Write your governor.

Letter I wrote to my Governor: Dear Governor Mead, 
I am writing to you with deep concern for this apparent trend in the GOP to sell off public lands. Wyoming's parks and forests make our state a very special place, and to sell these jewels off to the highest bidder will cut future generations off from a rich and varied natural habitat. Please stand up to the forces that would destroy this legacy. And please let me know of what I can do to help. Best, Amy Kathleen Ryan

Response I got a few weeks later:

Dear Ms. Ryan,

Thank you for your message to Governor Mead about state management of federal lands.  The Governor asked that I respond.

This year, a Wyoming Legislative Select Committee has been examining the effects of the state taking ownership and management responsibilities of federal lands.  Over half of the surface area and two-thirds of the subsurface of Wyoming is owned by the federal government.  This access to open, public land is a hallmark of Wyoming.  It has provided residents and others great opportunities to hike, fish, hunt and make a living for generations.  It also comes with certain challenges, such as slower economic development and decisions that are not necessarily in the best interests of citizens of Wyoming.

As the study of Wyoming taking ownership of federal lands within its borders has progressed, the Governor was asked in a recent interview his thoughts on the matter.  The Governor does not believe Wyoming’s constitution, its act of admission, requires the federal government to cede public land back to the state.  This of course varies from state to state.  

Wyoming has worked on a pilot project to manage a small tract of federal land for a specific purpose.  This was done in an area torched by forest fires.  Wyoming worked with the U.S. Forest Service to avert the spread of cheatgrass, an invasive weed.  This is an example of how Wyoming can work for the best management of federal land in coordination with the federal government.

Thank you again for your message. Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Sincerely,

Colin McKee

So I followed up:

Hi Mr. Mckee, I do have further questions.

How can Wyoming fund the management of such huge portions of our state without the fiscal support of the federal government? A lot of people are afraid responses like yours are just doublespeak for a plan to transfer public lands into private hands so that corporate interests can "help" the economy by destroying a natural balance that can never be repaired. The very study the state commissioned reported that a sale of public lands to compensate for the cost of management would be almost inevitable, and then who is to stop the owners from destroying the precious habitat that hangs in the balance? Wyoming is unique. If it is "developed" it will be destroyed. You must know that. Some things are more important than money.

I would appreciate hearing more from you about this. 

Thank you, 

AKR

I have not yet received a response. I don't really expect to.

Update: Because a lot of people in Wyoming spoke out against this legislation, it was dropped. For now.

Write your congressperson.

Letter I wrote to my Republican State Representative: 
Hi Congressman Lummis,
Thank you for your newsletter that I didn't ask for. You wrote to me of executive overreach, so I'm going to write to you about congressional obstructionism. Your political party has been playing a game of brinksmanship that has brought our government to a standstill more than once during a time of severe economic duress. You have obstructed infrastructure spending bills that would have brought much needed jobs to the working class, knowing doing so would increase the political power of the Republican party. Congratulations. You have obstructed "common sense" climate change measures that could save countless people from respiratory illnesses and unclean drinking water. You have obstructed supreme court nominations of perfectly reasonable, centrist nominees. You have created a huge controversy about "security breaches" regarding an attack on a single embassy when the Bush administration suffered 13 such attacks that resulted in 60 deaths. Your political party has become the party of obstruction, lies, and racism. Don't talk to me about overreach because to me that is utterly hypocritical. Sincerely, Amy Ryan

On How Difficult it is to DECIDE this Presidential Election!

Gee, I'm having trouble, because both candidates are so BAD!

I could vote for the guy who had to ask an advisor twice, on camera, why he couldn't use nuclear weapons, and still seemed unsure... Or maybe I should vote for the woman who worked with Russia, China and the EU to create sanctions against Iran to force them NOT to produce nuclear weapons.

Hm. I'll have to think on this some more.

I could vote for the guy who repeatedly refuses to disavow the KKK, or I could vote for the woman who wants to create a national task force to address violence against African Americans at the hands of police departments. But calling half of the other side "deplorable" was kind of a dick move, you know? Sure, there are a lot of swastika tattoos at those rallies, but she's white herself, so...

This is a real brain twister.

I could vote for the guy who wants to put pregnant girls in jail for trying to get an abortion, or maybe I should vote for the woman who made that historic speech in China about how women's rights are human rights. But don't forget: she's a woman! That's a conflict of interest right there!

Golly, this is a thinky problem!

I could vote for the guy who publicly appealed to Russia to hack the Democratic server to undermine the US presidential election, and has openly praised that horse-riding shirtless bald guy who murders journalists, (Vladimir somebody? The Impaler?!) or I could vote for the woman who brokered a cease fire between Israel and Hamas that lasted for eight years...

Nope. Still not sure.

It's just that she got some important emails mixed in with thousands of other emails on her private server that she wasn't supposed to have even though many government officials have them, and she deleted some emails to protect the privacy of her family and friends. That is MAJOR. Also she talked to somebody about her Foundation while she was in her State Department Office, and she got all those people in Benghazi killed. Sure, the FBI exonerated her of wrongdoing about the emails, she doesn't even draw a salary from the Foundation which sends medicine to AIDS patients worldwide, and I guess there's something about how the Republican Party repeatedly blocked requests from the Obama Administration to increase funding for security at high risk American embassies, but still. It's because of her.

I mean I guess with the guy who's running they were talking about... fraud was it? Like he's being investigated for it? And someone is suing him for rape when she was a child, and she has witnesses? And his like, BEST friend at the time is now in jail for rape? And there are no former presidents endorsing him at all? And also wasn't there something about how he took money from HIS foundation and used it for personal reasons? But is it really stealing if you're already rich?

This is really hard.

She has like, a squishy neck? Like she's old? And she doesn't smile enough. And... and... and...

I think I'll just vote for somebody who can't possibly win.