PDA

View Full Version : Senate boosts wilderness protection across US



stephanie
01-11-2009, 06:23 PM
By MATTHEW DALY, Associated Press Writer Matthew Daly, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 22 mins ago

… WASHINGTON – In a rare Sunday session, the Senate advanced legislation that would set aside more than 2 million acres in nine states as wilderness. Majority Democrats assembled more than enough votes to overcome GOP stalling tactics in an early showdown for the new Congress.

Republicans complained that Democrats did not allow amendments on the massive bill, which calls for the largest expansion of wilderness protection in 25 years. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and other Democrats said the bill — a holdover from last year — was carefully written and included measures sponsored by both Republicans and Democrats.

By a 66-12 vote, with only 59 needed to limit debate, lawmakers agreed to clear away procedural hurdles despite partisan wrangling that had threatened pledges by leaders to work cooperatively as the new Obama administration takes office. Senate approval is expected later this week. Supporters hope the House will follow suit.

"Today is a great day for America's public lands," said the bill's sponsor, Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M. "This big, bipartisan package of bills represents years of work by senators from many states, and both parties, in cooperation with local communities, to enhance places that make America so special."

Snip:
Besides new wilderness designations, the bill would designate the childhood home of former President Bill Clinton in Hope, Ark., as a national historic site and expand protections for dozens of national parks, rivers and water resources.

read it all here..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090111/ap_on_go_co/congress_wilderness

Abbey Marie
01-11-2009, 07:01 PM
I'm happy about this. The Dems did at least one good thing.

stephanie
01-11-2009, 07:07 PM
I'm not sure how I feel about this..for starters they did it in a SNEAKY way, without letting the Republicans get in on it, and second, it's not their land to take..

what's going to stop them from taking our land that we own??

Abbey Marie
01-11-2009, 07:12 PM
I see what you are saying. Thanks to the SC, that's already happening and I don't think it's very popular. But that is for economic development and it seems to be applied very unfairly. I see wilderness set-asides as a different issue, and I hope that it is treated as such. I am a huge lover of wilderness and the preservation of habitat, so this one is a positive for me.

The 66-12 vote must include lots of Republicans.

red states rule
01-11-2009, 07:16 PM
I see what you are saying. Thanks to the SC, that's already happening and I don't think it's very popular. But that is for economic development and it seems to be applied very unfairly. I see wilderness set-asides as a different issue, and I hope that it is treated as such. Ia ma huge lover of wildrness and the preservations of habitat, so this one is a positive for me.

The 66-12 vote must include lots of Republicans.

alot of Republicans voted for the $7 trillion in bailouts also Abbey

Like Steph, I need to see what the details are. Right now I am wary of anything this Congress passes into law

stephanie
01-11-2009, 07:18 PM
I see what you are saying. Thanks to the SC, that's already happening and I don't think it's very popular. But that is for economic development and it seems to be applied very unfairly. I see wilderness set-asides as a different issue, and I hope that it is treated as such. Ia ma huge lover of wildrness and the preservations of habitat, so this one is a positive for me.

The 66-12 vote must include lots of Republicans.

I'll have to look to see if I can find on how the vote was..

I'm very big on nature and wilderness also, but I just don't want our government overstepping their bounds, which it seems like they do, more and more..:cheers2:

PostmodernProphet
01-11-2009, 07:25 PM
isn't this the bill we discussed in another thread, that barred oil production in huge areas?......

stephanie
01-11-2009, 07:29 PM
isn't this the bill we discussed in another thread, that barred oil production in huge areas?......

you can almost bet that is the "main purpose" behind it.
from the article..

Coburn and several other Republicans complained that bill was loaded with pet projects and prevented development of oil and gas on federal lands, which they said would deepen the nation's dependence on foreign oil.


Environmental groups said the bill set the right tone for the new Congress.

"By voting to protect mountains and pristine wildlands, Congress is starting out on the right foot," said Christy Goldfuss of Environment America, an advocacy group. "This Congress is serious about protecting the environment and the outstanding lands that Americans treasure."

red states rule
01-11-2009, 07:31 PM
you can almost bet that is the "main purpose" behind it.
from the article..

Coburn and several other Republicans complained that bill was loaded with pet projects and prevented development of oil and gas on federal lands, which they said would deepen the nation's dependence on foreign oil.

With gas prices falling, why not set aside more land where the oil is located? Lets depend on foreign oil, OPEC cutting protection, and war in the ME to drive prices back up - and slap on an increase in the gas tax as well

Classact
01-11-2009, 09:25 PM
I'm happy about this. The Dems did at least one good thing.You really need to read this http://townhall.com/Columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2009/01/10/harry_reid%e2%80%99s_land_grab

Classact
01-11-2009, 09:28 PM
With gas prices falling, why not set aside more land where the oil is located? Lets depend on foreign oil, OPEC cutting protection, and war in the ME to drive prices back up - and slap on an increase in the gas tax as wellThis is the left paying back the envirowackos and trial lawyers... 2 million dollars per salmon stream reclamiation, senic waterways that prohibit energy shipment uses... damn humans can't even ride a bike on this sacred land.