Anyone Here Have a Republican Congressman

If so then give him a call *tonight* and ask that he vote to remove
against the budget reconciliation bill until Richard Pombo's public
land giveaway is removed.

http://www.tu.org/siteapps/advocacy/...NuFmG&b=376957

http://www.bettermines.org/pombo.cfm


g.c.

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 18:37:46 -0600, George Cleveland
wrote:

If so then give him a call *tonight* and ask that he vote
against the budget reconciliation bill until Richard Pombo's public
land giveaway is removed.

http://www.tu.org/siteapps/advocacy/...NuFmG&b=376957

http://www.bettermines.org/pombo.cfm


g.c.


The Pombo proposal made it through the Rules committee, although ANWR
didn't.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...la-home-nation

The only hope to defeat the porvision is to have the entire budget
reconciliation bill defeated.


g.c.

Just heard a news report on NPR that the Senate will probably block the
bill unless the ANWR thing is put back in. The Pombo proposal might be
moot if the bill gets ripped up in conference.
I have a Red congressman, but I doubt if he would care one way or the
other, probably leaning for it. We here in Texas would probably not be
affected, since we have no Federal public lands.

Great post. Thanks for the heads up. Seems Pombo and Bush are in
cahoots with trying to ruin our nations great public lands, and in turn
the fragile coldwater fisheries we cherish.

I can't afford one.
If I were rich I might buy a couple though.

My republican congressman seems to take pride in voting against
anything that I am for. I am suggesting that we vote agains ALL
politicians that are in office now on all levels of government. "I want
a different bunch of idiots."

Big Dale

THIS ****ES ME OFF!

This was one of my biggest fears when the present administration was
elected and my fears were amplified when Gale Norton was appointed as
the Secretary of the Interior. Gale Norton (who used to serve in my home
state CO) is in favor of managing OUR public lands by the principal of
"highest and best use" ie the usage that can produce the most (often
short term)income. (She was a member of the think tank Mountain States
Legal Foundation. Do some research on the think tank to see how they/she
feels our public lands should be managed)

This case goes even beyond being managed for the "highest and best use".
The sales would be MUCH below market value.

What's especially obnoxious to me is that, in a typical sleazy political
maneuver, it's just a "little" rider that got attached to a much larger
complicated Bill without any public input.

First we get "nothing" for the land and once that land is sold, we ain't
ever getting it back.

THIS SUX!!!

Willi

Willi wrote:

THIS SUX!!!

It will be reversed when the Democrats win control of the House and the
Senate in 2006. :-)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

"Willi" wrote

Gale Norton (who used to serve in my home
state CO) is in favor of managing OUR public lands by the principal of
"highest and best use" ie the usage that can produce the most (often short
term)income.

Pombo is a 'local' rancher/developer whose major ideology is "more money in
MY pocket, **** the future" He seems to have used millions of his own
money to gain office for the specific reason of profiting on those millions
spent by changing laws ( Endangered Species Act, for one ) that were slowing
his personal efforts to destroy as much of California as possible, as fast
as possible. TRUE scum and, therefore, I'm sure Bush must love him.

Let's all wave our flags, chant a mantra about 'protecting the American
people' and then do something to screw them while they aren't looking ....

"Larry L" wrote in message
...

"Willi" wrote

Gale Norton (who used to serve in my home
state CO) is in favor of managing OUR public lands by the principal of
"highest and best use" ie the usage that can produce the most (often
short
term)income.

Pombo is a 'local' rancher/developer whose major ideology is "more money
in
MY pocket, **** the future" He seems to have used millions of his own
money to gain office for the specific reason of profiting on those
millions
spent by changing laws ( Endangered Species Act, for one ) that were
slowing
his personal efforts to destroy as much of California as possible, as fast
as possible. TRUE scum and, therefore, I'm sure Bush must love him.

Let's all wave our flags, chant a mantra about 'protecting the American
people' and then do something to screw them while they aren't looking ....

Bottomline is that the greed of this kind of scum is not usually intimidated
by anything short of physical fear.

Dave