| Letters
to the editor from this week's Chronicle Dam it Simpson. By Senator Carl Crabtree It has taken me a moment to come up with words that are print approved after learning that Congressman Mike Simpson is spewing rhetoric to remove dams in the northwest. Congressman Simpson asked elected officials from around the northwest to stand with him, and as of today I am here to say that I cannot be there. I am a firm believer that our dams are needed and provide an asset to Idahoans. The way the legislation is written, I cannot support Congressman Simpson from where I stand. We don’t have to look back in history to see how unreliable energy sources, even a on a good day, have failed miserably in times of crisis. Take a look at our fellow Americans in Texas right now. In a state that doesn’t get much weather change we see people desperate for electricity due to an artic blast. And for a state like ours, where winter is real, imagine the threats we would be facing and the fight for electricity. We have an abundance of clean, reliable and dependable power because we have hydroelectricity. If we follow the plan Congressman Simpson so proudly touts, we will lose millions of megawatts of power – to save a fish, that he can’t guarantee for survival. Don’t take what I just said about the salmon out of context. As a rancher who values the land, my fellow friends in agriculture know and understand the importance of preserving what we have been given. We are the original environmentalists. We know and understand the importance of our natural resources and that includes the survival of the salmon. To state at the outset, that there is no guaranteed outcome makes the proposal even more incredible. The salmon working group, that consists of stakeholders from multiple states and representing multiple interests, are coming up with a cohesive plan for salmon and steelhead. This is very important to the people in my district. Let’s leave that group to continue their productive effort. This plan would be catastrophic for Idaho, but as I read over what is entailed, I know that for the people of north Idaho, specifically, we use the Port of Lewiston for wheat, barley, peas, chickpeas, timber, logs and chips – we have this incredible mode of export and import right in our backyard. You can’t put a price tag on a port. There is talk of expanding rail as an option, but talk is cheap, and the Port is efficient – this needs to continue. I do not stand alone in my feelings against the nonsensical multi-billion-dollar proposal. Idahoans across the state have taken a stance. We are not Oregon and we are not Washington – thanks goodness. We simply cannot risk eliminating a solid system that properly and efficiently uses the resources we have been blessed with in Idaho. We cannot risk the instability of this plan.
To the Editor First, I would like to thank the people who actually took the time and have reached out to get information about why we did not adopt a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance. Unfortunately, I have been made aware that there are some folks who have not reached out asking for signatures on a petition demanding that the Idaho County Board of Commissioners “declare Idaho County a Second Amendment Sanctuary with protection from outside governments that would infringe on these rights as described in the Constitution of the United States”. I would have to ask those circulating this petition, what would this really look like in practice? The devil is always in the details and actual FACTS. This petition lacks the foresight needed to adequately address what the organizers are really looking for. Based on this petition, it would appear that the desire is to create a nation in which every unit of government, be it a city, county or state, gets to decide which laws they are going to establish and enforce. What’s next? A county ordinance on abortion? Should a city or county in Idaho be able to allow the murder of the unborn simply by a local ordinance? Let me be clear, while I do like the concept of making a statement to protect our 2nd Amendment rights and put it on the Commissioners agenda for discussion a few weeks ago, I also must weigh the potential consequences for Idaho County citizens. When County Commissioners pass an ordinance, we have to be prepared to defend that law in court. I am concerned that if Idaho County passes a 2A Sanctuary ordinance, it suggests to the public that a person will be exempt from ALL Federal firearm laws. This, in my opinion, will put Idaho County on the hook to provide legal defense costs for both the County and any individual who might be charged. In case you are unaware, when lawyers are involved, there is a loud sucking sound coming out of YOUR bank account as hundreds and thousands of tax dollars are spent. And in this situation, those dollars would be recklessly spent, as this specific issue was addressed by SB1332 back in 2014. Being a strong believer in limited government and governing with common sense, I do not take passing an ordinance lightly. I do not believe putting useless, redundant laws on the books, nor do I believe it is good leadership to endanger the County’s financial security due to a feel-good ordinance. Sincerely, Skip Brandt Idaho County Commission To the Editor The February 24 piece by Skip Brandt, Idaho County Commissioners chair, (Idaho County Free Press, Guest Commentary, February 24, 2021) is a classic example of political doublespeak and condescension. Brandt claims certain concerned citizens of Idaho county are stupidly attempting to “create a nation in which every unit of government, be it a city, county or state, gets to decide which laws they are going to establish and enforce.” Yet, I imagine he actually knows the desire for a Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance reflects a concern for the integrity of the United States Constitution, the Second Amendment and section 11, article I of the Idaho State Constitution. Brandt also claims it’s a bad idea because it might cost money to protect Second Amendment rights. Since when do conservatives worry about the cost of protecting fundamental rights? True conservative don’t think that way; “good old boy” Republicans do. Perhaps Brandt is cut from the same cloth as the faux conservative Gov. Little. Your rights as a free citizen of Idaho and the USA are not the primary concern of the governor. He’s afraid that ending the state of emergency will shut off the federal money spigot – your freedom be damned. Is Brandt of a similar mind? Brandt also claims there is no need for a county ordinance because SB1332 is already in place. However, SB1332 was more of a publicity stunt than serious protection from federal tyranny. The law does not address the actions of federal officers. It only prohibits Idaho government officials, agents or employees from enforcing (certain) federal gun confiscation edicts. In other words, under the provisions of SB1332, your local sheriff is prohibited from helping the feds take your guns but is not directed to actually stop the feds when they come knocking at your door. So, don’t bother calling the sheriffs office (or the county commissioners) if Biden has his way on gun control; they don’t believe it’s their responsibility to actually take a stand against federal tyranny. When you put it together it seems Brandt doesn’t believe state and local governments have the responsibility of protecting their constituency from federal overreach. D. Eric Williams Cottonwood Letter to the Editor “From My Cold Dead Hands” Commissioner Brandt wrote that a 2A declaration is redundant and potentially risky. However as I understand it the petition is not for a law, and Mr. Brandt's response is inapt. The real issue is County POLICY, and Mr. Brandt avoided that question. IMO a strong POLICY statement can and should be issued - and not only by the County Commission, but also by the Sheriff and County Prosecutor. How about "COME TAKE MY GUN FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS..." In support of his "straw man" reply, Mr. Brandt (correctly) noted that “...when lawyers are involved, there is a loud sucking sound coming out of your bank account...." Good POLICY, no doubt. Well take a listen to the sound of local lawyer Scott Olds, appointed "special prosecutor" in criminal cases, sucking up huge amounts of court time and your money pursuing matters that need to be settled, not litigated, with no POLICY supervision. Why does the County Prosecutor permit this folly? I asked (in writing) and his reply was that he has NO authority to supervise lawyer Olds. Really? This answer does not pass the common sense test, nor explain why Olds was appointed to do the Prosecutor's job. Oh, right - "conflict of interest." Again - really? Prosecutor's offices see conflicts every day, and most address it with a "firewall" and do NOT appoint Special Prosecutors when only one prosecutor has the conflict - anyone else in the office can take the case - sparing taxpayers the expense and apparent lack of accountability inherent in this process. Perhaps Mr. Brandt needs to have a conversation with the County Prosecutor about that big sucking sound heard down the hall while he’s asking what the 2A POLICY of our County is – and don’t forget to ask the Sheriff too.... Joshua Palken Elk City To the Editor The February 24 piece by Skip Brandt, Idaho County Commissioners chair, (Idaho County Free Press, Guest Commentary, February 24, 2021) is a classic example of political doublespeak and condescension. Brandt claims certain concerned citizens of Idaho county are stupidly attempting to “create a nation in which every unit of government, be it a city, county or state, gets to decide which laws they are going to establish and enforce.” Yet, I imagine he actually knows the desire for a Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance reflects a concern for the integrity of the United States Constitution, the Second Amendment and section 11, article I of the Idaho State Constitution. Brandt also claims it’s a bad idea because it might cost money to protect Second Amendment rights. Since when do conservatives worry about the cost of protecting fundamental rights? True conservative don’t think that way; “good old boy” Republicans do. Perhaps Brandt is cut from the same cloth as the faux conservative Gov. Little. Your rights as a free citizen of Idaho and the USA are not the primary concern of the governor. He’s afraid that ending the state of emergency will shut off the federal money spigot – your freedom be damned. Is Brandt of a similar mind? Brandt also claims there is no need for a county ordinance because SB1332 is already in place. However, SB1332 was more of a publicity stunt than serious protection from federal tyranny. The law does not address the actions of federal officers. It only prohibits Idaho government officials, agents or employees from enforcing (certain) federal gun confiscation edicts. In other words, under the provisions of SB1332, your local sheriff is prohibited from helping the feds take your guns but is not directed to actually stop the feds when they come knocking at your door. So, don’t bother calling the sheriffs office (or the county commissioners) if Biden has his way on gun control; they don’t believe it’s their responsibility to actually take a stand against federal tyranny. When you put it together it seems Brandt doesn’t believe state and local governments have the responsibility of protecting their constituency from federal overreach. Jay Maxner Kooskia Redneck Review! No. 305 - 2/28/2021 A temporary change of pace! The last paragraph of RNR #304 claimed that the recent news about the contradictory future of our world climate "demands a closer look at the opposing positions next week." But another topic has surfaced which is more immediate, and thus will be given full attention now, with the opposing claims about our future temperature put off at least one more week! That "other topic" is the future price of gold and silver! It is today's purpose to review the known facts impacting the yo-yo price of especially silver! 1) Market manipulation! The facts! Ever since the take over of the near bankrupt Bear Stearns in 2008 by J.P. Morgan for the ridiculous price of $2 a share, silver has suffered from price manipulation by Morgan and as many as 8 other large banks. Morgan led the way from then to a year or so ago, selling silver short on the paper market, thus driving down silver prices, then buying back the actual metal at the suppressed prices, and storing it for the future. In this way, accumulating around 1 BILLION OUNCES of actual silver! (Ted Butler in the late January, 2021 issue of MARKET UPDATE published by Investment Rarities.) That came to an end some time ago with Morgan assessed a $920 MILLION fine for market manipulation, with the added threat to close their company if they repeat their manipulation. But about 8 other banks have copied Morgan's method of selling silver short, then buying back the physical silver at the depressed prices. However, research proves that these same banks are in a financial world of hurt today, as silver prices increased in the last year from about $17 to this year's average of near $27, resulting in their millions and even billions of potential losses. The same Ted Butler referenced above claims these banks are facing a combined loss of around $14 billion! 2)The current status of J.P. Morgan, and the near desperate condition of the underwater eight banks holding losing short positions suggests clearly that price suppressing actions holding silver prices down are near an end. Mr. Butler, a student of the silver/gold market for several decades asserts that silver's price is destined to explode in an amazing way in the future! 3)From decades ago ratios of gold available world wide to silver of 1 to 5, that is in the past there was five times more available silver than gold, the ratio has inverted, and because of heavy industrial use of silver, the available supply of silver in relation to gold is now about 1 to 5! Today, statistics show that there is now about five times more gold than silver available for purchase in the world today! 4)The historic early ratio of 16oz silver = 1 oz of gold, which was changed by our government to 35 oz silver = 1 oz gold during our bi-metal guarantee years has now averaged about 70 oz silver to 1 oz gold, though occasionally the ratio has reached an unbelievable figure of 120 to 1! Thus, these facts and other suggest silver is one of the most under priced investments today! Following are just a few more reasons supporting the above claim! 1) "The case for investing in silver could hardly be more compelling....We are living in a massive fiat money experiment that is not going to end well...silver is in an historic bull market, and is going to reach levels few can imagine..." Peter Krauth - Market Update" above! 2) "Silver Eagle sales...in the first two weeks of 2021 were over 4.5 million...that kind of demand would likely create a silver shortage that would cause a price eruption..." Stanley Lee - Market Update. 3)"There has never been a shortage of silver that tripped off an industrial-user buying panic. Everything I look at tells me we might be on the verge of such a shortage now." Ted Butler. (For access to these same Market Updates, call 800-328-1860 and ask for Bill Collins!) Jake Wren |
|