Letters for March 24, 2024
Traditional Idaho
Recently, Idaho’s House of Representatives moved to codify for everyone their fear of people who aren’t like them. If made law, House Bill 538 will protect offensive speech used against non-binary Idahoans and other sexual minorities in public places. While courts are divided on the legality of the use of slurs, the message in this bill is clear: refraining from hurtful speech against nonbinary individuals and other sexual minorities in public places is too hard and confusing for some Idaho lawmakers. They need protection.
Additional pain, this time against nontraditional families, was inflicted in House Concurrent Resolution 35 which would establish Traditional Family Values Month. Several representatives voting for the bill spoke proudly of their ability to overcome the consequences of non-traditional upbringings. They were eager to pull the ladder up behind them for Idaho’s current and future children who have the “misfortune” of living in a home without a biological mother and father enacting “traditional gender roles.” No one pointed out the irony that the next bill on the docket moved to ease adoption procedures.
Idaho is contracting as it shuts its doors to doctors, non-gun owners, immigrant laborers, sexual minorities and most women. Stop the steal.
Jean Henscheid
Star, Idaho
Costs keep rising
As we all have endured the nuances of lengthy winters in the Inland Northwest, I probably share similar thoughts with my fellow citizens regarding the “utility monopolies” that we are all victims of. Once a month, we see a larger and larger chunk of our bank account balances going to heat and the lighting of our homes. Most of us have been shocked lately by utility bills being what our mortgage or rent payments were not that long ago. It’s not like we can shop around for better rates or value for our families. We are forced to pay whatever the utility company chooses to charge us via a complicated, graduated calculation of our usages. Trying to figure that out just makes your brain fog.
Most of us do whatever we can to be good stewards of conservation and try to control our utility expenses. Thermostat dances, LED lighting, energy efficient appliances, blanket purchases – all good and productive activities for sure, but it also comes with significant cost. We’re anxious to compare our monthly utility usages from the previous year as you can do on some utility bills. We usually are delighted to see our efforts paid off when comparing apples to apples, and for a minute feel like Al Gore or John Kerry. Then we compare our cost for all those efforts and always see it cost us more than it did when we were slugs. So disappointing.
Jeffery Clacy
Liberty Lake
A sad St. Patrick’s parade
A beautiful day, a great parade on March 16. I thought the only dark spot was the sight of a three-legged dog causing my grandson to cry, but then, toward the end of the procession, was an entry of Semi Bird promoters, Trump signs adorning, and a strident woman hollering about “Taking back our country.” I then wanted to cry.
Sally Hetland
Spokane
Kroger-Albertsons merger
Why does the FTC oppose the Kroger-Albertsons merger? I have to wonder if this was more about politics than any real concern. In reading about Kroger and Albertsons rationale behind the merger, they claim this a response to a changing marketplace. That, because of the growth of Walmart, Costco and Amazon this is a necessary move in order to compete.
In my opinion, that makes a lot of sense. Walmarts and Costcos have been popping up in every community for a few decades. And conversely, Albertsons have been slowly disappearing. Further, Kroger and Albertsons have pledged to close no stores and lay no one off. So, why the opposition from the FTC?
With the approach from the current administration on nearly every issue, this appears to be a move to support major labor unions (who have opposed the merger). In other words, politics as usual. Even the Wall Street Journal called this decision a gift to Amazon and Walmart and highly politicized.
In an effort to satisfy a political constituency, it seems to me, it’s the consumer who will suffer from higher prices and fewer places to shop.
Carolyn Williams
Spokane
Competition should be encouraged, not stifled
I think we can all agree, the free market is what drives our economy. When competition is robust, consumers benefit. When it’s not, they suffer. When a gas station lowers the price of their gas, it forces the neighboring gas station to respond and do the same. If your local diner invests to create a better menu, other local diners must respond to improve your experience. In the end, it’s the consumer who enjoyed the lower price for gas and the better menu options.
The same goes in the world of grocery – however, it’s even more competitive. As the grocery market has changed grocers must respond. Today, Walmart, Amazon and Costco control the majority of the market. The traditional grocery store is fading away. However, in order to compete, Kroger and Albertsons are attempting to merge. The Federal Trade Commission is blocking the merger, calling it anti-consumer. That makes no sense. Combined, Kroger and Albertsons will be about half of Walmart. And Amazon and Costco continue to grow and compete – which is how it should be.
Kroger and Albertsons are also trying to compete. If this merger fails, consumer choices will continue to decline, and your neighborhood grocery store will soon be a thing of the past. We should be encouraging competition not stifling it.
Kelly Lotze
Spokane
The ‘moral’ choice
The Spokane Republican Party’s newly adopted platform is off the rails.
One statement, the “belief that life begins at conception” is patently false. Life begins long before that. In fact, the egg that eventually developed into you was alive and well in your mother’s ovary months before she was born!
Of course, conception was a crucial point in your long journey toward personhood. But I challenge anyone who claims to believe that a fertilized human egg is the moral equivalent of a baby to consider this: You are a mother of a newborn baby, and you are in the maternity ward. Your baby is in the newborn nursery down the corridor to the left. Down the corridor to the right is the IVF clinic where you have two frozen embryos. A fire breaks out, and you have time to save your newborn baby or your two frozen embryos. Which will you choose? Now ask yourself this: How many frozen embryos would you have to save to justify abandoning your newborn baby, as the “moral” choice?
Many “believers” have been, and continue to be, bamboozled by their religious leaders about this moral question. But the simple act of considering the above ethical “dilemma” reveals the truth: When asked to act on their supposed “belief,” no sane person actually believes that a fertilized human egg is the moral equivalent of a baby.
Justin StormoGipson
Newman Lake
Enforce contract community is entitled to
Chris Bowers asserts in a letter of March 21 (“Valley council should back SCRAPS”) that Spokane Valley City Council should back SCRAPS because the city cannot possibly get a better deal for animal control than the contract it already has with SCRAPS. The point he ignores, though, is that if that contract is not being complied with by SCRAPS and enforced by the city, then the city is not getting what it pays for and what the community needs.
Councilman Merkel and the City Council must review the contract for compliance. Spokane County and the board of county commissioners have a duty to provide the services contracted for, and without scrutiny from municipalities and the public, they seem disinclined to do so or to be transparent about what they actually are doing. A restricted euthanasia policy adopted by the commissioners years ago has been abandoned without explanation and in violation of a SCRAPS contract with the city of Spokane. Services, including hours and days of operation, have been reduced. Programs like TNR struggle. SCRAPS appears to regularly refuse to impound animals brought to its doors. Spokane County operates animal welfare services with no transparency, and apparently with no inclination to even call SCRAPS a “shelter.”
The city of Spokane Valley, and indeed all of the municipalities which contract with SCRAPS, should be evaluating their contracts to be sure they are getting the services to which they and their citizens are entitled.
Mary Giannini
Spokane