Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in July 2021

Deal, no deal

July 7, 2021

malloy

When President Biden announced on the White House grounds that there was a long-awaited bipartisan “deal” on an infrastructure bill – the greatest investment since the formation of the interstate highway system – he apparently forgot to mention the fine print that was part of the bargain.

Perhaps he forgot, or maybe he didn’t want to disrupt the joyous occasion. It’s not often that you see Republicans and Democrats slapping backs and shaking hands on anything, especially on things with partisan implications. Indeed, getting both sides to come to an agreement on a $1.2 trillion infrastructure plan was no small task and Biden helped make it happen.

Notably absent from that White House photo-op were Democratic progressives, which probably was a sign that something wasn’t quite right. The grand deal that Biden hammered out with Republicans quickly turned to “no deal” once Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi entered the fray.

They want the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill all right, but only if Congress approves spending an additional $6.2 trillion package for what could be named the “Socialists Dream Bill.” See Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren for details. The issue will be front and center when the Senate returns from recess, and subject to any number of twists and turns.

“It’s a moving target,” says Idaho Sen. Jim Risch. “The path forward is still uncertain as members of Congress must review what’s in it and how much it’s going to cost. In order for me to support it, it’s going to be the right bill for Idaho. Any major infrastructure bill must prioritize the construction and revitalization of hard infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, and exercise budgetary restraint to ensure taxpayer dollars are well spent.”

He also favors as part of the package a strong investment in broadband, which is essential in rural communities in Idaho and throughout the nation.

Risch, as with fellow Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, does not dispute the need for infrastructure improvements.

“The U.S. needs a reliable national transportation network we can count on well into the future,” Risch says.

Crapo, the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, says he is willing to work on proposals to solve the long-term solvency of transportation funding and broadband development. “We have an opportunity to create American jobs and return our economy to the strength and broad-based growth enjoyed prior to the pandemic. But to do this, we must focus on ideas that can garner true bipartisan support and remove partisan wish-list items.”

So, the position of Idaho’s senators is clear. They would be friendly toward a comprehensive infrastructure bill, assuming that Idaho would benefit and the funding mechanism was in order (no tax increases). But they want nothing to do with a $6.2 trillion plan put together by Bernie Sanders and “progressive” Democrats.

“Throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at pet projects unrelated to infrastructure and seeing what sticks won’t work,” Risch says. “And certainly, any attempt to tie an infrastructure bill to trillions of additional taxpayer dollars on liberal social priorities is a fatal flaw.”

It would be so easy for Republicans and Democrats to come to a “yes” on an infrastructure plan. But as we all know, nothing is easy in Washington.

Democrats could pass the whole ball of wax – the infrastructure bill and Sander’s dream bill – through reconciliation, which would require only simple majorities in the House and Senate. Republicans won’t like it, but not much they can do aside from complaining.

Biden would prefer bipartisan support over reconciliation, but Schumer and Pelosi may have other thoughts. Never underestimate the ability of Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Chuck Malloy is a long-time Idaho journalist and columnist. He may be reached at ctmalloy@outlook.com

Three guys walk in a bar . . .

July 6, 2021

meador

On this independence Day, I come back to a message I’ve been preaching for longer than two decades. I revisit this topic from time to time, each time convinced the need to share it is needed more than it was the previous one. In 2021, more than ever before, I am convinced this message bears sharing.

I spent about 20 years writing about food and beverage, including two editor-in-chief stints: one for a regional craft brewing publication and one for a fine dining and spirits magazine. Remembering the period when I grew into adulthood, I learned early how people of disparate backgrounds, economics, cultures and beliefs could sit at a table laden with good food and drink, genuinely enjoying each other’s company. I was amazed at how taking a meal and a drink with someone who held opinions opposing my own could unite us in our shared appreciation of the table before us. But this humbly universal principle goes so much further than a mere table.

I believe it’s crucial to remember we all have dozens of things in common for every one issue we disagree on.

Most of us default to that handful of notions that separate us — for some reason, those four or five opinions we fight about are much more important than the hundreds of sentiments we share.

Why? I mean, really. Isn’t it stupid to focus on a single political cause when we could sit down over the grilled ribeyes and local brews we both love? Isn’t it totally pointless to grumble over one political candidate when we could be eating sushi and drinking Northwest saké? Isn’t it a gigantic waste of time to hate someone because they don’t feel the same way we do about one cause when they actually do believe the same way we do on a host of other issues?

Why is it we now require a potential friend to march lockstep with us on two or three deal-breaker issues while we ignore the stuff we have in common? Are we really that insecure? Or is it monumental arrogance? Or is it some primeval stubbornness that keeps us hyperfocused when we could be open to others holding opinions different from ours?

After I witnessed the power food and drink have to bring human beings together, I spent years preaching it, writing about the abundant options of nourishment found throughout our region. Of course, any characteristics or tastes we share with others can unite us. But the fundamental and universal nature of breaking bread with each other can’t be beat for its straightforward honesty.

It’s nearly impossible to hate someone sitting at your table, enjoying magnificent meal, a couple of brews or an ancient whisky. That’s why I tell the following story from time to time.

————————— • —————————

Three guys walk into a bar...

Well, it was more than three and included an equal number of women. Several outspoken Democrats, a Muslim, a couple Catholics, at least one Republican, two Jews and probably four races were represented when a group of friends would sit around the table at a popular downtown Portland, Oregon bar a number of years ago. I was one of them. The makeup varied but the conversation and the beverage service remained predictable — we were a group of chums who disagreed profoundly on a handful of issues but we liked each other and we liked hoisting pints together. We were an assortment of personalities and professions, united by our shared affinity for post-work refreshment, at first anyway. But we soon discovered many other details we had in common, much of it tied together by humor — a lot of humor and a ridiculous measure of laughter. We met regularly and were always genuinely glad to see one another. Several times, we may have solved all the problems of the world and once I think we might’ve defined the meaning of life. Whatever the case, we celebrated our similarities and were comfortable with our differences — we knew the former far outnumbered the latter.

We did all this accidentally. We never set out to prove people who disagreed with each other could still be close friends. We didn’t intend to act all adult-ish and set our several differences aside because we had hundreds of things in common. We had no idea we were creating lifelong friendships around that table. No, we were a motley group who just enjoyed the fellowship of a shared table, littered with empty glasses and a lot of laughter. It was totally organic and completely accidental.

But now we need to do it on purpose.

When we think it’s okay to exercise violence against someone because we believe they’re wrong, we’re losing our grip on sanity, even our humanity. When we think we can send poison or bombs to someone with whom we disagree, something is seriously messed up. Obviously most of us totally get how screwed up a bomb is. But maybe not so much some of the lesser ways we express displeasure. This week alone, I saw three separate videos of peaceful protesters being assaulted by counter-protesters who got so angry they thought it was cool to hit someone. Seriously? That’s what we’ve become? We’re sure we hold the moral high ground so firmly that it’s permissible to hit someone just because we believe they’re wrong? And for a moment, we got so angry we couldn’t help ourselves?

I have a better idea: have a beer with them. Or a glass of whisky. Or a meal. I don’t mean go out and find a protest and invite the opposition to have a pint — although I’d admire your chutzpah if you did that. But consciously make the decision to sit down with someone you consider “one of them.” I’ve seen it happen many times — people who considered each other not worth an effort or even potential enemies discover they have some similarities after all. Some of the best friends of my life turned out to be the people with whom I disagreed the most.

I’ve been preaching the power food and drink have to bring people together for two decades. Outside of religion or political passion, nothing unites like a shared fondness for that which sustains and nourishes us. And while food and beverage do a lot to inspire shared enthusiasms, they don’t also usually include the risk of great division like religion or politics so often do.

This message I believe is more important now than ever. In this fractured world, consider sitting down with someone who belongs to the other political party or who comes from a different religion or culture. Do it more than once. Maybe even do it regularly. I promise your life will be greatly enriched as a result.

I’m not asking you to change your mind or alter your principles — just sit down and share a table with someone who’s different from you but might be a lot more like you than you thought. I’m not suggesting you embrace racists or rioters or dangerous fringe nutcases. But there are a whole lot of people in the broad middle — people who are remarkably like you and me, even if they hold opinions opposed to ours. These folks are as disgusted as you and I with the current mess. These are the people we need to invite to our table.

It’s amazing how tensions dissolve as a good meal is enjoyed. We can forget our disagreements and celebrate our similarities. Even if you believe you need to change minds or sway opinions, you should remember it’s much easier to do so over a comfortable table than over a stream of shouted obscenities. At the least, you’ll get a good story and enjoy a meal and a drink for your effort.

After an unprecedented year of quarantine, wildland fires, insane local and national politics and a visceral fight over vaccination, we need to step back and take a look at ourselves and our neighbors. Is this how we want to live? Is this “new normal” acceptable? Is nurturing widespread suspicion and distrust an example for our children?

Not for me. Not for my kids. Not, I hope, for you and yours either. Independence Day is a time to celebrate our nation’s freedom, a day most of us spend celebrating, relaxing and breaking bread with friends and family. This year, consider extending a hand and an invitation to someone outside your circle.

Do it on purpose. The power of food and drink coupled with a willingness to share a table with “them” is greater than you think.

A movie premiere

July 6, 2021

rainey

Now, this story’s gonna take some time to tell. So, hang in here while I try to make everything clear..

One of these days, you may receive an invitation to a “private showing” of a new movie. It’s called “The Deep Rig.” No. No, it’s not the story of a well-drilling operation in the Gulf of Mexico. No, this “rig” is meant to imply somebody - perhaps millions of somebody’s and some not of this earth - conspired to “rig” the 2020 Presidential election.

Cute, huh?

Oh, it gets cuter. ‘Cause this is the yet-to-be-released account of “proof” of all sorts of unsupported claims of how badly Mr. Trump was treated at the polls. And, in the “fraudulent” counting.

Remember Senator Karen Fann? Remember, she’s the Republican Majority Leader in the Arizona Senate and she’s who hired that Cyber-Ninjas guy (without a shred of experience) to conduct the audit of more than two-million votes from our Maricopa County election. Guy’s name is Doug Logan. You gotta remember that ‘cause the cast of characters - conspiracy believers, QAnon believers, former convicts and miscreants - means there will be more names and I don’t want you to be confused.

Well, anyway, there’s a special church for right-wingers in the Phoenix area called Dream City Church. Trump, himself, appeared there last year. And that was the site of the invitation-only premier of “The Deep Rig” about a couple weeks ago. Cost 45-bucks a head. Ms. Fann was there. So were other Arizona Senators. Including former Senator Ken Bennett who’s supposed to be the “impartial” liaison between the legislature and the counting folks. He’s supposed to assure the “validity” of our fraudit. “Unbiased,” he promised. “Accurate,” too.

The big bucks for the video production came from former Overstock CEO Pat Byrne. Proceeds - if significant proceeds there be - are supposed to go to pay for the fraudit which is now in the red ink bucket. Way in.

And, guess who’s appearing in this unfounded conspiracy production? Well, ol’ Doug Logan his-self. The guy who’s heading up the counting disaster. The guy who undertook the challenge with promises of honesty, integrity and other mouthy B.S. a few, long months back.

And, wouldn’t you know? Appearing in a brief supporting role? Why, retired general - and convicted-felon-but-Trump-pardoned - Michael Flynn. He spoke dire warnings and promised a “bombshell” when counting’s done. I think the word “shell” can be scratched and the word “bomb” left in.

Austin Stenibard was there, too. He’s a Qannoner who’s mixed up in all this. After all, he’s had a lot time on his hands since finishing his prison term for extortion or attempted extortion. Nice guy. Just misunderstood.

Starring in the film - just in case you’re not “invited” to a local premier - is our own little political disaster - the fraudit itself! Lots of coliseum floor footage and lots of completely unfounded claims of “illegalities, “uncounted Trump ballots.” “duplicity” and - wait for it - “FRAUD!” No proof offered. No showing of uncounted Trump ballots. Not even an old GOP pensioner claiming his vote was “stole.” No, Sir. Claims aplenty. But, proof of what’s claimed in “The Deep Rig?” Not a whit. And counting’s not done.

Anyone with a pound of common sense knew, from the git-go, this “fraudit” business was all smoke-and-mirrors. The search for any proof of wrongdoing at the polling places - or in the counting - was never the intent. The original idea was to somehow create something that hinted at fraud to give Trump “proof” for his “the-election-was-stolen”circus which is being presented weekly even as we speak. Alas, what started so “nobly” has become a rotted mess on the Veteran’s Coliseum floor.

When this group of elected and unelected bad actors gets to the last ballot and say they have a “result” in hand, who’s going to believe it? Or, any other “pronouncements” forthcoming? If Trump really is looking at this wretched group of conspirators to give him something - anything - useful to back up his discredited claims of wrongdoing, he’s going to be disappointed. But, who knows? He may take the phony information and run with it. He’s proved repeatedly - no facts will stand in his way.

Arizona’s really not a bad place to live. Oh, it’s 113-degrees on the patio at the moment. But, really, with good air conditioning everywhere you go, it’s not unlike where you live. Lots of vaccinated seniors having fun and living the “high life.” Between doctor’s appointments.

Please don’t let this fringe Republican ploy affect your thinking. Come see us. By the time you get here, the Coliseum will have been cleaned, disinfected and all those ballots and equipment will have been taken God knows where. Maricopa County folks don’t want any of it back.

So, it seems, the “work” of all those conservative Republican counters will have been sent to it’s rightful holding place. A large county dump-site. About 15 miles out of town.

Here’s to a happy fourth

July 5, 2021

jones

A group of American patriots met in Philadelphia on July 4, 1776, to sign a document declaring independence from the British Crown. The signers ended the Declaration of Independence, saying “we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.” They knew that formation of a new nation was dangerous and could only succeed if everyone worked together in common purpose. As Ben Franklin aptly put it, "We must all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately."

Years later, George Washington reiterated the theme of unity and common purpose in his Farewell Address. He said, “To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a Government for the whole is indispensable.” He issued a strong warning against political partisanship, saying it “agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection.” What a prescient warning from America’s Founding Father.

At this 245th anniversary of declaring independence, the nation is mired in political warfare, false conspiracy theories and, worst of all, an attempted insurrection. America achieved greatness by its people working together to forge a more perfect union. There have been many bumps along the way but we have always been able to right the ship of state and move forward in unity.

The last three decades have seen the development of such extreme political partisanship that the future of the American experiment is seriously threatened. Parties in Congress vote in lock step. The mantra of the party that does not hold the presidency is to make the current occupant of the office fail, even if it causes the country to also fail.

It does not have to be this way. I’ve witnessed a Congress where members worked in harmony to perform important work, despite strongly conflicting political views. I spent three years (1970-1973) working for a Republican Senator in Washington. It was a job that made me proud of my country. Senators and their staffs worked with one another across party lines to do the people’s business. There were certainly disagreements over policy but not the acrimonious exchanges that are commonplace today, not the poisonous process that is the daily gruel of the present-day Congress. There was a real ethos of putting country over party during those years.

My boss, Idaho’s Senator Len Jordan, was a commonsense conservative, who had the courage to do the right thing as he saw it. Although he supported his party when its objective aligned with his beliefs, he always put the interests of America over those of his party. Many of his colleagues in both parties saw it the same way.

Jordan voted for the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, along with 26 of his Republican colleagues, and joined 29 other Republicans in voting for the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Senate Democrats from secessionist states opposed both bills. Jordan voted against two of President Nixon’s appointees to the Supreme Court, both of whom appeared to be hostile to civil rights. Seventeen Senators of Nixon’s party opposed Clement Haynesworth and 13 voted against Harrold Carswell. That simply would not happen in today’s Senate.

The idea that Members of Congress must religiously support their political party, regardless of America’s best interests, is a clear and present danger to our country. It is contrary to the Spirit of 1776 that the nation celebrates on the Fourth of July. If we are to survive as a nation, each and every one of us must pledge to be Americans first and foremost, placing the future of our country above all partisan interests. We should demand that all who would represent us at every level of government do likewise. If we continue down the destructive hyper-partisan path we now are on, the promising venture that began in Philadelphia 245 years ago will not come to a happy ending.

A sweet breeze on a field

July 4, 2021

hartgen

I took a drive out around the Magic Valley one recent evening, past the ripening wheat and barley fields in the flat sunlight of a fading day, and was struck yet again by the glorious bounty of the land around us.
Our ancestors would truly marvel at the vast expanses of productive farmland, the technologies of pivot irrigation, the prosperous towns and burgeoning housing going up everywhere.

But they would marvel still more at the way we’ve retained much of the traditional values they established: the importance of family ties, our vibrant if changing adherences to faith, our willingness to support our schools, our common-sense and practical view of politics and civic engagement.

And they would marvel as well at our love of country, our heart-felt patriotism, our appreciation of America’s founding, our continuing if sometimes raucous republican form of government, our defense of freedom everywhere. We take too much of this for granted. Benjamin Franklin, asked what was the form of the new government, said “a republic – if you can keep it..” So far, we have done that, even under the stresses of modern times.

In a marvelous short poem at the start of World War II, Robert Frost captures the generation-by- generation march of settlement and progress across the continent of which the Southern Idaho region was a part. “The land was ours before we were the land’s,” he writes. “…To the land vaguely realizing westward, but still unstoried, artless, unenhanced.” (Frost, The Gift Outright, 1942). That is the Magic Valley story, the story of the West and the story of America, of how we have built communities with many stories, expressions of art, enhancements to many lives.

Today is the 245th anniversary of American independence and the love of nation which Frost so eloquently expressed is still much with us. We see it in the preservation of values, and in the many celebrations of our shared heritage. The fireworks, barbeques and community concerts are the outward expressions of our region’s putting love of country so high in our values.

We celebrate outwardly, as President John Adams urged us to do, and we carry that past into our present daily lives. We Southern Idahoans are proud Americans and we will not veer far from that by the siren song of discord. The only swamp which needs draining here is the one that some seek to impose on us. Their definition of freedom is freedom for themselves only.

These are mere voices of discontent, minimal complaints by those who’ve either have never lived elsewhere or who chose to ignore the beauty and freedom all around us. No matter. They will always see the glass as mostly empty, even when it is mostly full.

Later in the evening with the dusk descending, the gathering night turns quiet as if a storm is passing, leaving bits of wind-borne cottonwood seedings as a home-made quilt laid gently down upon the land.

Great Horned Owls hooty-hoot-hoot in the canyon beyond as a stillness settles across the valley broken only the trickle of the creek and the good-night calls of robins and magpies. A storm passes and the slight trailing wind rustles branches ever so slightly. Across the canyon, an expanse of wheat sways with the air’s guiding currents.

No one knows the hour when each will be called; it is in the hands of the same Creator who blessed this nation, this state, this land of our beloved Magic Valley. So once more, let us celebrate the gift outright, the bounty of the earth here, where “the dark fields of the republic roll on under the night,” (The Great Gatsby,1925). It is indeed a sweet breeze on a field.

Stephen Hartgen, Twin Falls, is a retired five-term Republican member of the Idaho House of Representatives, where he served as chairman of the Commerce & Human Resources Committee.  Previously, he was editor and publisher of The Times-News (1982-2005). He can be reached at Stephen_Hartgen@hotmail.com

A long time coming

July 3, 2021

johnson

I’ve been reading “letters to the editor.” It’s fun, occasionally even enlightening. A sample:

“Once we get together and rout the extremists from the midst of the Grand Old Party we will be able to go back to sane and sensible party politics in which we debate alternative programs toward progress in terms of facts and feasibility.”

“To all who believe in the right of individualism and all freedoms the Constitution once, yes once, gave you, become alert to the poisoned gifts of socialist order or you shall surely march down the corridors of slavery to the end that Lenin and his disciples have promised you.”

“I am so ashamed of the man who calls himself governor of Idaho … I have known for quite some time he leaned left, or as they like to call themselves, moderates or liberals.” The same writer observed about the losing presidential candidate in the last election: “The abuse, lies, and all the venom that spewed forth, it seemed to me the evil forces of Satan were against him.”

And a particular favorite letter: “I am getting fed up about these so-called Americans who believe in the John Birchers, Ku Klux Klan and many others who are trying to undermine our society. I have read the trash they publish and air. It only appeals to the mind of a seven-year-old.”

Each quotation is from a genuine “letter to the editor” – and there are dozens more like them – that appeared in an Idaho newspaper – in 1964.

The radicalization of the conservative right in America has been a long time coming, but it is possible to pinpoint 1964 – the year the GOP nominated Barry Goldwater, a card-carrying right winger, for president – as a critical milestone in the radicalization. To be fair, the origins of the radicalization that grips the GOP today actually go back even farther to post-war McCarthyism and a manufactured crisis over communist infiltration of American society and government.

Even accounting for a few momentary detours to something less radical than today’s Republican Party – think Gerald Ford, John McCain or Mitt Romney – conservatism in America over at least the last 70 years has been the happy home of conspiracy, contempt for facts and commitment to grievance.

And Idaho has not infrequently been a central melting pot for the conspiracy and anti-government sentiment. Frank Church, arguably the state’s most important national legislator from the 1950’s through the 1970’s, regularly felt the sharp end of this kind of politics. At various points in his 24-year career in the Senate, Church was labeled a socialist sympathizer and a “baby killer.” His stand against the Vietnam War was reason for the right to label him un-American and his investigation of the nation’s intelligence agencies led to the ludicrous accusation, made by allegedly responsible voices on the right, that he had singlehandedly destroyed the CIA.

An essay Church wrote in January 1965 for Look magazine – the piece was entitled “Conspiracy USA” – gave me the idea of going back and looking at all those old letters.

Church dubbed what he saw in 1965 “the slowly boiling outrages of extremism” and he warned, “we have already become accustomed to a level of political absurdity that would have seemed, a few years ago, quite impossible.”

You might think the fabricated outrage about the teaching of American history among a new generation of the right’s conspiracy spreading McCarthyites is a recent phenomenon. It’s not.

In his essay, Church quoted a letter printed in the Idaho Statesman in 1964: “The ‘Social Studies’ program [in the high schools] was initiated 30 years ago by American education intelligentsia after the Soviet plan, for the acknowledged purpose of promoting the ‘collectivist society’ in America.”

That nonsense of decades ago is not all that different from the public education bashing “task force” formed recently by Idaho’s lieutenant governor and aimed at rooting out “teachings on social justice, critical race theory, socialism, communism (and) Marxism” from public schools.

The co-chair of this witch hunt, Representative Priscilla Giddings, is always in high McCarthy dudgeon. As reported by the Idaho Capitol Sun, Giddings said “she found examples of indoctrination or critical race theory in libraries, the Idaho Public Television budget, early childhood development programs and ‘a little bit’ in K-12 public schools. She said she was particularly concerned where the words ‘equity’ and ‘privilege’ are used.”

The late Senator Church provided some context for all this in his 1965 essay.

“Scholars differ on why so many conscientious Americans are being caught up in the Radical Right,” Church wrote. “It is clearly a revolt against the established order by the discontented, motivated by a mixture of reasons: a quest for some higher purpose than is satisfied by the commercial standards of our times; a fear of the new relationships being generated by the burgeoning growth, urbanization and automation of the country; a resistance to the complexities of modern life, to the bigness of government, to the racial revolution, to a ‘cold war’ that never ends, to the absence of quick and easy solutions; a frustration over the inability of the United States, in the nuclear age, to swiftly work its will upon the world. These are the conditions of life with which we must cope, but they stir a rebel to go forth in search of a cause.”

Church wrote – and again it’s important to remember he spent his career under attack from these merchants of conspiracy and fear – that it was essential to expose the “delusions of the fanatical right” including its “propaganda, its frequent resort to outright intimidation and coercion” and what he called nothing less than its “totalitarian methods.”

Church was a prophet before our time. The Morning Consult polling firm reported this week that 26% of the U.S. population now qualifies as being “highly right-wing authoritarian,” twice the share of people who hold similar views in Canada or Australia.

There is nothing new, absolutely nothing new, in the playbook of the radical right. Tossing off “socialism” at every opportunity, condemning public education, ridiculous allusions to Satan, the life and death struggle for “freedom” are all pages in its well-thumbed playbook.

Optimists might take comfort in the fact that Goldwater lost in 1964, but his followers – and now a new and even more radical generation – have kept right on. These radicals delude themselves into thinking they are saving their country. What they are actually doing is taking aim at the very ideas of America: free expression, tolerance, community, inclusion and reason.

But, then again, what they are trying to sell is an old story. You can look it up.

Government of not-the-people

July 2, 2021

stapiluslogo1

The legal case involving the Idaho Legislature’s new law governing the ballot initiative process in the state, which was argued before the state Supreme Court this week, ought to be a slam dunk. And maybe it will be.

The court is constrained by the Idaho Constitution, which - in its section setting up the basics for the initiative in Idaho - says explicitly, “The people reserve to themselves the power to propose laws and enact the same at the polls independent of the Legislature.”

There’s also a long-standing legal principle that laws (including constitutional provisions) should never be interpreted in a way that makes them meaningless - that runs directly counter to their clear purpose. That applies to constitutional provisions, too.

The new law, from Senate Bill 1110, is essentially just an extension of the series of laws the legislature has passed not merely to establish some reasonable demonstration of popular support for a ballot measure, but to make the possibility of placing an initiative on the ballot all but impossible. The last time the requirements were increased, several cycles passed before anyone was able to achieve ballot status. In 2018 a measure expanding Medicaid - a proposal deeply opposed by legislative majorities - easily passed voter approval, and for legislators, that seemed to be the last straw:

The people had to be stopped. The state constitution had to be subverted. The new law has a modest-sounding statement of formal intent, but clearly it is intended simply to put an end to voter-generated ballot initiatives.

A recent column by former Idaho Attorney General (and former Chief Justice) Jim Jones on the subject of the Idaho Freedom Foundation and its peculiar conception of liberty led to a rebuttal containing a clear explanation that would apply to the effort to kill the initiative by a thousand cuts. On June 29 Doyle Beck of Idaho Falls delivered this: “Our country is not a democracy. It’s a constitutional republic. And, of course, a democracy, which is mob rule, threatens the existence of our republic, whose Constitution safeguards individual rights against the mob. Sometimes, politicians use the word democracy because they don’t know the difference between one or the other. Some who know the difference claim to say democracy as a kind of shorthand for ‘constitutional republic,’ which I think does a disservice to the meanings of both terms.”

Beck evidently knows the meaning of neither term. The United States was set up as a democracy, meaning that it is governed by the people (the term derives from the Greek demos, meaning the people of a place, and kratia, meaning a form of government). The United States is also a republic, that being the structure, or mechanism, through which the people exercise their rule. A democratic republic is not a contradiction in terms. A non-democratic republic would be something closer to, say, the old Soviet Union.

What Beck has confused is the mechanism or system, which is important but not fundamental, with the basis for authority in our system: The people, whose authority is at the core.

My question for Beck, and the significant number of people who would and do argue as he does, is: If the people should not be in ultimate charge of our system of governing, then who should be?

Who, in other words, would Beck and his allies like to install as dictator? (Actually, in the case of quite a few people in this nation, I can guess at a name.)

Our country has a significant (and scary) cadre of authoritarians, people looking for a big boss to tell them (and all of us) what to do; they’ve given up on the whole governing of-by-and-for the people thing. Legislation like SB 1110 and the ever-ratcheting opposition to initiative governance by the people make ever clearer who they are. You can check the names of the legislators among them on the Idaho Legislature’s website.

My guess, based on its past decisions and general history and some of what happened in the oral argument, is that the Idaho Supreme Court isn’t among them. Idaho can count itself fortunate if that’s the case.

Beautiful

July 1, 2021

schmidt

We camped last week on the Imnaha River in northeastern Oregon. It was beautiful and wonderful to be with my family. You should visit.

My great grandfather settled in the next valley, south of the Wallowa Range. The 1910 census says he entered the United States in 1877. I have no idea when he staked out his horse ranch in Pine Valley, but I do know that land, and the land I live on today in Moscow, Idaho was part of the 1855 treaty agreed on by the Nez Perce chiefs and the United States government. But things changed.

You should also know that the US government decided it had made a deal it didn’t want to keep and in 1863 tried to renegotiate that treaty with the Nez Perce chiefs. The offer was for a much-reduced area in central Idaho, what now comprises the Nez Perce Reservation. Joseph, whose father was buried near Wallowa Lake refused to sign, as did many other signatories who saw their land being taken. A Nez Perce chief who lived on the proposed reservation did sign the agreement. The US Army showed up to tell Joseph and his band to leave the Wallowa. “You say I have sold my land when a neighbor has signed the contract?” The rest is the bitter tale you must know. The battles, the deaths, the strategy and maneuvering that led to the surrender of the “nontreaty” Nez Perce 40 miles from the Canadian border, in the cold of winter. This story should be known by all.

Should our children know this story? Would teaching this story in Idaho classrooms be “compelling” them to believe one race is better than another? I don’t think so. I believe my great grandfather saw the grassy Pine Valley opportunity and took it. But if the 1855 treaty held, he could not have owned that land. Our government, and the US Army cleared the way for him.

But did the US government, and the hordes of immigrants looking for opportunity in the late 19th century in this great American west consider this an injustice? I doubt it. Free land, make of it what you can.

The Idaho legislatures half kneel to the right-wing conservative legislators who swung the “Critical Race Theory” effigy from their pike embarrasses me. Why can’t we stand up to bullies?

Maybe they learned from Joseph. He tried for years to discourage settlers into the Wallowa Valley, peacefully. He opposed talk of war. But when it became inevitable, he worked with his people. His younger brother, Ollokot, was killed. Many other chiefs and warriors and tribal members were killed as they ran for their lives to Canada.

Joseph tried to make the US Army, the US government, the bullies see the injustice. They could not. He and his followers paid.

This is a story that needs to be told. And I feel the shame. I don’t know if you will, and I cannot compel you to. But the story must be told.

Stories like this make one consider the balance of justice, and the world we strive to build.

We took a hike up from a trailhead in the hot sun and shaded timber to the Blue Hole of the Imnaha. The clear late June runoff ran between basalt out-croppings and you can stand above and look through the clear water. When we did this a couple years ago in the fall, the steelhead could be seen, heading up to their spawning grounds. It should be the season for Chinook salmon to spawn. I stood for a long while. But I gave up.

It is hard to know how to stand up to the bullies and opportunists around us. Knowing justice is just the beginning of the fight. Stories teach us. We should tell them.