I have certainly enjoyed over the years the spirited debates in which I have engaged with my good friend from the State of Arkansas. He is a most passionate and articulate representative of his constituents and he is certainly a credit to them. In the debate over raising grazing fees on ranchers who use the public lands, however, I find myself pining for a new subject. We have oft been down this road before. We have heard it all; about how those rotten billionaire ranchers are ripping off the American people; about how they are overgrazing and ruining the lands; about how we should have a progressive fee system that would hit some ranchers hard and leave others alone; about the inequity of rates charged for Federal versus State lands. It is all 'old hat.' Mr. President, I commend Senators Thomas, Craig, Domenici, Burns and all the others who have spoken out against this poor idea. I would be hard pressed to express my objections more cogently than they have done. Let me just underline a few concerns that those of us from Western States share with regard to this issue. And these concerns are many. Indeed, I dare say that I cannot see one virtue in this amendment. To begin with, let there be no doubt about it: This amendment is not an effort to inject fairness into public lands grazing. Rather, this is the effort of interests who want nothing more than to get private ranchers off of public lands.
Alan Simpson: “I have certainly enjoyed over the years the spirited debates in which I have engaged with my good friend from the State…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing concerns over proposed amendments to grazing fees on public lands.
Share
More from Alan Simpson
I see that we are going to have several Holman rules coming up. When the Holman rule was originally put in place years ago, it was meant to identify people who had committed crimes and we have had some of those that have been fired. It…
I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment. When we reduce spending overall, we have to make decisions. We have to make priorities. One of the things that we have tried to protect to the extent…
I have listened very carefully so far. So far I haven't heard anything that is not a policy difference. Again, I will repeat: Elections have consequences. Again, I will tell you I don't think this is constitutional. I don't believe it has…
To close. The challenge here, as I stated earlier, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle never saw a problem that they didn't think a government program could solve. Anybody that thought that we were not going to have to reduce…





