STREET TALK Asked Tuesday morning near the Missoula Post Office.
Q:
Inside Letters Briefs Up Front Ochenski Range Agenda News Quirks by Chad Harder
Missoula’s City Council voted Monday to make it unlawful to use a cell phone while driving or riding a bike. Will this new restriction affect your driving habits? Follow-up: If you could ban any common practice in Missoula, what would it be?
Kyle Ferris: Nope, because I don’t drive much. When I’m riding my bike, I’m not texting or using my cell because I want to be a good example to the car drivers. It really annoys me when someone pulls out in front of me and they’re talking on a cell. I really don’t want to be a dent in the side of someone’s truck. Ban the bans: I don’t think I’d ban anything in Missoula. There should be more positive growth and creative expansion. We should focus on what’s good.
Donna Hubbert: No. I don’t use a cell phone very much when I drive. Then again, I don’t really need to be told what to do or how to be an adult. I typically just pull over if I’m going to use my phone. Ban on change: You know, I wouldn’t ban a thing. Things are pretty much okay the way they are.
Bill Carey: Not really. I make it a point to not talk on the phone when I’m driving. Commissioner of etiquette: Bad manners, or poor attitudes, although I don’t really think of things in terms of banning things. I find Missoula to be a very enjoyable place to live, and I’d really have to switch gears in order to come up with something to ban.
Dan Funsch: Not much, because I don’t drive much. I do probably [use my cell phone] more on my bike than in my car, although only on secondary streets. Turn that dial: I’d ban fly-fishing, and NPR’s “Morning Classics.” Fly-fishing because it makes everybody who does it think they’re an environmentalist, and “Morning Classics” because you have to get up at 5 a.m. to hear any news. I mean, I like classical music, but the morning airtime should be used for news.
Missoula Independent
Page 4 June 4–June 11, 2009
Party time Missoula’s a great city for lots of reasons, not the least of which is that we care about the health and safety of our children. Each year for more than a decade now, parents, educators, community volunteers and businesses have sponsored the Senior All Night Party for graduates of Missoula’s high schools. The party is a fun, safe and supervised celebration of an American rite of passage. On behalf of the city, I’m happy to endorse and support the Senior All Night Party. I know the public-safety professionals in our police and fire departments take great comfort in knowing that young folks have a safe place to enjoy their friends on graduation night. Parents, too, can rest assured that their graduates are celebrating safely. Thanks to all of the folks who make this party happen for young Missoulians. If you’re called upon to help with time, money, goods or services, please consider lending a hand. The Senior All Night Party is a great investment in our children and another reason Missoula is a great city. This year’s party is set for June 6 at the University Center. Tickets might make a nice graduation gift for a senior who’s important to you. John Engen Mayor Missoula
A buck for Baucus In recent hearings to reform the nation’s health care system, Montana’s Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, has turned a deaf ear to advocates of single-payer health care. It is noteworthy that Sen. Baucus has received significant amounts of money in the form of campaign contributions from the health insurance and pharmaceutical companies. Max recently stated, “I’m just the hired hand. I want to hear what you want to see in any legislation we pass in Washington, D.C.” So we need to speak to Sen. Baucus in a language he can hear: Montana citizens are gathering at the state offices of Sen. Baucus Friday, June 5, at noon, to demonstrate their support for single- payer health care. Advocates are asked to contribute $1 reflecting their participation in American democracy to Sen. Baucus as a legitimate campaign contribution. Wear your dollar on your lapel with a sticker stating “We Hired Max” prior to the rally. If you are unable to attend, mail your dollar with a note or present it in person at the rallies. Organized nationally, we could send Sen. Baucus $50 million a month, one dollar from each person. He’d need
a baler at the back door to package the loot. Max would realize, “There’s something to this single-payer notion!” and we’d have health care for everyone in the country at a price we could afford— the intent of single-payer health care— with no “mandated insurance” slave collar. So, Max, can you hear us now? Bill Marsik Great Falls
Bankrupt system When a commercial bank fails, the FDIC intervenes with what is essential to restoration and consists of replacing the failed management, wiping out shareholders in order to clean up the balance sheets
He’d need a “ baler at the back door to package
”
the loot.
and ultimately (and expeditiously) selling the bank back to the private sector. Why then, you might ask, has this approach not been taken with Wall Street? Certainly the management has failed spectacularly, the balance sheets are in desperate need of cleaning, and with many stocks such as Citigroup’s down 90 percent since 2007, shareholders have all but been wiped out by the poor decisions of the supposed shepherds of the shareholders, the CEOs. The answer to this question might lie in another: Why are people so intimately tied to Wall Street in charge of the policy decisions attempting to correct this dire situation? It would seem prudent, even necessary, to implement an FDIC-style intervention in the cases of Wall Street. If the government assumed the “toxic” assets via an intervention, the taxpayers would actually receive the possibly 20 percent profits the hedge funds would otherwise make on our risk. Many Wall Street firms are clearly insolvent, but unfortunately these large firms still hold vast amounts of sway over policy makers and are claiming illiquidity by asserting their assets should be priced how they wish and not by the market. Virtually no effort to do anything but rehabilitate these firms to their former, destructive selves has been exerted. Intervention does by no means imply permanent state ownership. It is only a means by which banks can be relieved of their debt burdens and turned back onto the economy to help it recover. It is doubtful these firms will willingly dissolve to avoid any more “too big to fail” cross-
roads. Only federal receivership can mandate these changes along with a revamping of our antitrust laws. Surely more bailout funds will be politically impossible to come by due to overwhelming popular disagreement toward them, despite most economists stating there will be a need for more. But looking at Japan in the 1990s and their “lost decade,” why would we want to prop up our “zombie” banks? We are already majority shareholders in some of these institutions. But why, if we are the majority shareholders, are we letting these companies run themselves, for their own benefit and not for that of the taxpayer? Currently, it’s because Wall Street does not want to admit they did anything wrong. Their hope is they can skate by on taxpayer money for long enough that their toxic assets will magically right themselves. With the network of insiders accumulated in the government, it doesn’t seem they have any reason to assume anything else. In the administration’s dealings with the auto industry, even a casual observer could appreciate the differences between the Wall Street approach and the Detroit approach. Why does Wall Street have more leverage in policy designs? Wall Street is perpetually the leading political campaign contributor. But they are only playing a game that’s been allowed for the past 25 or 30 years. It is unsurprising, almost unmentionably so, save for the broader implications for the American taxpayer. By far the greatest amount of blame should be laid on the Wall Street culture of profits at any cost. But the American taxpayer needs to create an environment that allows President Obama to sever ties with Wall Street. The status quo had been created so as to allow Wall Street to dictate anything that suits their fancy. In what is at least called a democracy, it is up to the people of America to tell their elected officials that this is for so many blatantly apparent reasons unacceptable. As President Johnson said to civil rights leaders, “I agree with you—now go out there and create an environment for me to make changes.” We need to make it possible for President Obama to dissolve the unholy union of finance and governance, of Wall Street and Washington. Stephen Hayes Missoula Correction: Last week’s letter, “The final frontier,” misspelled author Herb Ruhs’ name. The Indy regrets the error.
etters Policy: The Missoula Independent welcomes hate mail, love letters and general correspondence. Letters to the editor must include the writer’s full name, address and daytime phone number for confirmation, though we’ll publish only your name and city. Anonymous letters will not be considered for publication. Preference is given to letters addressing the contents of the Independent. We reserve the right to edit letters for space and clarity. Send correspondence to: Letters to the Editor, Missoula Independent, 317 S. Orange St., Missoula, MT 59801, or via e-mail: editor@missoulanews.com.
L