NDAA
The Case of Private Rights Massacre
Absurd and Suicidal Leadership
By Stephen L. Wilmeth
My friend
Myles Culbertson remains a disgusted democrat.
In
discussions over the past several years, I must admit I have given him a tough
time regarding his political affiliation. The basis for our friendship,
however, is not predicated on absolutes. Rather, the allegiance to our families
and our industry, Agriculture, gives us ample common ground. More often than
not, we agree on the fundamentals of that bond. The sanctity of family and
private property rights allows us to emerge from any debate to stand united. On
that basis, our friendship endures.
The matter
of the idiocy of the pending National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), though,
draws attention to the vacuum between Myles and the Republican Party. It came
to light in a spontaneous remark.
“Every time I think about changing
affiliation I am reminded of why I don’t,” he once said. “I look at a republican
and ask myself why I would want to be one of those!”
More than a few of us have been
asking ourselves … the same question.
NDAA
To the political skeptic yet the
unbending Constitutional devotee, the measure to fund this nation’s defense should
be limited to military operations. That would necessarily include a package of
tanks, a submarine or two, a number of equipped combat teams, the allocation of
corrupt gratuity for clandestine operatives, worldwide catastrophe reparations,
electronic camouflaging technology, a new front sign for Ft. Bliss (in Spanish),
paper for congressional committee presentations, the recruitment of superior
coaching talent at the military academies, 7.62 brass, NightForce scopes, rules
of engagement critics, a unit train of purple hearts, billet machined actions, F-18
biofuel overhaul kits, unisex caps, meager wages, cadavers without thumb
prints, portable mosques, a warehouse of Starbucks coffee, 8,232,001 miscellaneous
items, and toilet paper.
What actually came out of the Armed
Services panels of both chambers was a package negotiated by those bastions of
military nemeses, the leadership of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources and
House Natural Resources committees. NDAA has been morphed into an omnibus bill
that includes the noted .308 brass along with an environmental dream of immense
proportions.
In a hypocritical announcement of
bipartisanship, even Doc Hastings (R-WA) is proclaiming victory. “The agreement
offers a balanced approach to public land management, providing opportunities
for new job creation and energy and mineral production, while simultaneously
protecting special areas”, he said.
He said nothing, though, about whether the United States
would be prepared to fight the next dozen world conflicts. Combine that with
what others have divulged and this matter must worry us all.
To the hinterlands
We didn’t expect to face this fight
on this front. We thought we could trust Representative Hastings and Senator Inhofe
(R-OK), ranking member of Senate Armed Services Committee.
The problem is those of us in the
hinterlands have come to know what the terms “balanced approach” and “protecting
special places” actually imply. Those are code words signifying members within
our ranks are going to get hosed.
We view overlaying this omnibus
approach into a defense spending package as a cowardice leadership facade. To
exploit the funding of military needs with a concession toward more wilderness,
more agency regulations, and more restrictions on private property rights in
the West is unconscionable.
There is no balance.
Tax payers are in line for 11 more
national parks!
The nation is going to get gored
with another 250,000 acres of wilderness for the meager offset to release
26,000 acres of wilderness study areas.
Arizona
is going to be ceded the right to create jobs in the Resolution copper project
on 2,000 acres of federal land by giving up 5,000 acres of private land in a
state that needs more government land ownership like Washington needs more politicians.
Section 3023 of the bill is
actually rewriting parts of the Federal Lands Policy and Management Act (FLPMA),
the act that promised the West certain usage rights of federal lands in a
vacuum of private land ownership. In a first read through this monster bill,
there is a suggestion that ‘looks’ will be overlaid into grazing permit renewal
and transfer process. Does that mean that if somebody sells a permit it might
wind up with zero value because the ‘look’ determines cattle numbers may be
reduced or eliminated?
Martin Heinrich (D-NM) is one
senator who seeks such federal grazing elimination. Moreover, he and Tom Udall
(D-NM) are going to be rewarded in NDAA with the inclusion of another 45,000
acres of wilderness in northern New Mexico to
go along with their 575,000 acres of federal, state, and private land national
monument debacle in southern New
Mexico that couldn’t pass legislatively on its own
merit.
In fact, none of the 250,000 acres
of wilderness involved has demonstrated worthiness or it would already be law. The
more you read, the more you realize this is a continuing model of self-serving
political exploitation on the backs of our military and the West.
That point is particularly
illuminated when Paul Spitler of the Wilderness Society labels this whole
package as a wilderness …“blockbuster”.
November results
Do Republicans understand the
consequences of November?
Do they comprehend they were
sanctioned to put their money where their mouth is with the demand to lead this
nation out of an absurd and suicidal glide path toward destruction or do they
think they got elected on their looks and tedious chatter?
The signs of sincerity and capability
of doing what they promised in their campaign slogans and democratic lambasting
are starting to appear curiously and hesitatingly tentative. What many of us
have feared … the propensity for republicans to avoid conflict by annulling
political advantages when actually placed in the leadership spotlight is already
starting to be manifested.
When the news of NDAA hit the
airwaves, our anger was immediate!
How dare this congress horse trade into
another 1,648 page entanglement suggesting that it is a law of fairness and
bipartisanship. The reality is we are embarking on another example of
leadership tomfoolery that must be passed before we figure out what is in it
and what the consequences will be to our freedoms.
In short, what the hell does a defense
appropriation measure have to do with creating wilderness, rewriting the FLPMA,
ostensibly streamlining oil and gas permitting, and nominating at least 67
additional provisions in a natural resources title of measures that should
begin and end with munitions to kill our enemies?
This nation is in the throes of a
systemic private rights massacre.
If NDAA is indeed a bipartisan
victory, we can expect nothing new from this incoming republican congress. What
we are witnessing is a continuation of citizenry sacrifice for a subversive
environmental policy that has become an existential threat to the West,
specifically, and to America’s
economic base, in general.
If republicans waver and continue
on this imbecilic path… their fate will be sealed in a similar November ambush.
Stephen
L. Wilmeth is a rancher from southern New
Mexico. “America has committed to a
unilateral effort to create wilderness. This country is now feeling the affects
of a policy that can only exist on the expansion of itself.”
First, I don't like the precedent of the House agreeing to land use legislation that hasn't even had a hearing in the House.
Second, I question the timing of this agreement. Why not include the NDAA in the short-term CR and then negotiate these provisions when the Senate is controlled by the R's?
And third, this shows the R's are as guilty of package log-rolling on non-related legislation as the D's.
Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM) released the following statement on the House passage of the NDAA:
“Voting
against the NDAA today was a difficult decision for me,” said Congressman Steve
Pearce. “As a Vietnam veteran, I always look to support the military and their
families. However, the NDAA does not fully meet the needs of our troops and
grossly expands the federal footprint in the West.” “As well as
being a veteran, I am the co-chair of the Congressional Western Caucus. In this
capacity I have a responsibility to protect and fight for the West. Included
within this NDAA is a massive lands package, added at the last minute of
negotiations. Creating nearly 250,000 new acres of wilderness that will greatly
restrict multiple use on the lands, is simply unacceptable. Already extremely
disadvantaged by massive amounts of public lands, the West continues to be under
attack by environmental and special interest groups that degrade the Western way
of life. In the past year, New Mexico has seen this first hand with the
President designating a nearly 500,000-acre monument, the Organ Mountains-Desert
Peaks National Monument. While the bill does include a small allocation for
local governments through a payment system called Payments In Lieu Of Taxes
(PILT), this does little to offset the dramatic damages this package will have
to access and ranching in the West.”...