Art Is Immortality

posted in: All news | 0

Editor’s Note: The following is excerpted with permission from Art Above Everything: One Woman’s Global Exploration of the Joys and Torments of a Creative Life (Beacon Press; June 10, 2025).

My dad drummed for presidents once. He drummed for admirals and ambassadors, movie stars and ministers. He drummed in halftime showcases of the NFL and Mardi Gras parades in New Orleans. He drummed in nightclubs from Amsterdam to Yokosuka. 

Long retired from the U.S. Navy jazz band that sailed him around the globe, Dad mostly drums in the garage now. His audience consists of Mom and me as we carry groceries from the car. Every time I pass him, during my brief visits home to Corpus, I think, I really should sit with him. Sit with him, listen to him, maybe even sing along when he switches to the keyboard, like I did when I was little. We especially loved the chorus of “The 59th Street Bridge Song” by Simon and Garfunkel: All is groooo-vy. But there are always meals to prepare, errands to run, tías to greet. Before I know it, Dad is driving me back to the airport.

Today, however, I set down the groceries and pull up a chair. Dad is practicing the rudiments, but, sensing my interest, he starts striking the snare again and again, revving it like an engine, before volleying from tom to tom so that the sound swells and drops, swells and drops. His sticks move so fast, they blur. A thunderclap of cymbals detonates a kick pedal boom that blasts me through the cosmos.

“Do you ever miss performing?” I blurt out, once I’ve recovered.

“Well, sure. Sure I do,” Dad says. His beard, once thick and red, has thinned and whitened. Sunspots speckle his hands. 

“But . . . I did it!” he says, then flashes his million-watt grin. With that, he returns to his sticks.

In his ninth year of Alzheimer’s, Dad loses the ability to walk. We decide as a family to move him into a neighborhood facility. Once a month, I fly to Corpus to discover something new he cannot do. How to brush his teeth. How to slip on his shoes. How to feed himself. How to talk. This month, it’s eye contact. His indigo eyes cannot find mine. Desperate to connect, I notice that—while his hands have long since curled into fists—there is still enough room for a drumstick. I slide one in until it feels secure, then raise up a book to meet it. Nothing happens. I tap the book against the drumstick, for encouragement. Still nothing. Dad stares off into space for a moment before closing his eyes. Mind racing, I remember the chant he once sang to his students to teach a particular groove.

“BOOM get a rat-trap/bigger than a cat-trap/BOOM!” I call out.

Dad’s eyes flutter open. A long moment passes. He taps out the groove, faintly but perfectly. Drumming is no longer his livelihood. It is his lifeline.

The night Mom texts me to come home, I am at a dinner party 550 miles away. Another guest takes one look at my shaking shoulders and insists on driving. It is nearly 10 p.m. by the time I’ve thrown mismatched clothes into a suitcase and locked up the house where I’ve been writing for the past two weeks. As we peel out of Marfa, the night air fills with skunk. I breathe in the musk, like Dad would do. Once, when he was little, his dog got sprayed while they were romping around the park. He has claimed to love the stench ever since, as it induced his favorite childhood memories. Riding sleighs with his brother Reed at Christmas. Pounding the beat in the high school marching band. The Mexican in me knows this skunk is a sign, then. I spend the next 545 miles trying not to interpret it.

We pull up to the care facility just after sunrise.

“Daddy, I’m here,” I call out as I enter his room.

Dad’s expression does not change, but there is movement beneath the blanket. I lift up a corner. His fist rises, as if in greeting. I wrap one hand around it and caress his face with the other. His indigo eyes are wide open. Peering into them, I chant words of love and gratitude. He moans in response.

At some point in the hours that ensue, Mom drives home for a shower. Holding our dad in our arms, my sister Barbara and I play his favorite songs. John Denver’s “Rocky Mountain High.” Judy Garland’s “Somewhere Over the Rainbow.” Frank Sinatra. Then I cue up Simon & Garfunkel’s “59th Street Bridge Song.” Moments after the chorus ends—All is groooo-vy—a nurse walks in. I peel my eyes away from Dad’s to ask how much time we have left. A couple of days, she says. His skin isn’t mottling yet. His legs are warm. His vitals have stabilized. There is still—

Barbara gasps. I look down. Dad is gone.

It is still dark the next morning when Alex, my sister’s husband, knocks on the door of my childhood bedroom. I roll out of bed and join him in the garage. He is breaking down the drum kit Grandma Madge bought Dad some sixty-five years ago. Prior to entering the care facility, Dad played it every day. I grab the throne, turn it upside down, and stare at the wingnuts. When I was little, I prided myself on knowing how to collapse every tripod in the kit. The muscle of that memory has since atrophied. I serve instead as the roadie, grabbing the pieces Alex disassembles and packing them into the trunk.

From Weber Road, we hang a left on Ocean Drive. The bay stretches out before us, black ink with white swells. We pull into Cole Park and set up Dad’s kit at the water’s edge. Alex, a professional photographer, grabs his Nikon and lenses. We kneel before the kit, waiting. Finally, the sun breaks the horizon. Its fire illuminates the bay, shimmering the cymbals. Alex photographs the kit from every angle, crouching, tiptoeing, lying flat on the damp grass, before turning to me and nodding. I have neither dressed nor groomed for this occasion but do as requested, stepping into the camera frame. Dad’s last sticks crisscross the floor tom. I take them into my hands. The blond wood is splintered from years of grazing rims. This is the closest I will ever come to holding his hands again.

A pair of early morning walkers pause and smile. They expect a concert to spring from my hands. A man on a bike stops to listen too. I look down at the kit. In a parallel universe, I would rub these sticks together, and thunder would follow. Yet somehow, in our forty-five years of co-existence, I never took one lesson from Dad. I don’t even know the proper way to hold the sticks. After an anxious moment, I raise them above my head and smash them atop the high tom, with enthusiasm, with love, but with nothing resembling skill.

My audience turns on their heels and walks away.

Nine days later, we place the cherrywood box of Dad’s ashes on the altar of a funeral home. Seventy of his closest friends, family, and former students file into the pews behind us. I give the eulogy. Barbara and Alex light the candles. My nephew Jordan gives the reading. We pass around baskets of CDs from Dad’s vast collection. An hour from now, Dad will receive a military sendoff at the Coastal Bend State Veterans Cemetery via a seven-gun salute. But first, we must give him his artist sendoff.

I play over the loudspeakers an excerpt from a jazz concert Dad played in Japan in 1961. Called “Skin and Bones,” the song features a two-minute drum solo. Dad utilizes the entire kit, unbelievably fast but with total control, manipulating the dynamics so that the sound swells and subsides, swells and subsides. Not even the saxophonists can keep up. His long-ago audience cheers him on—and soon enough, the attendees at his funeral do too.

Next, I screen a video of Dad playing a military march against the breakfast table. He is wearing his navy cap and windbreaker. It is our last Thanksgiving together. After zooming in on his hands, the camera pans over to those of his granddaughter, Analina, accompanying on doumbek. Dad started teaching her on a practice pad when she was five years old. When she finally graduated to his kit, the power transfixed her, as did the pleasure. By eleven, she had a sparkly gold kit of her own, which she played for hours each day. Upon graduating from St. Mary’s, she will take her sticks to the sea as Dad once did, only aboard a Carnival cruise ship instead of a naval aircraft carrier. 

In the video, Analina never takes her eyes off her teacher. Though capable of thunder, she abides by his slow, steady pulse. When the video ends, she squeezes the hand of her girlfriend before rising from the pew. Standing beneath the cherrywood box is Dad’s longtime throne. Analina takes her seat upon it. Before her is a snare drum and a pair of sticks. She slowly drops one stroke, then another, again and again, until she has created an opening roll. She segues into a sampling of the rudiments Dad taught her. Paradiddles. Flams. Single and double stroke rolls that predate the American Revolution, that signal to soldiers when to rise, when to fire, when to retreat. And finally, the “Downfall of Paris.” It is riveting, especially when Analina incorporates Dad’s signature move, slipping a drumstick under her right armpit after striking the left stick on 1, striking left again on 2 before transferring the stick to her right hand for the strike on 3, then removing the pit-stick with her left hand and slamming both sticks down on 4. From there, she transitions into her own improvisation. Something like jazz, but at a speed metal pace. Her skill is atavistic. 

Suddenly, Analina dips her head. Grief seems on the verge of overwhelming her—until something visibly intervenes. It straightens her spine, steadying her gaze.

“I don’t believe in god or the afterlife, I am not spiritual,” Analina will explain later. “But at the funeral, when I was closing it out, over my right shoulder, where his ashes were, he said, ‘Bring it back now, bring it back.’ It was so insane. I had never felt anything like that before in my life. But I felt it.”

Everyone in the funeral home feels it too. My father is actively channeling his art through his granddaughter. By and by, their double strokes start slowing, closing the roll. But their final beat lands like a roar.

The post Art Is Immortality appeared first on The Texas Observer.

Can $1,000 at birth change a child’s future? A Republican proposal aims to find out

posted in: All news | 0

By MORIAH BALINGIT, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — When children of wealthy families reach adulthood, they often benefit from the largesse of parents in the form of a trust fund. It’s another way they get a leg up on less affluent peers, who may receive nothing at all — or even be expected to support their families.

But what if all children — regardless of their family’s circumstances — could get a financial boost when they turn 18?

Related Articles


Trump heads to Fort Bragg while facing criticism for deploying military at Los Angeles protests


Judge orders US refugee office to reconsider some children’s cases


President Donald Trump pushes ahead with his maximalist immigration campaign in face of LA protests


Pentagon draws up rules on possible use of force by Marines deployed to LA protests


DC prepares for Trump’s military parade with 18 miles of fencing and 175 magnetometers

That’s the idea behind a House GOP proposal backed by President Donald Trump. It would create tax-deferred investment accounts — coined “Trump Accounts” — for babies born in the U.S. over the next four years, starting them each with $1,000. At age 18, they could withdraw the money to put toward a down payment for a home, education or to start a small business. If the money is used for other purposes, it’ll be taxed at a higher rate.

“This is a pro-family initiative that will help millions of Americans harness the strength of our economy to lift up the next generation,” Trump said at a White House event Monday for the proposal. “They’ll really be getting a big jump on life, especially if we get a little bit lucky with some of the numbers and the economy.”

While the investment would be symbolically meaningful, it’s a relatively small financial commitment to addressing child poverty in the wider $7 trillion federal budget. Assuming a 7% return, the $1,000 would grow to roughly $3,570 over 18 years.

It builds on the concept of “ baby bonds,” which two states — California and Connecticut — and the District of Columbia have introduced as a way to reduce gaps between wealthy people and poor people.

At at time when wealth inequality has soured some young people on capitalism, giving them a stake in Wall Street could be the antidote, said Utah Republican Rep. Blake Moore, who led the effort to get the initiative into a massive House spending bill.

“We know that America’s economic engine is working, but not everyone feels connected to its value and the ways it can benefit them,” Moore wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Examiner. “If we can demonstrate to our next generation the benefits of investing and financial health, we can put them on a path toward prosperity.”

Families of all income levels could receive ‘Trump Accounts’

The bill would require at least one parent to produce a Social Security number with work authorizations, meaning the U.S. citizen children born to some categories of immigrants would be excluded from the benefit. But unlike other baby bond programs, which generally target disadvantaged groups, this one would be available to families of all incomes.

Economist Darrick Hamilton of The New School, who first pitched the idea of baby bonds a quarter-century ago, said the GOP proposal would exacerbate rather than reduce wealth gaps. When he dreamed up baby bonds, he envisioned a program that would be universal but would give children from poor families a larger endowment than their wealthier peers, in an attempt to level the playing field. The money would be handled by the government, not by private firms on Wall Street.

“It is upside down,” Hamilton said. “It’s going to enhance inequality.”

Hamilton added that $1,000 — even with interest — would not be enough to make a significant difference for a child living in poverty.

A Silicon Valley investor who created the blueprint for the proposal, Brad Gerstner, said in an interview with CNBC last year that the accounts could help address the wealth gap and the loss of faith in capitalism that represent an existential crisis for the U.S.

“The rise and fall of nations occurs when you have a wealth gap that grows, when you have people who lose faith in the system,” Gerstner said. “We’re not agentless. We can do something.”

Critics say poor families have more immediate needs

The proposal comes as Congressional Republicans and Trump face backlash for proposed cuts to programs that poor families with children rely on, including food assistance and Medicaid.

Even some who back the idea of baby bonds are skeptical, noting Trump wants to cut higher education grants and programs that aid young people on the cusp of adulthood — the same age group Trump Accounts are supposed to help. Pending federal legislation would slash Medicaid and food and housing assistance that many families with children rely on.

Young adults who grew up in poverty often struggle with covering basics like rent and transportation — expenses that Trump Accounts could not be tapped to cover, said Eve Valdez, an advocate for youth in foster care in southern California. Valdez, a former foster youth, said she was homeless when she turned 18.

Accounts for newborn children that cannot be accessed for 18 years mean little to families struggling to meet basic needs today, said Shimica Gaskins of End Child Poverty California.

“Having children have health care, having their families have access to SNAP and food are what we really need … the country focused on,” Gaskins said.

Associated Press writer Josh Boak contributed to this report.

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

US-China trade talks in London enter their second day

posted in: All news | 0

By JILL LAWLESS, Associated Press

LONDON (AP) — The U.S. and China held a second day of talks Tuesday in London aimed at easing their trade dispute, after President Donald Trump said China is “not easy” but the U.S. was “doing well” at the negotiations.

A Chinese delegation led by Vice Premier He Lifeng met U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer for several hours on Monday at Lancaster House, an ornate 200-year-old mansion near Buckingham Palace.

Wang Wentao, China’s commerce minister, and trade negotiator Li Chenggang are also in Beijing’s delegation.

In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, right, shakes hands with U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent before their meeting to discuss China-U.S. trade, in London, Monday, June 9, 2025. (Li Ying/Xinhua via AP)

Lutnick said as he arrived Tuesday morning that the talks were “going well,” and he expected them to continue all day.

Asked late Monday how the negotiations were going, Trump told reporters: “We are doing well with China. China’s not easy.”

The two sides are trying to build on negotiations in Geneva last month that agreed to a 90-day suspension of most of the 100%-plus tariffs they had imposed on each other in an escalating trade war that had sparked fears of recession.

Related Articles


Trump heads to Fort Bragg while facing criticism for deploying military at Los Angeles protests


Judge orders US refugee office to reconsider some children’s cases


President Donald Trump pushes ahead with his maximalist immigration campaign in face of LA protests


Pentagon draws up rules on possible use of force by Marines deployed to LA protests


DC prepares for Trump’s military parade with 18 miles of fencing and 175 magnetometers

Since the Geneva talks, the U.S. and China have exchanged angry words over advanced semiconductors that power artificial intelligence, visas for Chinese students at American universities and rare earth minerals that are vital to carmakers and other industries.

Trump spoke at length with Chinese leader Xi Jinping by phone last Thursday in an attempt to put relations back on track. Trump announced on social media the following day that the trade talks would resume in London.

China, the world’s biggest producer of rare earths, has signaled it may ease export restrictions it placed on the elements in April, alarming automakers around the world who rely on them. Beijing, in turn, wants the U.S. to lift restrictions on Chinese access to the technology used to make advanced semiconductors.

Trump said that he wants to “open up China,” the world’s dominant manufacturer, to U.S. products.

“If we don’t open up China, maybe we won’t do anything,” Trump said at the White House. “But we want to open up China.”

Associated Press writer Josh Boak in Washington contributed to this story.

Long-thwarted efforts to sell public lands see new life under Trump

posted in: All news | 0

By Alex Brown, Clark Corbin and Kyle Dunphey, Stateline.org

Public outcry was swift and forceful after a U.S. House committee last month hastily approved an amendment directing the federal government to sell off more than half a million acres of public land.

A few days later, lawmakers advanced the larger bill — a sweeping list of President Donald Trump’s priorities — but stripped the federal lands provision.

Yet leaders on both sides of the issue say the battle over selling off federal lands is likely just heating up.

Some conservatives in Western states have complained for decades that the feds control too much of the land within their borders. They see a long-awaited opportunity in a Trump administration that’s sympathetic to their cause. Public lands advocates are bracing for more attempts to turn land over to states, industry groups and developers.

“The threat level is red alert,” said Randi Spivak, public lands policy director with the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental nonprofit. “Some of these states have been champing at the bit for decades to privatize. They’re certainly not going to let this opportunity pass without an aggressive effort.”

The ‘balance sheet’

In Western states, where most federally owned lands are located, some leaders view these lands as a treasured inheritance — places reserved for all Americans and critical for wildlife, tourism and outdoor recreation. Others feel that too much of the land in their states is controlled by officials in Washington, D.C., leaving it off-limits for development and curtailing its economic value.

Trump officials and allies have embraced the latter view. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has repeatedly called federal lands America’s “balance sheet,” describing them as untapped assets worth trillions of dollars. He has launched an effort to identify federal lands suitable for housing development.

Other proposals have centered around using land sales to pay for tax breaks or to finance Trump’s proposed government-run fund that could invest in stocks or real estate.

People boondock camp on public lands the day before the Annular Eclipse on Oct. 13, 2023, just outside Capitol Reef National Park, Utah. (George Frey/Getty Images North America/TNS)

For some state leaders, the newfound interest at the federal level to turn public lands into cash — along with Trump’s cuts to land management agency staff — aligns with a long-standing movement to reduce federal ownership.

“I look at it as an opportunity to say, ‘Hey, turn it over to the state,’” said Utah House Speaker Mike Schultz, a Republican.

Utah leaders have made the most forceful push to challenge federal land ownership. The state filed a legal challenge last year seeking to take control of more than 18 million acres of “unappropriated” lands — parcels held by the federal government without a specific designation such as a national park or monument. That effort hit a roadblock earlier this year when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

But with Trump in the White House, state leaders may pivot from challenging the feds in court to seeking their cooperation.

“We would love if the federal government just turned it over to us and said, ‘Here, manage these lands,’” Schultz said. “That’s an option as well. Those are discussions that are happening. Everything is on the table.”

Schultz declined to say which federal officials have been involved in discussions about transferring lands to the state.

Some lawmakers in Wyoming backed a state resolution this year — which ultimately failed — calling on Congress to hand over all federal lands except for Yellowstone National Park. Idaho lawmakers passed a measure calling on the feds to turn over a wildlife refuge to the state. And Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo, a Republican, has called for a “systematic release” of federal land in the state.

But public lands also have many supporters in Western states, including some prominent Republican members of Congress, such as Reps. Mike Simpson of Idaho and Ryan Zinke of Montana. Zinke was Interior secretary for two years during the first Trump administration.

John Leshy, who served as solicitor for the U.S. Department of the Interior during the Clinton administration, said proposals to dispose of federal lands tend to be stymied by fierce public backlash.

“Federal lands are really popular,” he said. “It’s political poison [to sell off public land]. It’s a different West now. Public attitudes have changed.”

Leshy also noted that livestock ranchers especially benefit from discounted lease rates offered by the federal government.

Housing arguments

The most recent clash over the future of federal lands was the amendment sponsored by a pair of congressional Republicans last month. The measure would have directed the Bureau of Land Management to sell more than 500,000 acres of land in Nevada and Utah. Local governments would have been able to buy the land at market value, with no restrictions on how they used it.

Related Articles


Trump heads to Fort Bragg while facing criticism for deploying military at Los Angeles protests


Judge orders US refugee office to reconsider some children’s cases


President Donald Trump pushes ahead with his maximalist immigration campaign in face of LA protests


Pentagon draws up rules on possible use of force by Marines deployed to LA protests


DC prepares for Trump’s military parade with 18 miles of fencing and 175 magnetometers

Backers said the sale would bring in revenue to cover Trump’s proposed tax cuts, while allowing local governments to build much-needed housing on the parcels. Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee said he would try to revive the measure as the Senate considered the bill this month, E&E News reported.

In Nevada, where 85% of land is owned by the federal government, some leaders say their communities are hemmed in by a checkerboard of public lands that constrain development. The city of Fernley, which is growing rapidly, would have acquired 12,000 acres under the proposal.

“We need housing,” said Benjamin Marchant, Fernley’s city manager. “The city can’t plan roads and water lines, sewer lines and gas lines, when you have federal land between two parcels that want to develop. This will bring a practical and helpful consolidation of all these lands into one developable area.”

Nevada leaders have long worked on proposals to transfer some federal lands to local governments and allow for increased growth. But some lawmakers say the latest push bypassed that collaborative process — and failed to include safeguards that the money raised from the sale of the lands would be reinvested into conserving public lands elsewhere.

“It was a complete betrayal of everything we’ve worked on in this state,” said Assemblymember Howard Watts, a Democrat. “This amendment is trying to sell off half a million acres of Nevada’s public lands in order to pay for tax cuts for billionaires. This is not going to address our housing problem. These lands are positioned to be sold off for other forms of development and extraction.”

Similar debates are happening in Utah. In southwestern Utah’s Washington County, local officials say the disposal of federally controlled land could help alleviate the region’s housing crisis and increasingly strained infrastructure.

The county is experiencing rapid population growth — in 2022, St. George, the county seat, was the fastest-growing metro area in America. County and city leaders hoped the amendment would have helped them manage the growth. The measure would have disposed of roughly 11,500 acres of federally controlled land in Utah, selling it at market value to local governments.

The proposal received pushback from all sides, including environmentalists, hunting and fishing groups, House Democrats and even conservatives.

“[The amendment] is consistent with how U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Burgum thinks about federal public lands, as simply assets on a ledger to be sold off,” said Steve Bloch, legal director for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, an environmental nonprofit. ” … It’s just antithetical to how Westerners think about the federal public lands that make up so much of our landscape.”

Washington County Commissioner Adam Snow, a Republican, said a lot of the opposition was misguided. The county would have acquired almost half of the land earmarked for disposal, and Snow said much of that would have been used to widen existing roads and construct new ones that are bordered by Bureau of Land Management property.

“These were not pristine wilderness lands. Some of the environmental groups tried to make it sound like we’re selling off Zion National Park, and that’s not even close to true,” Snow said. “If we can just not have to deal with the federal government every time we want to chip seal a road or improve an intersection, that would be really nice. Because we have to ask ‘Mother, may I?’ for everything out here.”

Local leaders say federal parcels could help ease housing pressures as well. Snow said transferring parcels to the city or county is one of the only ways to stop the area from becoming wildly expensive.

“We’re running out of room real quick,” he said. “ … There is still private land to develop, but they’re going to charge an absolute premium.”

The amendment that was stripped from the House bill was widely criticized for not having any restrictions on what could be done with the land.

“There was no language whatsoever that would require Washington County or St. George to do anything with these lands. They could lease them for development. They could sell them outright,” said Bloch.

The costs of management

In Utah, lawmakers have created a state Department of Land Management — essentially a placeholder agency that would be funded and staffed only if their effort to assume control of large swaths of federal land succeeds. Schultz, the House speaker, said the state is committed to keeping the lands in the public domain, reopening roads and campgrounds closed by the feds.

“We’d just take over the job from the federal government,” he said. “It is something that the state absolutely would do, and we’d do it more efficiently, more effectively and we’d have better outcomes.”

Schultz said the state could bring in the revenues needed to manage the land by raising lease prices for oil and gas operations on parcels currently managed for drilling.

But some public lands advocates say that’s not realistic. The federal Bureau of Land Management employed more than 950 people in the state as of 2024, and feds also assume the expensive task of wildfire management on their lands.

“If you look at the history of what Utah has done with their lands, they’ve sold more than half of them,” said Devin O’Dea, Western policy and conservation manager with Backcountry Hunters & Anglers. “We’re certainly of the perspective that states could not handle the economic costs of managing these lands. Their hand would be forced; they would have to sell these lands in order to deal with those costs.”

John Robison, Idaho Conservation League public lands and wildlife director, said Simpson — the Idaho congressman — and the state’s two senators have all won praise from constituents for their work on public lands compromises.

“Savvy Idaho politicians know that public lands are popular,” he said.

But other state leaders insist their governments are better equipped to manage the lands. Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador, a Republican, was among the officials who signed an amicus brief in support of Utah’s lawsuit against the feds.

“We live here, we work here, and we are far better stewards of our forests and resources than federal bureaucrats in Washington,” Labrador said in a statement. “ … If Idaho owned this land, we could lease it for timber, grazing, and mining — just like the federal government does — but reinvest that revenue right here in Idaho.”

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at abrown@stateline.org, Idaho Capital Sun reporter Clark Corbin can be reached at ccorbin@idahocapitalsun.com, and Utah News Dispatch reporter Kyle Dunphey can be reached at kdunphey@utahnewsdispatch.com.

©2025 States Newsroom. Visit at stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.