'); } -->
SHEEP STUDY
Embarrassing sheep law defies proven science
The 2009 Legislature passed a bill requiring the Idaho Department of Fish and Game to give priority to domestic sheep over wild bighorn sheep, one of Idaho's premier wildlife species, even when the domestic sheep are spreading deadly diseases to bighorn sheep. The transmission of diseases to bighorns by domestic sheep has been known since 1994, and that groundbreaking study and proof spread like wildfire through the wool growing industry and wildlife conservation groups at the time. It's been extensively discussed and verified by other studies ever since. It defies belief that any rancher raising domestic sheep would not be aware of that fact.
In supporting the bill, Dr. Marie Bulgin, director of Idaho's Caine Veterinary Center and a woolgrower herself, testified that there is no proof diseases are spread by domestic sheep to wild bighorns. Lt. Gov. Brad Little and Republican Sen. Jeff Siddoway, both sheep ranchers, and the stooges on the Idaho Fish and Game Commission, whose duty is to protect wildlife, all kept quiet about Bulgin's inaccurate, misleading testimony, allowing a very flawed bill to pass.
The resulting law has made Idaho the laughingstock of wildlife biologists, scientists and wildlife conservation organizations all over the world.
BURK MANTEL, Boise
INSURANCE
Vision policy contains a troubling eye-opener
Complete shock wouldn't even describe a recent encounter we had with a nationally known insurance provider.
I work part-time with a local company, and applied for a vision policy to help cover expenses of the yearly eye exams and possible replacement of glasses. When we received the policy, my wife called the insurance company to find out exactly what we were covered for, and É.
For the total yearly cost of $586.80 I am required to pay the insurance company, our coverage includes:
• One $35 payment for one eye exam per year each.
• One payment of $50 per year to help cover the cost of one pair of new lenses and frames, for each of us.
Total cost of the benefits covered by the insurance company to cover two of us, $170 per year. Speaking with our optometrist, the chances of actually using the other benefits offered in the same policy: "We had a better chance of being struck by lightning on a clear day."
Bottom line: The profit the company is making, $416.80 per year, not counting what little may be required for them to keep track of our policy. We are working on canceling this ASAP.
DONALD OREMUS, Caldwell
FRANKEN AMENDMENT
Idaho senators vote to protect Halliburton
Thirty Republican male senators, including Idaho Sens. Mike Crapo and James Risch, voted no on a defense appropriations bill introduced by Minnesota Sen. Al Franken. The bill sought to withhold defense contracts from companies that restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court.
Why was the bill introduced? Four years ago, 20-year-old Jamie Leigh Jones was employed by a Halliburton subsidiary and was working in Iraq. She was viciously gang-raped. The Department of Justice did not prosecute her assailants, the government of Iraq could not file charges, and she was prohibited from seeking justice due to contract limitations.
How could 30 Republican male senators vote no on this amendment? Easy. These 30 Republican male senators were issued magic glasses by Halliburton, and then and only then were they able to see through this "flawed" amendment. Protecting Halliburton is far more important than passing an amendment which will protect contract workers' rights to seek justice against perpetrators.
MALCOHM MCGREGOR, Boise
MORRISON CENTER
Parking policy unfair to disabled ticket-holders
Shame on the Morrison Center. Disabled people, beware!
Recently a disabled person tried to attend a performance. The person had received tickets about a month before. Upon arriving at the disabled parking area, the person was informed there was now (for the first time) a fee for disabled and VIPs of $10. All others attending received free parking. The person was told by several workers to park at the general lot because all disabled parking was full. Are you kidding?
When contacted, Morrison Center officials said they had taken spaces from the disabled parking and given them to VIPs starting that evening. They added six spaces somewhere else. Of course, no one knows where they are.
This is about charging disabled fees! Making a profit from disabled - is that where we are now? Is there any business that charges for disabled spaces at their business? Apparently, it's acceptable. After all, the Morrison Center does it. Lawmakers, protect your disabled citizens. Have we reached a point that profit is more important than social responsibility? Morrison Center, you just don't get it.
By the way, do they get tax dollars? If so, let the budget cuts begin.
Idaho, we're better than this. Morrison Center, this is Boise, not New York City.
WILMA CHAPPLE, Meridian
WELFARE
Immigrants place added burden on services
Over the past couple years I've been noticing an increasing preponderance of immigrants to the Boise area. Most are from various countries in Africa, but I've also seen a goodly percentage from the Middle East and the Balkan states. Many do not speak English and are obviously unemployed, and oftentimes I am behind them in line at the grocery store while they use their WIC cards.
Therefore, at the risk of being labeled a bigot or unsympathetic to their plight, my question is this: I understand that the local chapter of the International Rescue Committee - along with local churches - is responsible for assisting these people, thinking that they are performing humanitarian acts, but is any thought being given to the burden they place on our already weakened economy?
It's obvious that many of these people are never going to leave the welfare rolls, and therefore it seems unfair to natural-born Americans and Boiseans who are feeling the pinch of various government cutbacks and other economic downturns.
TIMOTHY FISETTE, Boise
Story Comments
We welcome comments but ask that you remain on topic. Some comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. Comments that are profane, personal attacks or otherwise inappropriate or are off topic are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Do not flag comments merely because you disagree with the comment.