CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE DENNIS LINTHICUM ON SAGE GROUSE LEGISLATION AND FEDERAL OVERREACH IN OREGON’S 2ND DISTRICT
For immediate release
February 28, 2014
Contact: Dani Nichols
In a recent TV interview, District 2 Representative Greg Walden was asked about the water issues plaguing much of Oregon. His response was complacent: he’d spoken to President Obama about the drought in the West, so “the President is aware.”
The President certainly is aware of the plight of farmers, ranchers and most of the West, but his solutions are not good for our communities. Recently, President Obama flew to Central California to declare that the desolation there is a product of “global warming”. Residents of a once-fertile, thriving, economically booming agricultural powerhouse know otherwise - that the devastation is because of shockingly bad federal policy - policies that Congress has allowed to continue. For instance:
- Five years ago a federal judge put the delta smelt, a baitfish, above people in the pecking order, and less than two years ago, President Obama threatened to veto a bill that would have resolved this situation and returned water and economic activity to California’s Central Valley.
- Environmental special interests managed to dismantle a carefully-crafted system of dams, reservoirs and irrigation by diverting water meant for agriculture to “environmental causes” with our Activist-in-Chief’s blessing. This forced the flushing of three million acre-feet of water, intended for the Central Valley, into the ocean over the past five years. They are now trying to continue this policy throughout Oregon.
- Twenty years ago, our Oregon forests, once humming with industry, fell silent because of the same absurd logic regarding the Spotted Owl. Today the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plans lethal removal of the real problem - the barred owl - by shotgunners.
Are these examples of sound Federal policy? Are you impressed that Representative Walden mentioned our drought while escorting the President to the podium during the State of the Union? Are you willing to sit idle and shrug when the activists dismantle your livelihood and blame the horrific results on climate change, as they have in California? Should we sit by and watch as Oregon’s farm and ranch land is reduced to a dust bowl by grotesquely disordered federal policy?
(This was printed as a guest column in the Klamath Falls Herald and News on February 21, 2014)
Have your kids ever asked “why” when you help them with their homework? Of course! Any problem needs to address “why” - if Johnny has 38 oranges and sells 12, he has 26 left - why? When I tutored my kids in math, I explained that this is straight-forward: pluses and minuses have strict rules, and we must obey those rules. In adulthood, we realize that if we don’t pay attention to mathematic rules, our currency, our bank accounts and our economies begin to fall apart. In a fictional word problem, it’s OK if we miss an integer and Johnny winds up with 16 oranges instead of 26. In the real world, Johnny goes bankrupt and has to close his fruit stand.
Which leads me to my point: telling Johnny that he has more oranges than he does, or letting him do fuzzy math is not good leadership. Sunday’s Klamath Falls Herald and News editorial critiqued my “lack of leadership” for opposing yet another tax in the Klamath Basin, but as a leader, I have to make those hard decisions. Their reasoning is that “leadership is more than saying no”. It certainly is, but I am not saying a simple “no” - I am saying what too many politicians don’t have the courage to say: “this doesn’t add up.”
Leadership, according to the Herald and News, is saying “yes”. It’s pleasant to hear that we can raise taxes and not affect the economy, or that the next levy, fee, tax or bond measure amounts to a good investment instead of faulty logic. So, the typical politician shuts his eyes to the real math problems we face. The progressive euphemisms: “investment,” “fair share” and “leadership” cover up faulty logic.
“My hunch is that if [the amnesty/path to citizenship immigration reform] doesn’t come up tomorrow, it’s probably months out. The point is that most of the primaries will have faded by then anyway. By the time you get to June, most of them are behind you.”
-Congressman Greg Walden, at a House of Representatives meeting on January 30, 2014.
Why do you think that Representative Greg Walden, a man with 30 years of experience in politics, wants to wait until the “primaries have faded” to tackle immigration reform?
This is political posturing, and it’s gone on too long. Our representatives know that we don't want amnesty — we want secure borders, enforcement of current laws and protection of U.S. citizens. Instead, they plan to offer conservative rhetoric and liberal action, once again proving that the current Republican establishment has lost their principles.
The Morning Blaze Midterm Election spotlight continues with a look at Oregon. Dennis Linthicum joins the program to discuss their views on topics such as term limits, balanced budgets and taxation.
Dennis Linthicum, Republican Candidate for Congress, explains his reasons for running and shares his views on such issues as lack of bipartisanship, ObamaCare, and forest management.
The other day, I was chatting with Bill Meyer of KMED Radio in Medford, and we got a call from a concerned listener who had just experienced an unusual phone call of his own. Apparently, there have been several paid telemarketers who are calling District 2 voters, asking if they would still vote for me if I was involved in a lawsuit. I had to chuckle - I'm not in a lawsuit and never have been, so this is clearly an attempt to make voters nervous and make them question my integrity.
Oddly enough, this same week, we've also been hearing a great deal of unrest about forest policy (a topic that Representative Walden and myself differ on, but that I addressed several months ago here and here).
And, wouldn't you know it, someone has also been telling local Republican groups, Tea Parties, etc. that I'm a poor candidate because of some recall efforts in Klamath County. Before we go on, let me address the recall issue. Firstly, it was a failed effort to recall me as a County Commissioner. It did not get enough signatures and never made it on the ballot.
KOTI-TV/KOBI-TV Five on 5:
The Bill Meyer Show:
On January 27th, this article was published in the Bend Bulletin:
If you don’t have time to read the whole thing, here’s an interesting quote from it:
“This increased visibility, as well as his advancing seniority on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, has allowed Walden to broaden his appeal outside Oregon. In 2000, the first time he ran for reelection, 86 percent of Walden’s contributions from individual donors came from inside Oregon, according to figures from watchdog organization the Center for Responsive Politics. This percentage has decreased steadily over time, to 84 in 2002, 82 in 2004, 78 in 2006, 75 in 2008, 73 in 2010, and 60 in 2012… … By comparison, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, drew 93 percent of his $423,000 in individual contributions from within Ohio in 2000. By 2010, when he became speaker, only 36 percent of his $3.2 million haul came from Ohio donors. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., has seen his in-state donor percentage drop from 66 percent in 2002 to 26 percent in 2012.”
“From the moment of conception, the unborn has a human nature. That he cannot yet speak, reason, or perform personal acts means only that he cannot yet function to the degree we can, not that he lacks the essential nature that makes those functions possible in the first place.” — Scott Klusendorf, in The Case for Life
As you wonder about today's tragic anniversary of Roe v Wade, consider the implications of Klusendorf’s statement. I believe Scott nails it. He states an obvious, self-evident, common-sense truth that deflates the pro-choice moral position. Philosophically, there is no significant difference between the man I am today and the baby that I was in my mother’s arms 57 years ago. Clearly, this same logic also holds for me as an embryo only days or weeks earlier than that.
While the rest of Oregon may be confused about its pioneering heritage, the overwhelmingly hard-working, entrepreneurial and adventurous 2nd District is not. Our District is a very conservative one, and proud to be so.
In fact, did you know that only two Democrats have been elected to represent us, in the entire history of Oregon's 2nd District? One was in the thirties, and one who lost his last election in 1980, Al Ullman. Ullman was considered a very conservative Democrat, and held his seat during a time when the 2nd District also included Salem and its environs.
Unfortunately, Rep. Walden’s staff is attacking me again today about my position on Federally-held forest lands here in Oregon. As I expressed on my website, I had to support this legislation as a County Commissioner because we were powerless to create better legislation from the County level. However, I think that should change. I think that counties and states should have more freedom over their forests, not less, and I think we can do better than HR 1526.
At the close of 2013, Congressmen Walden sent out a fund-raising letter in which he attacked me multiple times. I think this is a great opportunity to have a debate of ideas, in which the two of us discuss our views of the 2nd District and what should be done for the good people of Oregon.
Since he has not chosen to engage with me personally, I’m going to respond here to his characterizations of my positions and his own voting record. I think it’s essential to hold ourselves to high standards and carefully scrutinize what our elected officials declare, so that we can decide if they are still fit for office.
Now, on to Congressman Walden’s charges against me:
Last week, your current US House member sent out a puff piece attempting to justify his recent votes. These kinds of word games are exactly what's wrong with Washington — in an age when more and more people are demanding honesty from their elected officials, why are we accepting these kinds of false claims? Rep. Walden asserts that this deal is a series of “common-sense cuts and reforms in the plan” that will “reduce wasteful government spending by $23 billion more and when passed will avert another government shutdown.”
An analysis by Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee (SBC) details where, the proposal identifies two specific years “(2022 and 2023) to reduce deficits by $28 billion.” Do you think that's going to happen? Do you believe that politicians will keep these promises, when right now they are misleading us about the nature of the bill itself?
As I’ve shared many times, I own a small cattle ranch east of Klamath Falls, and the health and sustainability of rural livelihoods is a very important issue to me. The issues I want to address require serious reform, not small, impotent acts. We need to be willing to stand up for our way of life and the inheritance we want to leave future generations of cattlemen and agriculturalists. The time to address these concerns is now, with firmness, confidence and hope.
Rural Oregonians are demanding change on these five issues, and I stand with you:
1. Massive Overreach of the EPA...