A shift in Latah County
I’ve lived in Moscow for 23 years and can’t recall seeing anything quite like this. Perhaps some old-timers remember a similar turnout, but it’s been a while. Back in 2002, during the so-called “topless carwash” incident, this town leaned more conservative (before the Moscow Civic Association reign of terror), but the recent election results take it to another level.
Latah County saw a clean conservative sweep: President Trump took 52%, Rep. Russ Fulcher got the same. County Commissioners Tony Johnson and Jason Stooks won with 57% and 52%, respectively, while Sheriff Richie Skiles secured 58%. State Reps. Brandon Mitchell and Lori McCann won with 53% and 60%. Though Dan Foreman only pulled 48% in Latah County itself, he clinched 53% in Legislative District 6 overall. Local voters also showed where they stand on state issues, approving citizen-only voting by 58% and rejecting ranked-choice voting by 56%.
My father was a registered Democrat all his life. Before he passed, he told me he hadn’t left the Democratic Party — it had left him. I wonder how many long-time Democrats here in Latah County feel the same. Their party now pushes positions like sterilizing kids, abortion up to the ninth month, defunding the police, open borders, gender identity in schools, COVID-19 mandates, opposition to free speech, critical race theory, equity over equality, racial and social justice, and student loan forgiveness. With these results, maybe more Latah County Democrats see their party’s shift and decide it’s time to step away — just as my father did.
Dale Courtney
Moscow
‘Illegal immigrantion’ is just supply and demand
Come with me to Boise and I’ll take you on a tour of housing developments where the vast majority of the workers are “illegals.” Why are they here? Strange but a lot of us born in the U.S. won’t go up on a roof for minimum wage. I won’t do it, for instance, and neither will you.
They are technically illegal, noncitizens, waiting to get citizenship but some snuck in because there is work. The use of “illegals” for housing is just the story in Idaho. Go to Florida and elsewhere, they are used in tourism; in Arizona, Washington and California they are used in agriculture. “They” are embedded in our economy. They have become us. Start thinking of immigrants as us, not as “criminals.”
Percentagewise, they are no more likely to be criminal than anyone else. Our “illegal immigrantion” problem is because of supply and demand. It is caused by American businesses, some which need or want cheap labor, and it is not something that can just be turned off. Trump will do nothing about this “problem” because there is nothing he can do about it. He himself exploits the labor of immigrants.
Joe Campbell
Moscow
Wait — who’s trying to censor books?
In Dale Courtney’s opinion piece published in the Moscow-Pullman Daily News on Nov. 5, he focuses on his views concerning Democrats pushing an agenda to limit and control free speech. In his opinion “True free speech includes the right to access information, weigh facts, and make our own judgments.” He also rails against government overreach which “encroaches on parents’ role to guide their children’s exposure to ideas.”
In light of his stated opinions, I would be very interested to read how they relate to the topics of censorship of books and the restriction of access to material in school and public libraries. Far from being pushed by Democrats, this attack on “our right to access information, weigh facts and make our own judgments” and “guide our own children’s exposure to ideas” is being led by Republicans through book challenges and library bills.
Mr. Courtney, I await your response.
Beverley Wolff
Pullman
Thanks to candidates for their efforts
I want to express my deepest gratitude to Kathy Dawes, Julia Parker and Trish Carter-Goodheart for all the energy they put into their legislative campaigns and their determination and graciousness in the face of political attack ads, misinformation campaigns disguised as “polling” and even racist outbursts from other candidates. Running for office should not require anyone to put up with that kind of abuse. Idaho, if we want strong leadership and a functional legislature, we need to treat the people willing to put themselves forward to do that work for our state with respect.
Krista Kramer
Moscow
Disputes claims from Courtney, Anderson
Dale Courtney has presented a fallacious argument suggesting that Democrats are suppressing free speech. This is despite the fact that several of his examples occurred during the Trump administration, and in fact the speech itself was not censored.
It is not censorship to present contradictory arguments to conspiracy theories that are not backed by proof. For example, ivermectin was indeed designed to treat a parasite in horses, and has still, despite many studies, not been proven to work better than a placebo against serious illness in COVID-19. It was in fact the government’s responsibility to warn citizens of the risks of using a drug not for its intended purpose, and if people had started having serious side effects from it, then I’m sure Dale would have found a reason to criticize the government for not doing so.
Similarly, Scotty Anderson seems to think that just because Trump was reelected that the Democratic-attributed statements he presents in his column are all magically now untrue. There is in fact documentary evidence of many of the items mentioned (for example the “many fine people on both sides” statement after the neo-Nazi rally and Trump’s calls to jail his political opponents). As to many of the others, they are being presented without context and in such a way as to make them seem unreasonable (Project 2025 is in fact staffed by people associated with Trump and therefore it is reasonable to question whether Trump holds the same goals).
Additionally, both pots (Courtney and Anderson) are now calling the kettles black by saying that Democrats are fear-mongering. This is pretty rich coming from the party who put forth a candidate that spent most of his time talking about immigrants poisoning the blood of our country, that Democrats are demonic, and that we have an “enemy within” worse than any of our foreign adversaries.
If you want to have a reasonable conversation you have to start with reasonable premises. Go ahead and be glad your candidate won, just don’t take it as proof that your opinions are facts.
Heather Nelson
Moscow
Save the Palouse subgroup
Thank you for your reply to my concern about the NO WIND FARMS campaign sponsored by the Save the Palouse group, Tom Thompson. I agree with you. There should be no wind farms around Kamiak Butte. I said that in my previous letter. And I agree with you, given the excellent conditions for dry-land farming on the much of the Palouse, I would not want to put anything in the area that would disrupt current agricultural operations in the area. There is also the concern about lower property values around Kamiak, too.
Up to just recently, though, I have followed the discussion on Facebook by the Save the Palouse group. It seems that there is a subgroup within Save the Palouse that objects to any type of wind farm anywhere. They provide pseudo-science links to how they contribute to climate change. They post pictures of towers on fire, they post apocalyptic drawings of construction crews destroying prime farmland, and more. That subgroup seems to have co-opted Save The Palouse purpose.
Odd, that I can no longer follow Save the Palouse Facebook page. Must have been blocked. I have also stated there are other places to put such a wind farm that Harvest Hills is proposing. In particular the marginal lands in western Whitman County. That way the landowners out there could gain from added income and the county could still benefit from increased revenue — thus keeping our property taxes relatively lower.
Tom, while you explained why Save The Palouse chose the NO WIND FARMS sign, I do note some people have inserted ON KAMIAK on their sign. I identify with those people. I am not in disagreement with Save The Palouse when it comes to wind farms around the butte.
Wayne Beebe
Pullman
Money talks
WSU does excellent work mitigating the climate crisis, but did you know the WSU Foundation invests about $50 million in fossil fuels? I think it is a perverse case of institutional dissonance.
WSU has a proud record: Its researchers help boost crops, cure disease, manage the grid, store power, produce sustainable fuels and mitigate societal climate impacts. Its faculty educates the next generation of scientists and engineers and extension officers share sustainable agricultural practices.
In stark contrast, the WSU Foundation invests in fossil fuels. The WSU Foundation invests WSU’s money but is a separate entity and exempt from FOIA requests, so it is hard to confirm the exact fossil fuel investment amount. However, any amount of scorched earth investment is anathema to a land grant institution like WSU. For over three years, WSU’s Fossil Fuel divestment group has used a civil/respectful approach to encourage WSU to divest, but the WSU administration has ignored this. Perhaps it is time for WSU’s donors to flip the script and “Put your mouth where your money is.”
I think donors are proud of WSU and want to support its positive contributions. They make donations as a vote for the future and might be appalled to see their money redirected to undermine WSU’s efforts. It’s like someone changes your vote after you cast it. If you are a WSU donor or are considering donating, please ensure your donation investment reflects your values and those of WSU. Contact WSU and insist on it.
Simon A. Smith
Pullman
Who should we blame?
The November election and its aftermath reminds me of a children’s story: Henny-penny. She was hit on the head by something. She probably suffered from PTSD and announced that “The sky is falling.” “We’re going to tell the king.”
She enlisted the support from others: Cocky-locky, Ducky-daddles, Goosey-poosey, Turkey-lurkey and Foxy-woxy to tell the king.
Two lessons: The sky is not falling and never trust a fox. The sun, moon and stars still decorate the sky. Let us write our own story, “Who is to blame?” Let’s blame Democrats for everything in the past. The Republican Party in a historic landslide victory have a president, Senate, and House of Representatives of the same party.
As we turn the pages of our story, let us see IF the Supreme Court starts ruling to protect the people, have cleaner air and water, work with others to halt climate change, alliances are strengthened (NATO and SEATO), the economy has improved, taxes for lower and middle class have been reduced, consumer goods (food and gas) cost less, international health care for all women is guaranteed, pensioners still have Social Security (1935), the Affordable Care Act (2010), and Medicare and Medicaid A & B (1965).
The fox in our story has already taken us down a dark tunnel of lies: Trump University, Trump Bible, a promise to reduce the national debt but increased the debt by $7.8 trillion. Who should we blame?
Stan Smith
Viola
