by jhwygirl

There is a correction in this post, below, for HB75

This post is just for Monday and Tuesday. 105 committee hearings for just those two days. Keep in mind, too, that this is all on the downhill side, too – and I need to remember that also. Floor hearings are becoming all the more important, too. I will be making an effort to get up brief previews as stuff hits the floor. Those will be, please note, don’t-delay, email-or-call-today types of notices.

Last Thursday – and then Friday – were two disappointments – both SB425, the “Walleye Welfare” bill, and SB497, the “it protects protesters from people that are entering health care clinics” bill both passed 2nd and 3rd readings in the Senate – on a nearly party-line vote. These were no-go bills from my perspective – and others – so that they passed is a bad thing.

Is there any good to report out of that? Well, in committee, both bills passed unanamously out of committee – SB425 a 9-0 vote our of Senate Fish & Game, and SB497 a 12-0 vote out of Senate Judiciary. By the time they hit the floor, all of the Democratic committee members – save one on each of those bills – had changed their vote. So while the bills weren’t killed on the floor, clearly there was movement. Is there more good? There’s still another chance at these bills – they’re now in their respective House committees….which means ongoing public comment should continue, and may have an affect. So keep it up.

Now, onto the task at hand, shall we?

Monday has an interesting one – the topic of which we’ve blogged about here previously. Rep. Scott Sales has HB526, which would require the use of regular road salt and prohibit the use of magnesium chloride and calcium chloride on state and county roads. Now..boy. What do you say about this? The bill started out prohibiting salt – and I could see where that was too unspecific, so as originally proposed it has been amended. But amended to prohibit magnesium and calcium chloride? When both are more effective? And road salt is more corrosive? And worse for water quality? What are these people thinking? This is House Appropriations (another crazy place for it – it was originally in House Transportation – and me, I’d love to see this in House Natural Resources) – Samuel Speerschneider the secretary – sspeerschneider@mt.gov.

Here’s another one of those crazy unconstitutional ones: Rep. Joel Boniek has HB246 which would “Exempt(ing) from the federal regulation under the commerce clause of the constitution of the United States a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured and retained in Montana”. Honestly. The lunacy. And the waste of time. Boniek and the rest of the loonies that are proposing this kind of stuff should be embarrassed.

Sen. Jeff Essman has an interesting one: SB348, which would put forth a constitutional amendment to Montanan’s that would result in yearly legislative sessions that would alternate between regular and budgetary. This passed through the Senate overwhelmingly – 42-8. Now – I don’t know what I think about this: On one hand, if ridiculous legislation (like the one above, for example) weren’t getting proposed, maybe there wouldn’t be a need for annual sessions. On the other hand, 90 days has rarely been enough time to get stuff done. The cost of annual sessions – the fiscal note gets away from addressing it all together by basically saying nothing is going to happen until a time period out of our purview – would be significant. Further, we have interim sessions now where real analysis and attempts at bi-partisan agreement are worked out on significant issues. When would that stuff get done? If someone could explain that to me, maybe then I could support it – but as it stands now, we got a 90 day session that essentially focuses on the “regular” stuff like approving proposed bills that affect every day life, water quality, air quality, taxes, etc., and they have nominal hearings that are politically driven, with little substance given to true analysis, whether fiscal or scientific, of the effects. Would Essman’s proposal result in year-after-year of that? No analysis, just politically-driven decisions. If so, hell no. I wish the legislators would consider all that before they go putting forth a constitutional amendment to the voters that would result in a politically-driven decision that would then result in year-after-year of politically-driven decisions.

Sen. Carol C. Juneau wants to regulate the sale of alcoholic energy drinks with SB438. This one passed nicely out of the Senate, and hopefully finds the same support in the House. In House Business & Labor, Santella Baglivo the secretary – sbaglivo@mt.gov.

I’m going to have to split this post, people, so please click

Here’s another one that is whack – and seeming to go picking an unnecessary fight with Wyoming. Rep. Paul Beck wants to allow residents of Mammoth Hot Springs – which is well inside Wyoming’s border, folks – to plate their cars in Montana. What’s next? Wyoming will do the same for Silver Gate and Cooke City? Holy hell, people. Seriously.

And we need annual sessions? Perhaps legislators should get themselves under control, first…and then see whether annual sessions are necessary. Nothing says “big government” like never-ending legislators walking the halls and roaming the streets of Helena.

Sen. David Wanzenried has SJ9, which would authorize study of the state’s student loan system. I liked this one before, and it’s made it out of the Senate – so please give this one a little more love and let the House Education Committee know that this is smart legislation. Debbie Carlson the secretary – dcarlson@mt.gov

HB565, which has bi-partisan support (Furey, Flemming, Roberts, Hawks, Larsen, Shockley, Steinbesser and Zinke), would provide for Montana to pay a veteran’s costs for enrollment in TRICARE reserve for their first 6 months, and would be applicable to any veteran enrolling after July 1, 2009. In other words, the state would be picking up the tab for healthcare for veterans who return to and live in Montana for that first 6 months – that first 6 months as they adjust to civilian life and find jobs and all the other not-so-easy stuff that goes along with doing those things. Very supportable. This one has made it through the 2nd reading on the House floor, and has to make it out of House Appropriations. Contact Samuel Speerschneider, the secretary – sspeerschneider@mt.gov.

Still on Monday folks, but moving into Senate Committee hearings….

I’m big on water quality and quantity bills, ya’all know that. Sen. David Wanzenried has SB303 that would update the state water plan by allowing creation of separate water councils for each of the major river basins: Clark Fork, Missouri, Flathead, and Yellowstone. Right now, the law only allows for one water council, which is not only ridiculous, but unproductive: There is no way that one council can even attempt to analyze issues in all of those basins. What is Montana without it’s water, folks? This one has passed 2nd reading in the Senate and has been referred to Senate Finance & Claims, Prudence Gilroy the secretary – pgilroy@mt.gov.

The Healthy Kids Initiative hits the Senate side of the house with HB157, proposed by Rep. Chuck Hunter. While this is battling about in the finance end of things – and with the Schweitzer administration, who has placed its funding it his budget submittal – it is still working its way through the legislature. It’s in Senate Public Health, Welfare & Safety, Joan Linkenbach the secretary – jlinkenbach@mt.gov.

Another smart water quality/quantity bill comes from Michele Reinhart, with HB285. This bills allows for use of gray water in commercial and multifamily structures. It’s also made it out of the House – so send some love to this one, folks – in Senate Natural Resources – Lindsey Hern the secretary, lhern@mt.gov.

Here’s a bad one – Democrat Rep. Bill McChesney has HB278 which would allow for release of coal/strip mining reclamation bonds when “no more than 10%” of vegetative cover has been met. Current law has 20% successful coverage needed. Just say “NO” people. In Senate Natural Resources, Lindsey Hern the secretary, lhern@mt.gov.

Here’s another one in Senate Natural Resources – from another Democrat – that doesn’t seem to make sense. Rep. Kendall Van Dyk has HB75 which would eliminate the ability of the state to lien property that is in violation of DEQ laws regarding environmental rehabilitation. The current law allows for it. The current bill uses state funds for cleanup, but uses the lien as collateral. Instead – as I’m reading this bill – the state can only recall the bond on said project and not use anything else to strongarm some sort of cost-recovery. A better bill would require that bonding equal the costs of clean up – because – if you recall from this summer’s audits on DEQ, the bonds aren’t sufficient to do the work that is required should an operator default. A better bill would require regular review (say every 3 years) of bond amounts, and a better bill would require that conditions on permits allow said bonds to adjusted as necessary. If anyone reading this sees where I’ve missed something, please let me know. That being said, my current stance is Just Say NO. In Senate Natural Resources, Lindsey Hern the secretary, lhern@mt.gov

(No wonder it didn’t make sense……as corrected: Here’s another one in Senate Natural Resources – that’s been amended by Republicans in the House to the point of leaving the wording of the proposed bill virtually the same as the existing bill. Rep. Kendall Van Dyk proposed amending Rep. Kendall Van Dyk has HB75 to add liens on property as a means of ensuring clean-up and to seek reimbursement to the state when the state had to undertake said cleanup. Van Dyk also added clarification to the bill, referencing existing definitions in other parts of existing code. Now comes House Republicans, who strike the lien language, decimating a bill that was designed to hold polluters responsible, and turning it into a bill that would allow polluters to walk away knowing some state fund would pick up the tab.

I did Just Say NO to this bill today, via email….but I am considering sending off another email, asking Senate Natural Resources to amend this bill and re-institute the original clauses proposed by Van Dyk. Changes in law regarding bonding would certainly help keep developers/extractors honest. As it stands now, I’m pondering why bother with it in its current state. It’s very little different than the existing law.)

Moving to Tuesday

The ever hard-working Rep. Mary Caferro (of Helena) has HB578 which would created a “health corp” of retired doctors for in-home medical care for medicare and medicaid eligible patients. This one has made it through a 2nd reading on the House floor and as been referred to House Appropriations. The cost is barely of note, too. How smart is that? Please consider some support for this one, folks. Samuel Speerschneider the secretary – sspeerschneider@mt.gov.

Rep. Betsy Hands’ previously scheduled hearing on HB569 was canceled, and sees hearing on Tuesday. This bill would establish funding for a Montana Housing Fund. I liked this one before – still do. In House Appropriations, Samuel Speerschneider the secretary – sspeerschneider@mt.gov.

Rep. JP Pomnichowski, a 4&20 favorite for her great work on water quality, gravel pits and local government issues, has HB425, which would put into law a requirement for public notice regarding state oil and gas leases. It spells out the requirements of noticing on the state’s website – but notably, it removes noticing requirements to adjacent property owners and owners within 1 mile. It does, though, add a requirement of notice to surface owners (there are times when the surface and the mineral estates are split)….so, I find this one a mixed bag. A better bill would keep noticing requirements to adjacent property owners. This one was amended in committee – and it looks like the noticing to adjacent property owners was removed then. It’s now in House Appropriations, so, folks – read it..send your comments to Samuel Speerschneider the secretary – sspeerschneider@mt.gov.

Appropriations isn’t going to want to fool with the neighborhood noticing issue – they’re only looking at the fiscal part. Options here include an attempt to kill it in Appropriations, kill it on the Floor, seek amendment on the floor to put back the neighborhood noticing or lobby for killing it on 3rd reading if it remains intact. Regardless, comments are needed now. I suggest contacting not only Appropriations but any and all House legislators in anticipation of the floor vote, and let them know that unless neighbor noticing is replaced back into the bill, this one should be killed. Dead.

Former gubernatorial candidate Sen. Roy Brown has SJ16 which would allow for a study of the cost of auto insurance and compliance with mandatory requirements. I was in favor of a related bill by Rep. Dennis Himmelberger (HB323, which failed in committee) – and had a opponent to the bill put a comment in on this post, disagreeing with me. Now – I understand the reasoning behind advocating against 323 – and I understand why some committee members voted NO…but I do hope that Brown’s bill – it’s just for a study, after all – sees approval. If underinsured and uninsured motorists are affecting my checking account – they’re affecting yours too. It’s passed the Senate and is now in House Business & Labor – Santella Baglivo the secretary – sbaglivo@mt.gov.

Sen. Bradley Hamlett has SB367 which would establish electronic voting for uniformed military and overseas electors. Anything that ensures voting and facilitates participation in the election process is a good thing. This one saw a unanimous vote in the Senate, and is now in House State Administration – Marshall McEwen the secretary – mmcewen@mt.gov.

Here’s a bad water bill. It’s also a big government bill, creating a new political subdivision capable of taxing. Lovely, huh? More local taxing authority and bigger local government. From Republicans, yet. Rep. Ken (Kim) Hansen, in conjunction with Rep. Wendy Warburton have SB8 which would allow creation of regional resource authorities related to water. This kind of thing would conflict with the state’s oversight of water issues – and make a greater mess of what I currently believe is a mess, in many ways, already. Say NO to this one. This one has passed the Senate unanimously – Senators, what were you thinking? – and is now in House Local Government, Katie Butcher the secretary – kbutcher@mt.gov.

Rep. Anders Blewett has HB430 which would implement fines for barbed wire placed across state navigable waterways. It ensures that landowners can place barriers in navigable waterways as the barriers relate to water rights, provided there are portages put in place when such portages are requested by the landowner or the public. So, this bill is something that, for me, is a compromise. In House Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bryce Bennett the secretary, bbennett@mt.gov.

Well….I had started this post out to do Monday through Wednesday…but fiddlesticks. I’m tired. So that means this is probably part I of what will be 3 committee hearings notices.

When emailing public comment to committee secretaries, make sure to mention the bill by number and request that the comment be forwarded to all members of the (specified) committee. You can also call the Session Information Desk at 406-444-4800 to leave a message for as many as five legislators or one legislative committee per call. Your message will be delivered directly to the legislators. The TTY (Telephone Device for the Deaf) number is 406-444-4462.

This link will take you to a list of all House committees, and their members – and this link will take you to the same for the Senate. This page, then, takes you to a comprehensive list of all legislators, in the event that you want to contact them individually.

If you don’t know who your legislative representation is, either got to Project Vote Smart or head to the interactive Legislative District Map.

AND if all that wasn’t enough for you, don’t miss The Button Valley Bugle with their brief which includes upcoming legislation – a fantabulous bill from Bozeman’s Rep. JP Pomnichowski (related to eminent domain), other good legislation worthy of support, along with some stuff on stupid legislation, and some stuff on nutty legislation.

Peace my friends. Keep on keeping on.

Advertisements

  1. And on Tuesday, the House Judiciary Committee will hear about HB541, which would remove criminal penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana. http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0541.htm

    • Thanks John. This bill would actually put money back into the general fund and save taxpayers money. That fiscal analysis is only is only for state level – it would arguably more significantly have a positive impact on local government coffers which bear the costs of prosecution and incarceration costs prior to sentencing.

      You can call and leave comment for the entire committee, using the information at the end of the post above – or you can contact secretary of the House Judiciary Committee and ask that your comments be forwarded to the entire committee. Make sure to mention the bill number, also. Jennifer Eck is the secretary – jeck@mt.gov.

  2. March 9, 2009 at 12:32 am

    Change We Can Believe In: How About the End of Farmers Markets? Say Hello to H.R. 875: Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009
    March 9th, 2009

    What this will do is force anyone who produces food of any kind, and then transports it to a different location for sale, to register with a new federal agency called the “Food Safety Administration.” Even growers who only sell only fruit and/or vegetables at farmers markets would not only have to register, but they would be subject inspections by federal agents of their property and all records related to food production. The frequency of these inspections will be determined by the whim of the Food Safety Administration. Mandatory “safety” records would have to be kept. Anyone who fails to register and comply with all of this nonsense could be facing a fine of up to $1,000,000 per violation.

    I’ve bought food at several farmers markets for years and I have yet to meet any vendors who are fond of the government. I think it’s pretty safe to say that most vendors at farmers markets won’t go along with this. The problem will be that the people who run the farmers markets will be forced to make sure that vendors are “registered” with the government.

    Is this Change we can believe in? Maybe it is for Obama’s Secretary of Agriculture, Tom “I Fly with Monsanto” Vilsack.

    For the rest of us, this is a nightmare.

    Let’s take it piece by piece:

    What is the legislation called? H.R. 875: Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009:

    111th CONGRESS
    1st Session
    H. R. 875

    To establish the Food Safety Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services to protect the public health by preventing food-borne illness, ensuring the safety of food, improving research on contaminants leading to food-borne illness, and improving security of food from intentional contamination, and for other purposes.

    How does this affect farmers who just sell fruit and vegetables at farmers markets?

    SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

    (9) CATEGORY 5 FOOD ESTABLISHMENT- The term ‘category 5 food establishment’ means a food establishment that stores, holds, or transports food products prior to delivery for retail sale.

    13) FOOD ESTABLISHMENT-

    (A) IN GENERAL- The term ‘food establishment’ means a slaughterhouse (except those regulated under the Federal Meat Inspection Act or the Poultry Products Inspection Act), factory, warehouse, or facility owned or operated by a person located in any State that processes food or a facility that holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients.

    Does this really apply to fruit and vegetables? Yes.

    SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

    (12) FOOD- The term ‘food’ means a product intended to be used for food or drink for a human or an animal and components thereof.

    Registration:

    SEC. 202. REGISTRATION OF FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS AND FOREIGN FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS.

    (a) In General- Any food establishment or foreign food establishment engaged in manufacturing, processing, packing, or holding food for consumption in the United States shall register annually with the Administrator.

    (b) Registration Requirements-

    (1) IN GENERAL- To be registered under subsection (a), a food establishment shall submit a registration or reregistration to the Administrator.

    (2) REGISTRATION- Registration under this section shall begin within 90 days of the enactment of this Act. Each such registration shall be submitted to the Secretary through an electronic portal and shall contain such information as the Secretary, by guidance, determines to be appropriate. Such registration shall contain the following information:

    (A) The name, address, and emergency contact information of each domestic food establishment or foreign food establishment that the registrant owns or operates under this Act and all trade names under which the registrant conducts business in the United States relating to food.

    (B) The primary purpose and business activity of each domestic food establishment or foreign food establishment, including the dates of operation if the domestic food establishment or foreign food establishment is seasonal.

    (C) The types of food processed or sold at each domestic food establishment or, for foreign food establishments selling food for consumption in the United States, the specific food categories of that food as listed under section 170.3(n) of title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, or such other categories as the Administrator may designate in guidance, action level, or regulations for evaluating potential threats to food protection.

    (D) The name, address, and 24-hour emergency contact information of the United States distribution agent for each domestic food establishment or foreign food establishment, who shall maintain information on the distribution of food, including lot information, and wholesaler and retailer distribution.

    (E) An assurance that the registrant will notify the Administrator of any change in the products, function, or legal status of the domestic food establishment or foreign food establishment (including cessation of business activities) not later than 30 days after such change.

    (3) PROCEDURE- Upon receipt of a completed registration described in paragraph (1), the Administrator shall notify the registrant of the receipt of the registration, designate each establishment as a category 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 food establishment, and assign a registration number to each domestic food establishment and foreign food establishment.

    Inspection, Category 5 Food Establishments

    SEC. 205. INSPECTIONS OF FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS.

    (a) In General- The Administrator shall establish an inspection program, which shall include statistically valid sampling of food and facilities to enforce performance standards. The inspection program shall be designed to determine if each food establishment–

    (1) is operated in a sanitary manner;

    (2) has continuous preventive control systems, interventions, and processes in place to minimize or eliminate contaminants in food;

    (3) is in compliance with applicable performance standards established under section 204, and other regulatory requirements;

    (4) is processing food that is not adulterated or misbranded;

    (5) maintains records of process control plans under section 203, and other records related to the processing, sampling, and handling of food; and

    (6) is otherwise in compliance with the requirements of the food safety law.

    (5) CATEGORY 5 FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS- A category 5 food establishment shall–

    (A) have ongoing verification that its processes are controlled; and

    (B) be randomly inspected at least annually.

    (c) Establishment of Inspection Procedures- The Administrator shall establish procedures under which inspectors shall take random samples, photographs, and copies of records in food establishments.

    What happens if you own a farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding operation that does not prepare or serve food directly to the consumer?

    I hope you like having Feds crawling all over your property and telling you what to do.

    SEC. 206. FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITIES.

    (a) Authorities- In carrying out the duties of the Administrator and the purposes of this Act, the Administrator shall have the authority, with respect to food production facilities, to–

    (1) visit and inspect food production facilities in the United States and in foreign countries to determine if they are operating in compliance with the requirements of the food safety law;

    (2) review food safety records as required to be kept by the Administrator under section 210 and for other food safety purposes;

    (3) set good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety;

    (4) conduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products, or the environment, as appropriate; and

    (5) collect and maintain information relevant to public health and farm practices.

    (b) Inspection of Records- A food production facility shall permit the Administrator upon presentation of appropriate credentials and at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, to have access to and ability to copy all records maintained by or on behalf of such food production establishment in any format (including paper or electronic) and at any location, that are necessary to assist the Administrator–

    (1) to determine whether the food is contaminated, adulterated, or otherwise not in compliance with the food safety law; or

    (2) to track the food in commerce.

    (c) Regulations- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture and representatives of State departments of agriculture, shall promulgate regulations to establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production of food by food production facilities. Such regulations shall–

    (1) consider all relevant hazards, including those occurring naturally, and those that may be unintentionally or intentionally introduced;

    (2) require each food production facility to have a written food safety plan that describes the likely hazards and preventive controls implemented to address those hazards;

    (3) include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water;

    (4) include, with respect to animals raised for food, minimum standards related to the animal’s health, feed, and environment which bear on the safety of food for human consumption;

    (5) provide a reasonable period of time for compliance, taking into account the needs of small businesses for additional time to comply;

    (6) provide for coordination of education and enforcement activities by State and local officials, as designated by the Governors of the respective States; and

    (7) include a description of the variance process under subsection (d) and the types of permissible variances which the Administrator may grant under such process.

    Is registration required? Yes. Is compliance with inspections required? Yes

    TITLE IV–ENFORCEMENT
    SEC. 401. PROHIBITED ACTS.

    It is prohibited–

    (3) for a food establishment or foreign food establishment to fail to register under section 202, or to operate without a valid registration;

    (4) to refuse to permit access to a food establishment or food production facility for the inspection and copying of a record as required under sections 205(f) and 206(a);

    (5) to fail to establish or maintain any record or to make any report as required under sections 205(f) and 206(b);

    (6) to refuse to permit entry to or inspection of a food establishment as required under section 205;

    So what might happen if I refuse?

    SEC. 405. CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES.

    (a) Civil Sanctions-

    (1) CIVIL PENALTY-

    (A) IN GENERAL- Any person that commits an act that violates the food safety law (including a regulation promulgated or order issued under the food safety law) may be assessed a civil penalty by the Administrator of not more than $1,000,000 for each such act.

    Bill Status:

    H.R. 875: Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009 Introduced Feb 4, 2009
    Sponsor Rep. Rosa DeLauro [D-CT]
    Status Introduced
    Last Action Feb 4, 2009: Referred to House Agriculture

    (Powered by GovTrack.us.)

    More: Goodbye Farmers Markets, CSAs, and Roadside Stands
    Posted in Dictatorship, Economy, Elite, Food, Social Engineering, Surveillance, pHood | Top Of Page

    2 Responses to “Change We Can Believe In: How About the End of Farmers Markets? Say Hello to H.R. 875: Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009”
    pookie Says:
    March 9th, 2009 at 1:40 am

    Free trade begins at home.
    anothernut Says:
    March 9th, 2009 at 2:01 am

    I can’t help think this is a prelude (one of many, no doubt) to America’s “harmonizing” (I think that’s the term) with Codex Alimentarius.

    America has reach the backside of the event horizon of organised, institutionalised corruption and fraud on every level. Where protection rackets, embezzlement, larceny, confiscation, entrapment, misappropriation, and rico crimes, as well as murder have become the norm; by bullies, fraudsters, pervert soul sick class elites, politicians with their sykophants, lobbys, lawyers of the Kelptomania class who run everything. A litigation nation where truth is treason, justice is a mockery, and liberty is for sale to the highest bidder, where action of the State, arising from suspicion and not from proof, has degenerated into the satisfaction of vendettas by a “coin-operated congress”, a “blue-blooded-aristocratic Senate” and finally, a power hungry blood thirsty executive branch- a general system of tyranny, all in the name of “public safety” and “TRANSPARENCY”…not to mention the continued game of the blind belief of the so called “left” and the burning phallic angry of the spiteful right.. I see a time coming when they will feed your bloated corn filled human corpses to the cows, other humans will eat, will eat and be happy to do so as our economy further deteriorates. Solvent Green is people!people!

  3. Darn it, how embarrassing and frustrating technology can be, pardon the double… and pardon my seemingly abrupt post, but I read this blog periodically, mostly because I’m local, and mostly because jhwygirl does a great job of having her hand on the pulse of local and near by events. Much more so than Lee enterprises, and their manipulating propagenda or of the independant’s puerile gas, However, most of the commentary remind me of the hopenotic denizens of dalykos. Meaning, not a wit of seeing the meta-narrative, nor the difference between, micro v macro of the methodical situation we find ourselves increasingly in. As a friend recently said, we are stuck between, “the blind left, and the [angry] spiteful right” both with stunted imaginations and illusion of the dream.

  4. Van Dyk's Bill

    You claim: “Here’s another one in Senate Natural Resources – from another Democrat – that doesn’t seem to make sense. Rep. Kendall Van Dyk has HB75 which would eliminate the ability of the state to lien property that is in violation of DEQ laws regarding environmental rehabilitation. The current law allows for it.”

    This bill does nothing of the sort. The language about liens was stricken from the new bill in an effort to pass it…It was not stricken from existing statute. All the bill does is amend ERRA statute so DEQ can clean up illegal waste sites and increase enforcement. House GOP would have never let it out with the new lien language.

    Please step up the analysis a wee bit before posting.

  1. 1 Mineral County Sheriff’s Race Candidate Promises Not to Enforce Federal Laws « 4&20 blackbirds

    […] Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Brian Schweitzer. I mentioned this bill last session here, calling it “another one of those crazy unconstitutional ones”: “Those are the […]




Leave a Reply to jhwygirl Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


  • Pages

  • Recent Comments

    Miles on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    success rate for In… on Thirty years ago ARCO killed A…
    Warrior for the Lord on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Linda Kelley-Miller on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Dan on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    Former Prosecutor Se… on Former Chief Deputy County Att…
    JediPeaceFrog on Montana AG Tim Fox and US Rep.…
  • Recent Posts

  • Blog Stats

    • 1,669,530 hits
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 2,738 other followers

  • March 2009
    S M T W T F S
    « Feb   Apr »
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
    293031  
  • Categories


%d bloggers like this: