Join us by signing the petition at http://www.cosaction.com/?recruiter_i...
Then what? LOL
It's not as useless as slogans trying to sell the fringe Libertarian Party as the solution to all our problems because the states can and should act in some ways still possible politically, if and when anyone can get past the viros and progressives entrenched within the states
We are well within a post constitutional era in which the 9th and 10th amendments were gone long ago. Who would enforce them, outside a futile state attempt at armed conflict with the Federal government? The states are not simply going to "take back" Federal lands and there would be little popular support for even the goal, let alone a civil war.
Rhetorical appeals to "the Constitution" and the authority of the "states" fall on deaf ears for those who have, or who have been taught to sympathize with, the prevailing collectivist-statist mentality, which is much deeper than appeals to historic documents increasingly viewed as irrelevant.
I'm not really sure I agree with that. I think that getting bogged down in the "context" of the situation is exactly how we've gotten to the point we have - by ignoring principle. That's a Progressive's favorite play - to excuse their lack of adherence to law and principle through the language of justification. The principles in play here are specifically outlined in the Constitution in the 9th and 10th amendments granting express control over everything not specifically set aside for the Federal Government to the States AND the section of the Constitution (totally ignored) which specifically forbids the Federal Government from holding land.
Your declaring the Libertarian Party irrelevant does not make it so. History is a record of the evolution of ideas, born in the crucible of pro and con, survival by selection. We are observing that process now.
Those of us wanting to preserve individual freedom (individual rights, a foremost Randian value) must respectfully disagree with your pragmatic arguments favoring Trump. Perhaps you like that he is so blatantly selfish and proud of it, versus the Clinton campaign still seeming to cater to the altruistic trappings of collective selfishness. Neither of those will "grouse" about limiting mining rights (we're still on topic here).
The Libertarians are, in fact, the only party with a coherent philosophy, respecting property rights, individual freedom and an end to wars of aggression. The RepDems are approaching the totalitarian power grab of an Orwellian nightmare, curtailing individual liberty, privacy and free thought, fostering ever more enemies, and militarizing towards another world war.
I note people in this thread marking up and down with great alacrity. Now that is voting on principle, isn't it? Or are we driven more by emotions, whether idealistic, pragmatic, moralistic, realistic or manipulated? You may remember Rand's observation that the idealistic is the practical.
It is interesting to observe that the Libertarian Party as denounced by Ayn Rand 40 years ago has not only grown and absorbed many of the Objectivist philosophical principles but is the only seedbed closest to those principles. Short of launching an Objectivist Party, work with the party that is its one philosophical principled ally. Supporting Trump's Fuhrer persona as the antithesis of Hillary's socialism is immoral, to say the least.
I generated the maps in ArcGIS from their own downloadable data showing how they arbitrarily changed the maps from the Draft EIS stage to the Final EIS stage. They changed the habitat outlines from non-habitat all the way to priority habitat and then within SFA (Sagegrouse Focal Area) eligible for mineral withdrawal. After the public comment period was closed. Most illegal. And deliberately to take our project.
I initially made these presentations to the Elko County Commission that clinched their involvement in the lawsuit, and then ultimately based upon the power of these maps generated from their own data, persuaded Davis, Graham, and Stubbs to carry us pro bono. Our evidence and story was just too good. There was no way we could afford the lawyer fees. But our evidence, generated through my map work in ArcGIS from government data was irrefutable and damning as to how illegal the government agencies have acted with this issue.
But, the DOJ just rules what they want against all logic and evidence towards the result they want.
Right now, how familiar is that?
The Elko County Commission has been heavily tuned into these matters, through NACO, (Nevada Association of Counties), through Governor's Association's, through Washington, D.C. connections......ad naseum.
I know the Elko County Commissioners rather well. I toured them up through our project area personally. Some really good people, but they are up against larger enveloping forces than even they realize.
It is all too sad, because these guys are the highest elected officials in our jurisdiction. And they just don't know or realize, or have the kahoney's to exercise their true jurisdictional powers.
Load more comments...