WASHINGT0N, D.C. – Some days, even a U.S. Senator can’t catch a break.
Take Utah’s senior senator Mike Lee, for example.
On the heels of a recent brouhaha over Lee’s allegedly inappropriate comments about political violence in Minnesota during the weekend of June 14, he ignited another local firestorm by suggesting a plan that would sell off federal property in Logan Canyon and elsewhere in the West.
Under fire from the right and the left, Lee is now attempting to save face while carefully walking back the public lands proposal that he inserted into the reconciliation bill now being considered in the Senate.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) is fighting back against criticism from the right and the left of his proposed plan to sell-off public lands in the West with Facebook posts like this one that seek to clarify myths about his 11-page proposal inserted into the Senate version of the federal budget reconciliation bill (Image courtesy of Facebook).
In a posting on the internet platform X on Monday evening, Lee said he is removing all U.S. Forest Service land from his previous proposal.
The senator also promised to significantly reduce the amount of Bureau of Land Management property involved in the bill, saying that only BLM property within 5 miles of population centers would be eligible for sale under his proposal.
Finally, he pledged to protect farmers, ranchers and recreationists.
“They come first,” he added to the online post.
Originally, Lee had sought to include a “mandatory disposal” provision in the Senate version of the reconciliation bill, which would have put 2 to 3 million acres of public land up for sale in Utah, Wyoming and 9 other western states.
That provision, according to Lee, would help reduce the federal deficit and supply property for a new affordable housing boom in the West.
It seems unlikely, however, that the changes Lee announced to his proposal on Monday will do much to mollify the individuals and organizations that are arrayed against his land sell-off plan.
Environmental and conservation groups that have already voiced opposition to Lee’s proposal include the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, the Center for Biological Diversity, Western Priorities, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, the Idaho Conservation League, the Conservatives for Responsible Stewardship, the American Conservation Coalition, the Wyoming Wildlife Federation, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership and the Mule Deer Foundation.
Numerous organizations representing the interest of hunters and outdoor enthusiasts also oppose Lee’s plan.
Rather than sparking a housing boom in the West, these groups warn that Lee’s proposal would more likely lead to more high-end development.
They also express concerns about negative impacts on the environment, recreation, water quality and wildlife.
Several influential senators from western states have also reactively negatively to Lee’s proposal, including Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO); GOP Senators Mike Crapo and Jim Risch of Idaho; and Republican Senators Steve Daines and Tim Sheehy of Montana.
Unfortunately for Lee, the Senate’s parliamentarian agrees with those criticisms.
Elizabeth MacDonald ruled on June 23 that Lee’s 11-page mandatory disposal section didn’t comply with Senate rules requiring reconciliation measures to focus on budgetary concerns only.
Under Senate rules, Lee’s proposal would therefore require 60 votes to sustain it, rather than a simple majority.