H.R. 8167 Pittman Robertson Act.

Just because the manufacturer charges an additional 11% does not mean the distributor will double that and then the retailer doubles it again. That means that if they repeal it, everything will drop 40% and the states could charge 20%, give it to Fish and Game and save us money. Thats fairies and unicorns right there. For one, its not going to drop 40% and if it did and the state took 20%, they certainly are not going to give it all to Fish and Game. The reality is that Fish and Game would have to do without the money. They would have to cancel all the programs and all of the people in those programs would lose their jobs. Thats the reality.
Maybe in Tenn.. But in Arkansas the Game and Fish doesn't get a dime from the general fund. We fund them and they do a fantastic job with very little pay and resources. Fine bunch of folks. I wish all government employees were as dedicated and efficient. We would fund them here. but we are wasting our time even discussing it. And you are wrong about the percentage of the tax. It becomes part of the unit price and is marked up at every level. It is not separated anywhere.
 
Maybe in Tenn.. But in Arkansas the Game and Fish doesn't get a dime from the general fund. We fund them and they do a fantastic job with very little pay and resources. Fine bunch of folks. I wish all government employees were as dedicated and efficient. We would fund them here. but we are wasting our time even discussing it. And you are wrong about the percentage of the tax. It becomes part of the unit price and is marked up at every level. It is not separated anywhere.
Game and Fish don't get money from the general fund here either. I don't think you understood what I said. Just like Arkansas, the TN Wildlife Resources Agency gets their money from licensing and the Pittman Robertson Act. You are talking about defunding them and hoping that someone figures out how to keep paying them. The reality is that they will just be defunded and there will be no way for them to make up the difference through increasing the cost of licensing and the states are not going to enact their own state level Pittman Robertson Act. Again, thats the reality of it. If the Pittman Robertson Act is repealed, what is to keep the manufacturers from keeping the money and leaving the prices the way they are? In other words, the money goes to the manufacturers instead of the state game and fish and your license costs go up while at the same time the the state game and fish have to cancel some of their restoration programs, hunter safety and education programs, and lay some of their people off.
 
Game and Fish don't get money from the general fund here either. I don't think you understood what I said. Just like Arkansas, the TN Wildlife Resources Agency gets their money from licensing and the Pittman Robertson Act. You are talking about defunding them and hoping that someone figures out how to keep paying them. The reality is that they will just be defunded and there will be no way for them to make up the difference through increasing the cost of licensing and the states are not going to enact their own state level Pittman Robertson Act. Again, thats the reality of it. If the Pittman Robertson Act is repealed, what is to keep the manufacturers from keeping the money and leaving the prices the way they are? In other words, the money goes to the manufacturers instead of the state game and fish and your license costs go up while at the same time the the state game and fish have to cancel some of their restoration programs, hunter safety and education programs, and lay some of their people off.
The reality is its not going to happen and not worth our breath discussing
 
I see that BJ just okay a 25M fund to build a bridge to nowhere again in AZ. The funds were for transportation, not for building bridges to watch birds. I think it's for the bird's.
 
Top