Republicans About to Screw Up Mining Bill
Well, one Republican is.
Fitzgerald and eight other Republicans who joined together to back the Assembly bill said it’s been vetted publicly and “now is the time to move this reasonable legislation forward so we can create thousands of mining jobs in Wisconsin.”
Schultz said he can’t vote for the Assembly bill because it doesn’t set out any money to handle catastrophic disasters the mine might cause and there’s no reason the state needs money from the ore tax.
I’d have to agree. Scott Fitzgerald is screwing the pooch on this. They have until March 15th to get this done. I don’t see what the panic is for something that’s not going to create any jobs for 5 years. He’ll wind up not getting this passed and there won’t be any jobs created because the mining company will pull out.
Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald hand-picked the mining committee, but he caught members by surprise Wednesday when he threw his support behind the Assembly bill.
“We can’t allow the clock to run out on a project that could mean a generation of good-paying jobs and revitalize an entire local economy,” Fitzgerald said in a statement.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 0908 hrs
Ever been to Globe AZ or the Climax mine in Co?
That aside, domestic mineral or energy harvesting (with the possible exception of coal) is not in our best long term interest at this time.
Like China, we should be securing those resources from sources they may not always be readily available to us.
We need to refresh our concept of scarcity and the meaning of the word finite.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1011 hrs
Ever been to Globe AZ or the Climax mine in Co?
Nope, but I was at a mineral mine in New Mexico, and it was fascinating.
We need to refresh our concept of scarcity and the meaning of the word finite.
Why? And who gets to decide? You?
Also, this is an iron mine. Last time I checked, most of the iron ore used in this country comes from exotic places like Michigan and Minnesota.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1037 hrs
John Torinus has a spot on commentary about this.
So, the politics surrounding this mine pivot around two deeply important priorities in Wisconsin: the need to rebuild the state’s damaged job base and its citizens’ reverence for precious lands and waters. Given the passion and complexity surrounding the proposed mine in the Penokee Range, an orderly and transparent political process should be paramount if consensus is to be reached.
The process so far has been anything but orderly and transparent.
Not surprisingly then, the bill lacks anything resembling consensus. Consider the ways in which the process was set up for polarity vs. consensus:
• The bill was put together behind closed doors by Republican assemblymen, some anonymous, with input from Gogebic and WMC. Democrats, Bad River native Americans and environmentalists had no voice in the draft. That one-sided process led to their outright opposition to the bill as proposed.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1139 hrs
Amazing how Obama and Scott Walker continue to dominate the discussion of our future.
We are a major tipping point here. If we don’t approve things like this mine or the Keystone pipeline, we are basically telling America that we don’t believe in blue collar jobs anymore, nor a lower cost of energy and minerals that would help the US competitively.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1201 hrs
Schultz was a sure vote for a Senate bill that was 96% of what the Mining company wanted and was created in an open transparent and standard way. But giving away that 5% was too much for WMC and Gogebic Taconite so they called in their ideologically frenzied vassal Mr. Fitzgerald who pulled his little stunt worthy of the Kremlin under Brezhnev. But the amazing thing about these guys is how damn greedy they get….so greedy that they’re about to lose the enchilada and be set back procedurally much further than they would have with the Senate bill. Schultz won’t vote for it now….he’s an honorable guy with a respect for the public institution and its process and procedure that far exceeds his fear or fealty to the Senate’s Little Napolean. Besides, he used tobe Majority Leader, he represents a Dem-leaning district, and he’s already bucked Fitzgerald on the redistricting date switcheroo that Fitzgerald tried to pull thereby setting off 4 more recalls. Does that sound like someone to screw with in order to make your corporate overlords happy?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1212 hrs
The Senate bill was an absolute disaster, creating a new mineral tax that was intended as a “poison pill” to kill the bill. It was the right move to have a vote on the Assembly bill and let everyone show where they stand. And let’s face facts, Schultz is a Democrat and might as well switch parties.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1228 hrs
intended as a “poison pill” to kill the bill
I need clarification on this. Killed by who?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1237 hrs
“And let’s face facts, Schultz is a Democrat and might as well switch parties.”
I’m sure Mark Miller would welcome the opportunity to be Majority Leader now instead of after the recalls this summer. And Schultz would STILL win his district.
Papa Fitz screws around all session, pushes this bill off, then decides he doesn’t have time to let his own members work through the bill in public, so he tries to ham-handedly ram it through his own house. Maybe this thing wouldn’t have withered on the vine had Republican leadership actually starting moving on it a year ago.
I guess democracy is less fun when you have to compromise.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on February 16, 2012 at 1303 hrs
That “poison pill” nonsense is just a talking (screaming?) point of the Milwaukee right-wing talk radio foaming-at-the-mouth crowd. Anything that’s not exactly as WMC wants it is unionistic socialism. There was a time not long ago that Republicans (like Warren Knowles, Lee Dreyfus, Thompson, Scott McCallum) weren’t such bitter dead-enders when it came to the environment. Wisconsin is special is this regard and the right is playing with fire if it thinks that venomous anti-environmentalism is a winning issue in this state….perhaps the Waukesha-Ozaukee crowd doesn’t care, but I assure the rest of the state Dem and Republican does care and deeply. There are those who oppose the mine and those who might tentatively support it with careful thought and safeguards and then there’s the crowd that mocks and taunts and parrots the Mark Bellings and Charlie Sykes of the world. I would that the first two categories make up the vast majority of the state. You are forgetting that this is the state of John Muir and Aldo Leopold and Gaylord Nelson and yes, Republican Warren Knowles.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1310 hrs
Hyperbole much, wis-ite?
Face it: this bill is about symbolism as much as anything else. I think the Repubs have much to gain or lose depending on how this plays out.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1337 hrs
This is all about the arrogance of power. Why is it so necessary to
cram through a bill that:
1 taxes based on profit rather than tonnage mined. Profit can be massaged out of existence pretty readily as evidenced by any IRS tax filing?
2.gives little of the tax proceeds to the local governments who will have to bear the brunt of infrastructure necessary for the mining operation?
3. totally ignored the rights of the indians under existing treaties that guarantees the feds will shut this down without significant involvement of the tribes in the process?
4. rules out any contested hearing process and provides for automatic approval after a year with no provision for deadline extensions?I have to say that I am frustrated and disappointed with the flagrant disregard for process and the arrogance of power demonstrated by Senator Fitzgerald’s actions. An earlier Republican who stated the problem clearly said, “The true friend of property, the true conservative, is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man’s making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it. The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have called into being. There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will be neither a short nor easy task, but it can be done.”
It is amazing how clearly Theodore Roosevelt saw the problems we now face. But then he, like Lincoln, believed that “capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital and deserves much the higher consideration.” That is obviously not the attitude expressed in recent actions by legislatures in this state and others and we as a nation will be the worse for it.
Civility and compromise continue to be worthy goals for governance by both parties and are woefully absent now. In a few months hopefully a few Republicans will be woefully absent as well…we can only hope.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1350 hrs
Listening to the Milwaukee talk shows I see a lot of hypocrisy on the part of Republicans/Conservatives/ WI Legislature. Why is the Constitution being thrown out for “jobs”. Protecting property rights is part of the Republican party platform but are they being protected in this bill? Scanning it I do not see any protection for those mining neighbors whose property will be devalued.
Also, this is crony capitalism at its best. The bill has been written with Gogebic Taconite in the room. Come on! If there are so many great mines out there in other states then use the best of their mining bills for the Wisconsin Bill. Most likely Gogebic Taconite will sell out within a few short years, just as the sand mine in Blair, Wisconsin did - after making many “promises” . It doesn’t pass the smell test.
To the Wisconsin GOP Legislature and Governor Walker the Constitution and rights of the people should be of utmost importance making decisions.
Not rushing after “jobs” so Governor Walker looks good. (I hate to say this but I can’t think of any other reason for the Constitution and reason to be thrown out the window by Republicans/Conservatives).Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1359 hrs
It’s always funny to read RS and other left leaning types talk about compromise now when that word was never uttered when Doyle and the Dems were “ramming through” legislation. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
And for the person who asked, Kedzi is really against mining. He was exposed and is now backtracking.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1415 hrs
It’s always funny to read RS and other left leaning types talk about compromise now when that word was never uttered when Doyle and the Dems were “ramming through” legislation. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
I’m sorry, but I think us conservatives are better than that. If not, you’re just a Republican.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1419 hrs
I’m sorry, but I think us conservatives are better than that. If not, you’re just a Republican.
Posted by Pat on February 16, 2012 at 1419 hrsAnd you wonder why Obama is in office and the dems do/say whatever they want with no consequences.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1426 hrs
And you wonder why Obama is in office and the dems do/say whatever they want with no consequences.
What does that have to do with the mining bill?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1433 hrs
Pat,
So Conservatives should fight with one hand tied behind their backs, huh? It’s time to fight fire with fire and play just as dirty as the Dems do. Unless you are content with the Dems winning every battle while you hold your head high and proclaim, “at least we lost with honor!!”
But I’m glad you said what you did because it explains why the Dems can do anything and everything to get what they want and pay no price for it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1436 hrs
Pat,
So Conservatives should fight with one hand tied behind their backs? It’s time to fight fire with fire and play just as dirty as the Dems do. Unless you are content with the Dems winning every battle while you hold your head high and proclaim, “at least we lost with honor!!”
But I’m glad you said what you did because it explains why the Dems can do anything and everything to get what they want and pay no price for it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1438 hrs
Unless you are content with the Dems winning every battle while you hold your head high and proclaim, “at least we lost with honor!!”
What battle are you talking about?? Who won the last election. Who has control over the State of Wisconsin??
I’m saying conservatives are better than turning into a bunch of cry babies. It makes us look stupid.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1440 hrs
“I’m saying conservatives are better than turning into a bunch of cry babies. It makes us look stupid.”
How would passing the mining bill…ramming through on a strict, party line vote…be wrong? They won’t be able to get in through, but it’s what Doyle and the Dems did time after time.
I just advocate using the same tactics as the opposition.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1515 hrs
How would passing the mining bill…ramming through on a strict, party line vote…be wrong? They won’t be able to get in through, but it’s what Doyle and the Dems did time after time.
Because you bitched about them doing it. And now you want to do it. That’s what makes you sound childish. You wouldn’t let you’re kids getting away with rational like that. Or maybe you would.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1528 hrs
“It’s always funny to read RS and other left leaning types…”
Donated to Santorum this afternoon. I’m such a liberal!
Posted by Recess Supervisor on February 16, 2012 at 1603 hrs
The Scotties, Fitzgerald and Walker, just keep showing how much they do not get Wisconsin and its respect for process. They just don’t get that Schultz has a reverence for the process, as the past majority leader who knows how it worked to get work done, again and again. Given the right to the standard public hearings, the public would not have had to rush to the state Capitol last year and would not have had to wait hours in hallways, finally falling asleep there, starting the whole headline-grabbing protest.
Given the same due process for public hearings as the mining progresses would have won over Schultz. The Scotties are just not very skilled at this political stuff, are they? And now the Scottie Fitz got slapped down as “shameful” by a panel of primarily Republican-appointed judges for his redistricting tricks, hiding emails on how it was done. Considering how hard he fought to keep hiding those emails, they’re going to make a fool of him again—and others who foolishly followed his constant flouting of process rather than listen to wiser leaders.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1612 hrs
“Because you bitched about them doing it. And now you want to do it. That’s what makes you sound childish. You wouldn’t let you’re kids getting away with rational like that. Or maybe you would.”
Actually, I didn’t. I just said Doyle and the Dems rammed through legislation (and the lefties never whined about compromise), which they did. And I’m saying now that the GOP should do the same thing if they can. The Dems know that if you have the majority, you use it. Republicans have to do the same thing.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1641 hrs
The Dems know that if you have the majority, you use it. Republicans have to do the same thing.
And in the mean time, doing what Fitz is doing, is going to have the bill fail. The mining company will then pull out and there won’t be any jobs. That sounds like a winning tactic.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1654 hrs
Pat,
With the new mineral tax that the Senate bill added, the mining company would have pulled out, too. That’s why the it was put there…as a “poison pill.” If you’re going to lose, then take the vote and get people on record voting against job creation.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 1845 hrs
Schultz is not the only Republican in the Senate who is going to vote against this.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 2009 hrs
With the new mineral tax that the Senate bill added, the mining company would have pulled out, too.
Really? Quote your sources please.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 16, 2012 at 2036 hrs
Good comments Pat. Dems pass things with no consequences? What decade are you talking about? Obamacare? Fought tooth and nail on both Federal and State levels. I dare say they lost their majority because of it. Will Republicans in WI lose the House? If they do, it will be precisely because of their flouting of process so many times and on so many hot topics. Pat is exactly right. If Reps decide to (again) mirror the worst part of Dem behavior, how are they then distinguishable?
I want the jobs to come to WI. However, if the State throws away its own benefits like being able to reasonably tax it and gives permission for the mining company to more or less mine as they please, it sure looks like crony capitalism and that is really just another phrase for loopholes and corruption. Taxed only on profits on a multinational? That is likely just stupid.
Putting the mining company at the table and no dissenting interests screams of abuse and corruption and Reps want this to be business as usual? That is why I will never be a Republican. But thanks for perpetuating a failing system!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 0846 hrs
If other Republicans want to vote against it, let’s get them on record. Primaries are there for a reason.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 0942 hrs
Nope, but I was at a mineral mine in New Mexico, and it was fascinating.
So is a train wreck:)
Also, this is an iron mine. Last time I checked, most of the iron ore used in this country comes fAlso, this is an iron mine. Last time I checked, most of the iron ore used in this country comes from exotic places like Michigan and Minnesota.
For me, conservation of domestic resources is just common sense in light of a very uncertain future.
It is a conservative approach:)
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1032 hrs
So is a train wreck:)
Kinda like your comments on this blog.
I disagree with Pat and TUERQAS, who seem to be endorsing a race to the middle. Our elected officials should be governing, not figuring out ways to appease everyone so they can stay in power. I think they would be better off passing nothing than something watered-down.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1207 hrs
I think they would be better off passing nothing than something watered-down.
What exactly was being written into the Senate bill that was watering it down?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1358 hrs
http://m.brookfieldnow.com/blogs/communityblogs/139476743.html
A billion in punitive taxes, among others…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1511 hrs
A billion in punitive taxes, among others…
I read the actual bill, and I didn’t see anything in there written about “punitive taxes” or “among others”.
I did see an inclusion for $2 per ton of iron ore sold will go to a local impact fund to be distributed to area communities.
It’s not a deal breaker for the company. Why not have the Senate vote on the bill they drafted?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1527 hrs
Contrary to your opinion, the tax is very likely a deal breaker.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1534 hrs
Contrary to your opinion, the tax is very likely a deal breaker.
Source please?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1535 hrs
“It’s not a deal breaker for the company.”
Source?
Pat, there is an alternative site thirty minutes away in Michigan, where there will be no punitive tax.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1545 hrs
Pat, there is an alternative site thirty minutes away in Michigan, where there will be no punitive tax.
And they said they are going there if there is a $2 per ton tax?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1601 hrs
It’ll be $30,000,000.00+ per year. You can use me as your source, or you can use the brain God gave you.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1612 hrs
It’ll be $30,000,000.00+ per year. You can use me as your source, or you can use the brain God gave you.
Does this company own the iron range 30 minutes away?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 1625 hrs
You mean in Michigan where they have a specific tonnage tax?
So they’ll move 30 miles (which I’m not sure you’ve looked at a map of the proposed site and where the iron actually is not being yet mined in Michigan looks to me more than 30 miles but I’ll take your word for it, I’m not an expert.) and pay the same tax because the proposed tax in the Kedzie version was “punitive”
So you’d prefer that the people who live up there subsidize the needs of this mine with their property taxes? You’d much rather see a massive property tax hike on people north of Highway 8?These are real issues, and playing “Holier than thou” won’t solve them. What will solve them? Working with local officials, experts in the field, the company and the native tribes to come to a way to do this right.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2012 at 2359 hrs
So you’d prefer that the people who live up there subsidize the needs of this mine with their property taxes?
You appear to be a bit mixed up. Businesses subsidize communities. Not the other way around.
...and pay the same tax because the proposed tax in the Kedzie version was “punitive”
It’s not the same, not even close. The entire tax situation plays into account. Viability was calculated without the punitive tax.
I was born and raised in that area. These people want this very badly and they are very upset that politics are being played by those ‘holier than thou’. They just want the jobs….
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2012 at 0716 hrs
Total Entries: 20000
Total Comments: 134051
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 06:26 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 10:25 am
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 131
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 10:43 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).