Nevada Rancher Cliven Bundy became a GOP and Tea Party darling recently when he clashed with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) over cattle grazing rights to federal land. BLM confiscated — and subsequently returned after escalating safety concerns — nearly 400 of Bundy’s cattle because he has allowed them to graze on federal lands without a permit for many years, racking up an unpaid bill of over $1 million. This led to a standoff between Bundy, his friends, and Federal agents. There’s been a lot of back and forth in the political sphere — for example, Harry Reid called Bundy’s supporters domestic terrorists and everyone freaked out. And the entire incident turned Bundy into a de-facto spokesperson against Federal power, with many high-ups in the GOP supporting him.

And as so often happens — remember Joe the Plumber? — the poorly vetted farmer supported by the GOP as a representation of what is so great about this nation turns out to be pretty racist.

I’m just going to let you read Bundy’s words for yourself, courtesy of Adam Nagourney at the New York Times, because really, they’re too spectacularly offensive to paraphrase:

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

I don’t think I need to go into how spectacularly disturbing these statements are as a whole, but let’s just be very clear. This man, Cliven Bundy, essentially just said that he thinks that African Americans were better off as slaves. To national press. As someone who has been following politics essentially since I could read, this is probably one of the worst things I’ve ever heard.

First, in my probably futile attempt to interject some logic into Bundy’s statements, it’s clear the guy is a huge hypocrite. Because you know who receives a whole ton of government subsidies? Farmers and ranchers. Including those like Bundy himself.

In fact, that’s kind of what this entire debate is about — Bundy losing access to some of those very valuable subsidies. As a rancher, Bundy was able to graze his cattle on Federal land for about $1.35 per animal, per month. Similar accommodations on private land would run about $8-$23 per animal, per month. Now because of some policy changes, those subsides were going to be a bit less generous and create some other logistical problems, leading to Bundy’s standoff with the government. Yeah, he’s totally just against other people getting government subsidies, and thinks that getting them teaches other people bad lessons.

So how did this crazy man end up supported by some major players in the GOP, including Fox News pundits, Senator Rand Paul, and Senator Dean Heller? (Although to be fair, after the racist statements came out, both Paul and Heller ran away from supporting Bundy as fast as they could.) Well to start, I think there’s something in the Tea Party’s unwavering devotion to the idea of “grassroots politics” that can be scary. The story hit national news, and immediately, the Tea Party and others rallied around him. There was no consideration that the guy in a standoff with Federal Rangers might be insane. There was no consideration that this man, who was being held up as a shining example of the little man, the oppressed farmer, and the patriot, needed to be vetted.

And that’s dangerous. Fox News, and other conservative media picked up this story right away and stuck by the man, giving a voice to the crazy racist who would usually be limited to sending offensive chain emails to his relatives or writing a letter to the editor every single week in his local paper. Now I, of course believe in free speech, and think that Bundy should have the ability to say whatever the hell he wants, even if it is gag-worthy. But the national microphone he’s been given is concerning, because now the rest of us have to listen to his racist drivel. All of this could probably have been solved by just one of those politicians who supported him sending a staffer out with a notepad and asking, “Hey Mr. Bundy, how do you feel about ____.” I have a feeling he’d have been more than willing to share his racist opinions pretty quickly.

Whether or not Bundy is right about his squabble with the Federal Government, which I think is actually at least a legitimate debate, the way in which this entire thing has played out should be incredibly concerning for the GOP. If they want to argue about the use of Federal land, fine, do that through discourse, or legislation, or debate. I’m happy to entertain that conversation. But to use a crazy racist rancher who is probably causing the expenditure of even more tax dollars by dragging the Bureau of Land Management and other agencies into this is just bad politics, plain and simple.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service via Wikipedia]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Tea Party Darling Cliven Bundy is This Cycle’s Racist Joe the Plumber appeared first on Law Street.

“No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation which currently exists nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans.”

Only in Nevada…

Yes, those are the actual words of Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval, addressing a twenty year range war between a Nevada rancher and the federal government.

For two decades, Cliven Bundy, a 67-year-old rancher, has been embroiled in a battle with the Bureau of Land Management, a federal agency within the Department of the Interior that administers public lands.

The longstanding dispute reached its boiling point last week when the BLM seized nearly 400 of Bundy’s cows, alleging the animals were “trespassing” on federal land. Following the BLM roundup, hundreds of Nevadans showed up to protest the actions of the federal agency, claiming the BLM had overstepped its boundaries and infringed upon states’ rights. Looking much more like an armed rebellion, many protesters carried handguns and rifles and all shared Bundy’s sentiment that “this is a lot bigger deal than just my cows.”

The Conflict

While the fight between Bundy and the BLM has become a full-blown debate over states’ rights, it essentially boils down to a dispute over ownership: federal vs. state. Bundy, along with hundreds of fellow Nevadans who demanded the release of his cattle, believe the land in question, a 600,000-acre area near the Utah border known as Gold Butte, belongs to the state of Nevada. The Bureau of Land Management, on the other hand, assumed control of the land as part of a conservation effort in 1993 and has sought to maintain order ever since.

Cliven Bundy’s Case

When the BLM took control of Gold Butte and other federal lands back in 1993, it wasn’t to stick it to Cliven Bundy and other ranchers who had used the land for decades. Rather, the BLM claimed the seizure was an attempt to save the desert tortoise, an endangered species that was given the status of “threatened” in 1990. According to the Washington Post, the conservation measures included “the elimination of livestock grazing and strict limits on off-road vehicle use in the protected tortoise habitat.”

Not convinced by the conservation effort, Bundy accused the government of “land grabbing” and was not willing to relinquish his grazing privileges for another wildlife preserve. Fast forward to 2014 and the situation hasn’t changed much. Despite numerous lawsuits, court orders, and even violence between the BLM and ranchers – bombs were “anonymously” sent to land management offices in 1995 and 1996 –Bundy has consistently refused to remove his cows from the land.

A descendent of Mormons who settled in the area more than 140 years ago, Bundy claims he holds an “inherent right” to graze the land. He simply refuses to recognize federal authority on land he believes belongs to the state of Nevada. Although Bundy has agreed to pay any fees he owes, he will only fork over his money to Clark County, Nevada – not the BLM.

The Bureau of Land Management’s Case

Despite the skepticism of Bundy and other’s regarding the federal agency’s motive for seizing the land, the BLM has stuck to its story of conservation. For Bureau of Land Management Chief Neil Kornze, the issue is black and white: Bundy has been repeatedly breaking the law.

“This is a matter of fairness and equity, and we remain disappointed that Cliven Bundy continues to not comply with the same laws that 16,000 public-lands ranchers do every year,” Kornze told CBS News. “After 20 years and multiple court orders to remove the trespass cattle, Mr. Bundy owes the American taxpayers in excess of $1 million. The BLM will continue to work to resolve the matter administratively and judicially,” he continued.

After he refused to comply with BLM restrictions, the Bureau revoked Bundy’s permit in 1993 and have fined him countless times for grazing on federally protected land. Despite this, Bundy has never applied for a new permit nor has he paid any fines.

In 1998, a federal judge in Las Vegas ordered Bundy to remove his trespassing cattle from Gold Butte. After attempts to settle outside of court in 2013, the BLM implemented two federal court orders to remove Bundy’s cattle.

Current Status

Citing “serious concerns about the safety of employees and members of the public,” Kornze called off the roundup of Bundy’s cattle this past Sunday, releasing the 400 cows that were gathered.

While the question of whether Bundy is a law-breaking rancher or a champion of states’ rights remains up for debate, the conflict has paused for the time being.

Still, both sides recognize that they remain very much at odds. Those on Bundy’s side claim the fight has only just begun, and the BLM released a statement saying “the door isn’t closed” and that they would “figure out how to move forward with this.” That being said, the BLM’s decision to back down – and effectively allow Bundy and his followers to win the heated standoff – could prove to set a dangerous precedent for the future.

The situation in Nevada has even captured the attention of members of the U.S. Senate. While Nevada Senator Dean Heller calls the BLM’s  tactics “heavy handed,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has made it clear that the actions of Bundy and other ranchers will not go unpunished. “It’s not over,” Reid said. “We can’t have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it’s not over.”

[Fox News] [CBS News] [Washington Post]

—

Matt DiCenso (@mdicenso24)

Matt DiCenso

Matt DiCenso is a graduate of The George Washington University. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Battle of the Butte: Rancher Takes on the Federal Gov’t appeared first on Law Street.