by jhwygirl
Whatever happen to the Republican/Lieberman ideal of not wanting government to come between the patient and the doctor?
Ugh.
By now you’ve heard of the passage of the House’s Affordable Health Care for America Act. Before that vote could hit the floor, conservative Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak put forth an amendment pro-choice people are accurately calling The Stupak Coathanger Amendment. It prohibits the health insurance plans in any government health insurance exchange from covering abortions.
64 Democrats and all but one Republican (Shadegg, of Arizona, who won’t vote for any reform) voted for the bill, and there you have it – the end result being that those most in need of health care – those that have the least – will be left to fend for themselves as those with private coverage move to the front of the line.
For abortions.
Don’t kid yourself, either, into thinking it was anything less.
That amendment didn’t need to occur. Reform was going to pass, and Stupak was bluffing, and many were calling Dems on that bluff up to the vote.
Women’s rights are that expendable for that many? For what? For a show?
Shakesville’s quixote summarizes it well:
But women are just, as always, the expendable canaries in the coal mine. Their rights are toast, which means so are everyone else’s.I’m going to shout that: WOMEN’S RIGHTS ARE TOAST WHICH MEANS SO ARE EVERYONE ELSE’S.
Rights are for all. When only some people have them, they’re just privileges. And privileges can be taken away.
When only some people have them, they’re just privileges. And privileges can be taken away. Think about that.
The most superior Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (of Florida) is over this bill already, saying it will be stripped in conference, after which there is no chance to offer amendments – it becomes an up-or-down vote only.
I trust in Wasserman-Schultz. She’s the type of person you don’t want to get in front of – she’ll run ya’ down if you aren’t going top speed.
40 lawmakers have signed on to a letter saying that they will not support reform if Stupak’s amendment remains.
There are some things you don’t budge on. Pro-choice and preservation of that choice are building block components of the Democratic Party platform. There is no wiggle there.
No wiggle there with my vote either, btw.
Not one vote Not one dime Not one moment of time. Period.
by JC
This open thread is dedicated to the incredible perseverance and diligence shown by goof, lizard, Mark T. and PogoPossum last week on my thread the rise of the conservative party. Have at it boys! And if anybody else has something they’d like to gab about, this thread is for you.
by jhwygirl
Most of you, by now, have probably heard a little about the Swan Valley & Condon secessionists? The group of Missoulians up on the furthest northern reaches of the county that would like to secede to Lake County?
I’ve not heard anything for some time, and while I was tempted to give a holla to the courthouse and ask around, I failed to catch any time today to do it.
Apparently, though, there are more Missoula County residents that think they’d be better off with another county: Petty Creek residents have bent the ear of state Representative Gordon Hendrick about seceding to Mineral County.
Hendrick is hot on their cause, which would bring $253,663.58 of 2009 tax assessment revenue from Missoula’s 19th precinct to Mineral County. He’s also got his eyes on the tax revenue from 50 homes in the 20th precinct also.
Missoula County’s pretty large. It’s bigger than Delaware and Rhode Island. It may, frankly, be better for both counties if either Condon or Petty Creek if they went to Mineral or Lake County. Government, any level of it, exists to serve citizens…so if either of this group feels it isn’t getting its money worth – and the cost of providing those services on these outer reaches of the county is better met by another county, well – can’t really complain about that, right? Should be about the citizens getting the best value for their tax dollar.
Missoula County might be better off to not be sprawled out so much either.
All that being said, one thing that stuck out to me was how ill-informed Rep. Hendrick was – The Clark Fork Chronicle references Hendrick as saying that Missoula County had set precedent in having portions of it secede, and then he apparently referenced the Swan/Condon group. I mean – I can see him being overeager to get at what will probably amount to close to a million in tax revenue, but jumping the gun and telling Mineral County Commissioners that Swan/Condon was now part of Lake County was a bit of an untruth.
There’s also talk about creating another county. All very interesting stuff.
by jhwygirl
Sometimes I think I don’t pimp this blog often enough. This will be a bit of a rant.
Sad to see Missoula’s progressive talk radio AM930 go. So suddenly – and I’ve missed anything if it’s been mentioned elsewhere.
Now – I don’t know when it happened, but Tuesday I settled in the wheels for an early long drive east and couldn’t figure out if someone had messed with the settings on my radio or if whoever it was on the airwaves was some guest host…but clearly, it wasn’t progressive. Sure enough, later that day I got an email.
So now there are 3 conservative stations on the dial here (at 3)? 930, 1290 and 1340? Or something like that?
Now, I imagine Gap West (who owns all three of those stations and a near handful of others around town) is probably claiming that he’s not able to generate any ad revenue on that station. Would seem hard to believe, given he owns the other two regressive stations and Missoula is a progressive town, university and all.
Glad I have satellite radio because I’d rather listen to talk or news at times, and I sure don’t want to listen to that stuff. I’ll turn Gap West Missoula radio back on when they put progressive talk back on air.
by jhwygirl
In the form of $549,349 in campaign contributions from big oil.
“Give us a reason to vote for you, or we sit home”
by JC
Conventional wisdom already is telling us that the lesson democrats should take home (and republicans and the MSM is amplifying) is that when the base doesn’t turn out, as it didn’t in the NJ and Virginia gubernatorial races, that candidates should move to the right in order to capture moderates and independents.
Ezra Klein explains this phenomenon:
“…Barack Obama wasn’t on the ballot yesterday, and he won’t be on the ballot in 2010. If his voters stayed home last night, many politicians will take that as proof that they’ll stay home in 2010, too. That doesn’t just make the map harder for Democrats. It also moves Democrats to the right, as their consultants will explain that a winning coalition requires more voters from relatively conservative blocs, like seniors and downscale independents, and thus a more centrist campaign strategy.”
Kos takes the opposite approach, and clearly lays out why dems need to move to their left in order to shore up their electoral chances:
There will be much number-crunching tomorrow, but preliminary numbers (at least in Virginia) show that GOP turnout remained the same as last year, but Democratic turnout collapsed. This is a base problem, and this is what Democrats better take from tonight:
- If you abandon Democratic principles in a bid for unnecessary “bipartisanship”, you will lose votes.
- If you water down reform in favor of Blue Dogs and their corporate benefactors, you will lose votes.
- If you forget why you were elected — health care, financial services, energy policy and immigration reform — you will lose votes.
Tonight proved conclusively that we’re not going to turn out just because you have a (D) next to your name, or because Obama tells us to. We’ll turn out if we feel it’s worth our time and effort to vote, and we’ll work hard to make sure others turn out if you inspire us with bold and decisive action.
The choice is yours. Give us a reason to vote for you, or we sit home. And you aren’t going to make up the margins with conservative voters. They already know exactly who they’re voting for, and it ain’t you.
So as we head into the 2010 election season, dems have a choice: work for the progressive base that swept Obama to power, and ignite them to help fight for change; or follow the CW and continue the tack to the right in the off-year election, in hopes of capturing enough independent and centrist votes to make up for the loss of the base.
It isn’t just the right that is struggling with a split in their party–conservatives ejecting RINOs in an attempt to purify the republican party is indicative of the failure of GOP politics. The left likewise is split with a strong progressive section that refuses to follow timid democrats ratcheting to the right. Bad dem politics, as exhibited by the likes of Max Baucus, already is beginning to cement a growing rift between progressives and mainstream democrats on the left.
Democrats need to make up their minds what is more important to their party heading into ‘10: progressive ideals, or conservative, centrist and corporatist pandering. Because without a candidate like Obama on the ticket to turn out the progressive, young and minority base that his presidency owes its existence to, they’re left to their own devices (good policy votes for incumbents, strong stances by challengers) to motivate those voters to turn out.
As Kos said: “We’ll turn out if we feel it’s worth our time and effort to vote, and we’ll work hard to make sure others turn out if you inspire us with bold and decisive action.”
Obama should take that as a wakeup call for ‘12.
by Pete Talbot
Congratulations to Roy Houseman, who defeated incumbent John Hendrickson by 162 votes in the Ward 2 race. Condolences to Mike O’Herron, who almost took out incumbent Dick Haines in Ward 5: 1,398 – 1,328.
And with all the other Missoula Democratic Party-endorsed incumbents winning their seats, it looks like President Barack Obama has the support of all America — at least if you follow the thinking of the mainstream media.
You see, this off-year election was supposed to be an indicator of support for Obama, the Democrats, and their policies.
According to the AP, two GOP gubernatorial victories (New Jersey and Virginia) are “a troubling sign for the president and his party heading into an important midterm election year.”
Bull-ony.
Apply this reasoning to our city council races and the country overwhelming supports Barack Obama and the Democratic Party. It’s a litmus test confirming the national mood: a referendum on health care legislation, and the handling of the economy and the war in Afghanistan, and is a precursor to the 2010 elections … yeah, right.
First, the fact that a Democrat took the vacant GOP seat in New York’s 23rd Congressional District and a Democrat won a special election for a congressional seat in California are strong indicators that Democrats are holding their own — certainly as strong as looking at any gubernatorial races. People don’t vote for governors the same way they vote for U.S. Senators and Representatives.
Second, on the governor races, New Jersey is awash with corruption scandals (Really? New Jersey you say? What a surprise!). So, the voters are going to throw the bums out, doesn’t matter what party is at the helm. And Virginia has always been a conservative, southern state. I was surprised it had a Democrat as the incumbent. No big shocker there.
Seems that the mainstream media and the political pundits are reaching a bit so they can make interesting banter and exciting headlines.
by JC
It’s election day, and the thoughts on my mind, one year after Obama and democrats swept to victory and republicans went down in defeat, are thus:
Will the conservative uprising in elections back east amount to anything more than a squabble in the GOP, and progressive democrats will succeed in wresting control of their party from its moderate entrenchment?
Or has the republican party completely lost its ability to govern, and the return of the two party system will revolve around a centrist democrat/republican corporatism vs. a far right conservative ideology?
Alternatively, anybody feeling the love, àla hope and change?
by Pete Talbot
High Country News has a chart in its October 26 issue highlighting the wealthiest Western Congressfolk. There’s only one Montanan on the list of the 50 richest: Rep. Denny Rehberg.
Out of 100 Senators and 435 Representatives, Rehberg ranks 27th. And as the News reports, these are lowball figures because members of Congress report in ranges ($1 million to $5 million, for example).
Now, I don’t particularly have a problem with Denny’s wealth; heck, we should all be so lucky. But Denny has the best health care your and my money can buy. He obviously doesn’t need a public option. So, when he holds an “emergency” town hall meeting to spout right-wing misinformation like a “new board of federal bureaucrats to dictate the health plans that all individuals must buy” … well, how disingenuous.
It isn’t just Denny’s wealth that separates him from your average Montanan, however. It’s his health insurance. You see, Denny gets his insurance from the same pool as all federal employees — about eight million of them — making it one of the most flexible, affordable and transportable plans in the nation. Sort of like what a public option would offer the rest of us not on the public payroll.
I’m sure Denny likes his plan. He just doesn’t want you to have one like it.
And check out more of Denny’s misrepresentations covered by Pogie in two recent posts over at Intelligent Discontent.
(Sorry I couldn’t link to the High Country News chart. Couldn’t find it on their site. Here’s the Roll Call report where the News got its information.)
by Jamee Greer
This is cross-posted on Left in the West.
In what seems like history on fast-forward in the movement for LGBTI equality, today marked another milestone—equally important to the fight against the HIV virus—and in its support of people living with HIV/AIDS.
Today President Obama announced the signing of the Ryan White Treatment Extension Act of 2009, freeing up government funds to help hundreds of thousands of mostly lower income Americans living with HIV/AIDS get the important lifesaving treatments they so need.
There has been a ban on individuals with HIV from entering America for 22 years, an archaic and discriminatory law that comes from a place of misunderstanding, from attitudes heavily rooted in fear at the epidemic’s beginning—attitudes that still exist today.
This ban ends at the beginning of the new year.
Today’s speech by President Obama’s can be read in its entirety at the White House website, but here is an excerpt:
But it will also take an effort to end the stigma that has stopped people from getting tested; that has stopped people from facing their own illness; and that has sped the spread of this disease for far too long. A couple of years ago Michelle and I were in Africa and we tried to combat the stigma when we were in Kenya by taking a public HIV/AIDS test. And I’m proud to announce today we’re about to take another step towards ending that stigma.
Twenty-two years ago, in a decision rooted in fear rather than fact, the United States instituted a travel ban on entry into the country for people living with HIV/AIDS. Now, we talk about reducing the stigma of this disease — yet we’ve treated a visitor living with it as a threat. We lead the world when it comes to helping stem the AIDS pandemic — yet we are one of only a dozen countries that still bar people from HIV from entering our own country.
If we want to be the global leader in combating HIV/AIDS, we need to act like it. And that’s why, on Monday my administration will publish a final rule that eliminates the travel ban effective just after the New Year. Congress and President Bush began this process last year, and they ought to be commended for it. We are finishing the job. It’s a step that will encourage people to get tested and get treatment, it’s a step that will keep families together, and it’s a step that will save lives.
Despite the sense of optimism you hopefully feel by today’s announcement, the fight is far from over. Real health care reform that is inclusive of everyone, affordable for all and respectful and responsive to the privacy of those who live with HIV/AIDS, while working to lift the stigma surrounding the virus, is critical.
Missoula AIDS Council works to prevent the transmission of HIV, while advocating for and supporting individuals living with HIV/AIDS in Montana. Please consider donating today and visit http://www.missoulaaidscouncil.org/for more information.
Video from the President’s speech:
Ward 2 Candidate Hendrickson Steals Opponent’s Endorsement; Dick Haines Weaves His Own Web of Deceit
by jhwygirl
I expect negative stuff from this crew during an election, but John Hendrickson has sunk to new lows with a radio spot done in such a way that most listeners would be left to believe Mayor John Engen has endorsed the guy. The Missoula Independent’s Skylar Browning was first on the story, in its must-read-daily blog.
Hendrickson has been so ineffective in his last 4 years on council that he can not find anyone or anything to say something positive about himself that he had to plagiarize Mayor John Engen’s endorsement of his opponent Roy Houseman?
How amazing low is that? Really?
And you know he was thinking he was being oh-so-smart…
As for trying to claim Engen’s endorsement? Nothing could be farther from the truth.
See that paragraph up there on the top of the page? Now listen to that radio spot again. Unbelievable.
Ineffective has been my favorite word for both Hendrickson and Haines lately. Both of these guys are campaigning, essentially, on the same issues they campaigned on 4 years ago. Haines on his $50,000,000 bridge over the Bitterroot and Hendrickson with his not-quite-as-costly (unless you consider the rise in pedestrian and biker related deaths) recall of the W. Broadway diet.
I mean – even if you are on board with both or either of these issues, Hendrickson and Haines clearly aren’t your guys. Think about that. Not if you want to get something done.
Both of these guys claim to be fiscally conservative, yet both of their pet issues are costly costly changes to and issues that have been decided because of other factors beyond their control. Hell-be-damned, they want what they want regardless of what it’s going to cost – and in the meantime, neither one of them will work towards other solutions in the interim.
I can give Haines credit for at least admitting his involvement in suing the City – Hendrickson, on the other hand, didn’t have the guts to admit his involvement, even after Haines had ‘let ‘er slip.’
Haines compounds on his false claims to fiscal conservatism by deceptively suggesting that “(O’Herron) has said city council members should not sue their employers. Will he go along to get along?“
First off – Haines has been chasing O’Herron since the start of this election on this “suing his employer” statement of O’Herron’s. I find that funny.
Secondly – and you gotta love darthvadardemocrat* Lee Clemenson’s word choice – “Will he go along to get along?” ??? What? Will O’Herron work together to make sure something gets done? Will O’Herron (the horror) cooperate? Is that a bad thing?
On the other end of that ridiculous (think Jaws music in the background) suggestion that O’Herron will “go along to get along” as if it is something absolutely sinister, Haines did go along to get along on the vote to fund the separate analysis of the MDOT draft EIS for Russell Street. That cost the city some $85,000 I believe – feel free, anyone to correct me – and Haines went along and provided a crucial vote to move that alternative study forward all because he eventually wanted the same votes in return when and if his bridge-over-the-Bitterroot ever surfaced again.
So when, exactly, Ms. Clemenson, Mr. Haines, is it OK to go along to get along? Apparently it’s OK some of the time.
Ahh…the drama that is these Haines and Hendrickson. Vote the bums out. Houseman and O’Herron will get things done.
For his part, Engen has now recorded his own radio spot endorsing Houseman. Funny. It uses the same words.
Missoula County Democrats have filed a complaint against Hendrickson with the Office of Political Practices. As Keila points out – don’t hold your breath, anyone….the players in this could be long on social security before OPP ever gets to it. Ward 6 Councilperson Ed Childers is still waiting out on his complaint against Lewie Schneller from the 2007 elections.
Which is another problem all unto itself now, isn’t it?
*With a wink to klemz on that one…
by Pete Talbot
Buried in an AP story on climate change was Sen. Max Baucus saying he had “serious reservations” with a modest effort to cut carbon emissions over the next decade.
What a tool.
The bill being considered by a Senate environmental panel calls for a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2020. The bill might stave off catastrophic global warming … or at least it’s a start.
Here are some more choice quotes from our senior Senator:
“We cannot afford a first step that takes us further away from an achievable consensus on commonsense climate change legislation.”
There’s Max, trying to build that “achievable consensus” again. He sure did a fine job on health care. And Max, please explain “commonsense climate change legislation” to me. Would that be no legislation?
“Montana can’t afford the unmitigated impacts of climate change, but we also cannot afford the unmitigated effects of climate change legislation,” Baucus added.
Christ, I’m so sick of Max’s double talk I could puke slugs.
Compare Max’s quotes to those of the bill’s author, Sen. John Kerry. From the AP story:
… Kerry acknowledged that the bill would raise energy prices, but said the savings from reducing energy and the money to be made in new technologies were far greater.
“Are there some costs? Yes, sir, there are some costs,” he said and added that while an array of studies show restricting greenhouse gases will lead to higher energy prices, “none of them factor in the cost of doing nothing.”
Well said, John.
I’m surprised that Max stuck his neck out so far on this one. After all, his campaign contributions from the energy industry pale in comparison to the dollars he gets from the health care/insurance industry. Still, there are few Democrats out there who are as capable as Max of doing the wrong thing.
by jhwygirl
Montana Agriculture Department has issued the state’s first industrial hemp production license – the first since approving it into law in 2001.
Federal Law requires a special permit to grow hemp.
Laura Murphy, who works for a Bozeman medical marijuana business, plans to lease some land near Ennis and grow the crop. She has no intent of obtaining the federal permit.
Interestingly, last week the Obama administration announced a new no-prosecute policy towards medical marijuana in states where medical marijuana has been made legal.
Clearly there are some significant distinctions between hemp and medical marijuana. Hemp has thousands of beneficial uses – medical marijuana, on the other hand, is a waste if you don’t put it up in smoke, so to speak.
It’s an interesting case on state’s rights, though – Montana even reaffirmed its committment towards industrialized hemp this past legislative session when it passed a joint resolution urging congress to legalized the production of hemp.
Both of those bills, btw – the 2001 law and the 2009 resolution – had overwhelming support in both the house and the senate.
Will the Obama administration take the same hand with hemp as it plans with medical marijuana?
I also ponder the parallels of this issue another 2009 legislative session law, Rep. Joel Boniek’s HB246, a bill to exempt Montana-made firearms and ammunition from commerce clause.
Disclosure: I am not fan of Rep. Joel Boniek.
Now – aside from the sheer lunacy of a state writing into law (or a legislator voting for, or a governor signing into law) a bill that is simply titled “AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE,” the bill was intended to directly challenge state’s rights via the every powerful-and-easy-to-scare-up-tons-of-both-press-and-cash on media magnet: Guns.
Exempting from federal regulation? Under the Constitution of the United States? Really? How do you take an oath of office to uphold the laws of Montana and the United States….oh, never mind.
2001’s hemp law, on the other hand, took the approach of not only legislating an affirmative defense for anyone who obtains the state’s hemp-growing license, it requires the state to petition the federal government for a change or waiver.
As the Missoulian article points out, the state did apply in 2002 to the feds for recognition of the (then new) state law. Montana was denied. The Ag Department is currently considering whether to reapply now that they have issued a license – but points out it will administer the law.
Maybe our delegation should step in here and ask for a statement from the Administration regarding hemp production? Given it not only had overwhelming support, that support in Montana has been long and was just recently reaffirmed.
by jhwygirl
Ward 5 candidate Mike O’Herron scored a major endorsement with former Republican county commissioner Barbara Evans and community activist and past president of the Upper Linda Vista Homeowners Association Charlie Brown telling voters to vote O’Herron:
As Miller Creek residents, we need a representative from Ward 5 who has common sense, works with others in a collaborative manner, calmly listens to our concerns, and who can provide a realistic perspective to our problems and our future. For that reason, we ask for your support for Mike O’Herron for City Council, Ward 5.
Oh no they didn’t!
Did Queen Missoula Republican just say that Dick Haines was obstructive and unrealistic? The duly-signed letter details a short history of “the bridge” that Dick Haines has dithered about for nearly 5 years now, and the support it now has (or doesn’t) despite the rhetoric being put out by Dick Haines as of late.
In other words – misrepresenting an issue and the support it has isn’t really a nice thing to do.
Haines’ pet project has been that bridge. He ran on the issue back in 2005. He claims to be a fiscally responsible guy yet he continues to advocate for a bridge that would cost upward of $30 million dollars. The double-talk is worthy to point out.
What Evans and Brown were really saying – or asking – was this: Do you want solutions, or do you want someone who is going to continue to make unrealistic promises?
Here’s a link to Mike O’Herron for Ward 5 website. The main thing I see in O’Herron is that he shows a strong desire to move forward – to find solutions. Inaction does not appear to be an option for him. That is a good thing.
Voters in Ward 5 should take note of that endorsement. Barbara has been long active in local Republican politics, and Charlie has a long history of supporting Democratic party causes, while working bipartisan-style on many issues with Barbara Evans….endorsing O’Herron should give even the most diehard Republicans good reason to cast that vote for Mike O’Herron.
Charlie Brown is Mike O’Herron’s treasurer.
by jhwygirl
The Missoulian continues its coverage of Griz Coach Bobby Hauck’s asshole-ish behavior, with a report on UM’s crisis management of the situation, along with a synopsis of the nationwide attention being thrust upon the Griz football program – virtually all of it critical.
Hauck continues berating Kaimin reporters?! You have got to be kidding me?
Chelsi Moy’s story had some interesting WTH? tidbits, I thought – one of them being the reason offered up for UM President (King) George Dennison along with Vice-President Jim Foley’s excuse for being “unable to weigh in,” on the matter:
UM President George Dennison has been in Europe for the past two weeks working to expand student exchange programs in Italy and Ireland, and is attending the International Student Exchange Program’s annual convention in France, and therefore has been unable to weigh in on the issue.Executive Vice President Jim Foley was traveling this week, attending a Big Sky Conference meeting in Salt Lake City and a meeting with the Collegiate Licensing Company in Atlanta. On Friday, he was in Sacramento, Calif., with the Grizzly football team.
Really? A two-week trip touring Italy, Ireland and France? How much is that costing? While UM has a $3.6 million budget shortfall?
Beyond that – the Hauck “situation” began publicly back on September 18th, when the Kaimin reported it. Now, of course it may be possible that Dennison and Foley were in South America or Australia or something. But at that point, King George and VP Jim Foley knew (at least) that Hauck was shutting out Kaimin reporters. They had an obligation then to step in. Hauck should be a role model, as should UM and any and all of its programs – and allowing that behavior to occur, yet alone to continue is disgraceful.
Sport’s Illustrated columnist Jeff Pearlman sums it up well:
Generally speaking, pinning behavioral stupidity on your players is an even worse move than, say, locking out the student newspaper in a town where – on a good day – you’re covered by three media outposts. And even if your athletes did decide to protest, it’s your job – as a presumed educator – to do the opposite; to pull the student writers aside, explain your gripe and try to work it out in a mature manner.
We also know now that the administration was complicit in silencing the Griz players physical attack on a UM student, as VP Jim Foley acknowledged to the Kaimin last month.
Honestly folks – It’s appalling that this criminal behavior is condoned at the highest levels of administration in the University.
Another thing that struck me was this statement, from UM athletic director Jim O’Day:
“I would prefer (Hauck) did talk, but I respect the decisions he’s made…..I’m against forcing someone to do something against their wishes and would prefer an amicable solution.”Hauck’s behavior has brought unwelcome attention on the entire university. As an administrator, balancing an employee’s right not to talk to the media with protecting the university’s image is a tricky situation, O’Day admits(my emphasis added).
O’Day would prefer that he talks? “I’m against forcing someone to do something against their wishes?” – but then going on referring to “balancing the employee’s right not to talk to the media?
You have got to be kidding me, right?
Because UM tells all its other employees- and reminds them regularly – that they are to avoid talking to the press and they should refer all questions to the administration, blah, blah, blah…..so talking about an “employee’s right not to talk to the media” and “forcing someone to do something against their wishes,” are not really making sense when you put it in the context of their very own public information policy for employees.
That is, unless UM has changed its policy? Because it’s sounding like they prefer that their employee’s speak to the press when asked. I mean, I bet a whole lot of University employees might have a whole lot to say about the Griz football Bobby Hauck situation – and perhaps event the administration’s complicity in facilitating the behavior.
That 2-week trip to France and Italy and Ireland, too, I’m sure doesn’t pull a lot of sympathy either.
Lastly, Coach Hauck puts out a damned lame excuse (and I’m sure he thought he was oh-so-smart when he said it) for why he couldn’t answer questions from UM Kaimin reporters:
“My players have asked me not to participate in this. I had two seniors in my office this morning, and I apologize, but I’m not going to participate.”
So it’s the seniors on the Griz team are calling the shots? It’s not Hauck – it’s not King George Dennison, and it’s not VP Jim Foley – it’s the seniors on the Griz football team.
Shameless.
by jhwygirl
Following up on Monday’s news that ABC/Time polling showed 57% support a public option in health insurance reform changes being hammered out in congress, today brings us news that affirms that trend.
CNN polling tells us 61% favor a public option for inclusion in any health insurance reform bill. That number is up 5% since late August.
~~~~~
A few short weeks ago – just before the Senate Finance Committee’s bill was freed – Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi ordered a CBO markup of the cost of including a public option. She wanted an analysis of 3 different versions. Guess what? The CBO found that including a Medicare-for-all option, along with a 5% increase in doctor payments, would actually lower the deficit. The cost? $871 billion over 10 years – and it would insure everyone.
The Senate Finance Committee’s bill leaves 25,000,000 American uninsured.
House Democratic leaders wisely quick to jump on this – and even Harry up there in the Senate is is hinting that he’s got the 60 votes necessary to pass a bill that includes a public option.
Keep the calls and email folks. I’m told I put up Tester’s fax number for the Missoula office last time – and Pete was kind enough to fix it…this time, I’m a cuttin’ and pastin’ out of that post, that way I know the numbers are correct. With apologies to all….
Keep calling. Keep emailing.
Sen. Max Baucus – 329-3123 in Missoula – others here
Sen. Jon Tester – 728-3003 here in Missoula – 1-866-554-4403 statewide.
Don’t forget Denny:
Rep. Denny Rehberg – 543-0663 here in Missoula, or 1-888-232-2626 statewide.
by jhwygirl
NW Montana – Columbia Falls, to be specific – is taking another significant living-wage job loss hit, this time in the form of the closure of the Columbia Falls Aluminum (CFA) plant. The Missoulian’s Michael Jamison has a meaty story up on the closure and how the plant got to that point.
Cheap subsidized electricity, or rising electricity costs, depending on how you look at it.
Jamison details the court challenges that brought the cost of power for the plant to where it is today. A few things strike me, first being the tenacity of both BPA (a quasi-governmental outfit that moves power around the Pacific Northwest) and CFA: BPA was sued for providing at-cost power. BPA lost. BPA and CFA immediately put together a “bridge” agreement to continue more of the same. BPA is sued again. BPA loses again.
Screw the courts, they were determined to do what they wanted to do.
Secondly, I wonder about that relationship between BPA and CFA. And who else is getting that kind of deal? BPA is a quasi-government entity. They operate with a pretty swift hand when the see fit, under the umbrella of eminent domain and all other sorts of perks afforded to it where they operate. But they were also created out of an act in Congress, for the sole purpose of moving power from the NW’s dams to other areas in the West for no cost. That is (ah-hem) non-profit.
So when BPA was providing so-called “no cost” power CPA – and keeping in mind, BPA is a non-profit, so they’re not actually cutting their losses by cutting someone a deal – consumers were paying whatever it is we were paying.
Someone was paying for CPA’s power, and it wasn’t some for-profit corporate executives salary (it rarely is) – it was the taxpayer. You and me. Anyone using electricity here in Montana – anywhere here in the West or the region BPA serves – Montana, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and parts of Wyoming, Utah, Nevada and California.
Many people wonder where the power produced here in Montana goes. So do I. Montana can champion all those windmill sites (some going back to having been approved by Martz) – but if the power’s going to California, big friggin’ deal. If the consumer here in Montana is paying for the infrastructure that moves Montana-made power down to California, well – now that there would be pretty screwed up now, wouldn’t it?
Montana can run around championing a 210 megawatt plan near Glacier but if the power is bound for California, its Montana championing green energy for California while creating just a dozen full time jobs here in Montana and a whole bunch of powerlines running across our landscape.
Montana’s not gonna get green browning up our landscape with powerlines for California. That’s all I’m sayin’.
And as for the free market? Seems everyone loves it until they actually have to live with it.
by jhwygirl
Have you filled out your ballot yet? Get ‘er done. Why wait until tomorrow? Or next week.
The Missoula Independent has its endorsements out today – and (as usual) I am in full agreement.
Dave Strohmaier for Ward 1
Roy Houseman for Ward 2
Bob Jaffe for Ward 3
Jon Wilkins for Ward 4
Mike O’Herron for Ward 5
Marilyn Marler for Ward 6
John Engen for Mayor
Both John Engen and Jon Wilkins are unchallenged. Far as I can tell, Wilkins doesn’t have a website.
If you haven’t gotten your ballot yet (this is a mail-in only election), you might want to contact the County Elections Office at 258-4751 to verify your address. If you are at a different address from your registration or if you haven’t registered to vote yet, you’ll have to be heading to the fairgrounds to vote.
That’s why it’s important to vote early and get it done. If you wait until election day and can’t find your ballot or you find out your not registered, you’ll be having to venture down to the fairgrounds.
meh.
Anyone not able to get what I’m trying to convey about the voting-at-the-fairgrounds thing?
by jhwygirl
An ABC News-Washington Post poll released today shows that 57% of Americans support a public option.
Limit it to only those that can’t afford market insurance? Support soars to 76%.
And what if the GOP refuses to participate? Still a majority of Americans want reform.
What should those concerned about electing and re-electing either Democrats or Republicans think of those numbers? Well, howz about these numbers for those watching the election factor of health insurance reform.
Keep on keeping on, people
Sen. Max Baucus – 329-3123 in Missoula – others here
Sen. Jon Tester – 728-3003 here in Missoula – 1-866-554-4403 statewide.
Don’t forget Denny:
Rep. Denny Rehberg – 543-0663 here in Missoula, or 1-888-232-2626 statewide.
by jhwygirl
With seemingly little backlash from the tailgating Griz fans. Lauded at homecoming..and still packing them in.
Hauck doesn’t have to care. Clearly, Hauck can do whatever he wants, with little backlash from the University administration, from the fans, or from the Board of Regents.
At least some responsible journalists are stepping up to the plate. Indy editor and primary blog poster Skylar Browning hit Hauck on the eve of homecoming, reporting that the Kaimin had notified its readers that it no longer could effectively provide sports coverage for the Griz football team.
So 3 weeks after the Kaimin does some unflattering – but factually accurate – reporting on Hauck’s handling of an umpteenth violent criminal act involving the Griz team, Coach Hauck is still taking out hissy-fits on the University reporters who cover the team?
As Browing gets at the highlight of inadequacies surrounding Hauck:
Hauck’s killing himself here. Assuming he still aspires to coach at a FBS school, what’s a potential employer going to think of a coach who gets rattled by student reporters in Missoula? That’s not to mention his shady three-year-running record of having players caught in high-profile assault charges. If Hauck quit holding a grudge, held his players more accountable and faced the issue head-on, he could actually focus on what he sometimes appears to enjoy: coaching football.
Where’s the Missoulian? A full week after the Kaimin reporting that it could no longer effectively cover the Griz – after having its sports writer witness Hauck’s asshole-ish behavior (having repeated the question to Hauck that Hauck berated the Kaimin reporter for) – the Missoulian finally brings the story to the notice of Missoulian readers everywhere.
Other than that, the only noise emanating from the Missoulian concerning Hauck’s irresponsible and border-line criminal behavior has been a lone LTE, by Missoulian Donna Hall.
But check the comments on the Missoulian’s late-is-better-than-never article. Seems the public isn’t all slap-happy let’s-win-at-any-cost Hauck-is-a-Superstar happy with the the handling of the Griz football program issues.
Maybe they realize now how absolutely accurate Browing is? That if Hauck’s gonna get rattled by some student reporters (and that statement should not serve to reflect on the skills of the Kaimin’s reporters), how is he going to hit big time?
Yesterday, sports blog Deadspin got at the Hauck story, and it seems they’re looking at it the same way: If Hauck can’t handle the heat of a university paper, he might want to rethink his game plan. (That, too, came to 4&20 via the Indy’s blog.)
And now, college sports writer for the New York Times, Pete Thamel is taking notice of Hauck’s childish irresponsible behavior.
All of this, for me, comes down to what it is UM symbolizes, and what makes UM valuable. Is it the Griz? Or is it education and ethics and social responsibility?
Hauck is stomping on the latter – he may be the coach of the Griz, but he is also a leader both at UM, in Missoula, in Montana – and yep, to Griz fans all over. When he recruites poorly and then covers up the crimes of his proteges, he’s facilitating their behavior.
problembear is wondering the same.
I’ve asked, and I don’t remember if it was on these pages our in conversation, but what is it that Missoulians and the University and the Board of Regent’s needs? A shoot-out on the streets? Will it mean more or less if its downtown as opposed to the University District? Or maybe if it happens in the Rattlesnake it really isn’t OK?
I mean – the charges that came out 2 years ago were kidnapping, assault and weapons charges. That’s a home invasion, folks. Missoula Montana?! Then there was a murder arrest wrapped up there somewhere – but it was Hauck’s protege’s buddy up visiting from southern California, and he was extradited, so I guess that makes it OK?
Or maybe it’s the boys-will-be-boys mentality? Kind of a more sanguine version of the everybody-drinks-and-drives-here-in-Montana defense thrown up by Sen. Greg Barkus and Rep. Denny Rehberg fans?
Whatever it is, it needs to stop. The fans, the university administration and the Board of Regents need to take a hardline with Hauck – assist him in recruiting, because obviously he’s learned few lessons in those regards – and set some standards for grades and academic achievement and responsibility. Perhaps the team should be required to be involved in extra-curricular activities that are community-based?
Failure to expect better will continue to result in more of the same.
Other than that, I’m thinking some anger-management classes are in order for Senator Hauck, himself.
by jhwygirl
Really should be giving credit to supermissoulian Ellie Hill who tweeted on a NYT article, “The Public Plan, Continued“.
It’s a good article that lays out – very plainly – what a public option means; some of the various options of public option health insurance; and a nice overview of the process now that all health reform bills are out of the various committees and heading to merging committees and floor votes.
I like the read, for the fact that not enough main media sources are stepping up and explaining the meaning of the words swirling the artificially inflated controversy over single payer or public option. It also touches on one of the things that I’ve been waiting for – which is the legislative debate. Up until know, much emphasis was placed on one person as if what the committee he heads up puts out is what we are stuck with. We could end up with something very different than that which has been the central focus of all public option single payer advocates – and now is when it will happen.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she and the majority she claims in the house won’t approve anything without a meaningful and real public option. Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, is taking a more milder position (he doesn’t seem to want to fight for anything, IMHO) – that a public option isn’t passable. To say that they are at odds, is clearly putting it mildly.
Anyone catch video of Nancy’s cold shoulder to Harry’s shoulder hug this week?
My bet is on the Lady of the House.
~~~~~
There are many who have been working on insurance reform since just as the presidential election finished up. Health insurance reform is the biggest domestic policy attempt in U.S. Congress in generations. We’re only half-way there. Those truly working on meaningful reform been able to focus on the meat-and-potatoes of the issue and not all of the extraneous personality-based coverage that is purposefully the focus of our corporate media. I admire that – because even when I ask them (as I’ve been drawn into it myself) “what in the hell is Max thinking,” they skillfully brush it off and guide the discussion back to the facts and figures and the heart of the issue.
Who benefits from shifting the discussion away from the topic at hand and instead focusing on all the “superstars”? Olympia Snowe, Up and Coming? What sells now that America is numb? Policy or personality? Last week it was Sen. Harry Reid – this week it’ll be Rep. Nancy Pelosi.
Maybe we should be talking about the fiscal irresponsibility to the taxpayers and the added cost to health care should there be no real public option instead of Harry v. Nancy, Baucus v Dodd/Kennedy, Republicans v Democrats.
Maybe we should be taking about the 50 million uninsured in America and the effect that has on the cost of health care.
Maybe we should talk about what what the cost is to America if we don’t act.
Because that’s the real news.
by jhwygirl
The Missoula League of Women Voters is sponsoring, for this months luncheon presentation, a health care forum, with the topic of discussion being “Long-term Care in Missoula”.
The events are held in room 302 in the MCAT building at the corner of Spruce and N. Higgins. The forum starts Monday at 11:45. You can bring your own lunch, or the MLWV has a $5 option waiting for you.
Mary Dalton, Respite Coordinator for Missoula Aging Services will be speaking.
by jhwygirl
First the Ward 3’s Vote for Bob Jaffe video, which comes to 4&20, not by Bob Jaffee, but via Skylar Browning’s Indy Blog post:
Browning’s brief remarks are funny, and I agree. I also think that Badenoch was funny, saying “I think Bob Jaffe represents a lot of things I support. He’s progressive…but at the same time (my emphasis), he’s reasonable. I can tell that thinks about issues very seriously. He’s not a knee-jerk kind of guy. He’s thoughtful and I appreciate that.”
Council goddess Rye is hilarious, and so is Bob Clark, Missoula citizen.
Oh – and credit definitely has to go to “Bob Jaffe fan” Paul Wheaton – at minimum, he has a future in campaign election videos, for sure.
On the other topic…
Some HOW TO VOTE information…
Deadline is past for voter’s (pre)registration. If you want to vote now and haven’t registered, you have to head down to the fairgrounds, where the County Election’s Office has set up (due to high turnout in previous elections, and limited facilities/crowded halls).
This move has few, happy (maybe the county elections staff). Even Missoulian reporter Keila Szpaller lamented the move in a tweet.
Even the results. {sigh}
Can we maintain no tradition?
City elections are mail-in only. No polling stations will be open.
Mail-in ballots are coming out in a few days. There’s Mayor (unchallenged), the Municipal Judge (unchallenged), then your councilperson vote (of which Ward 4 is unchallenged too). It looks like if you live in Seeley Lake, there’s an election there, and another in the Evaro/Finley/O’Keefe area to form a community council – at least what I can see of the sample ballot.
So when you get that ballot, fill it in ENGEN LOUDEN and, depending on which ward, STROHMAEIR or HOUSEMAN or JAFFE or WILKINS or O’HERRON or MARLER and get it back in the mail.
Voting early helps all the candidates, no matter who they are. Their effort will be to get you to vote – if you get it done early, you allow your candidate the potential to round themselves up even more votes.
Inquiring minds want to know…
by JC
Update: The Button Valley Bugle beat me to ‘tubes on this theme, with a post from friday
From Venom is not a strategy:
“Republicans celebrate every time America fails and cheer and applaud for more failures in the future. Republicans have moved well beyond political opposition into a state of actual abhorrence for our country. I can only imagine the abject joy that will be felt and demonstrated by Republicans should another real tragedy strike America. They not only agree with the Taliban, they have become the Taliban.”
Update, 10-13-09: 289-34. That’s how many thousands of hits asking the question “Why do Republicans Hate America” vs. “Why do Democrats Hate America” gets at Google today. Not exactly scientific, but a telling number, nonetheless. And a lot of fodder for thought.
by jhwygirl
Please consider this an open thread
7 Montana businesses were amongst 140 that went to Washington to lobby Senators Baucus and Tester to pass “strong” climate and energy policies that would cut carbon pollution and create over 1.7 million jobs.
The two mentioned in that link from Bozeman.
Our Sen. Jon Tester is filing an amicus brief, along with Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson and Rep. Mark Souder, to the U.S. Supreme Court which sides with the National Rifle Association in challenging Chicago’s handgun registration laws. Great Falls Tribune has a local perspective, as does KFFB in Great Falls.
Ellie Hill, Director of Missoula’s Poverello complex of facilities is celebrating her 4th year anniversary at the job. She’s still a lawyer, she says, and says the Pov’s biggest perk for her is being a celebrity in dark alleys. Ms. Hill contributes immensely to Missoula, so next time you see her on the street (or in an alley), say “Thank You, Ellie Hill,” because without her a whole hell of a lot would not be happening.
This past Thursday, Rehberg voted in support of a bill that included the expansion of the definition of hate crimes to include sexual orientation.
The newest self-promoting, fund-us-with-a-new-tax boondoggle pitching to Missoula is the Tourism Business Improvement District . Bunk in the West has the story.
The Button Valley Bugle always has something interesting to say. Daily must read. One of the latest best is this one which thanks tourism for pumping $168,000,000 into Montana’s economy. That generated 45,000 jobs. People who stayed the longest? People who were here to fish. Here to use our waterbodies; Our streams and lakes and rivers. Beautiful in its simplicity, isn’t it?
Goes to show, you don’t always know that good old clean streams is all it takes to get people out here to spend some cash. TBID’s? Fuggedaboutit!
Montana should sit back and take a serious look at that: Montana’s open space and mountains and streams and rivers are what people come here to see. Taking care of ensuring that there’s water – clean water at that – in our streams and rivers, and taking steps to maintain our agrarian roots will help keep people wanting to come here and spend their cash for far longer than some new tourism bureau designed to merely add to tourism magazines and play 2nd fiddle the local chamber of commerce.
OK. That was a bit preachy for a Saturday. My apologies.
Wanna smile? Check out this post from Chris LaTray, who is naked-in-your-face open about his love for the rock band KISS.
Some newer blogs? Montana Wildlife Gardner, Duganz, A Heretic’s Life, and A Drunk Goes Jogging, the latter being painful at times…but you can’t help but root for him.
Got any other blogs you wanna share?
-
Recent Comments
