Okefenokee mining protection bills do not advance House
The bills were aimed at Alabama-based Twin Pines Minerals' plan to strip mine for titanium dioxide, staurolite and zircon around three miles from the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge's Trail Ridge. The Trail Ridge is 'the ancient sand dune that serves as an earthen dam for the swamp,' GRN said, and is essential for hydrology in the Okefenokee and surrounding areas like the St. Mary River.
House Bill 561 would have prohibited future mining along the Okefenokee's Trail Ridge, a GRN spokesperson said. If passed, it would've prohibited the director of the EPD 'from issuing, modifying, or renewing any permit or accepting any bond to conduct surface mining operations on Trail Ridge for future permit applications and amendments,' the bill said.
The second bill, HB 562, would've place a five-year moratorium, or hold, on mining along the Okefenokee's Trail Ridge. GRN said that this hold would've provide state regulators and independent scientists time to evaluate how mining at the Twin Pines site could impact groundwater levels under and near the swamp.
The five-year timeline would've aligned with the Twin Pines demo mine duration, which includes four years of active mining plus one year groundwater recovery monitoring.
The Okefenokee mining bills were sponsored by several Republicans in Georgia's coastal areas, including Thomasville's Darlene Taylor, Savannah's Ron Stephens and St. Mary's Rep. Steven Sainz. Gerald Greene (R) of Cuthbert, Debbie Buckner (D) of Junction City and Carolyn Hugley (D) of Columbus also sponsored the bills.
Proposals that didn't pass Thursday could still be brought up again later, but it can be more difficult to advance them. They could also be considered next year since this 2025 is the first year of a two-year session.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
11 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
When Trump meets Putin, anything could happen
Top Republicans were horrified. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called it a 'disgraceful performance.' Trump's own national security adviser at the time, John Bolton, would later write that 'Putin had to be laughing uproariously at what he had gotten away with in Helsinki.' Trump plans to see Putin on Friday in Alaska for the first time since his return to the White House to discuss the U.S. president's goal of ending the war between Russia and Ukraine. With Putin pressing peace proposals that heavily favor Russia, many analysts and former Trump officials worry that he will once again turn a meeting with Trump to his advantage. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up During Trump's first term, he and Putin met six times in person and had several more phone conversations. (His successor, Joe Biden, met Putin only once, in June 2021, before the Russian invasion of Ukraine.) Advertisement Those interactions alarmed many of Trump's senior aides, who watched as the U.S. president disregarded their advice, excluded them from meetings with the Russian leader and proposed impractical ideas that appeared to have been planted by Putin, like creating a U.S.-Russia 'impenetrable Cyber Security unit.' The idea was dropped as soon as Trump got back to Washington. Advertisement The relationship has grown more complicated in Trump's second term. In recent months Trump, eager to fulfill his promises of settling the war between Russia and Ukraine, has grown irritated by Putin's unwillingness to de-escalate the conflict. Putin will land in Alaska determined to rewind Trump's view of the war to February, when he berated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at a contentious White House meeting for not showing more gratitude for U.S. support, while speaking warmly about Putin. 'Since the blowup between Trump and Zelenskyy in the Oval Office, Europeans, Ukrainians and Ukraine's supporters inside the administration have cobbled together a policy of helping Ukraine stay in the fight and preventing the lurch by Trump to embrace Russia's view of the conflict,' said Andrew Weiss, vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 'The real test on Friday will be how much of that policy survives the first in-person contact between Trump and Putin in his second term,' Weiss added. The White House portrays the meeting as an example of Trump's dedication to stopping the bloodshed in Ukraine and defends his unconventional style as a needed break from slow-moving diplomatic customs. But critics worry that the hastily planned conversation will play into the hands of Putin, a former KGB agent known as a master manipulator. 'I think he believes he should reel Trump back in, and believes his KGB skills will do that,' Bolton said in an interview with NewsNation last week. The Russian leader may also benefit from the fact that Trump, in contrast to his first term, has few advisers pushing back against Putin's worldview. For his trip to Helsinki, for instance, Trump was surrounded by such Russia hawks as Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. Advertisement Today, Secretary of State Marco Rubio is the lone member of Trump's inner circle with a clear record of criticizing Putin. But even Rubio, who also serves as Trump's national security adviser, has softened his tone since joining Trump's Cabinet. The Alaska meeting was set after Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, met with Putin in Moscow last week. Witkoff, a friend of Trump and a fellow real estate mogul, had no diplomatic experience before joining government. He has been criticized for meeting with Putin without other U.S. officials and for echoing his talking points afterward. To be sure, the Russia hawks around Trump in his first term often had little success. When Trump called Putin after the Russian president was reelected in a March 2018 vote widely seen as illegitimate, Trump's aides placed a clear instruction in his briefing papers: 'DO NOT CONGRATULATE.' Trump did so anyway. Not even a federal investigation into 2016 Russian election interference was enough to restrain Trump. When the two leaders last met in person, on the sidelines of a 2019 Group of 20 gathering in Osaka, Japan, Trump joked with Putin about the subject. 'Don't meddle in the election!' Trump said, with a smirk and a finger wag. Putin grinned in delight. The investigation, and the presence of Putin critics at high levels of his administration, may have led Trump to conduct his conversations with unusual secrecy, however. When the men first sat down together, at a G20 summit in Hamburg, Germany, in 2017, Trump was joined only by his secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, and an interpreter. After the meeting, Trump took the interpreter's notes and ordered him not to disclose what he heard. Advertisement That evening, Trump and Putin had an impromptu conversation, initiated by Trump, at a group dinner. No other Americans were present, and the White House confirmed the meeting only after surprised witnesses spoke to reporters. Asked by reporters what he had told Trump in Hamburg about the 2016 election, Putin replied, 'I got the impression that my answers satisfied him.' For his part, Trump called a New York Times reporter in Hamburg just as he was departing from the summit and said Putin had told him that Russia could not have been involved in the 2016 election because its operations were so sophisticated they never would have been detected. Trump said he was 'very impressed' by that argument, a case he went on to make in public. Analysts said they have low expectations for the sort of breakthrough on Ukraine that Trump is hoping to achieve in Alaska. Putin has shown every sign that he believes he can gain more on the battlefield than in negotiations -- at least on the terms Trump has so far required. Maria Snegovaya, a senior fellow for Russia and Eurasia with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noted that in his first term Trump tried to strike major deals with the authoritarian leaders of such nations as China and North Korea, with limited results. 'In general, Trump's history of meetings with strong men from Xi Jinping to Kim Jong Un does not lead to a successful deal that follows,' she said. Advertisement Fiona Hill, who was senior director for Europe and Russia on the National Security Council in the first Trump White House, agreed that any breakthrough appeared unlikely. Putin and his aides have been frustrated at a lack of diplomatic progress with the Trump administration, and Hill said she sees little fresh ground for a deal, even one favorable to Putin. The Russians 'always want something they can take to the bank, an agreement they can hold the U.S. to,' she said. 'They were excited by Witkoff at first, since he's a direct channel to Trump, but they're frustrated there's no structure around it.' While Putin might welcome a leader-to-leader meeting, she said, 'he wants the details to be worked out later. And Trump isn't a details guy.' This article originally appeared in
UPI
2 hours ago
- UPI
Texas files motion against O'Rourke in fight over redistricting maps
Texas on Tuesday filed a contempt motion against Beto O'Rourke, alleging he is violating a court order by continuing to fundraise for state legislators who fled the Lone Star State earlier this month. File Photo by Kevin Dietsch/UPI | License Photo Aug. 12 (UPI) -- Texas filed a motion for contempt Tuesday against Beto O'Rourke, accusing him of violating a temporary restraining order barring him from fundraising for Democratic lawmakers who fled the state earlier this month amid a deepening fight with Republicans over redistricting maps. In the motion, filed in the District Court for Tarrant County, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton alleges that O'Rourke -- a former U.S. House legislator and potential Democratic presidential candidate -- violated a court order that was handed down Friday by continuing to solicit donations for Texas Democrats through the Democratic Party's ActBlue fundraising arm, specifically at rallies in Fort Worth and Abilene that were held over the weekend and online. "Beto is about to find out that running your mouth and ignoring the rule of law has consequences in Texas," Paxton said on X. "It's time to lock him up." Democrats have come out in force since their Texas colleagues fled the state earlier this month to deny Republicans a quorum to pass redistricting maps that would give the GOP five additional seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Critics and Democrats argue that the maps draw lines that dilute the voting power of Latino and Black people, while serving as a power grab by President Donald Trump through rigging the GOP representation in the House ahead of next year's midterm elections. Usually, redistricting occurs once a decade with the publishing of U.S. Census Bureau data. O'Rourke has been at the forefront of the effort to support Texas Democrats and a target of Paxton, who, on Friday, secured a temporary restraining order barring his fellow Texan from soliciting donations for nonpolitical purposes, including to fund "out-of-state travel, hotel or dining accommodations or services to unexcused Texas legislators during any special legislative session called by the Texas governor." The motion filed Tuesday centers mainly on social media posts by O'Rourke that encourage people to donate "to have the backs of our Texas Democrats in this fight," and the two rallies held over the weekend, specifically the Saturday event in Fort Worth, where Paxton in the motion quotes the Democrat as having said, "There are no refs in this game. [expletive] the rules," seemingly to suggest he was openly flouting the court order. O'Rourke responded to the lawsuit by accusing Paxton of purposefully misusing his words in a social media post, that included a clip from the rally the attorney general quoted him from. The clip shows O'Rourke speaking about encouraging all Democratic-led states to redraw their maps as Texas has to "maximize Democratic Party advantage" because "there are no refs in this game." In the Tuesday response, O'Rourke said Paxton was "lying to try to silence us." "We alerted the court that the AG's office blatantly lied in its filing," he said in a post on X. "We're seeking maximum sanctions in response to his abuse of office." If the court finds O'Rourke in violation of the temporary restraining order, it could fine him up to $500 and jail him for up to six months. The next hearing in the case has been scheduled for Aug. 19. The filing comes the same day the Texas Senate approved the controversial redistricting map 19-2 along party lines, with nine of the 11 Democrats walking out before the vote in protest.
CBS News
2 hours ago
- CBS News
Texas legal battles over redistricting swell; second special session set
Friday is an end and a beginning. It concludes a frustrating special session where Texas lawmakers were unable to reach an agreement on proposed congressional district lines. Republicans who have their foot on the accelerator to drive over the current map in favor of districts that would likely give the GOP more power with five new congressional seats. The red votes were in place, but the blue opposition left the building. Democrats have refused to give Governor Greg Abbott the seats he wants to give to President Donald Trump. Tuesday was another failed attempt at gathering with Texas House Democrats in Illinois, New York and Massachusetts. "If we still do not have a quorum on Friday, the House and the Senate will sine die this session, and the Governor will immediately issue a proclamation for a 2nd called special session," Texas Speaker of the House Dustin Burrows said. "We will gavel in for the 2nd session Friday and reestablish the call of the House." Burrows said Gov. Abbott has the proclamations in place for the second special session. Burrows also said that, in addition to the existing measures against the absent lawmakers, the state plans to charge them for the Texas DPS search, including overtime costs. "As of today, the amount is well over six figures in just overtime," he said. "We have travel and operational costs that are being tracked as well." The heat between Attorney General Ken Paxton and former Congressman Beto O'Rourke. Paxton won a temporary restraining order against O'Rourke's Powered by People, saying it was funding the Democrats who skipped out on the special session. O'Rourke spoke at a rally in Fort Worth on Saturday. Paxton believes some of what he said violates the TRO. He wants O'Rourke held in contempt and possibly jailed. "The temporary injunction doesn't prohibit Mr. O'Rourke from saying things," appellate attorney Chad Ruback said. "They don't match up. These are two ships passing in the night. The temporary injunction prohibits Mr. O'Rourke from raising money and spending that money for the Democratic legislators who are currently out of state." Ruback said it's hard to predict what could happen in the Paxton and O'Rourke showdown in a Tarrant County court, especially with politics involved. "I think the Attorney General's filing today seems like a lot of political grandstanding," Ruback said. "It does not seem like it's going to accomplish much from a legal standpoint. That being said, stranger things have happened." Appeals are Ruback's turf. He is not involved in the case but sees it heading to an appeal. "Any time the attorney general is filing things addressing hot political issues like this, there's going to be a hot political response to it, and then a hot political reply back from the attorney general," he said.
