Ed's Kingdom for a horse slaughterhouse

by: Yellowstone Kelly

Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 10:03:19 AM MST

You just can't make this stuff up.

Ed Butcher so badly wants to slaughter horses. He's teaming up with Two Rivers Authority in Hardin to attract investors from China to build a horse slaughter facility.

In case you've forgotten, Two Rivers is the outfit that built the prison in Hardin and then could not find any prisoners.

None.

Not even Guantanamo detainees.

Well, OK, there was Mike Hilton (and his America's Private Police Force) who blew into town with a couple of luxury SUV's and hired a couple of folks to occupy the place before the promised investments and prisoners never materialized.

Now, Representative Ed Butcher, the sponsor of the bill which puts Montana in a position of allowing one on these damned things to be built, has the Two Rivers folks dreaming big time.

Sorry, Hardin, Ed and his bunch do not intend to use the prison facility, but there is an ethanol facility that was built and also never utilized (Is there something in the water?) that could be transformed into a major equine killing floor.

This is all being done under the guise of economic development. The area is desperate for any activity that creates jobs.

If Ed succeeds in moving this idea forward, Montana will be the scourge of the nation. There are no other such facilities in the United States anywhere.

If he fails, Hardin and Montana will be a laughing stock again for a couple of weeks.

We are all geniuses when we dream

by: Yellowstone Kelly

Wed Oct 14, 2009 at 06:03:53 AM MST

This column is must reading. It even includes a laid-back picture of the Governor.

Americans don't east horsemeat, you see. So, Ed argued during the deliberations on his bill that the meat would be exported to Europe. The problem is that the European Union is about to require extensive documentation (really a life history) of each horse. Kinda concerned about the industrial-strength medications horses are pumped full of and their effects on humans.

With that venture on the ropes, he found another potential market: Mainland China. That's right: Communist China. Given his outlandish views, one might conclude that Ed would be a bit cautious when dealing with the menacing Red Hoard, the people of the real People' Republic.

But, no.

Here is what he had to say recently in a Mike Dennison story:

Yet Rep. Ed Butcher, R-Winifred, acknowledged that any such plans are a long way off, even if he can help arrange a visit by Chinese business interests.

"You have to work on their timeframe, and they're very cautious," Butcher said. "These people are good businessmen. You have to be able to present a very logical business proposal."

Ed says communists are good capitalists. . . ? ? ? ! ! !

OMG: This Globalism thing has gone too far!

And, as Nick D wrote in the comments of the Missoulian piece, "if logic is what the Chinese investors are looking for, none of the Butcher guys should be anywhere near the conversation."

Horse Slaughterhouse bill becomes law, but questions remain

by: Jay Stevens

Tue May 05, 2009 at 08:54:02 AM MST

In its opinion page today, the Gazette editorial board reiterates its objections to the bill for the usual reasons: it basically gives one particularly lax industry a free pass on health and environmental regulations. But there's also these two items:

• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says such slaughterhouses could compromise the state's efforts to adhere to clean-water and air quality regulations....

• U.S. Department of Agriculture approval is needed to ship horse meat overseas and Congress has blocked that approval process.

As a result -- as the editorial notes -- there are still a lot of questions about this law. Is it constitutional? Will Butcher et al. find an investor to build -- especially without the USDA participating in inspections? After all, one assumes investors will only build a slaughterhouse if they can sell the meat overseas...

I still can't believe the legislature rubber-stamped this dog. What were they thinking? Until proven otherwise, I'm assuming Ed Butcher has a stash of Polaroids tucked away somewhere of legislators in compromising positions...

A bad bill earns its publicity

by: Jay Stevens

Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 20:45:33 PM MST

However, House Bill 418 goes far beyond recognizing the usefulness of horse slaughter. This legislation would gut existing Montana law that protects citizens' rights to have a say in or to appeal government decisions. HB418 was written to shut out citizen concerns about a business that would be holding large, live animals, killing them, processing and disposing of animal carcasses....

Whoa! Those waivers could leave neighbors of a proposed plant with no effective means to ensure that their concerns were addressed.

A majority of Montana House members have rejected Schweitzer's amendatory veto. If the Senate also rejects it, the bill will go back to the governor's desk, forcing him choose between vetoing it all or supporting a bill that gives one type of industrial facility waivers not granted to any other. Schweitzer should opt for the veto.

I have to say, it's been interesting following this one through the legislature. It kind of slipped under the radar, got passed on the premise that it's solely about building a slaughterhouse, and now it's getting the attention it deserves.

Let's see what the Senate does with this thing now that they know Montanans are watching and understand the implications of the bill...

A thanks to Gov. Schweitzer

by: Heartland1

Sun Apr 05, 2009 at 15:24:57 PM MST

Governor Brian D. Schweitzer
Office of the Governor
Montana State Capitol Bldg.
P.O. Box 200801
Helena MT 59620-0801

Dear Governor Schweitzer,

I'm writing this afternoon to thank you for vetoing the portions of Rep. Ed Butcher's recently passed bill  dealing with the establishment of a horse slaughtering facility in Montana.  Like you, I have no issues the establishement of such a facility, and if there proves to be a need for it, then Montana will be ready to meet that need.

But I strongly agree with the rationale for your veto, and I think that Ed Butcher's reaction to your veto proves the sound logic you used to veto it.  Ed represents my district,  but when he seeks to short circuit my rights as a citizen to contribute input on the siting  of such a facility, or prohibit me from suing such a facility if it seeks to externalize its costs in a way that affects my health or welfare, well, then he doesn't represent me.  You summed it up quite nicely-Ed's Bill was in fact a Trojan Horse, seeking to establish a precedent  for making facilities immune to compaints and concerns from their surrounding communities.

Again, thanks for the veto.  Your good judgement on this matter is why I've supported your candidacies in the past,

All the best,

Jeff Shelden, AIA

JS:cvs

What's doin' in the legislature...

by: Jay Stevens

Wed Mar 18, 2009 at 09:05:22 AM MST

Jhwygirl has some excellent posts up. Earlier she posted the schedule for the first half of this week -- just to give you a taste of what contentious things were batted around in the legislative chambers.

Krazy Kerns' gun bill -- HB 228 -- had its hearing, and jhwygirl noted that opposition is increasing. And it's gaining wider attention, too. Gouras' AP report landed in the Seattle Times. I still don't get it: do Montanans think that needing to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon is a bad idea? And as jhwygirl noted, Larry Jent's SB 92 establishes a castle doctrine for Montanans that's reasonable. Why the love for Kerns' bill?

And the Horse Butcher bill sailed through its Senate committee yesterday. Now I'm not deaf to the need for a place to send horses to slaughter -- I'm not even against using the plant to slaughter wild horses -- but as jhwygirl points out, "this is one bill that has been cited as a violation of Montana's guaranteed right to a clean and healthful environment."

Another way of looking at this bill, is that it gives preferential legal and regulatory treatment to one particular industry. Why? Why not hold the horse slaughter industry to the same health and safety benchmarks as any other?

Mike Dennison's got a report on SB 499, which would lower the coal-severance tax for "green" projects. Its sponsor, Jeff Essman, argues that lowering the tax means more coal production and revenue. Opponents call it another boondoggle for the coal industry:

That same promise was made 22 years ago when the coal industry successfully lobbied to cut Montana's 30 percent coal-severance tax to 15 percent, they said - and it did not lead to more coal production.

"Except for a temporary increase to get the bill passed, there was no increase in production; if anything, it has gone down," said Verner Bertelsen of Helena, a former legislator and co-chairman of Montanans for the Coal Trust. "We doubt that reducing the tax will stimulate coal development in Montana. There are many more significant factors in siting a coal mine."

I'm leaning towards the boon-doggle side. That, and coal's a dying industry. Let it die, and let's think of better, more sustainable long-term use of our public lands...

And in Missoula, there's some buzz that it's not receiving its fair share of the stimulus money. And what money it is getting isn't going to mass transit or city infrastructure projects.

Can anyone explain Greg Barkus' rant on the Rotunda Report against government spending during a recession? It sounds like a theory patched together from shaky theoretical texts and right-wing blogs. We're in a Keynesian world right now; does Barkus not know that? In any case, it's kind of chilling to think that this man has any power over the state economy.

House Republicans Strike Another Blow in War Against Low-Income Children

by: Matt Singer

Sun Mar 08, 2009 at 12:49:40 PM MST

The House Education Committee locked up on a vote on funding of Head Start -- 8-8 right down party lines.

Look, I know that this is a tough budget and all, but this is a really dumb move. There is some data out there that shows that the academic effects of Head Start may wind down a bit in the years after participation. But there's a ton of evidence that Head Start is a great investment that teaches children, helps them earn more later in life, and keeps them out of prison down the road. What's more -- it does it more effectively than other programs with similar goals. BOOM. That's what we call good public policy.

But it gets worse, because Senator Representative Ed Butcher is on the Education Committee, we get gems like this testimony:

We keep seeing this absorbing more and more of the resources, coming in from a direction that goes beyond education

And ... they're well intentioned ... I'm sure they do a lot of good for a bunch of messed up people.

Children's health insurance saves money down the line. Head Start saves money down the line. When liberals call these things investments, we do so for a reason -- because we think it would be nice if we could build some public buildings other than prisons.

Rollin' out the un-welcome wagon...

by: Jay Stevens

Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:25:27 AM MST

When Denton rancher Scott Seilstad challenged incumbent Republican state Rep. Ed Butcher in a primary contest this June, he had to tangle with something other than Butcher: campaign mailers and money from a bevy of obscure political groups bent on defeating him.

Seilstad, a pro-life Republican who signed a pledge against raising taxes, found himself accused of being soft on abortion, cozy with labor unions and supporting higher taxes.

"I don't mind a good, clean campaign on the issues," Seilstad said. "But this kind of deception of the voters the last few days of the election is sleazy campaigning."

Seilstad, who lost the House District 29 Republican primary to Butcher by 20 votes, wasn't the only legislative candidate targeted by last-minute, third-party campaign mailers during the June 3 primary.

The report only mentions 2 of the "10 or so groups responsible for the mailers": "Mothers Against Child Predators" and the "National Gun Alliance."  A quick Google search shows that the National Gun Alliance's President, Dennis Fusaro, was Ron Paul's national field director. Is this shadowy network of groups using lurid, false mailers the fruit of Paul's movement here in Montana?

Rebecca also reminded us that Ed Butcher - recipient of these groups' largesse - has ties to last election's terrible trio of ballot initiatives through his son, Trevis. That effort, too, was funded by mysterious out-of-state donors using less-than-honorable tactics to force extremist legislation on the state.

You can bet this won't be the last time we hear of these groups. I suspect we'll see some more mailers dropped in the general election.

Trevis Butcher cries "foul" over investigations into funding of 2006 initiatives

by: Jay Stevens

Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 12:08:21 PM MST

Remember, these initiatives and their zombie brethren sprung up all across the country and were funded by a single man - libertarian Howie Rich - through front organizations (like Butcher's), who hired professional signature gatherers to fill petitions. Only the process was marked by "pervasive fraud" -- the gatherers lied about the content in the petitions, and the initiatives were thrown out.

The report explains why Unsworth is investigating Butcher's group:

Montanans in Action was formed in early 2006 as a nonprofit group for "educational" and political purposes, Butcher said. Such groups don't have to reveal their supporters - unless they act as an independent political committee that primarily supplies money to political campaigns.

Unsworth said his investigation seeks to establish whether MIA is an independent political committee, which would make it subject to reporting who gave it the money routed to the campaigns of the three ballot measures.

Butcher and his attorneys have accused Unsworth of conducting a "politically motivated witch hunt," notes that Unsworth is "active in Democratic circles," and claims against the group are "wild accusations."

Only thing is, antipathy for Butcher and his methods are bipartisan. It was the terrible trio of initiatives that inspired Senate Bill 96, a bipartisan effort to curtail the kind of wild, mercenary signature gathering so pervasive under Butcher's organization. (SB 96 passed with overwhelming support, and was signed into law by Governor Schweitzer.) Meanwhile, Daddy Butcher's initiative reform bill - which would have punished the groups who brought action against Baby Butcher's bills and made it harder for initiatives to be thrown out - died in a Republican-majority House committee.

There's no doubt Butcher's activities were suspiciously in alignment with Howie Rich's. More than one investigative journalist tied the money here in Montana to Rich. And Rich himself admitted that he financially supported the efforts here to make the terrible trio of initiatives law.

Butcher has no case here, and should hand over the requested documents. Montana has a right to know who's sponsoring political activity in the state.

Ed Butcher is an idiot part 513

by: Adri

Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 09:27:40 AM MST

Because the entire editorial is idiotic please excuse the length.  Butcher's editorial and my reply follow after the fold...

Debunking Ed Butcher

by: Matt Singer

Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 21:01:44 PM MST

The biggest problem with Butcher's comments isn't that they're offensive. It's that they're wrong.

Unsurprisingly, Butcher is blaming Democrats for the whole thing, since his "private" email to a constituent got forwarded.