Lauren Boebert attacks Democrats on House floor claiming they ‘hate Christmas’
Republican lawmaker proposed an amendment requring local foresters to submit plans regarding Christmas tree sales
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Colorado Representative Lauren Boebert slammed Democrats while on the House floor saying they hate Jolly St. Nick as she sparred with California Representative Katie Porter over the sales of Christmas trees on federal land.
“It’s so sad to hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle hate Christmas,” Boebert dryly said Tuesday.
Her comment, which led to laughter from audience members in the chamber, was part of the debate over her proposed amendment to the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program – which seeks to reduce wildfire risk and restore landscapes through collaboration between the public and the government.
Boebert’s amendment requires regional foresters to submit an annual plan regarding the sale of Christmas trees and firewood on federal land. It is a measure she asserts would allow families to heat their homes cost-effectively and thin overgrown forests.
Porter, a progressive member of the House, disputed the amendment believing it unnecessarily places a preference over a marketable product over landscape restoration.
“Tree harvesting for anything other than the purpose of landscape restoration is not in the spirit of the program,” Porter said.
“The forest service already has broad authority to conduct the sale of firewood and Christmas trees, they don’t need it under this restoration program,” the California rep added.
But rather than address Porter’s concerns, Boebert first accused her colleagues on the other side of the aisle of hating Christmas.
The accusation seemingly lit a match under Porter who said as a Christian, she was “offended” that Boebert suggested she hates Christmas.
“This bill is not about, nor has nothing to do, with inhibiting people from celebrating their religious holidays,” Porter said.
The sudden pivot from the amendment’s purpose to a debate over the representatives’ fondness for Christmas is an unsurprising turn of events for a House floor debate. Conversations over bills and amendments have famously divulged into heated debates over unrelated topics.
In 2023, the Republican-controlled House used precious remaining hours to debate reinstating whole milk into schools. In 2019 two lawmakers got into a tiff about the band Nickleback while discussing a voting rights provision.
Porter concluded her argument, “Many of us make happy family memories with trees that are living. We have ways to enjoy trees without cutting them down or burning them.”
Ultimately, Boebert’s amendment passed.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments