A New Mining Bill? Think That Through
A few words over at Purple Wisconsin on the subject:
Given the new Democratic majority in the State Senate, and Republican Senator Dale Schultz's previous opposition, anything resembling the measure that earned its rightful deposit in the bad-bill shredder will go nowhere this year.
You will remember that the Assembly bill was written in secret with iron mine people at the table, while conservationists were not allowed through the door.
And the Ojibwe Bad River Band whose reservation, water and food supply are close to and down river from the proposed mine site near Ashland were also kept from the bill-drafting process, ignoring their unique perspective, legal rights and cultural risks.
And that an alternative measure produced by a select Senate committee was killed, along with the committee itself, by the legislative leader who appointed the committee and gave it a mission - - Senate Republican Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald.
Who then ignored scientific testimony about the proposed mine's public health threat - - "billions of gallons of sulphuric acid produced" - - as Fitzgerald pushed the bill to its 17-16 defeat.
You might want to read an interview with Schultz about how bad the original bill really was.
So: a compromise on that bill is the wrong way to go.
It's dead. Don't exhume it.
Begin an entirely honest, open, science-based and inclusive discussion with all parties on an equal footing: mining proponents, mining opponents - - and the Bad River Band, whose proximity to the proposed mine site, and sovereign, treaty-protected tribal status must be acknowledged and respected.
Not as a compromise with, or of anything, but as a validation of reality.
And start with the existing law, which has worked well balancing all geographic, economic and intrinsic interests, including the State of Wisconsin Constitutions's water-quality Public Trust Doctrine, and work from there.
8 comments:
I wish we could all agree that the process has got to start with all parties at the table and with a respectful attitude towards all. The GOP which claims to care about taxpayers, should avoid dragging us into legal battles with the tribes which will certainly result from disrespect of tribal rights. And our "divide and conquer" Governor should not be allowed to pit those who need jobs against those who treasure a clean environment.
The current system has quite obviously not "worked well" as you proclaim.
The poor system we currently have is precisely why they decided to not invest in Wisconsin with the mining operation. There were far to many hurdles to even get the ball rolling.
Lefties need to understand the simple concept of more gov't regulations = less business investment and opportunities.
I love the posts that claim all parties need to be at the table with a "respectful attitude."
...Then continues with calling him our "divide and conquer" Governor.
Hypocrisy anyone? Where is the respect you are calling for?
"The current system has quite obviously not "worked well" as you proclaim.
"
The wild rice is still growing in Ashland. The water is still potable. The rivers full of fish.
Seems to work for me.
"I love the posts that claim all parties need to be at the table with a "respectful attitude." "
Here's a hint:
if you want to legislate about something profoundly important to the northwest corner of WI, don't hold your House hearing in the southeast corner of WI. Don't schedule it so that the Senate hearing on the same bill is at the same time 2 hours drive away.
Because if you do that, people will infer that you do not have any respect for them.
Or is this too hard for you to understand, RD?
You are missing the point. The OP was calling for "respectful attitude," (there were not any qualifications on that call for respect) yet went on to be disrespectful.
My comments and those of the OP have nothing to do with the logistics of where the meetings should be held.
To RD: I'll bet you'd want some guaranteed public input and scientific review mandated for a mining application if an open pit mine were to be scoured out of a religious shrine like Holy Hill in Waukesha County, or next door to a different shrine, like Lambeau Field.
Go take a look at the Public Trust Doctrine in the state constitution and tell me why that principle shouldn't guide mining applications?
Rayguns, it's you who continues to miss the point. Holding hearings in the opposite corner of the state (far away from most of the affected parties) is the 'diss' part of 'disrespect.'
"Divide and conquer" is not a disrespectful term applied by Anonymous One to the Guv: it's simply the Guv's own words describing the Guv's own tactics. If "Divide and conquer" is such an honorable term/tactic, why do you take offense when it's used to describe the person who said it? I'd consider the term an insult if applied to me, but then I never advocated for it or spoke it. In fact, it's the antithesis of what I do think and how I operate.
RD said: "The poor system we currently have is precisely why they decided to not invest in Wisconsin with the mining operation."
Au contraire, mon frere.
GTac decided it didn't want to play by the rules already in place, called existing legislation. So it funded a few legislators' and the new guv's campaigns, had its own lawyers write rules more "fair" (to GTac, and only GTac), and then tried to jam the above down Wisconsin's throat. Meanwhile calling for "certainty."
If it's certainty that's truly needed (not just preferred), why then wouldn't -- or more likely, couldn't -- GTac guarantee a specific number of jobs, at specific annual salaries, for a guaranteed length of time, and make public which of those jobs would be actually available to Wisconsinites, especially locals with no training or experience? Then determine which provisions of the existing legislation would have to be changed or done away with in order for GTac to make X amount of profits? You know GTac has done those calculations already. Why not make them public?
Essentially, by demanding legislative changes that will affect all parts of the state, public resources that belong to the people of the state and the tribes, and the eventual cost of clean-up that will be borne by the taxpayers of the state, GTac is asking for a state hand-out to conduct its private profit-making. GTac is making Wisconsin its business partner. The people of Wisconsin, especially those in the tribes and local communities, deserve to have the entire picture, financials and all, before deciding whether to exchange short term profits for long-term environmental and public health devaluation. Only then can the electorate determine the cost/benefit analysis of its decision to allow this type of mining or not. Only then can legislators know what is the will of the people and what is truly best for Wisconsin.**
Our legislators would be wise to remember that GTac is no constituent, resident, nor even a person and once the corporation is done with Wisconsin, they'll be on to the next profit-making opportunity with little care as to what they leave behind.
**I'll guarantee that the actual picture, documented legally and presented fully, won't be as rosy as the one painted by pro-mining legislators and GTac. If that were the case, it would have already been presented.
Post a Comment