'Intended' residency response lacking
Mike Dennison's article (June 6) reported that House Speaker Scott Sales asked Attorney General Mike McGrath for a formal opinion on the residency of Sen. Jesse Laslovich.
I'm the Republican candidate for Senate District 43. Until the article was published, I was not aware that Sales had filed a formal complaint with the AG. I'm also in the process of questioning Laslovich's residency with the Secretary of State's office and the Office of Political Practices. At this point, I considered the residency question an administrative matter to be resolved by one of the agencies. Requesting a formal opinion from the AG converts what should be an administrative matter to a legal and ethical issue.
As a legislator, Laslovich is chairman of the Judicial and Ethics committees. Although he's still a legislator, Laslovich is working for the Attorney General's Office of Consumer Protection. The Separation of Powers clause states, "No person or persons charged with the exercise of power properly belonging to one branch shall exercise any power properly belonging to either of the others."
Concerning residency, the Legislative Qualification clause states, "For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts." Laslovich is working in Helena for the AG, his wife is working for a Helena law firm and their residence is in Helena.
Laslovich stated that residency "boils down to the intent of the person" and that he uses his parents' address because he considers Anaconda his home. When he was attending law school, his parents' address was his residence. Now that he's graduated law school, married, employed and living in Helena, the response that he considers Anaconda his "intended" residence is no longer persuasive or appropriate.
Dick Motta, Philipsburg
Let's concern ourselves with real issues
I was saddened to read Fredericka Ibsen Thompson's letter (Missoulian, June 12) suggesting that Senator Obama will "take away the guns of law-abiding citizens."
I say, "No - that would be impossible."
Let's get realistic and be honest. There are approximately 80 million gun owners in the U.S. After getting the law passed to confiscate everyone'e firearms (another impossible task), imagine trying to enforce it. Right - that's never going to happen. Let's not unnecessarily alarm folks, OK?
Rather, I would prefer that Thompson concern herself with a real situation. There were 3,012 children killed by gunfire in a single year in the U.S. That is eight children every day. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics, 2002). That horrifies me, and we must do better.
Also, let's use some common sense and improve the policies and results that the Republican administration has caused or allowed. We are all paying the price. At least Obama is not in bed with the oil companies, unlike George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
Democrats are working to extend the average $300/week unemployment benefits for 13 additional weeks. That would really be vital to people out of work from the recent Midwest floods, for instance. Just imagine if most of downtown Missoula was underwater to the rafters of all buildings. How long would it take for businesses to reopen? Ever seen the damage resulting from days of flood water filling a building?
And, the town of Chapman, Kan., was totally leveled by a tornado last week. Most of those citizens will be out of work indefinitely. Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont., voted against the extension of unemployment benefits -- the bill was defeated by Republican votes.
Yet, soon we will have spent $1 trillion in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Our citizens deserve better. Think about it - pray about it.
Claire Adrienne, Missoula
You can judge people by their associates
Growing up, our Catholic church taught about God, gospels and helping mankind.
Apparently, Father Pfleger and Rev. Wright of Chicago do not share those teachings. Recently, Pfleger, a frequent guest speaker in Wright's south side Chicago church, dramatically spewed vitriolic hatred, bigotry and hate mongering during a mocking of Hillary Clinton. Later, Pfleger offered an "apology" - "I'm sorry if I offended anyone." Sorry? During decades of religious activism, being offensive has been Pfleger's exact intention.
However, my point is not the bigotry of Chicago's churches. The critical question here is Barack Obama's poor judgment. He enjoyed a 20-year association with Wright and Pfleger - and called their mentoring "a positive experience." These men preached over 1,040 sermons in their churches. Obama's marriage was consecrated and his children were baptized by Wright. Obama claims he "had no idea of the hateful rhetoric preached from their pulpits."
Another questionable relationship for Obama occurred after being elected to the U.S. Senate. He was buying a house in Chicago and approached well-known Illinois political fixer Tony Rezco for advice. Rezco found a mansion Obama wanted. The mansion was $2.2 million with a separate vacant lot valued at $243,000. Obama acquired the mansion for $300,000 less than the asking price. Rezco's wife paid the owner $625,000 for the vacant lot. Obama later helped pass legislation favorable to Tony Rezco on sound reasoning - "it was the right thing to do."
A person should be judged by his associations. Obama cannot make excuses for relationships with Rezco, Wright and Pfleger. Is this the "change" Obama represents? His tough talk about ethics reform in government is overshadowed by his company over the past two decades - while he claims he knows not what they do.
Charles Berger, Missoula
Question policies, not the hunter
How lucky we are to have Heather Winters Jones (letter, "Incident doesn't sound like self-defense," June 6) to be able to determine the "truth" of an incident from afar.
Without the necessity of actually witnessing the event (Missoulian, "Bear hunter kills wolf in self defense," May 30), she is able to determine that the hunter was lying, and that the killing was not justified. She also notes that the female wolf potentially had "three to six pups" that may have been orphaned.
I suppose that whatever family the hunter might have left behind if the wolf had attacked him is inconsequential in her argument.
While many of us would like to see the correct balance between the continued existence of wolves and the safety of livestock and humans, I do not believe that accusing people of lying and minimizing the threat of an attacking wolf is the proper approach.
Scott Bair, Missoula
Schweitzer needs to show leadership
In a time of crisis in our state livestock industry, we could use a little more support from our governor and a little less finger-pointing and pouting.
Gov. Brian Schweitzer's response to the Paradise Valley brucellosis case was little other than a jab at the state's cattlemen who joined together to protect themselves from his lazy attempt to put a small Band-aid on a big situation.
Schweitzer's plan for brucellosis management, creating a "split-state status," was opposed by a large portion of the cattle industry because it avoided having to fix the actual problem at hand. Also voting down the plan to create a split-state was Schweitzer's own Board of Livestock. Schweitzer's plan did nothing to attempt to eliminate brucellosis in the Paradise Valley and other Greater Yellowstone areas; it only provided a possible fix for the cattlemen outside of the designated area having to suffer along with those closer to the park.
Placing the blame back onto the ranchers, Schweitzer claims that had his plan been implemented, the whole state would not have lost disease-free status. Wrong! He all too conveniently leaves out that it is nearly impossible the split-state would have been in place this quickly. It would have taken months to develop the criteria to be reviewed by the USDA, thus his plan would have protected no part of the state in this situation.
The outbreak is the second in the state, and ironically the second since Schweitzer has been in office and has backed away from aggressively hazing bison back into Yellowstone Park. Hopefully, Schweitzer has not forgotten the importance of the livestock industry to the state of Montana; perhaps he could support its ranchers in their attempt to not only maintain a livelihood, but also the heritage of our state.
Jessie Sarrazin, Livingston
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)