Thoughts from the Middle of Nowhere

The children have been called back into Special Session by Gov. Brian Schweitzer to solve the budget mess they left and to vote on his pet project which failed the first time around. Reading the article it looks like he payed off some Republican children to get what he wants and the citizens of Montana will have a state budget. We will see. I'm not to sure if the philosophy of "if you have it spend it" is very smart. These kinds of spending increases that the Governor is demanding might not be sustainable in the long run but what do I know. I just have to live within my means unlike the Government who just takes more and more when the desire hits them.

Tax reform means, 'Don't tax you, don't tax me. Tax that fellow behind the tree.' Russell B. Long

The Montana Constitution requires a 90 day Legislative session every two years. The only purpose given in the Constitution for the Session is to draft a balanced budget that will run the State for the next two years. You know what, the children couldn't handle this simple little thing required of them from the Constitution.

The Democrats blame the Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats. It depends on which side of the aisle you stand on to decide who's to blame. I'm sure there is enough blame to spread over both sides but the Republicans are coming out looking the most scarred by the fray. This might not have been the case if Lange wouldn't have had his "YouTube" moment but that is water under the bridge and the Republicans are in trouble over this situation.

Looking beyond the parties, who is being hurt the most by the children feuding like they are? The citizens of Montana. No budget and now looking at having to foot the bill for a special session. If the session is called within the next 7 days the startup costs will be significantly less than if the Governor waits longer but he seems to not be sure when to call them back.

The whole thought of having to do this all again is sickening. Watching the children fight over how to divvy up the projected $1 billion dollar surplus is really getting old. Both sides need to give a little to come to a solution but with both sides standing on their high horse that isn't going to happen and the citizens of Montana are going to continue to suffer.

It will be interesting to see how all the feuding affects the 2008 elections. Even Republican supporters are questioning whether they want to support the party in 2008 so we will just have to wait and see.

Children are in a very precarious position when they enter into relationships with adults because their personhood is not acknowledged in our society. Kate Millett

The children are out of control this time. Mainly one individual who used an obscenity laden tirade yesterday in the Republican party caucus. The only reason I say children is that there was quite a bit of applause from those present over his words. I guess something better to say would be the Republican children are out of control.

Now I don't know everything that went on in the meeting between Gov. Brian Schweitzer and House Majority Leader Michael Lange and it doesn't matter. This kind of name calling and obscenity is not necessary in our Legislature and in our State. I made a call for civility and no name calling many moons ago and I stand by it. Michael Lange was in the wrong, period, no questions asked. The Governor response to all of this was great. As much as I don't like the man, he took the high road calling Lange "a perfect gentleman." After his tirade I wouldn't have been as generous but that's the sign of a good politician.

Common courtesy and decency are obviously a dying commodity. What I can't figure out is how the party of "family values" thinks such profanity and vitriol upholds their party standards? They think such profanity is the example they want to set to school children across the state? How hypocritical.

One needs to know what the hierarchy of values are from which one takes inspiration, and in a democratic society this is the subject of continuous democratic debate. Rocco Buttiglione

I see the EPA is weighing in on the CBM issue here in Montana. They are telling our fair haired Governor that the proposed law, SB 407, that would allow the CBM water to be stored in unlined stock ponds might violate the Federal Clean Water Act.

Boy, what a way to put me on the spot here. If anybody has any doubts about how I feel about CBM development, they can just look here. In short it scares me spitless. I've even talked about SB 407 and my feelings on it. Pumping the precious water out of the ground here in Eastern Montana and dumping it out is short sighted and wrong. The water will evaporate away and then there will be no water for cattle, wildlife, or humans around here and it will just become the "Big Dry." Surface water is a very short commodity in Eastern Montana and more and more ranchers are relying on wells to water their cattle. Pumping the water out for short term profit will damage the long term potential to raise livestock in this country. That's my position, short, sweet and to the point.

What puts me on the spot though is the Feds stepping in and saying something about the issue. This whole CBM issue has put me in league with the NPRC, a radical environmental group who I never thought I would see eye to eye with, and now I find the Feds stepping in and also supporting my side. Radical environmental groups bother me, but the Feds sticking their nose in State business really torques me off. What a a spot I'm in.

They say politics makes strange bedfellows and I guess this just proves it. I am aligned with some of the things I despise but the importance of water in this arid part of the State is very important to me so I'm stuck. Am I happy that the EPA is sticking its nose in on this issue? No, but anything to stop this bad piece of legislation will have to do I guess. I think I had better go gargle now. I sure have a bad taste in my mouth.

There is no man, however wise, who has not at some period of his youth said things, or lived in a way the consciousness of which is so unpleasant to him in later life that he would gladly, if he could, expunge it from his memory. Marcel Proust

I'm afraid I am going to have to take a little different viewpoint than most ranchers on this subject. Why should we spend money on getting the wolf delisted when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has all ready announced that it has planned on doing it? Admittedly it is still in the comment period and they could decide different when all is said and done, but why not wait and see what they decide.

Maybe the bill should appropriate the money if and only if the FWS decides not to delist the wolf after they close the comment period. That will give the process time to work without having to resort to getting the courts involved. Its much easier and logical. It might take a while for the delisting process to work but a court case is no faster. In this case either way the wheels turn slow and there is no hurrying. Patience is the key.

The next question in the whole debate is whether state control of the wolves will be any better. How will state managers balance the needs of the wolves with the needs of the landowners and animals involved. Will they consider the decimation of the northern Yellowstone elk herd a problem or will they consider it normal and leave things well enough alone? This is a bigger concern to me than whether the wolf is delisted or not. Do we really want to trade in the known evil for the unknown evil when it comes to wolf management?

I was always interested in putting forward the ideas that represented my viewpoint. I feel the same about anything I'm doing. David Lloyd

Two years ago when the Montana Legislature was in session I wrote very often about the stupidity of the ethanol mandate they were trying to put in and how if consumers wanted ethanol the market would support them and their would be no need for a mandate. As usual, nobody listened and they voted in an ethanol mandate. They did decide that we had to produce enough ethanol in the state to support the mandate before it kicked into effect which was a slight victory. To date there is still no ethanol plant in the state, they are still talking about one in Hardin but nothing has ever come of it and there is a proposal for one in the Northern part of the state but nothing has come of it yet either so there still is no mandate.

Now this time around the Legislature wants to mandate the use of biodiesel in the state. Now I feel the same way about biodiesel mandate as I do about the ethanol mandate, it's wrong. Why can't the Legislature just let the consumer decide?

Biodiesel flopped when it was introduced to the Billings retail market last summer.

Town Pump offered biodiesel at its convenience store on 32nd Street West and King Avenue. The company discontinued sales by the end of the year because motorists wouldn't buy it.

"Sales were very poor so we had to make a decision, and when it got close to winter, we decided that we needed to offer another kind of product," said Jim Kaneally, supply and distribution manager for Town Pump.

Kaneally said the Billings station initially introduced biodiesel at a price slightly higher than conventional diesel. "Eventually, we had to drop it to the same price, but it still wouldn't sell," Kaneally said. "We tried it in Great Falls and we had the same result."

Oh, I see, the consumers aren't interested in biodiesel so the Legislature just decides the best solution is to SHOVE A MANDATE DOWN OUR DAMNED THROATS AND WE WILL LIKE IT OR BE DAMNED.

The Legislators again try to sugar coat this biodiesel proposal by saying the mandate won't go into effect until a certain number of gallons of biodiesel are produced in the state but that means nothing. Just like for ethanol Montana biodiesel will never be able to compete with the Midwest farmers and their capacity to grow crops. We are just to arid here and there are not the water sources for widespread irrigation to produce the necessary crops.

What I find interesting about the ethanol and the biodiesel mandate, at least to my understanding, is that once there is enough of either product produced in the state to kick the mandate in, there is no saying the local fuel companies need to use the Montana product in their blends. Once the mandate kicks in the oil companies can buy cheaper products from the Midwest for their blends and leave the Montana plants high and dry. Real helpful to Montana producers this shoving down out throats a mandate is going to be, isn't it? The politicians sugar coating is awful sour when looked at in this light.

I'm so tired of this shit, why can't they just let well enough alone instead of imposing their will on us. Biodiesel might be the next best thing to sliced bread but can't we as consumers decide that without the damned politicians and their lackeys shoving it down our throats? I guess not, us dumb consumers don't know what is good for us so we need to be told.

BULLSHIT WE NEED TO BE TOLD!!!! LEAVE US ALONE!

Perfect freedom is as necessary to the health and vigor of commerce as it is to the health and vigor of citizenship. Patrick Henry

Children at play. That's all this is. The Republicans are going to throw all the toys away to please one member of the Constitution party and the Democrats won't even look at the toys because all they can do is cry about HB2 not being part of the toy chest. What ever happened to working together? Why don't the moderates on both sides of the aisle work together to fix this problem? They are present in the chamber, just not standing up and making their voices heard. They are letting the radicals on both sides hurt all Montanans.

Everybody wants to blame just the Republicans for this situation. I think both sides are to blame and it is disgraceful. If they would act like adults this would get solved reasonably and the citizens of Montana wouldn't have to suffer.

People are ridiculous only when they try or seem to be that which they are not. Giacomo Leopardi

Don't you love it when politicians make noise to hear their own voice.

Schweitzer cautiously optimistic about budget

Gov. Brian Schweitzer predicts that the Legislature will finish its work on time and leave Helena with a balanced budget, despite the flap created when House Republicans split the big budget bill, House Bill 2, into six separate spending bills.

Excuse me, the part about finishing on time and with a balanced budget are just noise. These things are required by the Montana Constitution so all parties involved have no choice but to finish on time and with a balanced budget. That's just noise designed to make things sound ominous by the Governor.

Now The Governor's concern about the six separate bills coming to his desk in a staggered fashion might have some credence if the Governor didn't control the State Senate. Since he does all he has to do is have the Senate Majority leader schedule final votes on the six separate bills all at the same time so that they all come to his desk at the same time. Problem solved.

This whole story is just a bunch of noise. Part of the political game that is being played in Helena. Let's not get to up in arms about it.

Noise proves nothing. Often a hen who has merely laid an egg cackles as if she laid an asteroid. Mark Twain

It looks like the Montana House wants to allow all the usable ground water in South Eastern Montana to be pumped out of the ground to be gone forever. I really hate to tell these people but ponds and reservoirs go dry over time and then the ground water is needed to water the cattle. If we have pumped the water all out for short term profits, there will be no more water so you can run cattle.

Also, I have another question. If this bill exempts CBM water from water quality standards, what happens with the State of Montana's lawsuit that Wyoming is contaminating our streams with CBM water? If it's exempt from Montana water quality standard, we have just given the Wyoming CBM industry a present of untold value.

Hopefully the Senate kills this poorly thought out bill. Ranchers who care about the long term in the cattle business realize how short sighted it is to dewater the aquifers we need for our survival in this dry country.

We have to preserve it and use it sustainably. And the short-term use of resources at the destruction of the long-term heritage of this country is not a policy that we can pursue. Bruce Babbitt

I'm a little confused, a normal state it seems like. There is a bill in the Montana Legislature to public finance legislative races. The bill even talks about how the money is going to be raised for the idea. They would use $500,000 in State money to seed the project and then "fund the program with voluntary income tax checkoffs." All fine and dandy if you want to publicly finance campaigns. The next paragraph in the story is where my confusion starts.

Montana used the same checkoff method to help fund campaigns of governors and Supreme Court candidates, but the number of people contributing sank so low that the program was eliminated.

So, the citizens of Montana have a proven record of not voluntarily doing this via tax checkoff but we still want to try and do it again. This confuses me. Why is the person sponsoring this not showing a little wisdom and paying attention to what history has all ready shown to be a failed method of funding? Some people never learn I guess.

As for my opinion of publicly financed campaigns, I really don't have an opinion. At least this bill is voluntary. I don't like the idea of such a thing being mandatory. If it were mandatory it could violate a person's right to free speech. By being voluntary this is avoided. In the long run I don't support this since the voluntary funding idea will never work so then they will start using general tax funds to fund it. That I don't like.

Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems, in my opinion, to characterize our age. Albert Einstein

I would be real curious to know what is the driving force behind the push for States to mandate the new HPV vaccine. Is it truly the health and welfare of the children behind the push or is it the health and welfare of the company that makes the vaccine, Merck & Co, that is driving this? I ask because a Legislator in Montana is considering pushing for it to be mandatory here in the state. The article states that the series of shots costs $360 but I noted on the local news the other day that they said the prices in Billings were $500 for the series of shots. Sounds to me like getting states to make it mandatory would really help the drug company out.

Don't get me wrong, if there is a way to prevent cancer, that's a good deal to but if the state wants to make such an expensive shot mandatory, they should also pay for the shot. I know, the question becomes, can you afford the shot or can your child afford the cancer years down the road? Tough question to answer. I was vaguely ware there was a shot for cervical cancer but had never looked into it for my girls. The article states the shots should be administered by 11 to 12 years old and my girls are older than that now so I don't know if it would do them any good.

Then the question becomes, by giving the shot to your kids, are you advocating a sexually promiscuous lifestyle? This whole HPV vaccine raises a lot of questions. The biggest to me is who is going to benefit the most out of it. The company or the people?

The great benefit of monogamy is that you get to trust the person you're with and she gets to trust you. And so much comes out of that. So whether or not men and women were meant to be monogamous -- and we can debate all the theories until we die -- I know I gain something great from it. David Duchovny

Well, the Montana Senate is smarter than I thought. I'm glad to see this one go down to defeat as you undoubtedly all ready know if you read my thoughts on it. Usually the Legislature doesn't show this much common sense. I applaud them.

If that rampart collapsed your liberties would be a vague souvenir of a happy past. John Amery

Governor details range of clean-energy tax breaks

Gov. Brian Schweitzer wants property tax breaks as big as 75 percent for "clean and green" energy development and transmission, part of his effort to develop energy resources in the state.

Schweitzer unveiled details on the tax breaks Wednesday, which he hinted at during his State of the State address last week.

A leading Republican in the Legislature said he thought the incentive package would receive bipartisan support.

I'm really surprised by this one. Our Governor is not noted for wanting to give businesses tax breaks. Anytime you mention tax breaks and businesses the usual response is that you are talking "corporate welfare" and how bad that is.

I am glad to see this. This will give some incentive to utilize the States vast potential of energy we have. You know the Republicans will support this so the chances of getting through the Legislature is good. Montana Legislature helping out Businesses instead of taxing them more. What a surprise. I have to give Gov. Brian Schweitzer a kudos on this one.

Give tax breaks to large corporations, so that money can trickle down to the general public, in the form of extra jobs. Andrew Mellon

House rejects federal ID card program

The House gave bipartisan support Wednesday to a pair of bills that would make Montana one of the first states in the country to say ''no'' to federally approved national identification cards.

The measures by Reps. Diane Rice, R-Harrison, and Brady Wiseman, D-Bozeman, are nearly identical. Rice's won unanimous tentative approval, while Wiseman's was endorsed on a 99-1 vote. Final votes are scheduled Thursday.

''We're asking Congress to recognize that they have made a mistake, and to undo it,'' Wiseman said. ''The cards aren't secure, with no prevention for ID theft. They won't protect us from terrorism.''

Both called the federal Real ID Act of 2005 an attempt by the federal government to usurp power from state governments, and said it threatened an individual's right to privacy, which is guaranteed by the Montana Constitution.

Well, for once the Legislature is doing the right thing. I guess they can't always be wrong.

The soul's impurity consists in bad judgments, and purification consists in producing in it right judgments, and the pure soul is one which has right judgments. Epictetus