Start with the key evicence, what Emmer wrote, full text, no text added, no text left out (images omitted):
Dear Friend,
In the last months of Tim Walz’s failed tenure as governor, he can’t help himself from staging a few more politically motivated stunts. Recently, he signed an executive order to ban mining in Northern Minnesota, which is detrimental to our state’s economy, the Minnesotans who have relied on mining as their livelihood for generations, and our country’s national security.
Mining is the backbone of Northern Minnesota. It creates union jobs, brings billions of dollars of investment back to our state, and aids the nation’s efforts to end our dependence on China, which is crucial to national security. Walz’s ban defies common sense, as it would send more of the mining industry to countries like China and Russia who simply do not care about their environmental impact. Meanwhile, the United States has the most stringent environmental laws in the world, and our domestic mining projects are done responsibly.
This week in Washington, we passed the Protecting Domestic Mining Act, which would provide a streamlined, targeted, and clear-cut permitting process. This legislation strengthens our country’s mineral production and supply and reduces our reliance on foreign adversaries for these critical minerals. Bringing mining back to Northern Minnesota will not only boost Minnesota’s economy, it will provide good-paying jobs for hundreds of Minnesotans.
In Northern Minnesota, mining is a way of life – but Governor Walz continually fails to recognize the interests of our state as a whole. In his mind, “One Minnesota” really means “One Downtown Minneapolis.” His policies only prioritize the most Far-Left extremes of the political spectrum, and Northern Minnesotans deserve better.
I have always supported the mining industry in the great state of Minnesota, and will continue to do so. It is disheartening to have mining consistently under attack from so-called leaders like Governor Walz. The days of the Radical Left handcuffing our state's mining industry are OVER.
Sincerely,
/s/
"Sincerely," but * * * with a bit of slight of hand non-mention of the sole key fact at issue.
Start with a few facts. Taconite is an iron ore, and its mining has been a profit making venture for mining companies in Minnesota for many decades, and a source, the major source at a guess, of employment income to the great majority of Minnesota's "Iron Range" families.
Indeed, Taconite has been continuously mined in Minnesota. yielding profits and jobs, for more than at least half a century, and while the State government and regulators have had a generally favorable outlook toward Taconite mining ventures, they have not been without problems needed to be fixed.
Yet, the problems have not stopped the mining. But over time some grotesque offenses of the mining firms' penny pinching to maximize shareholder rapacious gain-lust have been curbed in the public interest, without coming near to killing the cash cow. The cash cow today is prospering and yielding needed tax income to the state.
See: e.g., Reserve Mining Co. v. Herbst, 256 NW 2d 808 (Minn 1977) for the landmark example of a taconite firm having to have a practice curbed, i.e., dumping asbestos laden mine tailings into Lake Superior. Once stopped, the industry came up with other ways of tailings disposal. Still profitable, but more restrained in terms of public harm.
THE KEY FACT EMMER OMITS
Emmer wrote, "Recently, he [Gov.Walz] signed an executive order to ban mining in Northern Minnesota, which is detrimental to our state’s economy, the Minnesotans who have relied on mining as their livelihood for generations, and our country’s national security. [...]"
Taconite mining, absolutely unaffected by the Walz order.
A never before done in Minnesota copper/nickle mining proposal was curbed, where the public harm and foreseeable dangers were/are magnitudes greater because of sulfide ores being involved, resulting is acidity and heavy metal releases to the watershed housing the Boundary Waters Wilderness, and constrained by treaty with tribes holding by treaty the right to ongoing wild rice harvesting from the wetlands of the watershed, where poisoning the water moots any rights to aquaculture use.
Do note, the word "sulfide" is nowhere in the Emmer missive.
At risk, the integrity of the pristine waters of the country's most visited of our National Parks, and the income of the extended wilderness outfitter trade community which has arisen from the worldwide popularity of the motor-free canoe waters.
Walz correctly determined the mining firms did not need to put the public interest at risk on any accelerated time frame, and his banning order was time restrained so that Minnesota's next governor, with her own senior regulatory staffing in place, could process the question without stress or rush or decisional bias history had Walz acted beyond a postponement, a temporal step only, rather than making some substantive situational choice that might hinder in any way his successor.
(Her being the pronoun because both Parties have women on the November ballot for Governor).
So, what Walz did was eminently reasonable, restrained beyond fault when all is known, so that a slant obscuring all that should be mentioned might confuse and mislead Emmer's readers.
Now, did Emmer tell a structured but partial story because he's too stupid to understand the total situation, and he did not know better, or was some other factor at play?
Bottom line: He is stupid, but not not that stupid!
So go figure. A con by the U.S. House Whip, because he sees the nation's Commander in Chief getting away with shit, and so why not emulate? Could it be?
Or is there some third explanation besides stupid or deliberate con?
Readers, figure it out. It's not as if it's a complicated situation. It's pretty clear.
UPDATE: Related items, here, here and here. Try search = sulfide copper mine tailings storage failures worldwide
