Wednesday, March 21s, 2007

Opinion & Editorial

by Cheryl Holden Rice, Stevensville

With dedication, true Bitterrooters live the natural, cultural, and historical sense of community. Here, blessings of unique natural areas, national treasures, and clean water are protected into perpetuity.

We recognize that we share our naturally isolated narrow valley floor with wildlife, U.S. Highway 93, a railroad, and the Bitterroot River. We realize that majestic mountains, some over 10,000 feet above sea level, do not easily allow escape of impurities, such as from fires, exhaust, or sewage. And we believe in the purity of the global gift of the Bitterroot River that serves Montana, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and the Pacific Ocean.

Bitterrooters understand that U.S. 93 is the only road that fully serves us with no other practical way out for about 100 miles. In contrast, Missoula is a hub for highways U.S. 10, U.S. 12, I-90, U.S. 93, MT 135, and MT 200. Enhancing this hub, we can provide Bitterroot U.S. 93 passage for Canada-Mexico or Glacier-Yellowstone, a jewel for tourism. For instance, Yellowstone Gateway areas report tourism brought $265 million in 2003 (www.npca.org/northernrockies/gateway).

Because we are in a planning process mandated by Montana, we want to protect open and agricultural land with light commercial, industrial, and residential areas before we soon suffer residential saturation - the most expensive kind of development because of infrastructural needs.

Determined excellence is evident. Main Street Victor, Stevensville, Darby and our other communities embody historic and cultural good taste. We have wildlife refuges and parks. Over 4000 hand-gathered signatures hand-delivered to the Forest Service voiced sensitivity to irreplaceable, pristine, nationally-owned, non-motorized Lolo Peak and Carlton Ridge with seven ski resorts already within a day's play. Thirty-year-old Eagle Watch, the Bitterroot's first large subdivision, epitomizes the policy of no parcel less than two acres per home. Over 5300 hand-written signatures signify gratitude in the interim planning for one house on each two-acre or more parcel. Judge Jeff Langton grasps the sense of Bitterroot quality when some question the one-per-two legality in district court. Then Ravalli County Attorney George Corn exemplifies true Bitterroot respect for the promise of a vote in this.

November 2006 interim-planning and county commissioner votes boldly address what is perceived as deliberate denial of quality planning by some officials in close politics with certain developers and realtors that put the Bitterroot at reprehensible risk with inexcusable needs, taxes, and traffic. Also, it is regrettable that Hamilton businesses cannot vote on Wal-Mart. Yet, voters refuse to repeat anything similar to October 4, 1891 historical Bitterroot robbery when government, in cahoots with land-grabbers, forced American Indian families off homelands despite local protest, then sold the lands to the highest bidder.

With my family here 139 consecutive years, I vouch that the Bitterroot left to us to safeguard is as sacred to us as the right to vote. Huge numbers of humanity cannot safely, physically or economically, be supported here, especially when monetary gain for a few is the focus. We do not approve death-trap bottleneck or strip development. Long-term progress must be planned for our children who deserve common sense, conviction, courage, and commitment.

A global water system, an international highway, national forest and refuge, and our friendly, but fragile, local infrastructure merit these. Our cultural, historical, and natural amenities will increase our economy in unique Bitterroot style. As county commissioner candidate Jim Rokosch shared, "Yes, our scenery can be eaten." Thank you to those who realize the only option is to protect true Bitterroot excellence with distinction.

Voters knew what it meant

Dear Editor,

Treating citizens with contempt is inexcusable. There's no doubt that that's how we were being viewed when the county commissioners met with the public on March 15 to discuss whether our interim zoning initiative (passed by voters last fall) means one house per two acres or an average density of one house per two acres.

I sat there as paid lackey after paid lackey stood up for the development industry and lied with straight faces that they thought it meant average density. How do I know they were lying? Because the development industry and their cronies, which include some, not all, of the real estate and construction businesses, spent $47,000 last fall attempting to sink the initiative. Remember their full-page ads, mailers and presentations vividly portraying what growth would look like if the initiative passed? None of it portrayed "average density." They all depicted what the initiative said: one house per two acres.

Despite land speculators' attempts to scare the public into thinking that the initiative would create sprawl, the public understood that it was an interim measure to effectively halt irresponsible development and allow time for the commissioners to get on with countywide zoning, a job they've refused to address for years. The development industry should support the democratic process instead of insulting the voters' intelligence with bald-faced lies. And please commissioners, stop wasting your time and mine with needless meetings.

Pat Tucker
Hamilton

Response to Essen letter on obscenity

Dear Editor,

I am writing in response to the letter Marty Essen wrote in last week's Bitterroot Star. He wrote about ten reasons not to sign the Obscenity Ordinance Petition. I hope, Mr. Essen, that you will get your copy of said newspaper so you can follow along.

In response to: 1) You were discussing how law enforcement would need to be sent across the county to house search. Well, those that want to obtain pornography through the internet or on their cell phone will continue to do so even if law enforcement had the time to search for it. That is not the "big ticket" item about the petition. It is mostly for the protection from businesses that will house strip joints, adult bookstores and the like. Society does need to be protected from these things, as they are highly offensive to the majority of people. Anyone who really wants to commit murder can, and they do from time to time. Does that make laws against murder obsolete because, by gosh, if I want to murder I will? Mr. Erickson has the right to go about putting a stop to something he is against.

2) Just what is wrong with a $500.00 fine, 6 months in jail or both when you have forwarded an improper email or cell phone photo anyway? Are you, Mr. Essen, actually saying some photos or emails might be improper? You, yourself, actually believe in moral absolutes?

3) I did not know America was based on obscenity. Hmmm... interesting. So if I do obscene things I'm an American but if I am against obscenity I am un-American? Very interesting. Our presidents used to proudly proclaim that we were the freest country, you say. Well, they never said that we had "no laws" or "no rules." Just freedom. Freedom, like you have, to write in newspapers about people, their ideals, beliefs, etc. without fear of being arrested or worse. Give up another freedom to people like Erickson, you say. What kind of person is Erickson anyway? You seem to be highly afraid of him. Or is it that you are afraid of anyone that has ideas, values, opinions, that are different than yours, especially when they involve moral absolutes?

4) Just what is a legitimate business in your eyes, sir? Is it one that pays taxes, pays employees a fair wage, keeps their business in good repair, or is registered with the Better Business Bureau? Just wondering, because obviously you have some criteria for legitimate business and I would be curious to know what they are. If a business meets your criteria of legitimacy, then will they be able to sell anything they feel like selling? You better watch out with that idea. A business could sell all sorts of things you might be against. Like maybe, shirts that say, "Erickson For President." Maybe free enterprise should only be available to businesses that pass your criteria test, Mr. Essen. Would that make you a happy man?

5) I am told that I am in the radical-right group because of my beliefs. I believe in the One and Only True Living God of the Bible and His Son as my Savior. I believe in absolutes. I believe there is evil in this world. I am against homosexuality and I am against murder - abortion or otherwise. Being in the radical-right does not make me a Taliban member or supporter, but if it makes you feel good to lump us all together, then by all means do so. If you want to imply that supporters of anti-obscenity petitions are sending the terrorists a little love than do that also. Do so with the understanding that that is your opinion and you are allowed to state it because you have freedom. I also have the freedom to state that you, Mr. Essen, are helping to fuel the terrorists' hate against our country and are helping to spur on their attacks. How? By your support of obscenities. This gives terrorists more to hate us for. They want to rid the world of our "immoral" country as it is now. Your idea to let America be obscene will only cause more attacks on our dear country.

6) The Bible does have a lot of sex in it. It should. God is the one who created sex and He created us, male and female. He wants us to have sex and enjoy it. It must be done in the right arena - only a male and female, married to one another, so that sex can be enjoyed wholly and completely as God designed and intended it to be. The Bible definitely talks about sex in a "kinky" way. These are abominations. For example: Leviticus 18 talks about a ton of "kinky" things. These things are mentioned and many others because people were doing these things in those days and still are today. God wanted people to understand that these things were wrong. I have read the King James, the New International and the New American Standard versions of the Holy Bible and nowhere does it use the exact wording you have used in Ezekiel 23. You chose to take God's words and put them into your own words so that it would "fall under" the obscene writing section of the ordinance. You chose to write those words, Mr. Essen, not God. In many nations around the world people are forbidden to distribute the Bible in whole or in part. But many people risk their very lives for even just a page of the Bible. You ask, "Should anyone have to worry about the legality of what they quote from the Bible? In answer to that, no. As a Christian and defender of God, I will not worry about laws that go against God or His Holy Word. You can have me locked up, torture me or kill me but you will never stop me from quoting the Bible. I am sure there are many other Christians around our country that feel the same way.

7) You say that Erickson's reasoning that "porn causes rape" is flawed. What do you have to base that on? How many police officers, psychologists and actual rapists and pedophiles have you talked to? There is overwhelming evidence to support Mr. Erickson, not you.

8) You stated that, "Porn can actually prevent rapes from occurring." Are you serious? Simple biology, huh? You stated, "Men who view sexually-oriented materials often relieve themselves before they finish." Key word often, not always. If you knew anything about rapists, than you would know that a huge majority rape out of hatred or control of women. Their fire is often fueled, before they rape, by stimulation of viewing porn. You can search files the country over, interview police officers, psychologists and the actual offenders and find out for yourself. Most men will never rape, but those that have a penchant for it sure enjoy the rush that pornography gives them before they commit the crime.

9) I would gladly have my money spent on the ordinance and all it entails. Better than to have even more of it going to the penitentiary system to pay for those that rape, molest, abuse, pander and profit from obscenity issues That also includes any problems faced by people who "enjoy" porn and cannot control themselves. I also would enjoy paying for elections and the defense to stop "obscene businesses" from springing up.

10) Why would anyone protect the rights of others to view pornography even if they themselves don't like it? Well, that usually boils down to a few things. Like if that "thing" is outlawed then I might have to give up something I do that is questionable. Or, if that thing is viewed as unlawful than what I do might be viewed as unlawful too. Or how about, if I go against that thing than I might be saying there really is wrong and right. That would mean absolutes and ugh... intolerence. Oh no! You stated that putting a certain version of morality to a vote just might take away the very right someone cherishes the most. Hmm... let me get this straight. Are you saying whether it passes or not might take away the very right someone cherishes most? Or are you saying that if it passes (by majority vote of the people, I might add), then that might take away the very right someone cherishes the most? Either way you slice it, you are saying essentially that someone might actually cherish obscenities. If that is the case then our money will be spent on the nut case who cherishes their right to view porn more than anything else. Oh, how tragic. Do you really want people running around with that mindset? Do you really, Mr. Essen?

One last thing, you tend to bring the Bible or God into many of your thoughts in the Bitterroot Star. What are you really afraid of, Marty Essen? God and His truth are not afraid of you. Go Dallas!

Jeri Elmore
Stevensville

More 'smoke and mirrors' in Helena

Dear Editor,

The legislative session is half over. If the second half of the session goes like the first half, 2007 will be the session where partisan politics beat public policy.

A lot of "smoke and mirrors" politics is going on. By using "Cliff Note" descriptions of a bill, a bill can be presented as a good thing. But sometimes, when you actually read the bill, it becomes apparent that the citizens' best interests aren't really being met.

Rep. Bob Lake's March 7th letter is an excellent example. Rep. Lake was championing several bills and based on his descriptions, I'd agree. Then I read the bills. As Rep. Lake said during the 2006 election when his voting record was challenged, there's more to these bills than he's telling you.

HB 678 - Property Tax relief. This bill barely passed out of the House on a 51-49 vote. Its basis is property tax reductions by changing school funding laws. It's a "robbing Peter to pay Paul" bill for education by "increasing" state level funding to local schools by basically shifting around current funding structure. This incredibly convoluted bill doesn't pass the "smell test."

HB 345 - Renters Tax Credit. Passed the House 75-24. The maximum credit to renters would be 3% of gross rent paid on a maximum of $4000. The maximum credit would be $120. Renters would receive a tax credit only if their household income is less than $45,000/year.

HB270 - Healthcare Tax Credit. Rep. Lake said the House had passed this bill but as of March 5, this bill was marked on the LAWS website as probably dead, as the 3rd reading deadlocked on a 50-50 vote. The basics of this bill: taxpayers paying their own healthcare/insurance could get a tax credit equal to 50% of expenses with a maximum of $200/year if single or $500/year for a family. This tax credit only applies to single households with income under $35,000 and families with income under $50,000. Anyone with income over $70,000 would not get the tax credit. If folks can't afford to purchase healthcare insurance in the first place, how does a $200 off your taxes help? And for those who do make enough money to buy health insurance, why can't they get the tax credit?

Also in HB270 is a real stinker of a clause. In 2005, Democrats pushed for and got passed a law that allows a tax credit for small businesses providing health insurance for their employees. HB270 reduces the tax credit from $100/month/employee to $100/year/employee, an $1100 reduction in tax credit for small businesses. That's a nasty hit to small businesses.

HB564 - Income Tax reduction. This is an across the board .2% income tax reduction. Income over $13,900/year would be taxed at 6.7% (currently 6.9%). If you make $13,900/year, your income tax reduction would be $27.80/year or $2.32/month. Average income in Montana is $32,000/year and you would receive $64.00/year or $5.33/month. At $100,000/year, your income tax reduction would be $200/year or $16.66/month. Average Montanans' tax reductions won't even buy two gallons of gas a month.

HB 529 is Rep. Lake's bill increasing the exemption for the business equipment tax to $100,000 and reducing the overall tax rate from 3% to 2%. To offset the large amount that local governments would lose in tax base, the bill proposes the state reimburse 50% of the lost tax revenue to local governments. Someone will have to make up that other 50% reduction in taxes in order for local governments to provide services at current levels. Who will pay more? (Answer: homeowners, again.)

Rep. Lake's letter claims about a total $600 million in tax reduction. Looking at the fiscal notes of each bill, I don't know where he's getting his numbers. He has inflated all official figures by substantial amounts.

Bottom line: don't believe everything you hear from our representatives in Helena. Get the rest of the story. Go to www.leg.state.mt.us and look up the bills.

There's a Three-Card Monte game going on in Helena and while the dealer always leads you to believe you will win big, at the end you lose. Watch our representatives closely. After all, it's our lives they are affecting.

Deb Essen
Victor

Thanks from Friends of Mission

Dear Editor,

The first Friendly Family Brunch, sponsored by the Friends of the Historic St. Mary's Mission in March, was enjoyed by many, not only for its delicious food, but for its community camaraderie. It took many hardworking volunteers to make it the success that it was, starting with the outstanding cooks, Cathy Atkinson and Bill Severson. Expert assistance for the brunch was given by Riga and John Winthrop, Ann Marie and John Carbin, Colleen and Jay Meyer, Beth and John Stone, Molly and John Munk, Father Mike Smith, Caroline Davis and Earl Jansvold. We are most grateful to all who attended, and look forward to seeing you at our next brunch in the fall.

The Friends of the Historic Mission is a new, non-denominational organization committed to raising funds for the preservation and restoration of the historical St. Mary's Mission. Anyone wishing to join our group is more than welcome, and can contact Beverly Helrich at 777 2505.

Beverly Helrich, President
Friends of the Historic Mission

©2006 Bitterroot Star
This site was Done By Dooney