Category: Uncategorized

The attempted removal of Dr. Bob Lutz, the Medical Director of the Spokane Regional Health District, by the supposedly unilateral authority of Amelia Clark, SRHD’s administrative officer, has all the smell of a behind-the-scenes power struggle. The local situation is a mirror of today’s national issues: the politicizing, denial, and sidelining of science and medicine. 

If Amelia Clark’s motivation for the attempted firing is the “personnel issue” she claims then that issue needs a public airing and a public vote by the twelve member SRHD’s Board of Health.  

Bylaws are often unnoticed until a crisis develops. Amelia Clark (and whoever it is who might have her ear) failed to consult the rules before the unilateral announcement she made at the squirm-worthy press conference last Friday. Those rules, the Bylaws of the SRHD Board of Health state plainly:

The Board of Health shall approve the appointment and termination of a District Health Officer. The District Health Officer shall be a qualified physician trained and experienced in public health. The Health Officer shall report to the Administrator. 

The Board of Health meets routinely on the last Thursday of the month, but the Bylaws also state:

Special meetings may be called by the Chair at his/her discretion, at the request of the Executive Secretary, or on the written request of a majority of the members, provided that written notice is given each member and the media at least twenty-four hours prior to the proposed meeting concerning the time, place and subject, except in an emergency, as provided by RCW 42.30.080

Every one of us should, at a minimum, send an email to the members of the Board of Health demanding a prompt special meeting, a public airing of the issue, and a public vote on this effort to dismiss Dr. Lutz. The email need not be long. It will be numbers that count, not eloquence. I have no doubt there are email writing campaigns under way among anti-mask, anti-science groups in the community who support this attempted ouster. 

The quickest way to communicate with all twelve members of the Board of Health is send an email to public_comment@srhd.org . Such an email is disbursed to each of them. 

Or you can email to the individuals on the Board of Health, whom I have listed below with a little background information. All of these people are nominally “non-partisan”, but some of their likely allegiances are fairly clear. The Commissioners and their appointees tend to lean against public health mandates (some like Jason Kinley and Josh Kerns, quite openly) and the members from cities and towns leaning in favor of the scientific guidance of public health. Remember that Ben Wick in his position of Chairman has the power to call a special meeting according to the Bylaws.

I hope you will pay close attention to these people and their backgrounds as this drama plays out. 

Ben Wick, Mayor of the City of Spokane Valley City Council and Current Chairman of the SRHD Board of Health
bwick@spokanevalley.org

Linda Thompson, City of Spokane Valley Council member
lthompson@spokanevalley.org

Kevin Freeman, Mayor of the Town of Millwood, representing all the smaller towns and cities in “the District”, i.e. Spokane County
mayor@millwoodwa.us

Breean Beggs, President of the City of Spokane City Council
bbeggs@spokanecity.org

Karen Stratton, City of Spokane City Council member
kstratton@spokanecity.org

Betsy Wilkerson, City of Spokane City Council member
bwilkerson@spokanecity.org

Al French, Spokane County Commissioner, and frequent non-attendee at BOH meetings as well as the longest standing and most influential of the three Commissioners
afrench@spokanecounty.org

Mary Kuney, Spokane County Commissioner (most recently added Commissioner)
mkuney@spokanecounty.org

Josh Kerns, Spokane County Commissioner
jkerns@spokanecounty.org

Jason Kinley, naturopathic “physician” and notable speaker at Matt Shea sponsored anti-lockdown protests, nominated by Josh Kerns from Kerns’ Commissioner District as “the only person who applied.”
jkinleynd@gmail.com

Chuck Hafner, a civic-minded Spokane Valley businessman who once served on the City of Spokane Valley’s City Council, now serving on the BOH from Mary Kuney’s Commissioner District.

Andrea Frostad, a dental hygienist serving from Al French’s Commissioner District

I do not have separate email addresses for Mr. Hafner or Ms. Frostad, but they can be reached through the blanket email public_comment@srhd.org that I listed first. 

Staff:

Amelia Clark, Administrative Officer
aclark@srhd.org

L. Ann Pitsnogle, Executive Assistant
lpitsnogle@srhd.org

For more information:  https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2020/oct/30/shawn-vestal-theres-no-excuse-for-the-silence-of-t/

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2020/oct/31/what-is-the-spokane-regional-health-district-and-w/

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

It is Sunday early, a day I don’t usually write, but circumstances demand it. Citizens of Spokane County need to pay attention to an unfolding local struggle with lives at stake. THERE ARE THREE ACTION ITEMS BELOW. (each marked in Bold).

Last Thursday, October 29th, news hit the local airwaves that the Spokane Regional Health District’s health officer, Dr. Bob Lutz, had been “forced out.” (For clarity, the “Health District’s” district is Spokane County.) Dr. Lutz has served admirably as the District’s health officer since 2017. He is a skilled physician and a scientist who pays attention to data. He has led the Covid pandemic response in Spokane County from the beginning. 

The news conference SRHD held the next day was a thirty-seven minute exercise in obfuscation. Amelia Clark, the administrative officer, led off with the statement that everyone “reports up to me” including the health officer, Dr. Lutz. According to Ms. Clark, “to clarify rather than a decision [sic]” a discussion “was had” in an “executive session” of the Board of Health regarding “performance concerns of the health officer” and the “executive committee gave me their support to ask for Dr. Lutz’s resignation.” There was no mention of a vote or how each of the twelve members of the Board of Health stood on the decision Ms. Clark claimed was hers to make without further explanation to the public. 

We, as citizens of Spokane, need clear answers, not executive decisions made in the dark. What the hell is the “performance concern?” What is the evidence? Who is driving this decision at the end of week before a major election, right as we see record numbers of local infections and deaths and as the whole country faces the pandemic surge experts have predicted for months? 

That brings me to the first action item: Sign on to the petition for Spokane Regional Health District Transparency addressed to the SRHD Board Members. Here’s the link:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdHFUsWBQGF7b7ByGkHM-EOVWfTUNzNETNbCOt31hjI0ixAHw/viewform?gxids=7628
Under “organization or business” I put “retired.” Others have suggested “voter.” There is no need to specify your employer unless you are authorized to speak for the organization.

This afternoon at 3PM (remember we’re now on Pacific Standard Time. Sunset 4:30PM) there is a gathering at the Spokane Regional Health District Building (1101 W College Ave, the tan building with the cylindrical, domed corners on the north side of the river) to show support for transparency and Dr. Lutz. It should be a beautiful afternoon. Please wear your masks and practice social distancing. (In Dr. Lutz’s words,“Breathe. Just not on each other.”)

This is an evolving story. Amelia Clark, whatever her motives and influences, did not read the Bylaws of the Board of Health, nor Washington State Law. There is an excellent article this morning on the front page of the Spokesman and online (similar content by different bylines) that details the power structure and governance of SRHD and its Board. The same front page notes that Dr. Lutz has not resigned and has hired legal council, suggesting a power struggle to which we should all be paying attention. 

Six members of the twelve member Board of Health are the (very Republican) Commissioners of Spokane County, Al French, Josh Kerns, and Mary Kuney, and their three appointees (one of whom, Jason Kinley, is an ally of Matt Shea and a speechifying opponent of pandemic management). French, arguably the most powerful elected official in eastern Washington, almost never attends SRHD Board meetings, but might well be pulling strings behind the scenes. All six of these people have been silent since this controversy blew up, pushing other local (city) officials into the spotlight as the public face of the Board. 

I smell a rat. The only two of the twelve members of the Board of Health who are on Tuesday’s ballot are Josh Kerns and Mary Kuney. Their silence I read as complicity. If you haven’t already turned in your ballot at one of the drop boxes, register your protest by voting for David Green and Ted Cummings to replace these two–and put French in your sights for the next election cycle.

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

If you are a Washington resident and a frequent reader of this column it is likely that you have already received your November 3 General Election ballot, filled it out, and either mailed it in or deposited it in one of the official drop boxes. If you’ve done all that you are not quite done, though, until you’ve gone to MyVote.wa.gov  to confirm, by clicking the “Ballot Status” tab, that your ballot has been received as “Accepted.” Washington State’s system of mail-in voting offers us this opportunity for peace of mind. Use it. (The alternative web address votewa.gov takes you to the same place as MyVote.wa.gov. Memorize one of them.)

If you are a registered voter in Washington and haven’t received your ballot yet there is something definitely wrong. Call (for Spokane County) 509-477-2320 or, better, put on your mask and visit the Spokane County Elections Office. Start here for guidance on addresses and what to bring: https://www.spokanecounty.org/4578/Elections
Not registered? You can still do that there, too.

Questions on this tracking step? Check out: “Wondering if your ballot’s been counted? Here’s how to track it in Washington and Idaho” from The Spokesman. 

Why take this extra step? See: “What if your ballot hasn’t arrived? Take your cue from this Liberty Lake woman“

And here’s some debunking of election angst for Washington voters by Jim Camden of the Spokesman: “Hackers unlikely to cancel your vote with replacement ballot. Here’s how the elections office prevents it” 

Today make it a point to talk up the election with like-minded friends and suggest they check their Ballot Status, too. You just might find someone who has not yet voted.

Many of us feel this is likely to be the most consequential election of our lifetimes. I certainly feel that way. Let’s do our part and be sure we get it right.

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

The Manchester Union Leader (aka the New Hampshire Union Leader) is among the most conservative of U.S. newspapers. The Union Leader hadn’t endorsed a Democrat for President in more than a hundred years, when, this week, they published an endorsement of Joe Biden. The rumbling was heard all the way to Spokane. The Biden endorsement by the Union Leader was made even more remarkable, when, last Sunday, Stacey Cowles, in his position as the publisher and sole member of the “Editorial Board” of the Spokesman Review, endorsed Donald Trump for President. 

To read Mr. Cowles’ endorsement of Trump is to see the nose-holding a staunch fiscal conservative must do before making this recommendation:

The list of Trump’s offenses is long. He panders to racists and prevents sensible immigration reform in a nation built on immigrant labor and intellect. He tweets conspiracy theories. He’s cavalier about COVID-19 and has led poorly through the pandemic. He seeks to dismantle the Affordable Care Act without proposing a replacement. He denies climate change.

Voters knew his character in 2016 and elected him anyway. Four years later, the nation is still standing. Indeed, in many ways it flourished until the pandemic upended everything.

As my friend Bill Siems wrote in a proposed letter to the editor, “Since the country isn’t dead yet, should we take another dose of the same poison?”

The rest of the Mr. Cowles’ endorsement is a remarkable stew of Trumpian talking points and conservative economic angst that runs back all the way to mid-twentieth century opposition to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

Cowles repeats the Trump campaign standards, “Unemployment among communities of color reached record lows…He provided historically high support for traditionally Black colleges.” This, apparently, is supposed to outweigh Trump’s repeated dogwhistles to the Proud Boys, Patriot Prayer, and the marchers in Charlottesville. Cowles writes, “He rolled back extreme environmental regulations and led the way for U.S. energy independence,” just a couple paragraphs away from casually mentioning that Trump “denies climate change.” The cognitive dissonance peals like cracked bells. One of Trump’s first proud moves of de-regulation was to strike down rules around release of methane (a major greenhouse gas) at well heads. For Cowles, energy independence and de-regulation beats any concern over the existential threat of climate change. (Stacey needs to watch this video on youtube.)

For Mr. Cowles, Trump’s strongman tactics and divisive, inflammatory rhetoric are somehow justified by Trump’s “policies and instincts for helping America,” by which Mr. Cowles is reaching back to the laissez-faire economics of the Gilded Age or the 1920s. I have no doubt Cowles’ mind-twisting endorsement of Trump is sincere and well-thought-out within his own mindset. He comes by his opinions honestly as a member of a family that very likely opposed Roosevelt’s programs of the New Deal in the 1930s as corrosive to economic progress. The programs the New Deal spawned, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, were considered “socialist” by many at the time, especially members of the wealthy class–something we tend to forget, since most current politicians (for fear of backlash) only dare peck at these programs by couching their positions in talk of “reform.”

Should we cancel subscriptions to The Spokesman Review in protest? Many at the Spokesman were truly appalled by Cowles’ endorsement of Trump. If you are a subscriber I urge you to read Shawn Vestal’s column posted on Monday, October 26th and to peruse the letters to the editor over the next week before further consideration. For all that I often perceive a rightward lean in Spokesman coverage, it is a damn sight more diverse in opinion than many local papers–and I think its continued existence is a service to the community. At the same time, be sure to read and support The Inlander. Pay attention to the names and general stances of the reporters and writers at both papers. Even if Cowles’ fervent wish for a Trump victory is not fulfilled, there will be much to do in the coming years to shore up our democracy–and a lot of that work will need to start locally.

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

P.S. As an example of the rewards of paying attention to the names and work of individual writers, read Gary Crooks’ comment on Cowles’ endorsement of Trump. Gary Crooks offers perspective as a former employee and writer of endorsements at the Spokesman. His column just appeared, not in the Spokesman (from which he retired), but in The Inlander: “Now Would be a Good Time to Acknowledge the Pandemic.” 

In my youth in the 1950s and early 1960s lawbreakers were apprehended by upright men like Marshal Matt Dillon of the TV series Gunsmoke. The “bad guys” were always warned; they knew who was arresting them; they were only shot if they pulled a gun and shot first. Even then, the accused was usually shot in the hand that held the gun. Then he was trotted off to jail. On 1950s television the accused got a fair jury trial that revealed their actual guilt or innocence. Lynch mobs were lawless and the sheriffs protected people threatened by one. If a wrong were committed it was always put right. The television–and the world it depicted–were presented in sharply focused black and white. Sadly, that doesn’t appear to be the way things work.

On October 13 the New York Times published an article entitled, “‘Straight to Gunshots’: How a U.S. Task Force Killed an Antifa Activist.” In the tumult of pre-election news the article did not get the attention it deserved. The article (and this 3 minute 43 second clip from the article that is found on youtube) presents disturbing evidence that should remind us of a Duterte/Philipines style extrajudicial killing. 

Just as disturbing is this youtube video of Mr. Trump, bragging to his rally crowd that “We sent in the U.S. Marshals. Took fifteen minutes and it was over.” (U.S. Marshals, who work under the direction of Trump’s attorney general, William Barr, could be engaged because Reinoehl had crossed the state line from Oregon into Washington. Otherwise, Trump, Barr, and the federal Marshals would have lacked jurisdiction.)

William Barr in his press release was on the same message as Trump concerning this extrajudicial killing, describing Reinoehl as a “violent agitator.” This wording is prejudicial propaganda to describe a man whose arrest warrant was for “second-degree murder with a weapon and unlawful use of a weapon,” not “violent agitation.” With his words Barr has judged Reinoehl guilty of a crime for which no jury will ever hear the evidence. 

Reinoehl’s killing by U.S. Marshals was worrisome to many in law enforcement.  Quoted in the The Hill, Ken Klippenstein, D.C. correspondent for The Nation said:

“The folks I know in law enforcement are extremely angry about it because whether or not that’s what happened, the message sent to the public is that the marshals and local law enforcement in the FBI that served with them in this operation are just these kind of lawless roving gangs that are going to go out and do the president’s bidding,”

Michael Reinoehl, the man shot to death under Trump’s and Barr’s direction in the incident analyzed by the NYTimes, was accused of killing Aaron J. Danielson on the streets of Portland, Oregon, Saturday evening, August 29th. Danielson was shot on a downtown Portland street in an altercation that involved Danielson allegedly carrying a baton and using pepper spray. The shooting occurred after Danielson participated in the provocative Trump 2020 Cruise Rally. That rally involved cruising pickup trucks containing men shooting paintball guns and spraying pepper spray at Black Lives Matter protesters. (Who was more the “violent agitator” before the shooting?) Danielson, originally from Spokane, was closely associated with Joey Gibson, far right provocateur and founder of Patriot Prayer, a gun-waving group that tends to attract white supremacists. The media at the time, including the Spokesman, told Danielson’s life story in detail and with notable sympathy, a man caught up in the patriotic passions of his time. 

Shortly after Danielson’s death Reinoehl was named as the prime suspect. Five days later, on Thursday, September 3, Reinoehl died in an indiscriminate hail of bullets in a neighborhood in Lacey, Washington, gunned down, according to all but one witness interviewed by the NYTimes, by men who descended abruptly in unmarked vehicles. Bullets whizzed past an eight year out on his bike and through the walls of nearby apartments. No bullhorn announcement like the one you might imagine hearing, “This is the police! Put your hands in plain view or we will shoot!” preceded the gunfire. Reinoehl died on the street with a pistol in his pocket. Did he die thinking he’d been shot by the police or by a rightwing mob?

Reinoehl is presented in most of the media as “self-described antifa,” as if that alone were grounds for execution. Examine that. “Antifa” is short for anti-fascist. As I recall history, anti-fascism was the side to be on for most of the 20th century. Where is the detailed examination of Reinoehl’s life? Where are the interviews of his friends? When will we hear and see the evidence presented to a jury in a court of law in this land that claims to pride itself on justice and “the rule of law?” 

Thanks to the current federal administration under Trump and Barr Michael Reinoehl lies dead, accused, judged, and executed like he might have been in what we used to call a “banana republic.” What have we become?

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

P.S. Trump has a long history of meting out judgment and recommending execution. The most public example of this was directed at five black and hispanic teenagers in the Central Park jogger case in 1989. As a private citizen Trump spent tens of thousands of dollars placing ads and grandstanding over his perception of their obvious guilt, an effort many believe strongly influenced their convictions and incarceration. In shameful disregard for the rule of law, Trump continues to insist on their guilt of these men despite their total exoneration based on DNA evidence and the confession of the actual rapist in 2002. The sordid tale of this initial miscarriage of justice (and Trump’s involvement) is told at length in the recent Netflix short series dramatization, “When They See Us.” This alone should have been grounds to disqualify Trump for elective office. 

P.S.S. I highly recommend a revisit to another piece of history that had faded in my memory by watching the excellent dramatization, “The Trial of The Chicago 7,” also on Netflix. I rather doubt Trump and Barr were thinking this strategically, but one has to wonder if they considered that having Michael Reinoehl murdered was this best way to avoid what might have become a political show trial.

Cathy McMorris Rodgers (CMR) and Dave Wilson, candidates for Congressional District 5 (comprising most of the ten easternmost counties of Washington State), participated in a debate on the local public television station, KSPS, last Monday, October 19. The questioners were Kip Hill, reporter for the Spokesman, and Doug Navornick, reporter and community stalwart whose voice I often hear on local public radio, KPBX. It was live-streamed on youtube, where you can still watch it. 

The exchange reminded me why many of us campaigned so hard for Lisa Brown to unseat McMorris Rodgers in 2018. If we send her back to Washington in 2021 she will once again be in the minority in the U.S. House. There she can continue making well worn and discredited statements like she did in the debate.  According to McMorris Rodgers the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the Republican tax giveaway to corporations and the rich, is still her party’s miracle legislation that provided “well-paying jobs for hard-working Americans.”

The first question in the debate was from Doug Nadvornick, “If you were to draw up a coronavirus relief proposal what would be the essential elements and what would you leave out?” First, McMorris Rodgers highlighted the prompt passage in March, 2020, of the CARES Act. Then she proclaimed: “I DO believe that we need an additional corona relief package…As far as the priorities that I hear I think at the top of the list is the liability protection that businesses and hospitals, ah, schools need because there’s a growing number of lawsuits….” I thought my head would explode.

Cathy, the country is hurting. We are facing the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression. Many people face eviction and food shortages, and your and your Party’s priority is liability protection for businesses?? Liability protection for businesses is the primary Republican talking point (after blaming Democrats) for holding up another coronavirus relief bill, a bill that even the Trump-appointed head of the Federal Reserve advocates? As Dave Wilson pointed out, the people (and the economy) need financial relief now. Cathy’s priority is protecting businesses (with hospitals and “schools” as an afterthought) from lawsuits that will be filed later, work through the courts over years, and face a business-friendly appellate judiciary her Republican Senate minority (representing a minority of the population) has packed thanks to McConnell’s slimy political maneuvering. Cathy, your priorities are pathologically warped. You and your Party are not the adults in the room.

Let’s examine the legislative history of coronavirus relief. It is true that the House and Senate passed and Mr. Trump signed the CARES Act, H.R. 748 (the “engrossed bill”), into law in March. McMorris Rodgers had no hand in writing it. The bill was written by Mitch McConnell and his minions in the Senate in consultation with the White House. Surprised? I was. The House of Representative, we are taught by McMorris Rodgers and others, holds the “power of the purse”, the House is where spending bills are supposed to originate. The Senate circumvented that Constitutional mandate by “repurposing” a House Bill, H.R. 748, that was introduced long before the pandemic. The original H.R. 748 was a minor spending bill with broad House support. It dealt with a change in excise tax treatment of employer sponsored health insurance.  H.R. 478 passed the House in July 2019 and then lay dormant (while McConnell worked to pack the judiciary) until March 20, 2020. H.R. 748 was then repurposed, i.e. completely rewritten, into the CARES Act by McConnell’s folks in consultation with the White House. 

I cannot say how often this workaround is used so that the Senate (and whoever controls it) can make a mockery of the Constitutional “power of the purse,” but it was an eye-opener to me. Mitch McConnell is a U.S. Senator representing the 4.5 million people of the state of Kentucky (U.S. population is around 320 million). McConnell sits at the head of the “majority” Republicans of a Senate who represent, in aggregate, a minority of the population of the United States. In spite of the tiny electorate to which he answers, McConnell is a man of immense power. He is the actual holder of “the power of the purse.” 

The CARES Act (still labelled as H.R. 748) was passed on a voice vote both in the Senate and later in the House when it returned there for final passage to become the “engrossed bill” signed into law by the president. There was no notable dissent in either party, since it didn’t contain a poison pill like the “liability protection” McMorris Rodgers now offers as the main priority to be considered before any further relief. 

Apparently, now the word has come down from the business interests that fund the Republican Party: “You will delay any additional coronavirus relief. Your talking point here (after first blaming Democrats) is to highlight the terrible lawyers and the lawsuits they’ll bring against us (for things like our negligence in getting workers infected and killed by coronavirus in our meatpacking plants).”

McMorris Rodgers says with conviction in the debate, “I DO believe that we need an additional corona relief package,” but she, along with her lock-step Republican colleagues, voted against the second relief package, the HEROES Act (H.R. 6800), passed by the House on May 15, 2020. McConnell, arguably the most powerful person in the U.S. government, a man directly representing a tiny minority of Americans, has announced that further stimulus is dead on arrival in the Senate. McConnell, of course, only has to answer to his corporate backers and the Fox News listeners of the State of Kentucky. 

McMorris Rodgers’ only function is to serve as a mouthpiece for Republican select and powerful business interests and a distinct minority of American voters. Dave Wilson would make a far better Representative.

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

P.S. For many years I tried not to look too hard at politics. I justified not paying much attention by leaning on the old saying, “to retain respect for sausages and laws, one must not watch them in the making.” I was wrong. We are governed by laws. If we look away from the process of making law we will empower a few people with questionable allegiances to control our lives, people like Mitch McConnell. On the other hand, if we each tried to master all the details of legislation none of us would have time to do anything else. That’s why we elect people to represent us in city, county, state, and federal governments. When the people holding office swing too far in one direction, when they get out of step, when they hold up consideration of needed legislation on the grounds that what is really needed is “liability protection” for business, then it is time to vote them out.

P.P.S. One last comment: the sausage that McConnell and his minions wrote into the CARES Act is grossly partisan as well. The 2.2 trillion dollar act is 300 pages long and contains abundant opportunities to “pick winners and losers.” Here’s one “small” example of the partisanship: 274 billion (1/8 of the total) was earmarked for distribution to state and local governments for “Covid-19 response.” Logically, the money would be doled out to the states on a per capita basis. That would work out to roughly $856 per person. But, no, McConnell and company, representing states of small population, inserted a zinger: the minimum amount a state was to be allotted was 1.25 billion. The result? Wyoming (population 600,000) received $2083/person, a major windfall to a state, which, at the time, was barely touched by Covid-19. In contrast, California (population 39,500,000) ravaged by Covid-19 at the time, received $388/person. [The rules under which these funds were distributed were even more complicated, although the net distributions were as I wrote. The rules and actual amounts are detailed here.] My curiosity about these details was first piqued by an article noting that Idaho, with an annual state budge of less than 4 billion was in pretty good fiscal shape after receiving 1.25 billion in covid-19 relief funds (more than a quarter of its annual budget). At the same time I noted that Washington State was struggling with a budget shortfall in spite of receiving $2,952,933,375 in Covid-19 relief. Washington State has 4.2 times the population of Idaho and received only 2.7 times the relief funds. What was wrong with this picture?

In all the media frenzy leading up to the November 3 general election it is easy to miss things happening under our own noses, but when a story about the Inland Northwest appears in the spotlight of national media I sit up and take notice. What have we become?

When a six minute segment entitled “Are Paramilitary Extremists Being Normalized? Look To Idaho For Answers” came on National Public Radio’s (91.1FM) Weekend Edition last Saturday, October 17, I took notice. (Click the title to go to the NPR website and listen or read.)

The Weekend Edition segment is primarily a spinoff of the national media coverage of the right wing militia plot to kidnap the Democratic Governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer, but the Weekend Edition story also touches on the disinformation that threatens a rational response to the Covid pandemic: 

At Bonner General Health, [in Sandpoint, ID] Dr. Morgan Morton recounts a patient she had the other day who wanted to wait until after November to schedule a needed procedure.

” ‘I don’t want to do a COVID test,’ she said, and I said, ‘What do you mean? Why would you choose after November?’ I was totally oblivious,” Morton said.

Morton, who is head of the medical staff at the small hospital, said the patient told her that after the election, all of this — the worldwide pandemic — is just going to go away.

“And I was just like … mind blown,” Morton says.

The segment goes on to discuss the heavily armed white men that turned out last June in Sandpoint and Coeur d’Alene to “protect the community” against the rumored imminent arrival of “antifa” terrorists. Rather than feeling protected, regular citizens and especially the unarmed folks carrying signs for Black Lives Matter, felt intimidated by these men dressed for war and accountable to no one. It felt like a threat, a dress rehearsal for a coming event:

For some longtime locals, there was this sense of “here we go again.”

The recent arrests of militia members in Michigan are echoing loudly in Idaho, a state that has long been synonymous with violent right-wing extremism. But after the fallout from the 1992 anti-government standoff at Ruby Ridge cooled and a lawsuit broke up the infamous Aryan Nations, some longtime locals thought they had finally moved past the ugly past.

The sobering–and frightening–thing is that, unlike Richard Butler and his Aryan Nations that plagued the region from 1970 to 2000 the current “militia” movement has people both in public office and as candidates for public office in the Inland Northwest. Idaho State Rep Heather Scott on the Idaho side and Washington State Rep. Matt Shea and his acolytes in Legislative District 4  (Spokane Valley north to Mt. Spokane) on the other. LD4 Rep. McCaslin  Jr. and candidate Rob Chase are examples, to name only a few. The ground is so fertile here that the name Ammon Bundy is not only a big draw but the man himself has moved to Emmett, Idaho, from Nevada to live among kindred spirits. (See more on Ammon below.)

As residents of the Inland Northwest it behooves us once again to wake up this movement, learn the names and the stories that tie them together. These people are armed, threatening, and worrisome. We need to pay attention. 

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

A fascinating, disturbing–and essential–orientation to parts of this militia movement and the characters in it, including Matt Shea, Cliven and Ammon Bundy, and the Spokane Martin Luther King Day bomber(2011) can be had at Bundyville and Bundyville, The Remnant. Both were researched and written by Leah Sotille, a music reporter for Spokane’s weekly paper, The Inlander, at the time the MLK Day bomb was planted. I greatly admire her work. I urge you to become acquainted.  

Ammon Bundy, and his father Cliven, spring from Fundamentalist LDS stock who, for decades, grazed their cattle on public land while refusing to pay grazing fees. That is breaking the law, a fact that is often lost in the telling of the rest of the story. When federal law enforcement came to collect on the debt in 2014 the Bundys summoned a ragtag army militia groups and created the Bundy standoff that made the Bundys infamous to some and famous to others. Ammon went on to engineer the month long armed occupation  the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge two years later. State Reps Matt Shea and Heather Scott were sympathetic visitors and possible co-conspirators in that outrage. Ammon Bundy inexplicably (to my mind) talked his way out of federal charges related to the Malheur occupation. Leah Sottile, writing in the Washington Post, described it this way:

When Ammon Bundy took the witness stand, he seized it like a pulpit, delivering 10 hours of testimony about his family, his Mormon views and his interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

Ammon is apparently quite the orator, using his oratory and his infamy, to whip up controversy in his new home, the Inland Northwest. We would do well to remember that the Bundys and this movement started by intentionally breaking the law and order that binds the rest of us. What the Bundys and their followers are engaged in is armed rebellion, not First Amendment protest. The death of Lavoy Finicum was just a skirmish in a rebellion they hope in incite.