BuzzH
Well-known member
I would say not real serious, or he'd get off his duff and start getting some support/funding for it. Typical politician....all talk. "We have to get our forests back into a healthy state" says Dubya. Great idea Dubya, now fund the project.
How can his healthy forest initiative be taken seriously when he allows funds to be stripped from parts of it because wildlfire
management isnt being funded?
I'm not sure whats the biggest joke, the Healthy Forest Initiative or Dubya.
Montana, Wyoming lawmakers furious at stripped fire funds
By TED MONOSON, IR Washington Bureau - 07/29/03
Money was part of $983.6M bill that would replenish FEMA disaster aid accounts
WASHINGTON - Western lawmakers are furious that the House of Representatives leaders stripped $319 million from an emergency spending bill before leaving for a month-long break.
"It is foolish and irresponsible to leave firefighters across the West without every penny they need to do so safely and effectively," Rep. Barbara Cubin, R-Wyo., said. "Here we have firefighters risking their lives, and the Forest Service due to run out of firefighting funds in the next week or so, and Congress is deliberately ignoring this train wreck about to occur."
Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont, like Cubin voted against the bill and lashed out at the House leadership for stripping the money to fight wildfires from the bill. Despite the opposition, the bill easily passed by a vote of 352 to 60 on July 25.
"People outside the West simply don't get it," Rehberg said. "Our states have had years of drought, we have wildfires threatening thousands of acres, and they stripped the bill of much-needed funds to fight fires that are burning right now as we speak. You know, there's a reason we keep talking about drought, forest management, and planning ahead - it's wildfires, which threaten lives and devastate the local economy."
The money was part of a $983.6 million spending bill, HR 2859, which would replenish Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) disaster aid accounts. The legislation would provide immediate relief because it is intended to make up for shortfalls in fiscal year 2003, which ends on Sept. 30. Congress usually provides most of the money before the fiscal year begins.
Because the House passed the bill immediately before leaving town, senators cannot change it and have it become law before they leave at the end of this week. When the House and Senate pass different measures they have a conference to reconcile the differences. Because the House is not in session, that conference cannot take place until September. The same exact bill must be passed by both the House and Senate and signed by the president to become law.
Before the House voted on the measure, Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., urged them to include the money for fighting wildfires.
"In Montana, both sides of Glacier National Park are on fire, and we're headed for a 'perfect storm' situation," Burns said. "We cannot wait on this important issue. It is critical the House includes this specific funding to ensure we are able to manage our fires through this extremely dry season."
House leaders not only rejected Westerners' plea, but also President Bush's, by stripping the money to fight wildfires from the bill. President Bush requested $1.89 billion, including $1.55 billion for FEMA and $289 million to fight wildfires.
Both Burns and Cubin noted that because of the decision, federal agencies would have to borrow money from accounts that are intended to treat forests to reduce the threat of wildfires.
The action also came less than a week after Montana Gov. Judy Martz told a Senate committee that Montana and other Western states need more money to prevent wildfires.
"Talk about being pennywise and pound foolish," Cubin stated. "We are going to force the Forest Service to borrow money from other accounts to fight fires, including fuel reduction which can prevent some of these wildfires. While trying to save $300 million now, we're going to pay hundreds of millions more down the road by not getting out ahead of the West's fire crisis by using fuel reduction techniques."
Burns added: "We can all see the destruction these fires are causing, and it is clear we need to get funding directed towards taking care of them, rather than borrow money that will take it away from other important projects."
Rehberg was particularly steamed that the money was pulled from a bill that aims to provide relief for all sorts of natural disasters.
"It's time the rest of Congress treated our disasters the same way they treat hurricanes, tornadoes and floods," Rehberg said.
How can his healthy forest initiative be taken seriously when he allows funds to be stripped from parts of it because wildlfire
management isnt being funded?
I'm not sure whats the biggest joke, the Healthy Forest Initiative or Dubya.
Montana, Wyoming lawmakers furious at stripped fire funds
By TED MONOSON, IR Washington Bureau - 07/29/03
Money was part of $983.6M bill that would replenish FEMA disaster aid accounts
WASHINGTON - Western lawmakers are furious that the House of Representatives leaders stripped $319 million from an emergency spending bill before leaving for a month-long break.
"It is foolish and irresponsible to leave firefighters across the West without every penny they need to do so safely and effectively," Rep. Barbara Cubin, R-Wyo., said. "Here we have firefighters risking their lives, and the Forest Service due to run out of firefighting funds in the next week or so, and Congress is deliberately ignoring this train wreck about to occur."
Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont, like Cubin voted against the bill and lashed out at the House leadership for stripping the money to fight wildfires from the bill. Despite the opposition, the bill easily passed by a vote of 352 to 60 on July 25.
"People outside the West simply don't get it," Rehberg said. "Our states have had years of drought, we have wildfires threatening thousands of acres, and they stripped the bill of much-needed funds to fight fires that are burning right now as we speak. You know, there's a reason we keep talking about drought, forest management, and planning ahead - it's wildfires, which threaten lives and devastate the local economy."
The money was part of a $983.6 million spending bill, HR 2859, which would replenish Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) disaster aid accounts. The legislation would provide immediate relief because it is intended to make up for shortfalls in fiscal year 2003, which ends on Sept. 30. Congress usually provides most of the money before the fiscal year begins.
Because the House passed the bill immediately before leaving town, senators cannot change it and have it become law before they leave at the end of this week. When the House and Senate pass different measures they have a conference to reconcile the differences. Because the House is not in session, that conference cannot take place until September. The same exact bill must be passed by both the House and Senate and signed by the president to become law.
Before the House voted on the measure, Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., urged them to include the money for fighting wildfires.
"In Montana, both sides of Glacier National Park are on fire, and we're headed for a 'perfect storm' situation," Burns said. "We cannot wait on this important issue. It is critical the House includes this specific funding to ensure we are able to manage our fires through this extremely dry season."
House leaders not only rejected Westerners' plea, but also President Bush's, by stripping the money to fight wildfires from the bill. President Bush requested $1.89 billion, including $1.55 billion for FEMA and $289 million to fight wildfires.
Both Burns and Cubin noted that because of the decision, federal agencies would have to borrow money from accounts that are intended to treat forests to reduce the threat of wildfires.
The action also came less than a week after Montana Gov. Judy Martz told a Senate committee that Montana and other Western states need more money to prevent wildfires.
"Talk about being pennywise and pound foolish," Cubin stated. "We are going to force the Forest Service to borrow money from other accounts to fight fires, including fuel reduction which can prevent some of these wildfires. While trying to save $300 million now, we're going to pay hundreds of millions more down the road by not getting out ahead of the West's fire crisis by using fuel reduction techniques."
Burns added: "We can all see the destruction these fires are causing, and it is clear we need to get funding directed towards taking care of them, rather than borrow money that will take it away from other important projects."
Rehberg was particularly steamed that the money was pulled from a bill that aims to provide relief for all sorts of natural disasters.
"It's time the rest of Congress treated our disasters the same way they treat hurricanes, tornadoes and floods," Rehberg said.
