Utah's public land stance vs Outdoor Retailer Show

Southern Elk said:
Good article. It says they lost at least half a billion dollars. Also, they were about to expand from 2 shows per year to 5. It also mentions a bike show that they wanted and now have no shot at.

There will be lots of open dates to fill with something else.
Click to expand...


Haha...... here is the best part. The arrogance (and trust me, I know arrogance) of Gov Herbert....

Herbert's spokesman called the retailers' demands "offensive" and reflected "gross ingratitude," and refused.
Click to expand...


My guess is that someone calls the Church to get involved. This does not make Utah look good.


.
 
didn't read all the comments on this thread so if this has been put out there please ignore and am just throwing this out there for comment...what about having the expo and all it's exhibitors stay in UT to deliver the message about public lands? Would that be more constructive than a boycott or not?
 
Nice thought, but a majority of the "public" in Utah has drank the Kool-Aid of Noel, Peay, Herbert, Ivory, Chaffetz, and Bishop. The people in Utah will not provide any form of cover for anyone, or anything to do with opposing PLT. I would suggest that a majority of the public there is likely in favor it. One step further, if they keep re-electing the assholes that represent them and support PLT, look in the mirror for the problem. Good on the OR industry, leave nothing but a dust trail behind you leaving Utah. Make Utah and its delegation outcasts, an Island of misfit toys. Carry your support of Public Lands to a State where educating people about the importance of public lands, and keeping public lands in public hands will do some good. Utah is not that place.

Its not 1960 and we're not sticking it to the man over a climbing route in Yosemite, and staying in Utah is a waste of everyone's efforts to oppose PLT.

Utah's delegation will not change their minds on PLT...ever. Leave them to wallow in their own foolishness.
 
Last edited:
BuzzH said:
we're not sticking it to the man over a climbing route in Yosemite, and staying in Utah is a waste of everyone's efforts to oppose PLT.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Her analogy is laughable and other comments do nothing to address the issues in my opinion.
 
UT Legislator, Ken Ivory Doubles Down on the anti-public lands position by using his Legislative Chairmanship to use UT Taxpayer money for spreading his personal anti-public land ideology. Seems Ivory views the Utah General Fund as his own marketing budget.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...000-for-education-2-for-lawmakers.html?pg=all


Note that it passed the Utah House 44-25. Federalism for all. 'Spose he will be the one getting paid to teach the theology?
 
Big Fin said:
UT Legislator, Ken Ivory Doubles Down on the anti-public lands position by using his Legislative Chairmanship to use UT Taxpayer money for spreading his personal anti-public land ideology. Seems Ivory views the Utah General Fund as his own marketing budget.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...000-for-education-2-for-lawmakers.html?pg=all


Note that it passed the Utah House 44-25. Federalism for all. 'Spose he will be the one getting paid to teach the theology?
Click to expand...

Interesting place to find the money for this endeavor...wonder if Fielder will be following his lead on this too?

Ivory said the bill would not be funded with new revenue but instead through a reallocation of savings found by the Natural Resources Appropriations Subcommittee, which he co-chairs.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Ben Lamb said:
Funny thing: Montana has that same concept being heard on the 23rd.

http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2017/billpdf/SB0295.pdf
Click to expand...


What will be the next religion is she going to try get the state to pay for its indoctrination?

Having her political teeth kicked in over State Transfer, the new marketing scheme is "Federalism." Don't suppose she is using her Senate position to promote the Utah American Land Council agenda. And people wonder why Montana Legislature is such a circus show at times. Pretty much to be expected with so many of these screwballs and wingnuts being promoted in primaries by the out-of-state interests with all the money, and then the bought-and-paid-for leadership of the Republican Party appoints folks like her to Chair Committees and be on their Legislative Leadership team.

Idgits!

65th Legislature SB0295.01
1 SENATE BILL NO. 295
2 INTRODUCED BY J. FIELDER
3
4 A BILL FOR AN ACT ENTITLED: "AN ACT PROVIDING FOR FEDERALISM TRAINING FOR LEGISLATIVE
5 EMPLOYEES; AND PROVIDING THAT CERTAIN LEGISLATIVE BRANCH EMPLOYEES ARE REQUIRED TO
6 COMPLETE FEDERALISM TRAINING."
7
8 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:
9
10 NEW SECTION. Section 1. Course on federalism required. (1) In order to enhance certain state
11 employees' ability to identify, prevent, or aid in repealing federal encroachment into state jurisdiction, each
12 attorney and each professional session and interim committee staffer employed by the legislative services division
13 is required to take a course or seminar on the principles of federalism at least once in every 2-year period. The
14 course or seminar must include a minimum of 4 hours of instruction, training, or study on two or more of the topics
15 in subsection (2). A qualifying course or seminar may be taken online or in person. A federalism course offered
16 at no cost to the public developed in conjunction with a state legislature meets the requirements as long as two
17 or more of the topics in subsection (2) are addressed.
18 (2) Course topics may include:
19 (a) fundamental principles of federalism;
20 (b) the spheres of sovereignty as they apply to state and federal jurisdictions;
21 (c) the limits of Article VI, clause 2, of the United States constitution, commonly referred to as the
22 supremacy clause;
23 (d) the sovereignty, supremacy, and jurisdiction of the individual states, including their police powers;
24 (e) the history and practical implementation of the 10th amendment to the United States constitution;
25 (f) the enumerated powers, authority, and limits on the authority of the federal government as found in
26 the United States constitution;
27 (g) methods of evaluating a federal law in the context of the principles of federalism;
28 (h) how and when challenges should be made to a federal law, act, or regulation on the basis of
29 federalism;
30 (i) the separate and independent powers of the state that serve as a check on the federal government;
- 1 - Authorized Print Version - SB 295
65th Legislature SB0295.01
1 (j) first amendment rights and freedoms contained within the constitution; and
2 (k) any other issues related to federalism with an emphasis on the state's most advantageous legal
3 position.
4
5 NEW SECTION. Section 2. Codification instruction. [Section 1] is intended to be codified as an
6 integral part of Title 5, and the provisions of Title 5 apply to [section 1].
7 - END -
Click to expand...
 
These people are both stupid and scary. Don't know how this will all shake out but in the end but I gotta believe good will triumph over evil, correct?
 
SB-295- Montanny's charter for re-edjufication camps. If you're gonna play in the legislature you need some book learnin', boy. Rally for support of this bill next week. Wear pink camo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Oak
State Land Board Outdoor Recreation Business Plan
Replies
7
Views
813
LuketheDog
LuketheDog
O
Utah CD2 special election (Chris Stewart’s district)
Replies
2
Views
468
Aperventure
A
K
Does Montana want to bid for the Outdoor Retailer Show convention?
Replies
5
Views
1K
Irrelevant
Irrelevant
M
Patagonia, North Face on the front lines and taking the fight to them
Replies
14
Views
3K
TheNorthStar
TheNorthStar
M
Outdoor Retailer Show Leaving Utah
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
ben27706
ben27706

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,126
Messages
1,947,980
Members
35,034
Latest member
Waspocrew

Share this page

Back
Top