For some people these benefits last decades, like Social Security, Medicare, and veterans services. Others might be used temporarily during hard times as a safety net - unemployment insurance, job re-training, food stamps, Medicaid, disability insurance. These are just some of the crucial government programs funded by our taxes.

Currently government involvement is roundly criticized. Yet imagine if these benefits and services didn’t exist for the elderly, poor or those unemployed or disabled. Folks, we’re in this together. It’s because of our core values and principles that these programs exist.

Unfortunately it’s these same government-run programs that many would condemn as evil socialism. But let’s be honest. We all know someone who relies on one or more of these programs. Maybe it’s you? Family? A neighbor? Many cannot imagine life without them, whether it’s health care, food or a monthly check.

Times are difficult. We need to recognize and appreciate the socialistic aspects of our country that we take for granted. No country is purely capitalistic. Most are a blend of socialism and capitalism. We’re no exception.

I don’t wish to deny the anti-government folks access to the socialistic programs they so hate but never decline. But we all need to be honest and not hypocritical.

Right now we have a health care crisis that’s been ignored; one the private sector can’t fix. And yes, President Obama and Congress are considering yet another public health insurance program to help the 46 million uninsured. I hope they’ll succeed.

Now’s the time to give our nation the gift of universal health care. When that day comes we’ll be that much more proud and grateful.

Van P. Keele

Hamilton

Health care not a right

In response to Michelle Kister’s letter on Dec. 10, 2009. Michelle wanted an explanation why Denny Rehberg’s staff has health insurance while her family goes without because of cost.

Michelle also wanted to know why Denny didn’t vote for Obamacare then ended with “Do what’s morally right.”

Several things: Denny Rehberg’s staff, like myself, do not have health care. We have health insurance, which we pay for. There is a difference between the two. As for the high cost of insurance, socializing health insurance will not reduce the cost of insurance it will increase it with a reduction in services available.

If you want true health care reform open up the state line, remove the restrictions that prohibit the smaller health insurance companies from competing with the two big boys and of course tort reform to reduce fraudulent law suits and outrageous payouts.

By doing this doctors wouldn’t have to perform additional unnecessary tests to protect themselves from ambulance chasing attorneys.

And finally in the Constitution we as Americans have the Right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Health insurance is not a right granted to us in the Constitution. Not only did Denny Rehberg act morally he acted within the law.

Lance E. Broshar

Stevensville

Climate legislation

No, we need to contact Senators Burns and Baucus and tell them to vote against a carbon tax and climate legislation as it is written.

If climate change via CO2 emissions is true then scientists should be working on green resolutions not a tax structure to buy and sell carbon coupons, and giving billions to third world countries.

If CO2 is a dangerous cause, why are we not logging dead trees and planting two for each one cut. Why is Al Gore traveling all over to talk global warming instead of video-conferencing from his mansion?

Because he will make millions on the buying and selling of carbon coupons. Why are all these people traveling to Copenhagen to talk global warming when they should be video-conferencing too. Isn’t that a reason fiber optics were spread all over the continents.

Those who speak global warming do not “walk the talk.” They are hypocrites and just travel around telling everyone else to stay home and live a third world lifestyle. Let’s just stop “Friday night lights” type activities, no more night games. No more sports or business travel. Cities and towns should order unnecessary lighting off.

Carbon coupons are not an answer to global warming/climate change. I wonder what these scientists would’ve thought if they lived in the Dust Bowl of the ‘30s.

William Walczynski

Corvallis

Forest travel plan

I attended and participated in the citizens committee in Hamilton representing motorized travel interests in the Bitterroot National Forest.

Forest Service personnel explained that the best way to get their attention was by offering solutions to problems. In the spirit of offering solutions to the growing problem of user built trails, where the vast majority of these illegal trails were built by ATV users, I put forth a realistic solution.

Simply stated, the solution was a network of official and challenging trails for motorcycle, ATV and Jeep type vehicles that could be maintained by motorized recreational individuals and clubs. I also suggested that the development of official motorized trails and challenge routes was just as important to future generations (of perhaps electric powered off road vehicles) as is wilderness preservation efforts. I suggested that by having official trails (that had true destinations such as lakes, streams, or beautiful mountain views), the Forest Service would realize a reduction in user built trails simply because the motorized interests would have places to play.

I was told by Forest Service representatives that it was an excellent thought.

Having reviewed the proposed travel plan, I see no attempt to implement the motorized trail systems I proposed. What I do see is a travel plan that ignores motorized interests to the point of distasteful discrimination.

Speaking in percentage, I see a 70 percent reduction in motorized trails and no designated challenge routes whatsoever. During our committee meetings, the Forest Service personnel used the phrase “Let science decide.”

I agreed, provided social and psychological sciences were part of the deciding scientific approach. The psychological “need” to recreate is undeniable. The diversity of recreational pursuit is empirically proven. The only logical stance of the Forest Service is to embrace a multiple use agenda for “our public land.”

Unfortunately, the Forest Service chooses discrimination and personal predigest as its management style. So, here is my prediction: Brace yourselves (Forest Service and BLM) for the unprecedented creation of even more user-built trails. Sorry folks, there can be no Sherwood Forest (Kings Forest) in the land of the free.

Mark S. Pickles

Victor

Elk or wolves

If something isn’t done immediately about this out-of-control, rapidly growing wolf population, we’ll be hunting by permit only here in the Bitterroot - if we’re lucky.

Mary Ewer

Stevensville

---

Reader's Comments >>

Name:

Email: (optional)

Comments:

Image Verification: (Case sensitive)   

---