Bipartisan Senate duo finds common ground on fighting wildfires

In the halls of U.S. democracy, bipartisanship is a difficult concept. But some topics seem more likely to warrant collaboration between Republicans and Democrats, especially when it comes to housing or housing-adjacent issues.

One such issue is natural disasters, including wildfires. Two senators with different bases of support are uniting in their efforts to fight them through new legislation.

Sens. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.) — who hail from states with very different political leadership — are combining their efforts to pass a series of bills that would more aggressively fight the increasingly common occurrence of wildfires.

They told news outlet Semafor that the collaboration and compromise has been easy to reach.

The pairing could have been seen as unexpected. Padilla worked through the 2024 campaign as a deputy on the Democratic Party’s campaign apparatus, and had sought to defend then-incumbent Sen. Jon Tester, whom Sheehy defeated in November.

But Sheehy explained that the working relationship has been fruitful, and that the issue itself is one that warrants teamwork and action. The report also added that Sheehy had helped found an aerial firefighting company in Montana, so the point of collaboration seemed clear.

“If we can’t agree on literally making sure that cities don’t burn to the ground, then our republic is probably lost, you know?,” Sheehy told the outlet.

Padilla indicated that if their planned bills get through both the House of Representatives and the Senate, they would approach the White House together.

“I can’t wait for a joint letter to the White House once the bills get through both the Senate and the House,” Padilla said. “The Senate version of the Fix Our Forests Act is probably the prime example of what the collaboration can and should lead to.”

One of the things the pair is hoping to do is to centralize the national fire response. Sheehy said that this is primarily a matter of necessity.

“We keep referring to the West, which obviously is still the epicenter for it. But let’s not forget, just about a month and a half ago, that town that burned in New Jersey was in the 98th percentile of fire danger,” he explained. “It wasn’t a surprise.”

Sheehy also mentioned the wildfire that devastated the town of Lahaina on the Hawaiian island of Maui, saying it was in the 99th percentile for danger.

“That town had been modeled as a severe fire risk. Nothing had been done about it,” he said.

When asked about potential points of disagreement, potentially including climate change, Sheehy said that any climate action would not necessarily provide the needed relief in the short term.

“If climate change is the cause of all these fires — guess what? Whatever dials we turn on the climate will be 20 or 30 or 40 or 50 years down the line,” he said. “And in the meantime, we owe our communities better protection than we’re giving them now.”

Padilla acknowledged a need to tackle both issues. And while he is thinking about the potential long-term causes of more fires, it doesn’t diminish Sheehy’s observation that action is needed now.

“We have to do both,” Padilla said. “So I agree that the here and now has created a crisis, has created a sense of urgency, which is why we’re doing this bill to be more strategic and effective in how we respond.”

Sheehy added that two fires in 2021 — the Dixie and Caldor fires — combined caused more carbon emissions into the atmosphere “than every single car in California.”

The House version of the bill was introduced by Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) in January and included 56 co-sponsors — 39 Republicans and 17 Democrats.

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) introduced the Senate version into that chamber in April, where it is supported by Padilla and Sheehy. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) also offered a statement of support.

It passed the lower chamber on Jan. 23 with a vote of 279-141, with no Republican opposition and 141 Democrats voting no.

Hearings in the Senate were held earlier this month. If passed there, the bill may need to go back to the House for reconciliation prior to going to the president’s desk to be signed into law.