President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Ted Harvey

20%↑

15%↑

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Doug Bruce

20%

20%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
January 09, 2017 12:20 PM UTC

Western Slope Seethes Over Public Lands Selloff Vote

  • 20 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Rep. Scott Tipton (R).

Jason Auslander at the Aspen Times follows up on last week’s surprise vote in Congress to make the transfer of federal lands easier–an issue that caused fireworks in last year’s CD-3 race when incumbent GOP Rep. Scott Tipton insisted he would never be part of any such thing:

A move by Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives earlier this week to make it easier to transfer federal public lands to states is causing consternation in the Roaring Fork Valley.

“I think it’s corrupt,” said Pitkin County Commissioner Rachel Richards. “It’s robbery. They’re robbing the public of land forever.”

Will Roush, conservation director of the Carbondale-based Wilderness Workshop, agreed.

“(I’m feeling) disappointment, and maybe a little bit of surprise,” Roush said. “(House Natural Resources Committee Chairman) Rob Bishop and House Republicans are against public lands, but to see it happen so quickly was a surprise.” [Pols emphasis]

This issue was explored in detail in an excellent reader diary last Friday. In the case of Rep. Scott Tipton, the issue of selling off federal lands is particularly salient after his Democratic opponent Gail Schwartz tried hard to make it an issue in their campaign last year. Tipton pushed back mightily on the suggestion that he has supported selling off public lands, and the press more or less sided with him:

Tipton told the Herald that he has always supported preservation of public lands and keeping those lands public.

“She’s not telling the truth,” Tipton said of Schwartz’s accusations. “Not once have I said selling off public lands, sponsored or written legislation to sell off public lands.”

Today, Rep. Tipton’s campaign-trail assurances stand out in harsh relief:

Roush also pointed out that Tipton was attacked by his November general election opponent Gail Schwartz for being anti-public lands. Tipton forcefully pushed back against the criticism, saying he supported public lands, Roush said.

“You can’t have it both ways,” Roush said. “Either you’re an advocate for public lands or you’re not.” [Pols emphasis]

Actions, after all, speak louder than words. The issue of selling off public lands wasn’t at the forefront in every congressional race, but in Tipton’s case it was. And Tipton made statements that were belied by one of his very first votes in the new Congress.

No matter how politically safe Tipton feels right now, that’s not very advisable.

Comments

20 thoughts on “Western Slope Seethes Over Public Lands Selloff Vote

    1. Devaluing them by not accounting for the …say mineral values… owned by the American people before transferfing or selling them off does the opposite. You might actually educate yourself on the subject at hand before barfing up a nonsensical talking point, per the Twain maxim of opening your mouth and removing all doubt. 

    2. Yeah, I know.  Isn't it bad enough that Russia interfered in our elections?  Now we need them cornering the international energy markets too?!?! 

       

      BTW, still waiting for your Epic Diary praising Trump for singlehandedly taking on his party over the Ethics commission.  I know, PP already wrote one, but I bet you could do better.  Write that diary Moddy.  It'll be EPIC!!!! 

  1. Used to work in the O&G business as an explorationist.  Except for National Parks, etc., public lands are available for minerals and timber use.  Selling them off does no one any good except the wealthy folks who buy them.  Expect that even the Bundy's would find that with Tipton's sort of deals they'll find themselves bumped off the land, and not even find it available for hunting, hiking or other recreations. 

    And…once you sell it off….it ain't coming back.   Permanent damages by a wayward president and congress.

      1. In this instance, it's clear that Moderatus indeed does not have a clue. Perhaps he should put pressure on the oil & gas industry which continues to sit on thousands of acres of undeveloped energy leases. The total of leased and undeveloped acreage in Colorado is 271,191. 91% of BLM land in Colorado is open for leasing. The Energy Act of 2005 requires the BLM to do a quarterly lease sale of parcels nominated by industry. 

        As for using the land, outdoor recreation does a very good job of that, generating over $13 billion dollars in economic activity; about a billion in tax revenue to state and local governments; and supports over 110,000 jobs.

        "Locking them up" and similar commentary is a typical refrain from the oil & gas industry which pathetically claims to not have access to public lands. More fake news for Moderatus to ponder.

    1. The Bundy bunch just wanted their free stuff. That's what they mean when they talk about "FREEDOM!". Free Stuff. Bundy (dad's) deal was that he wanted to graze cattle on public land from 1993 to 2014 without paying grazing fees. . Then Bundy (son) & Co. deal was that he wanted to graze cattle,  hunt and fish in a wildlife refuge, but didn't want to pay hunting license fees or refrain from killing endangered species. The Hammonds, who owned land adjacent to the refuge, also shot at hunters on the public lands, and torched some buildings.

      It's almost like the nutcase right wants FREE STUFF!!!!

      The difference is only in degree and number of places left of the decimal point. Tipton's oil and gas buddies want to drill, baby, drill, making private millions on public lands for pennies on the dollar, so again with the FREE STUFF!! The rednecks just don't want to obey no fukin' gubmint lawz that get in the way of their obtaining their FREE STUFF!!!

       

      Voyageur, if you read this, consider it a tribute.

        1. Yeah.  Don't want to pay for healthcare?  Don't get sick.  And if you want education, you are just an elitist snob.   If you want either, you deserve to pay through the nose dfor them.  It's not like they're important.

              1. MJ: the actuality is that the oil & gas industry does pay substantial royalties to the states in form of severance taxes. You may be thinking of hard rock mining which, thanks to the antiquated Mining Act of 1872, pays no royalties to the US Treasury or states.

                One reason why Colorado now has a state budget problem is the huge drop in severance taxes paid by O & G, due to the large decline in prices, and production, caused by the energy glut and world-wide market conditions (the Saudis continuing to pump all out to try and take market share from US based shale O & G producers).

                1. …and the fact that U.S. producers also continue to pump all out, because they borrowed money from banks instead of investors to fund their activities. Banks have to be repaid, investors not so much. Somehow these oil companies thought that, this time, the price of oil would never drop. 

                2. due to the large decline in prices, and production, caused by the energy glut and world-wide market conditions  

                   

                  Colorado has always shorted ourselves on mineral severance taxes. Your statement above is somewhat misleading. Yes, prices are down, but our fair state has given the O&G industry (exclusively) billions in tax subsidies through the "Ad Valorem" tax credit, in which they can directly deduct their property taxes from their severance tax bill. This leaves our severance tax rate at less than 2%….the lowest in the Rocky Mountains.

                  I'm sure you already know this, but just forgot to mention it.

                  The jackass who keeps howling about “Free Stuff” believes it is only “free stuff” if it is given to someone who actually needs it.. If it is given to industry, it is a “subsidy”….not free stuff at all.

                  1. You are correct in saying that our severance tax rate is the lowest; and far too low in my opinion. Yes, I forgot to mention that. Was in a hurry.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

208 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!