Pros And Cons Of HJR 69

Technical support

The largest issues caused by the bill are direct conflicts between U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR). The supporters of HJR 69 boasted faulty claims for support, using a political platform created by Trump to oppose all Obama-era rules for being too liberal (Ruskin 2017). Comments in support of HJR 69 state that the prohibitions would affect Alaska residents’ access to hunting land and subsistence hunting. Proponents of the bill also voiced fears that the federal government would take state land as well as control over it, thus taking power from states.

These advocates’ claims had no truth, but the volume at which the Republican Party used them overpowered any truth in the situation.

When it comes to protecting what he believes is right, Mr. Young will use false information and name calling to get what he wants (C-SPAN 2017). He even resorted to profanities when met with opposition, declaring “that’s the most bunch of bull shit I’ve ever heard” in response to Representative Jared Polis’ comment on the absurdity of HJR 69 allowing inhumane predator hunting practices (Ruskin 2017). Young claims the Obama-era rule is unlawful because of a small paragraph within Note 25 of the Alaska Statehood Compact, which states: the United States will transfer jurisdiction of Federal lands in Alaska to the state, so long as they are used for conservation of the lands and the flora and fauna that live there (House Republican…2017). This line of reasoning is flawed and forgets the overarching purpose of the statehood act, which is to include Alaska as a state within the union. This means Alaska agrees to surrender its territory to the United States, thereby making the federal government the governing body residing over the state. Within this law it explicitly grants management over Alaska lands

Young is a formerly licensed trapper (Pacelle 2017). This is important to keep in mind because it can easily lead to bias in his intentions to have the bill passed as a motive for monetary gain due to possible bribery by hunting outfitters or other state officials. It is clear that Young is the sponsor for HJR 69 after proposal by the State of Alaska however, there is little to no documented evidence of specific individuals or groups who started the push for this legislation. It is suspicious that no one is claiming responsibility for it and thus further puts Young’s motivation into question. While not claiming responsibility, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game agrees with Young, giving him the state’s full support and stating that “to eliminate what we believe is the unlawful preemption of the traditional state-federal jurisdictional relationship for the management of fish and wildlife that was the [original] intent of Congress” (Obama Administration’s…2017). Many other organizations are worried that if HJR 69 is not passed the stage would be set for nationwide removal of other states’ authority to manage fish and wildlife. Believers and proponents of the new legislation include the organization Americans for Prosperity who stated, "The Constitution delegates lawmaking powers to Congress, not federal administrators. We support using the Canada Revenue Agency to roll back the Department of Interior's overreach, bring