When Gov. Dayton, SecState Mark Ritchie and the Executive council postponed mining job creation in northern Minnesota, they stirred up a hornets nest of difficulties. Sen. Bill Ingebritsen is criticizing the decision, saying that militant environmentalist organizations are trying to stop mining in northern Minnesota:
Sen. Bill Ingebrigtsen, R-Alexandria, blames environmentalists for a delay in the state allowing mining companies to explore under some northeastern Minnesota lands.
“The environmentalists, I think, are behind this because they want to slow down any type of mining up there,” said Ingebrigtsen, Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee chairman.
There’s little doubt but that militant environmentalist organizations want to destroy the mining industry. The question is whether the DFL legislators will take a stand against these militant organizations. There’s no evidence that they will:
Ingebrigtsen said he was surprised that Lt. Gov. Yvonne Prettner Solon, from Duluth, did not fight the rest of the council to support mining as economic development for her northeastern Minnesota neighbors. “I would think Prettner Solon would be a little more aggressive.”
There’s no justifying Lt. Gov. Prettner-Solon’s wimping out on this decision. She should’ve fought for the Range. That she didn’t says everything about who’s bought her.
Republicans should reject this legislative attempt:
Property owners told the Executive Council they will ask legislators to pass laws next year to give them more rights to refuse mining company access to their land, as well as laws that could allow them to purchase mineral rights.
Selling mineral rights to dozens of people essentially ties up a project indefinitely, which is the environmentalists’ goal. The militant environmentalist organizations that enthusiastically support the DFL don’t want mining developments.
Any Republican signing onto this legislation as a co-sponsor should expect a primary challenge. Signing onto this potential legislation is supporting radical environmentalists.
That said, it’s fish or cut bait time for the DFL. They can either be slaves to these militant environmentalist organizations or they can work to improve the lives of their constituents. They can’t do both because their purposes are cross-purposes.
Finally, the Executive Council’s decision is indicative or the DFL’s Twins Cities-centric nature. The DFL’s inability to win consistently outside the Metro has produced an Executive Council that doesn’t have a clue about mining, property rights or putting the Iron Range to work.
The DFL isn’t the party that used to care about the Second Amendment and creating high-paying jobs in rural and northern Minnesota. They’re a wholly-owned subsidiary of the special interests.