Wind project not wasteful

Recent letters to the editor regarding the Harvest Hills Wind Project in Whitman County complain about “wasteful” government support for clean energy. Let’s put this in context.

Federal subsidies paid by your tax dollars to oil and gas companies like Exxon, which reaped a $22 billion profit last year, are currently $14 billion annually. Between 1919 and 2009, such tax dollars totaled $437 billion. Combined with generous leases, drilling permits, and government purchases of fossil fuels, support for oil and gas has amounted to trillions of dollars from federal, state and local governments.

Since the 1920s, policies aggressively favoring automobiles caused the decline of streetcars and intercity trains, while massive spending on roads, sometimes destroying neighborhoods, farms and natural habitats, enabled the growth of the petroleum industry. While fossil fuel use increased standards of living, resulting emissions caused steadily rising pollution.

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, the largest government investment in clean energy, will cost $800 billion over 10 years, but the financial benefits to Americans are much greater. The IRA will yield cumulative economic benefits from reduced greenhouse gas pollution of over $5 trillion from now to 2050.

Fossil fuel energy is becoming more expensive over time, while solar and wind energy are already cheaper. Clean energy transitions provide good manufacturing, installation, and maintenance jobs, and projects like the Harvest Hills Wind Project benefit local communities economically.

We cannot afford the increasing costs of pollution-producing energy, which contributes to droughts, more destructive wildfires and storms, reductions in snowpack and stream flows, heat domes, and rising sea levels. All these hazards threaten human health and safety.

Investing in a cleaner and cheaper future is not money wasted.

Leonard Garrison

Moscow

Vote yes on Prop 1

It’s simple really. Proposition 1, the Open Primaries Initiative, will ensure that every Idahoan’s voice is heard in our elections and that elected leaders have broad support. People from all political parties should support the Initiative as it promotes fairness and better representation for all voters.

Our system of closed primaries allows a small group of party-based extremists to control who wins primaries and who gets on the general election ballot. In my view, this keeps us from selecting candidates most likely to improve the quality of life in our state.

Open primaries allow all voters to select candidates from all parties. This encourages anyone elected to office to be accountable to a broad base of voters, not a small minority of extremists, ensuring that candidates address the concerns of all Idahoans, not a narrow faction. This would help us get beyond political polarization, fostering collaboration among elected officials, resulting in solutions to our state’s challenges.

Our state has its greatest hours when elected officials listen to the people and come together across the political spectrum to formulate solutions that serve the greatest good for the greatest number of people. I am supporting Proposition One because it promotes more representative elections and responsive government, leading to more great outcomes for the people of Idaho.

Do your own thinking, and I believe you will join me in voting YES for Proposition One!

Steven B. Daley Laursen

Moscow

I agree: Price controls don’t work

Given our very different political leanings, it’s a little disorienting to find myself largely in agreement with Dale Courtney’s Sept. 11 column, “Why government price controls always backfire on consumers.” He’s right that price controls don’t work because they distort the free market and cause shortages. He’s right that you can’t defeat the laws of supply and demand. And theory aside, he’s right that price controls have been attempted over and over again, and their track record is on par with that of trickle-down economics. (It seems the field of economics has a wishful-thinking problem.)

There is certainly a role for government in a free market, and it’s largely to prevent powerful corporations and the like from using their power to distort the market. The government isn’t the only one that gets in the way of “the invisible hand.” This is why Kamala Harris proposed a ban on price gouging (companies profiting off a disaster like the pandemic by raising prices just because they can), which is akin to price controls but presumably only used in very narrow circumstances. Most states already have laws against price gouging on the books, though, and current high prices are more the result of greed than gouging, so her proposal is more politics that serious policy.

If she’s serious about fighting inflation, she should focus on breaking up monopolies and increasing competition. Numerous industries in our country are now essentially monopolies, and breaking them up and reining in anticompetitive practices is the best way to fight high prices. Basically, eliminate market failures such as monopolies and then let the market do what it does best, finely balancing supplies of goods and keeping prices low with no need for top-down interventions.

Ryan Urie

Moscow

Parker: a refreshing change

I’ve been thinking about upcoming elections as a resident of District 6. We need a humane approach to government, not catering to the special interests of out-of-state dark monies like those of the so called “Idaho Freedom Foundation,” a group hellbent on destroying our very constitution by starving public schools and stealing the identities of our small communities, a group determined to get their noses into your doctor’s office with you, a group committed to a new Idaho that would be unrecognizable.

Julia Parker would be a refreshing change from the clutches holding onto our Sen. Dan Foreman. I asked Julia how she would consider and write legislation. She told me that she has a standard for making those decisions, considering if it is necessary, how much it costs, if it helps, who it might harm, and how any harm could be mitigated.

Julia supports public education K-adult, important in our district. Julia supports a family approach to health care that keeps the legislature out of your personal decisions. Julia supports common sense tax structure that doesn’t burden the most vulnerable with a grocery tax, fully funding our schools and reforming our tax structure to a fair and equitable structure. Julia supports conserving our public lands and our environment for our recreation and that of future generations.

I know that I can trust Julia Parker to represent me in the legislature. She has my vote because of that human approach to legislating. I hope she also has yours.

Brian Potter

Potlatch

Vote No on Prop 1

Proposition 1 is a double-edged sword to destroy Idaho.

First there’s the “open primaries” edge. It allows any person to run in a “jungle primary” with no restrictions or adherence to a Party Platform, party rules, party bylaws, etc. These are all used by the grassroots members of a party to hold their legislators accountable.

Second, the “Ranked Choice Voting” edge. This requires that you vote for all four candidates in a ranking system. Its not one person, one vote anymore. It requires costly computer systems to tabulate three rounds of voting if one candidate doesn’t receive over 50%. Does it make any sense to turn over our voting system to companies that aren’t accountable to the voter and let them determine the winner using logarithms?

This effort stinks from the influence of big money donors from outside of Idaho. As a Republican Precinct Committeeman in Nez Perce County, I know what is happening here.

They HAVE open borders, they WANT open bathrooms, they NEED open primaries!

Go to: secureidahoelections.org for more information.

Join me and vote NO on Proposition 1 to keep elections as they are now.

Vote Yes on HJR 5 to allow only U.S. citizens the right to vote in Idaho.

Vote Republican to save our state.

Daniel Crawford

Lewiston