Thursday, August 27, 2009

Cutting dead weight

Posted By on Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:25 PM

In democratic societies, those who profit from the status quo typically have powerful avenues of influence to manipulate regulation and policy. Recognizing that fact, democracy is not a tool of easy health care reform. Consequently, processes by which costly, outmoded, inefficient health care practices can change are only by disruption of the status quo. Such disruptive opportunity looms before us now.

Quality, affordable health care for every American will only come from elimination and integration of the remaining complex players in the totality of health care in the United States.

Effective integration of necessary players is the key step in the creation of a new health care model that achieves the goals envisioned. Unfortunately, elimination of players and practices that have caused the health care crisis disrupts their status quo, intensifies their lobbying and leads to total disarray of purposeful legislation. Without elimination of special interests influencing Congress, partisan presentations in the media, statistically flawed polling and untruths, there is no factual analysis. Progress in achieving real health care reform is stymied. The result is disastrous.

It is necessary to disrupt our health care non-system, and rethink the hodgepodge of legislative bills offered now. Congress must realize the end result is more important than individual interests—the condition of health for every American is what is paramount. Responsibility for national health care must be given to an entity having long-term perspective, willing to spend today to save tomorrow; preventive programs that save by keeping us well; compassionate, personal care with choice; coverage for every American; simplicity of administration; funding by simple, fair taxation; savings by elimination of waste and duplication; comparative procedural effectiveness; and oversight.

A national single-payer health care program is the best plan for every American.

Richard A. Damon

What "we" want

Posted By on Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:23 PM

I think Sens. Tester and Baucus should know that the people of Montana do not want federally subsidized (mandated) health care. Neither do we want caps on carbon, more "stimulus" or "troubled asset" bailouts. We want, and rightfully expect, responsible stewardship of Montanan concerns in Washington, D.C.

Max and Jon, we are not willing to spend any more of Montana's revenue and tax dollars in projects outside our state. We are not going to spend money on regulated energy bills that at minimum will increase our utility bills, nor are our business or personal tax dollars going to be spent on medical care for illegal immigrants. Similarly, we expressly are not interested in advocating a liberal justice to the Supreme Court. Montanans, as a people, would much more appreciate a little more adherence to the Constitution, and a little less to a "progressive" platform.

I would strongly recommend that you consider the people of the state of Montana in your future voting patterns. You do not represent the interests of lobbying groups or special interests, but the citizens of the state. You represent hard-working Americans, not ACORN or the United Auto Workers. Also, try something completely different, and in agreement with federal law, stop illegal immigration and send these individuals home—no amnesty and no federal benefits.

It might be worth noting that in accordance with Article 6 of the Montana Constitution, we, the citizens of the state, have a vested right to petition for a redress of grievances. You should consider this a right to recall persons who are not working for the benefit of the state. Article 6, by the way, supersedes Title 2 of the Montana Code.

John Greene

Not good enough

Posted By on Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:22 PM

Sen. Jon Tester's Forest Jobs and Recreation Act unfortunately displays a lack of adequate comprehension and balance in addressing urgent management needs for our seriously fire-prone federal forests. What is really needed is policy change by the U.S. Forest Service opening forests to timber management at a level that will significantly reduce the threat of massive catastrophic fires increasingly destroying watersheds, environment and wildlife. This could be accomplished at minimum taxpayer expense. Closely related are the causative bug infestations spreading throughout the forests and feeding fires of the Northwest. All can be tracked back to inept, cultist philosophies pressuring a lop-sided, misdirected environmental movement.

Environmentalists and government appear so obsessed with protecting these lands from "loggers" that they refuse to acknowledge that density reduction by productive, selective thinning of timber and fuels (not limited to dead, dying and burned) is the only feasible solution. It would correct this massive problem, while enabling the forests to pay for their own hospitalization and restoration. Missing is respect for "profit," the essential ingredient for funding the worthwhile things in our country and our lives. It even provides the taxes for government operation. We certainly do not do well on "credit." Unfortunately, our green regime is busy destroying what is left of essential, well-directed profit motivation and opportunity.

Blind power being applied largely through the judiciary, combined with lack of knowledge, contributes to the ongoing human-caused catastrophe killing our forests. Obsession with recreation and locked down human access under the pretense of "protecting" endangered species and trees overrules common sense solutions, thus producing destruction by ignorance. Dispersing consolation crumbs to a starving timber industry hoping that somehow a few mills might still survive is not a solution. Token fuels reduction projects are a gross under-estimation of what is needed.

Tester's basically timid approach lacks comprehension of the magnitude, and reflects the misguided perceptions of the environmental community. Only a sound, healthy industry with long-term assurance of supply established by firm governmental policy can produce needed industrial infrastructure and long-term job security. Random group-managed projects cannot correct the present man-made decline in forest health. Success can only be achieved through realistic prioritization, sound goals and objectives, and the application of proven science and technology under professional timber management with freedom to operate.

Failure has proven inevitable when management is attempted by a variety of unskilled but well meaning special interest groups. However, professional stewardship can and should incorporate guidelines and controls that will satisfy public and environmental interests.

Clarice Ryan

Recent Comments

  • Re: Shush up already

    • It doesn't seem to matter where you are, the new people are exceptionally loud nowadays…

    • on September 25, 2016
  • Re: Not very sporting

    • Not only setting it and baiting it...but walking away from it. Who, other than a…

    • on September 22, 2016
  • Re: A place to walk

    • Montana, you have multi use trail users and you are the last state to create…

    • on September 18, 2016
  • More »

© 2016 Missoula News/Independent Publishing | Powered by Foundation