Monday, December 22, 2003
Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Brown just announced a plan to use the Permanent Coal Tax Trust that might actually work: He proposes using coal tax revenues to match federal dollars for highways, water systems and other projects. Obtaining federal matches would bring $600 million to Montana over the next 10 years, compared to $65 million the money would otherwise earn in interest, he says.
The $688 million already in the fund would not be touched, Brown said.
A two-thirds vote of the Legislature would be required to put the plan up for public vote, he said. If the Legislature turns the idea down, he said he would work for a voter initiative to get the plan on the ballot.
UPDATE: Here's the response from Laurel Republican Ken Miller: “The best thing we can do to grow the economy in Montana is to allow Montanans to keep more of their hard earned dollars. If the coal severance revenues were used to lower taxes to employers and employees directly, then I would consider that a better use of the dollars. If they are diverted just to grow government spending, that would be a very unfortunate mistake.
"Many proposals to spend the coal trust have come and gone with little success. It seems to me we would be better served by a Governor that put the time and effort into finding and implementing 5 or 10 percent efficiencies in Government programs, without eliminating critical services. Inventing new ways to spend tax money is short sighted. We need leadership that thinks generational.”
The $688 million already in the fund would not be touched, Brown said.
A two-thirds vote of the Legislature would be required to put the plan up for public vote, he said. If the Legislature turns the idea down, he said he would work for a voter initiative to get the plan on the ballot.
UPDATE: Here's the response from Laurel Republican Ken Miller: “The best thing we can do to grow the economy in Montana is to allow Montanans to keep more of their hard earned dollars. If the coal severance revenues were used to lower taxes to employers and employees directly, then I would consider that a better use of the dollars. If they are diverted just to grow government spending, that would be a very unfortunate mistake.
"Many proposals to spend the coal trust have come and gone with little success. It seems to me we would be better served by a Governor that put the time and effort into finding and implementing 5 or 10 percent efficiencies in Government programs, without eliminating critical services. Inventing new ways to spend tax money is short sighted. We need leadership that thinks generational.”
U.S. News has released a detailed story following a five-month investigation of the Bush administration's extraordinary penchant for secrecy. Nut graph: "For the past three years, the Bush administration has quietly but efficiently dropped a shroud of secrecy across many critical operations of the federal government--cloaking its own affairs from scrutiny and removing from the public domain important information on health, safety, and environmental matters. The result has been a reversal of a decades-long trend of openness in government while making increasing amounts of information unavailable to the taxpayers who pay for its collection and analysis."
Not only has the Bush administration classifed as many documents in two years as Clinton did in his last four, Bush also has made it easier to reclassify documents so that information once public has gone behind the shroud again.
Not only has the Bush administration classifed as many documents in two years as Clinton did in his last four, Bush also has made it easier to reclassify documents so that information once public has gone behind the shroud again.
Sunday, December 21, 2003
Just wondering: "Shattered Glass," the movie about Stephen Glass' journalistic fabrications at The New Republic, has been out for seven weeks now and still no sign of it in Billings. True, it's done lousy at the box office, but critics raved about it. Shouldn't us journalist types get at least one week to revel in Schadenfreude over a colleague gone wrong?
I don't usually think of Billings as a cultural backwater (how could a guy who has lived in College Station, Texas, ever think that?) but it is discouraging to look at the critical ratings on Rotten Tomatoes. At least nine other current movies that have gotten favorable ratings of 80 percent or better have never played in Billings, and most of them never will (although some have played elsewhere in Montana). It isn't that there aren't good movies out there, dear reader, it's just that we don't get to see them.
UPDATE: "Shattered Glass" has made it to Missoula, but the Independent hated it.
I don't usually think of Billings as a cultural backwater (how could a guy who has lived in College Station, Texas, ever think that?) but it is discouraging to look at the critical ratings on Rotten Tomatoes. At least nine other current movies that have gotten favorable ratings of 80 percent or better have never played in Billings, and most of them never will (although some have played elsewhere in Montana). It isn't that there aren't good movies out there, dear reader, it's just that we don't get to see them.
UPDATE: "Shattered Glass" has made it to Missoula, but the Independent hated it.
Saturday, December 20, 2003
Wolfgang von Eitzen, the German citizen and former Billings resident whom immigration authorities were busy separating from his American family while foreign terrorists were learning to steer airplanes, sent along a packet of stories from the German press about the United States and the war in Iraq.
I'm about halfway through the packet, and it is fascinating stuff. If nothing else, it redefines concepts of what constitutes liberal bias in the media. As others have noted, what passes for liberal in this country would be firmly in the conservative camp in much of Europe. In general, the German press appears to view Bush and Iraq this way: He was a pampered child, fond of "Cowboy-terminologie," who never had a serious idea and never gave a flip about Iraq until he was "gekidnappt" by neoconservatives. Now he's gone from being a big talker to a supplicant for help from the United Nations to bail out a failed effort in nation building. As the editor of Stern, a popular German news magazine, put it, Germans should give Bush no money and no soldiers but rather some advice: Listen to your allies and don't view the Security Council as a self-service store.
In a withering critique of Bush, Stern asks, "How could it have come about that a politician who after the attacks of Sept. 11 had won the support of the entire world has become only two years later the most hated man on the planet?"
If there's a bright side, it may be that Stern doesn't seem to blame Americans themselves for the nation's sorry relations ("worst in history," Stern maintains) with the rest of the world. It blames Bush.
It all reminded me of the chuckle I got the other day when a caller to Sean Hannity's radio show announced, as if it were a fresh discovery he wished to share with the world, that people in other countries don't think like we do. It was a shocker, but he had an explanation: "They don't use reason." If only it were so simple.
UPDATE: I forgot to mention the most interesting quote, which I have not seen anywhere in the American media. According to Stern, Bush told three senators during a meeting in the White House in March 2002, "Fuck Saddam. Wir stuerzen ihn." The last part means, "We'll destroy him" or, "We'll take him down." The first part means the president was really annoyed at Mr. Hussein.
I'm about halfway through the packet, and it is fascinating stuff. If nothing else, it redefines concepts of what constitutes liberal bias in the media. As others have noted, what passes for liberal in this country would be firmly in the conservative camp in much of Europe. In general, the German press appears to view Bush and Iraq this way: He was a pampered child, fond of "Cowboy-terminologie," who never had a serious idea and never gave a flip about Iraq until he was "gekidnappt" by neoconservatives. Now he's gone from being a big talker to a supplicant for help from the United Nations to bail out a failed effort in nation building. As the editor of Stern, a popular German news magazine, put it, Germans should give Bush no money and no soldiers but rather some advice: Listen to your allies and don't view the Security Council as a self-service store.
In a withering critique of Bush, Stern asks, "How could it have come about that a politician who after the attacks of Sept. 11 had won the support of the entire world has become only two years later the most hated man on the planet?"
If there's a bright side, it may be that Stern doesn't seem to blame Americans themselves for the nation's sorry relations ("worst in history," Stern maintains) with the rest of the world. It blames Bush.
It all reminded me of the chuckle I got the other day when a caller to Sean Hannity's radio show announced, as if it were a fresh discovery he wished to share with the world, that people in other countries don't think like we do. It was a shocker, but he had an explanation: "They don't use reason." If only it were so simple.
UPDATE: I forgot to mention the most interesting quote, which I have not seen anywhere in the American media. According to Stern, Bush told three senators during a meeting in the White House in March 2002, "Fuck Saddam. Wir stuerzen ihn." The last part means, "We'll destroy him" or, "We'll take him down." The first part means the president was really annoyed at Mr. Hussein.
Outpost staffer Jim Larson sends a link to this story, which poses the question: "How much of what left and right think about each other is real, and to what extent are they railing against, and defending, Platonic ideals -- ideals so far removed from reality that they have ceased to be useful?"
His answer is a bit too reasonable for my tastes: He argues that the red and blue states aren't as different as politicos would have us believe. I prefer an iffier proposition: That conservatives and liberals have long since met in the middle and are now charging past each other in opposite directions. Thus we have conservatives who favor increased spending (as long as its for the military, energy companies and timber interests), huge budget deficits, preemptive wars and social engineering, which liberals rail about deficits, federal overreaching into private and state concerns and keeping the troops at home.
His answer is a bit too reasonable for my tastes: He argues that the red and blue states aren't as different as politicos would have us believe. I prefer an iffier proposition: That conservatives and liberals have long since met in the middle and are now charging past each other in opposite directions. Thus we have conservatives who favor increased spending (as long as its for the military, energy companies and timber interests), huge budget deficits, preemptive wars and social engineering, which liberals rail about deficits, federal overreaching into private and state concerns and keeping the troops at home.
Clark Johnson, now the Bozeman city manager, will take over as Sen. Conrad Burns' chief of staff on Jan. 1. He will replace Will Brooke, who is leaving to manage the Bush-Cheney campaign in Montana and to return to his Bozeman law practice.
Johnson was born in Butte and raised in Billings. He is a Montana State University graduate and has been Bozeman city manager since 1997.
Johnson was born in Butte and raised in Billings. He is a Montana State University graduate and has been Bozeman city manager since 1997.
Friday, December 19, 2003
Yellowstone County Commissioner Jim Reno wants to discuss turning over the county's troubled Public Defender's Office to state jurisdiction. He writes: "From my vantage point, I see many reasons to transfer the obligation to the State of Montana: 1. There may be a savings to Yellowstone County taxpayers. As we have come to know only so well, the state chooses not to reimburse Yellowstone County for all costs associated with running the department. 2. Most counties no longer provide this service. To my knowledge there are less than 6 counties (and the number is decreasing) that still have PDO as a county responsibility. 3. State assumption of the PDO will help insure a more uniform indigent defendants system across the state. 4. More involvement with the private attorneys. In most parts of the state, private attorneys provide indigent defense via contracts with the State."
While Conrad Burns fulminates about new snowmobile rules (see below), the state's Travel Montana division is putting the best possible face on the situation.
Now it's Brian Schweitzer firing off cannons. In a news release, he admonishes the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad to "start acting like a partner not a lord."
"The cozy relations between Montana political leaders and the railroad have led BNSF to think they can gouge Montana farmers," the release says. "Recent news reports state that former Governor Marc Racicot has been paid huge payments and received 4,400 shares in BNSF stock options as a board member of BNSF and Governor Martz received a $50,000 boost from BNSF when they paid for political ads attacking her opponent in her gubernatorial bid."
Calling BNSF one of the worst examples of consumer gouging he has encountered, Schweitzer says, "Montana is not a colony to be exploited by the puppet masters at BNSF headquarters in Fort Worth, Texas."
Wanna bet?
"The cozy relations between Montana political leaders and the railroad have led BNSF to think they can gouge Montana farmers," the release says. "Recent news reports state that former Governor Marc Racicot has been paid huge payments and received 4,400 shares in BNSF stock options as a board member of BNSF and Governor Martz received a $50,000 boost from BNSF when they paid for political ads attacking her opponent in her gubernatorial bid."
Calling BNSF one of the worst examples of consumer gouging he has encountered, Schweitzer says, "Montana is not a colony to be exploited by the puppet masters at BNSF headquarters in Fort Worth, Texas."
Wanna bet?
The invaluable Jackie Corr sends along this delicious link to a Drudge Report item saying that Bill O'Reilly's sales figures on his new book are vastly overstated. O'Reilly's response: "You can't believe a word that Matt Drudge says." Which actually is true, but it reminds me of a call that O'Reilly took one day from a woman who said that his book ranked No. 15 on the best-seller list rather than No. 1, as he had been claiming. O'Reilly called her a liar and hung up. I guess you can't believe a word that radio talk-show callers say either, but she sure didn't sound like a liar.
Sen. Conrad Burns has fired full-bore at the federal judge who vacated a decision allowing snowmobiles into Yellowstone Park this winter. Among other things, the senator says in a letter to Secretary of Interior Gale Norton that Judge Emmet Sullivan's decision is "completely insupportable," "cruel," "outrageous and offensive," "does not follow the law, is not balanced, and is gratuitously unfair," and "does not offer a balanced assessment of the facts." Of the judge himself, the senator says he "completely overstepped his bounds," is guilty of "judicial arrogance masquerading as law," and "shares the values of the environmentalist plaintiffs who despise the recreational choices of average Americans and who look to the courts, rather than the political branches, for their legislation."
No word on what the senator really thought.
No word on what the senator really thought.
Tuesday, December 16, 2003
South Dakota Politics notes that The New Republic has called for at least threatening to strip Democratic renegade Max Baucus of his Finance Committee seat.
I happened to be halfway through a story in Harper's magazine about the Slobodan Milosevic trial when news broke that Saddam Hussein had been captured. Milosevic's trial at The Hague started in February and is expected to last for a couple of more years. His is one of about 100 cases before the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Terrory of the Former Yugoslavia. Altogether, the cases are expected to keep the Tribunal busy until 2012.
Thoughts from the author, Guy Lesser, about bringing Saddam before a similar tribunal: "The several years of both direct and indirect preparation involved in, for example, marshaling adequate admissible evidence and finding witnesses is but one issue. Others include whose notion of a 'fair' trial will prevail, and whether the trial is to deal with almost twenty-five years of International Humanitarian Law and human-rights abuses or ought to be a brief proceeding limited in its scope. If the latter, victims' families are certain to raise passionate objections. A trial of broad scope, on the other hand, would undoubtedly drag on for several years. And it is quite easy to imagine that much would be made of active U.S. support of Hussein's regime during the conflict with Iran, that the 'legality' of the United States invasion would be vigorously contested by the defendant(s), and that every effort possible would be made to play to the region's anti-American audience, portraying Hussein as both a martyr struggling to defend Islam from the West and something of a pawn, turned upon and betrayed by his former ally, the United States. Doubtless, too, some attempt would be made not only to portray the current Bush agenda for the Middle East in a sinister light but also to implicate the United States during the period prior to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, perhaps even in the role of an accomplice that supplied and trained Hussein's armed forces while turning a blind eye to IHL crimes they were fully aware of and might have done something to prevent."
Thoughts from the author, Guy Lesser, about bringing Saddam before a similar tribunal: "The several years of both direct and indirect preparation involved in, for example, marshaling adequate admissible evidence and finding witnesses is but one issue. Others include whose notion of a 'fair' trial will prevail, and whether the trial is to deal with almost twenty-five years of International Humanitarian Law and human-rights abuses or ought to be a brief proceeding limited in its scope. If the latter, victims' families are certain to raise passionate objections. A trial of broad scope, on the other hand, would undoubtedly drag on for several years. And it is quite easy to imagine that much would be made of active U.S. support of Hussein's regime during the conflict with Iran, that the 'legality' of the United States invasion would be vigorously contested by the defendant(s), and that every effort possible would be made to play to the region's anti-American audience, portraying Hussein as both a martyr struggling to defend Islam from the West and something of a pawn, turned upon and betrayed by his former ally, the United States. Doubtless, too, some attempt would be made not only to portray the current Bush agenda for the Middle East in a sinister light but also to implicate the United States during the period prior to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, perhaps even in the role of an accomplice that supplied and trained Hussein's armed forces while turning a blind eye to IHL crimes they were fully aware of and might have done something to prevent."
Time to move to Klein: Just got official word that Starbucks is opening two Billings stores in February: one in Rimrock Mall and one in a "retail space neighboring the mall."
Bridget Barrett, regional marketing manager, says, "We are incredibly exited to bring the Starbucks Experience [her italics] to Billings.” Maybe she meant "excited." But up here in Klein, we take these things literally.
Bridget Barrett, regional marketing manager, says, "We are incredibly exited to bring the Starbucks Experience [her italics] to Billings.” Maybe she meant "excited." But up here in Klein, we take these things literally.
An incredibly exiting discussion is going on at City Lights about Bill O'Reilly's bizarre use of "secular" to describe major American newspapers. I weigh in, for what it's worth, somewhere down around comment 12.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)