KUFM Commentary

Is it really "public interest"?

The term “public interest” is tossed around a lot and we should think about what it means. Groups sue to stop the construction of a generating plant, transmission line, highway project, or a timber sale and say that the lawsuit is being brought because of “public interest”.

This greatly bothers me because I have not asked anyone to represent me in stopping projects meant to improve the quality of life in Montana, provide jobs, and manage forests. As a member of the public with an interest in promoting not hindering activities, I object to some group saying it is operating on my behalf. These people do not represent me or my best interest.

Along with “public interest” is another term used in most often a disparaging manner and that one is “special interest”. Along with “special interest” comes lobbyist said in a fearful tone.

While some disdainfully dismiss the efforts of “special interests” and lobbyists, we at least are honest about who we represent and exactly how and why we are doing so. I do not claim to speak for all of the public when I make statements or write op-ed pieces. It is very clear that I represent those companies and individuals who belong to a trade association that was formed to provide a single voice on issues vital to their well-being.

The same holds true for numerous associations across Montana that rightly have an interest in issues that will have an impact on their businesses or customers. The name nearly always is simple and straightforward and tells who is represented like the Montana Chamber of Commerce, Montana Contractors Association, or the Montana Logging Association. It would be pretty hard to not know who the members are and therefore understand the positions they take on issues.

And, yes, there are lobbyists working for these entities. It has grown very tiresome being vilified because I have a license to lobby for my members. There are some who think it is great sport to cast aspersions on those of us who publicly express our views on subjects for our organizations. The lobbyists I know and work with are hard working, honest individuals who do their level best to provide factual information to the public and to elected officials on behalf of their clients. We pay the State of Montana a lobby license fee and file reports so anyone can see who we lobby and what, if any, funds are at play. We work under very transparent conditions as we should.

According to my research, the number of public interest groups active in Montana politics has increased dramatically since the late 1960s. Much of this increase is accounted for by the creation of new kinds of organizations usually formed around some cause or idea and my experience is that it can be very difficult at times to know exactly who they are and what they represent. Names like Citizens Against Everything do not give a clear indication of what they are all about, what they want or who funds them. Unless they officially lobby there is no paper trail to find out details about them. These individuals seem to come together to oppose an action or activity and not to promote anything positive. Fortunately when their single issue is somehow resolved these groups go away.

The most dangerous are the self-appointed “public interest” groups that are in business to throw roadblocks in the path of positive development and they do not go away but rather remain as a conflict industry. When a spokesperson stands up and touts that the group is acting in the “public interest” when in fact it is not, they give the false impression that what they want is in the best interest of the public-at-large. They cannot, and do not, represent all of the citizens of Montana.

These small, vocal entities not representing most Montanans have set a pattern to go directly to court where the lives of many are decided by the decisions of a few. I can name countless lawsuits that have been filed on timber sales with much needed work stopped and jobs lost in the name of the so-called public interest. It is simply wrong.

In writing the Federalist papers, James Madison worried about what he called factions, his term for interest groups, and felt the need to organize constitutional government in a way that moderates the bad effects of factions. He wanted to have a society that would be so large no single faction could dominate public life. Mr. Madison would be horrified to see how much damage some “public interest” factions have inflicted on our society. It is evident from his writings that those actions are not what he or the other Founding Fathers had in mind.

On behalf of the Montana Wood Products Association based in Helena, I am Ellen Simpson.

Alternative Energy: One size does not fit all

One of the more annoying things we experience in life is being subjected to opinions of individuals who stray from their areas of expertise and wander into places to prattle on with a complete lack of knowledge. This nasty scenario keeps cropping up when the topic is the use of woody biomass and whether it is pure enough to be considered a renewable resource.

The uses for wood in whatever form are so many and varied it has been said that if wood did not exist, someone would try to invent it. Outside the uses everyone should know about including building materials for construction and paper products like those used in every home and office on a daily basis by all Americans, wood has long been used for fuel.

Wood did and still does provide a heat source for many Montanans on cold wintery nights. The newest proposed use of more wood for consumption by our citizens is to generate electricity and to complement the use of coal, natural gas, solar, hydro and wind power. There is no perfect source to provide the electricity demanded by the public but woody biomass certainly has its place in the equation.

There are numerous endeavors underway to develop many of the alternative energy sources with biomass in the forefront. Studies both completed and underway are indicating the positive aspects of biomass both from a carbon neutral stance and use of a readily available source. Montana has the dubious honor of housing over five million acres of dead and dying beetle-killed trees on our landscape. Unfortunately, that number increases by the day and we will soon be in the same place as Colorado with 100,000 trees a day falling and creating a hazard for people and critters.

Unlike wind farms that can cover huge landscapes both physically and visually, biomass operations are and can be located at existing facilities such as sawmills and wood products manufacturing plants. In many Montana communities, schools and other public buildings are utilizing biomass to provide heat and electricity for daily operations. There are permits required for operation to ensure air quality and other regulatory conditions imposed by the government.

A word or two of why biomass operations are less intrusive than wind farms should be mentioned. An example is the Judith Gap wind farm with about 90 towers some of which are on state trust lands. The foundation for each tower is 48 feet wide and seven feet deep with fiberglass blades that when at the top of the arc are nearly 400 feet in the air. It is quite a sight if you have not viewed it for no other reason than the fact that the towers are visible for literally hundreds of miles. The reason the land disturbance is mentioned here is for the benefit, or discomfort, of those who constantly push the idea that we should provide all of our electrical needs by use of wind. This is ludicrous and completely impossible even if every view shed and mountain top in Montana had wind towers and I know of no one who likes that idea.

Wind energy has been heavily subsidized for years and simply is not the reliable source needed by our citizens. The wind does not blow all of the time and must have a backup system to maintain a steady flow of electricity. The most stable sources are coal and natural gas and at this point are the lowest cost to the consumer. However, there are many rational reasons for moving toward more renewable sources of power generation, including biomass, but not to the exclusion of those two most reliable sources. As usual, the argument becomes the one-size-fits-all when the discussion should center on how each of the sources fit with the others in a complementary manner.

Like so many aspects of our economy and lives there is room at the table for all of the energy sources and it is to everyone’s benefit to stop trying to fight off the other players and figure out ways that we can all be in the game.

We need those who have no expertise in energy matters to stop spewing nonsense and allow the discussion to take place with reasonable and knowledgeable folks who understand the positive attributes of how all of the energy sources can interact, so we can move ahead for the needs of all Montanans.

Ellen Simpson, Montana Wood Products Association

Medical marijuana and the workplace

The quagmire of medical marijuana continues to intensify. The exploding number of cards being issued by mostly travelling caravans of doctors who spend less than 10 minutes per patient prior to signing a card allowing the use of marijuana for alleged medical purposes is staggering. The impact of this on Montana businesses is as yet unknown but common sense indicates it, too, will be staggering.

Montana voters in 2004 approved the use of medical marijuana through passage of Initiative 148 and statutorily is the Montana Medical Marijuana Act. The Act was sold to the public as a last resort solution for those suffering from a debilitating medical condition including wasting syndrome, cancer, AIDS, and Multiple Sclerosis to name a few. According to reports, the number of patients was relatively low not reaching 1,000 patients until June 2008, four years after passage. Now two years later, the number is over 15,000.

Twenty-five percent of the card carriers are 21 to 30 years old with most claiming severe or chronic pain as the debilitating medical condition needing medical marijuana for treatment. Does this translate into nearly 4,000 Montanans in this age group so ill as to need a drug of last resort to function? It will be interesting to find out more in this regard as more facts are unveiled by authorities attempting to regulate medical marijuana.

This brings up why this usage is becoming an increasing concern to those of us involved in businesses that require drug tests as a condition of employment. Sadly even before medical marijuana showed up on the scene it was difficult enough to find employees who could pass a drug test prior to employment. The antidotal stories by employers in mills, construction, and mines are many and varied regarding the numbers of applicants turned away because of failure to pass the test.

The issue is relatively new to the legal system in Montana and other states that have also legalized medical marijuana. The cases are just starting to appear wherein workers have been fired because of failure to pass a drug test and have sued employers claiming it violates their rights because of failure to accommodate medical marijuana use by waiving terms of a company’s drug testing policy. A recent ruling by the Oregon Supreme Court stated that state law is trumped by federal law that classifies pot as an illegal drug and therefore an employer was within his right to fire a worker who could not pass the drug test because of use of medical marijuana. The ruling has been called “a shot across the bow” by those who support the use of medical marijuana.

The Montana Medical Marijuana Act clearly provides that an employer is not required to accommodate an employee’s use of medical marijuana. However part of a Montana lawsuit claimed that the sued employer violated the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) in addition to the Medical Marijuana Act. It is somewhat unclear as to whether the ADA comes into play. The water continues to become even more muddy as the number of card carriers grows and the issues become more varied.

Another area where medical marijuana users and the workplace is increasingly sticky is worker’s compensation provided by employers for on the job injuries to workers. All worker’s compensation policies exclude any employee who is impaired when injured. This includes prescription drugs as well as alcohol use on the job. According to the construction industry there is nothing on the books that gives guidelines as to when a worker is impaired from medical marijuana use on the job. All employees deserve to feel safe in their work environments and especially when working in places with hazardous equipment so this is of special concern.

Montana’s mills and manufacturing facilities work diligently to provide safe working conditions for their employees. It is incumbent upon all employers and employees to do their part to ensure everyone is as safe as possible on the job. However, accidents do happen even under the best of circumstances, but to add more possibilities to the mix that create hazards simply cannot be tolerated. Many industrial jobs are inherently dangerous and we all need to be vigilant in doing everything within our power to ensure safety.

The entire business community is watching with great interest as the cast of characters involved with medical marijuana continue to make their cases in the court of public opinion, in front of legislative committees, and on the front page of daily newspapers. One clear observation appears to be that this is a well-intentioned effort that has been hijacked and now is running amuck with numerous consequences for Montana’s citizens.