http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills info@washingtonwatch.com http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1 http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1862.html#39835 Uhhh...Jim...you write, "Those opposed are small minded and would place the People of America at the mercy of foreighn countries as they have our oil." Umm...Jim...who owns Resolution Copper Mining? Uhh...Rio Tinto. What country does Rio Tinto belong to, Jim? Uhh...the United Kingdom. Who are the largest investors in Rio Tinto, Jim? Uhh...Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait. Who's at whose mercy here, Jim? You also write, "Just say no to Gang-Green and their elitist attitudes." Umm...Jim? I'm no elitist. I have worked in mining my whole life. It will be great to see this mine up and running. It would be even better if it were an American company to do it, and not some foreign company that doesn't give one rat's ass about the America you--and I--hold dear.... 39835@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 05 Aug 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1862.html#39720 We need this industry to sustain American industry. Those opposed are small minded and would place the People of America at the mercy of foreighn countries as they have our oil. Just say no to Gang-Green and their elitist attitudes. They would starve AmericaJUHWO to attain their idea of utopia.... 39720@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 01 Aug 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1862.html#34514 As for providing jobs, you miss the point here as well. The jobs will be "highly skilled." RCM states this over and over again. I live in Superior, we have many hard working people. But Superior does NOT have a highly skilled workforce. So where are these highly skilled workers going to come from? Elsewhere. Where are these highly skilled workers going to live? Elsewhere. Where are these highly skilled workers going to shop, buy their cars, send their kids to school, eat out at night, etc.? Elsewhere, that's where. Mining is our history here in Superior. But good god, just be honest. We're not the most sophisticated bunch. The lies, half truths, and misinformation RCM puts out there to garner support is really an insult to the good people of my town. It's like somebody taking advantage of your grandmother. Shameful.... 34514@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 11 May 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1862.html#34515 RCM has done a poor job with their environmental commitment! Take the Shaft 9 dewatering program. First, RCM was going to dump the waste water into Queen Creek until ADEQ busted them (oops!). So RCM began building a pipeline to send the water to the Magma Irrigation District, until they were busted by Forest Service, whose land the pipeline crosses (oops!). Then, EPA questioned irrigating alfalfa fields, with toxic heavy metals (oops!). So RCM came up with a new plan: for irrigation, RCM would "blend CAP water 10 to 1 with mine wastewater. But the Feds hadn't been notified, said, "HUH?!" Correct me if I am wrong: if same piece of land is irrigated with blended water, over time the same amount of heavy metals spread on the same plot of land, then in the end, the same amount of heavy metals is concentrated on this land as if you didn't blend with CAP water at all. RCM counts on people not thinking too deeply about RCM methods. Shame.... 34515@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 11 May 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1862.html#31806 Just say no! They don't have to live here we do. And we don't want them here. If anyone is going to mine this, at least make sure its an American company. Otherwise we're just throwing what's left of our national treasure away!!... 31806@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 30 Mar 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1862.html#30842 S.1862 is a dishonest attempt by a foreign mining conglomerate to avoid the daylight and due diligence of proper and appropriate environmental and hydrological impact studies. Rio Tinto knows that such a project would never get fast-tracked were it required to have the proper and appropriate studies completed. Passage of the land exchange cedes ownership of the land in question to Rio Tinto, who would then be under no obligation to conduct the necessary studies. The massive profits bandied about by Rio Tinto execs would go straight to London, and be of little to no value to Arizona's or the US' macro-economy. Passage of the land exchange is BAD for our environment, BAD for our economy, and BAD for our democracy. OPPOSE this land exchange. OPPOSE S.1862!... 30842@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 24 Feb 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/110_SN_1862.html?rev=11972 <p>S. 1862 would provide for the exchange and conveyance of certain National Forest land and other land in southeast Arizona.</p> <h2 id="toc0"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2007 - Directs the Secretary of Agriculture (the Secretary) to convey to Resolution Copper Mining, LLC, all interest of the United States in and to specified federal land in Pinal county, Arizona, in exchange for Resolution Copper conveying to the United States title to: (1) the Secretary to specified non-federal land in Gila, Yavapai, Maricopa, Pinal, and Coconino counties, Arizona, and (2) the Secretary of the Interior to specified non-federal land in Pinal and Gila counties, Arizona.</p> <p>Directs the Secretary to convey specified land in Pinal county to the town of Superior, Arizona.</p> <p>Instructs Resolution Copper to deliver to the Secretary an executed document granting a permanent conservation easement for the easement area (the surface estate of the Apache Leap Conservation Easement Area) to an entity that is: (1) a qualified unit of government or Indian tribe; or (2) a land trust or other qualified organization. Requires Resolution Copper to determine whether the area covered by the easement should be managed to establish: (1) additional cultural and historical resource protections or measures; or (2) additional or alternative public access routes, trails, and trailheads to Apache Leap.</p> <p>Directs: (1) the Secretary to construct in the Global Ranger District of the Tonto National Forest one or more replacement campgrounds for the Oak Flat Campground; and (2) the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the Arizona State Parks Board approximately 2,000 acres of land under such Secretary's jurisdiction within the exterior boundary of the proposed Tam O'Shanter Area State Park for the establishment of such Park.</p> <p>Requires the Secretary of the Interior, upon request by the Board, to grant the Board a right-of-way for the construction of an access road on a specified route in order to provide public access to the proposed State Park.</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc1"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>Latest Major Action: 7/24/2007: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc2"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc3"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 11972@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 22 Oct 2007 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/110_SN_1862.html?rev=5645 <p>S. 1862 would provide for the exchange and conveyance of certain National Forest land and other land in southeast Arizona.</p> <h2 id="toc4"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc5"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to update the status of the bill!)</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc6"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc7"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 5645@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/110_SN_1862.html?rev=5646 <p>S. 1862 would provide for the exchange and conveyance of certain National Forest land and other land in southeast Arizona.</p> <h2 id="toc8"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc9"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>Latest Major Action: 7/24/2007: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc10"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc11"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 5646@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1862.html 7/24/2007: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 24204@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 24 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT