List of Politicians Who Support Public Lands

[Southern Elk]

Is there a list anywhere that shows our current Congressmen and Senators that support public lands and are against transfer/sale? I've seen the questions asked before, if any organization is issuing scores, such as the NRA does with 2nd Amendment support and I believe the answer was no.

If the list doesn't exist, maybe we can start one here? If you know the stance on certain politicians, post it up. BHA sent out an email the other day with the following quote "We are encouraged that President Elect Trump, along with some courageous House and Senate Republicans, have broken from their party on this issue." Do we know who these courageous Republicans are? I would like to send them a letter of encouragement.

I saw where Randy posted on FB that his Rep. Zinke was a Republican who supports public lands. Can we name others?

Please don't let this thread turn into fighting and bickering like so many others. Now is a time where all sportsmen should come together, regardless of political orientation, to support this important cause.

 

[Southern Elk]

Here's a link that BHA sent out yesterday to email your Congressmen and Senators regarding the two bills that are currently in committee, that would transfer lands in Nevada. If you haven't done so, please take the time to send this email stating your opposition.

http://www.backcountryhunters.org/s...tm_medium=email&utm_source=backcountryhunters

 

[Southern Elk]

So I guess there is no list of who is for and against it? Surely organizations like BHA and TRCP keep track of such things.

If you know where your reps stand, please post it up. Both my Senators and my Representative are Republican. I have sent them several emails voicing my opposition. I have never gotten a clear answer on where they stand. My best guess is that they would tow the party line when it came time to vote.

If any of these bills come up for vote, we will have a scorecard to look at.

 

[Nameless Range]

Sometimes it's not clear. But this thread is a good idea. Here's my take for Montana when it comes to whether we can count on our Senators and Representative.



Montana

Reliably Against Transfer: Senator Jon Tester
Probably Against Transfer: Congressman Ryan Zinke
I'm not holding my breath: Senator Steve Daines

 

[hank4elk]

NM S-D Heinrich -Pro Public lands & wise use of said lands.
NM S-D Udall - Pro Public lands.
NM Rep-R Pearce - Pro-Sale & or Transfer for exploitation of said lands.

 

[Paul in Idaho]

Good question. I have searched for the same type of reference, and haven't found anything.

 

[shootbrownelk]

All I know is that both our Wyoming senators are totally behind the transfer. As is our newly elected lone representative....Ms. Liz Cheney, the daughter of the Draft Dodger Dick Cheney.

 

[smarandr]

Idaho:
Senator Risch - pro transfer
Senator Crapo - likely pro transfer, but I can't pin him down. He did vote for the Murkowski amendment which sets up an account for the sale of public lands.
Rep Simpson - says he's not for transfer
Rep Labrador -

 

[Sawtooth]

Idaho House of Rep. Mike Simpson is pro public lands.
Labrador not so much.

 

[Ben Lamb]

The list, unfortunately, is pretty easily segregated by one important factor: party affiliation.

There are some outliers like Simpson and to a lesser extent, Zinke (supports the Labrador Bill).

It's not enough to simply look at transfer either. Look at votes on budgets, specific conservation plans like the sage-grouse efforts, etc. You have to take the whole of it, not just one or two issues, as important as they are.

 

[Zach]

The list, unfortunately, is pretty easily segregated by one important factor: party affiliation.

There are some outliers like Simpson and to a lesser extent, Zinke (supports the Labrador Bill).

It's not enough to simply look at transfer either. Look at votes on budgets, specific conservation plans like the sage-grouse efforts, etc. You have to take the whole of it, not just one or two issues, as important as they are.

Assuming you mean all issues, not just those directly related to hunting? Even then, it's all relative to your beliefs.

 

[u1299]

The list, unfortunately, is pretty easily segregated by one important factor: party affiliation.

There are some outliers like Simpson and to a lesser extent, Zinke (supports the Labrador Bill).

It's not enough to simply look at transfer either. Look at votes on budgets, specific conservation plans like the sage-grouse efforts, etc. You have to take the whole of it, not just one or two issues, as important as they are.

I'm gonna make a comment here that hopefully doesn't get me in trouble but I think it needs to be said because it's the truth and Ben just touched on it concerning party affiliation. I won't even mention which party consistently supports a transfer and which one doesn't because anyone with an ounce of common sense already knows that. If you're one of those who doesn't subscribe to party affiliation but instead votes for the person with no patronage to either party, and you honestly cast your vote for the supporters of our public lands, then I'm sorry but at the end of the day you voted for a majority of one party over the other, your scorecard will reflect that. The Republicans now have the Oval office, Senate and House and there seems to be mass hysteria among the public land hunters and anglers our public lands are in trouble. Your right, they are in trouble, more damn trouble than ever in our history and I fear like never before it may be to damn late to stop it.

 

[DRAFTSTUD]

No U1299 that does not reflect a scorecard. You cannot vote in a crook and say I have done my responsibility to maintain our Public Lands when you cannot say what the Losing party would have done with the Pay to Play policies of the Clintons. John

 

[IlliniFIre]

For what it's worth, Illinois Sen. Durbin (D) has been supportive when I have sent emails. Same with Sen. Kirk (R), but he lost his reelection bid. Rep. Davis (R) appears to support as well. My current rep, Rep LaHood (R) has given very politician like answers. He also sits on the Public Land Subcommittee so I have been frequently sending emails. It may be time to upgrade to phone calls.

 

[Southern Elk]

For what it's worth, Illinois Sen. Durbin (D) has been supportive when I have sent emails. Same with Sen. Kirk (R), but he lost his reelection bid. Rep. Davis (R) appears to support as well. My current rep, Rep LaHood (R) has given very politician like answers. He also sits on the Public Land Subcommittee so I have been frequently sending emails. It may be time to upgrade to phone calls.

Looks like Kirk was replaced by Tammy Duckworth a Democrat who was the former US Rep for District 8. Any idea where she stands? Hopefully with the rest of the Dems.

 

[IlliniFIre]

I can't say for sure on Duckworth. If I were to guess, she will probably follow whatever the Chicago machine has to say.

 

[joelhunter]

Todd Young (R) in Indiana made it clear that he supports National Parks and Wilderness, but believes too much land in the west is tied up federally. He didn't comment directly on the bills I asked about, but expressed support for a bill sponsored by Labrador.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Assuming you mean all issues, not just those directly related to hunting? Even then, it's all relative to your beliefs.

I was referring to the myriad of land management & conservation issues, nothing else.

 

[CwNova]

Here is a response from Senator John McCain (R) Arizona:

"As you know, Arizona is home to some of the world's most beautiful natural scenery. Every year millions of tourists from around the world travel to my home state to marvel at the Grand Canyon or to enjoy our many hunting, fishing, and hiking opportunities. A great deal of outdoor recreation and economic development occurs on federal land, which generates many millions of dollars in economic activity and supports many thousands of jobs in Arizona each year.

In Arizona, the federal government owns over 40% of the land, including national parks, forests, and wildlife refuges. Unfortunately, the expanding size of the federal estate and the restrictive regulations that apply to using federal property can also work against economic growth as well as environmental stewardship. For example, federal laws that restrict the Forest Service from bringing a viable timber industry to Arizona has hurt our state’s efforts to actively and responsibly thin our overgrown forests to reduce wildfire risk. As a result, wildfires have consumed over 20% of our states pine forests since 2002.

I believe we must strike a balance between managing our public lands for multiple-use, including conservation, while giving local governments more authority to foster economic activity within their boundaries. Please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind when legislation affecting federal land is considered in the Senate."


$*)Q!#@$ Idiot

 

[u1299]

No U1299 that does not reflect a scorecard. You cannot vote in a crook and say I have done my responsibility to maintain our Public Lands when you cannot say what the Losing party would have done with the Pay to Play policies of the Clintons. John

No Draftstud you're right, I can't say with 100% certainty what she would have done, only about 99.9% based on my observation of where Democrats have traditionally stood over the last 40 years of my life where I've actually been paying attention to this issue.