I am one who has believed that Greg Walden’s commitment, as our Congressional representative, has been to serve all the people of his district. He has accomplished this by listening to local concerns, then by acting on them nationally. His support of rural health care has made a difference and enabled rural institutions, such as our hospital, to gain equal footing with urban health care centers and has improved access to health care for many.

A crying need in our county and the nation is health care for the uninsured. Oregon has one of the highest uninsured rates and our county, Hood River County, at 19 percent, has one of the highest uninsured rates in Oregon.

However, if you are a child living in a family earning $30,000 a year, your chance of being uninsured is nearly 70 percent. Without health care insurance the burden of providing for the uninsured falls on the shoulders of local health care institutions committed to the cause of providing care to those in need, regardless of the ability to pay. We are fortunate to have such an institution in our community.

To help states and local communities, the United States Senate, by a vote of 67-29, gave final approval to the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) legislation. The house previously passed its version of SCHIP by a vote of 265-159, which would also cover children’s dental and mental health services. Forty-five members of Greg’s party supported the legislation.

Unfortunately, Greg was not one of them and the president vetoed the legislation. While the Senate has the votes to override the veto, the House does not, UNLESS, 15 additional Republican representatives, such as Greg, move to support the SCHIP legislation.

Three days prior to his veto, President Bush issued a presidential proclamation commemorating “Child Health Day,” which I am sure Greg supported. But can we support a child’s health without providing the needed care?

I believe it extremely important for the people in our county to urge Greg to reconsider his negative vote, to join with the other members of his party, the Oregon House delegation, Senators Smith and Wyden, and move to support the override of the presidential veto.

While I believe Greg’s vote failed those who are most in need of health care, we, too, will fail if we do not strongly urge him to change his vote on this vital local and national need.

49 and fine print

“An education is what you get when you read the fine print; an unforeseen experience is what you may get when you don’t.”

Be sure to read the fine print in Measure 49. Don’t rely on news media headlines. Then vote to protect your private property rights. They may not be what you hoped for.

Vote no on Measure 49.

The fair teaches

My sister and I are writing in response to a letter by Barb Basco in the Sept. 26 Hood River News.

In the letter it implied that the whole raising an animal is about the money. My sister and I would like to disagree. Before we even get to raise an animal(s) we have meetings to learn about the animals that we will be taking to the fair.

Not only do we get to learn about our specific animals, but our 4-H leaders do a great job of teaching us about different animals. We had to memorize the different types and names of cows this year. This was the third year that my sister and I raised market goats. We now have learned about the goats’ anatomy, their preferences in food and, unfortunately, we’ve had to deal with illness.

We are aware that our livestock will be sent off to a butcher and we’ve even learned about the different cuts of meat and which ones are better than others. We raise these goats with the notion that the harder we work, the more we will be rewarded for it with a higher auction price. If we didn’t want to sell these animals we could have chosen alternative projects.

In the breeding project the 4-H’er gets to learn about the animal as well, but they do not have to sell the animal.

All of us livestock kids know what the fair is about. The fair is a place to show off our ability to choose, feed and raise an animal appropriately.

My sister and I have thoroughly enjoyed our time in 4-H. It has been both informative and educational.

Truth about food

I am compelled to respond to Ms. Worsham’s statement that “At slaughter houses the cow is shot in the head, quick and painless.”

The industry does not use live bullets due to safety issues and the cost involved. They instead use a Captive Bolt Gun to stun and render the animal unconscious. Unfortunately, this is not always the outcome and some cows are still conscious when they are bled, skinned, and butchered.

For more information, please refer to www.goveg.com/factoryfarming_cows_trans.asp, and from there you can link to a Washington Post investigative article about slaughterhouse practices.

No, I am not a vegetarian, but I take responsibility for my choices and do not delude myself into thinking my food dies “quick and painless.” And yes, I fully support 4-H and FFA.

‘Blight’ of 49

Measure 49 is a dishonest and misleading measure that should be voted down.

I have spent the money to be a Measure 37 claimant because the original SB100 that became Oregon’s land use system was hijacked. When originally brought out by the legislature, compensation for “takings” was to be part and parcel but was never implemented. The deception started there, and now Measure 49 being brought out from the back room of power politics as a fix to Measure 37 continues this dishonest past. I filed to build seven homes on 35 acres, only because that was the maximum allowed in 1973.

Recently I scattered the ashes of my wife of 50 years on the property as she requested. I am gifting the stock in our private corporate farm to my children, who desire to live there someday, and build a house. Does that sound like someone who wants to start a housing development?

The vast developments that the proponents of M49 are saying will dot the landscape are simply not going to happen. There are enough safeguards with local restrictions and market conditions without Measure 49, and there is no proliferation of development, period.

Anything else you hear or read is scare tactics and pure speculation or fabrication. The same socialists that instigated this deception are now saying this is a fix to Measure 37.

When you negate all existing claims as Measure 49 does, this is no fix. It repeats Measure 37 and leaves us with the old land use laws, that a supermajority of voters said needs fixing; plus deceptively sneaks in more restriction on commercial/industrial land and adds restrictions to city property owners.

They say that three houses will be allowed for cases like mine. Fat chance! Add another $5,000 for application fees plus all the restriction now on our system, like an $80,000 income requirement, and they “might” approve it from Salem.

As if that isn’t enough, they determine where on your property you can build and allow only a 2-acre split; the landowner pays all the expenses including any the state may have, and is subject to challenge by anyone on the planet which must be defended by the landowner. This last is to ensure 1000 Friends (of Oregon) and their friends can stop anything in case it is not to their liking.

Private property rights have been the engine of prosperity for this great nation. Measure 49 destroys your rights and is a deceptive, dishonest, heavy-handed blight on the Oregon experience. Vote no on 49.

49 balanced

Across the country, Oregon is famous for its natural beauty and its lack of sprawl. Measure 49 will go a long way toward maintaining this. The measure permits a few houses in the orchard out back for the grandkids but prohibits a massive subdivision in the middle of, say, Pine Grove. It’s clear to me that this would find favor with the bulk of the voters who approved Measure 37.

And make no mistake — a vote against Measure 49 will bring down on us an avalanche of sprawling development throughout our valley and the state. Please join me in voting for this very reasonable and balanced measure.