The history goes back to the beginning of the last century, essentially. Because the Federal Government owns more than half of our land, we historically received payments for essential services--schools, police and the like--that were based on timber receipts. Now that the environmental laws have changed, those funds are not there. So, as I understand it, the presentation that my colleague is making today is based on the idea that this is not about Oregon's seeking some kind of arbitrary figure that we basically would like to offer up as kind of a wish list or to try to get through because we will try to bull it through, but that it is really based on history. It is based on a historical formula that stems from the fact that the Federal Government owns most of the land. Is that essentially the kind of historical viewpoint that my colleague is trying to bring to the Senate?
Ron Wyden: “The history goes back to the beginning of the last century, essentially. Because the Federal Government owns more than…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the historical basis for federal payments to states based on land ownership and timber receipts.
Share
More from Ron Wyden
If Congress passes this bill, members will be condoning the tariff chaos of the last year and a half – and inviting more.
Congress has a responsibility to ensure that the personal health information of the tens of millions of people who rely on Medicaid is protected and that HHS and CMS comply with federal court orders.
Taxpayers cannot keep writing blank checks for a Department of Defense that repeatedly fails to account for trillions of dollars in assets.
The last thing you should have to worry about if your house burns down in a wildfire or washes away in a flood is being hit with a massive tax bill.





