Announcing: The Road to Helena.

by: Doug Coffin

Sat Aug 06, 2011 at 07:11:45 AM MST

In an era of of extreme cynicism about government, maybe it's time for everyone to engage rather than retreat. The overriding reason for the GOP capture of the Montana legislature in 2010 was that Democrats and left-leaning independents didn't vote. On both the national, state and local levels Republicans had better organization and more participation so they won. It's pretty simple.

I propose that more of us need to engage and participate if we really want to fight for our beliefs. Participation is the mother's milk of democracy. Participation stems from basic civics i.e. from simply voting to volunteering, contributing or even running, as I have chosen to do. The recent debate in WDC over the budget cap gave Americans a cynical choice between bad policy by Republicans and bad leadership by Democrats. Here's to trying to boost our side, even just a little.

http://missoulian.com/news/sta...

Attention All Planets Of The Solar Federation ...

by: Rob Kailey

Tue Feb 08, 2011 at 00:00:00 AM MST

(Carfreestupidity and I must have been sharing a brain over the last day or so.  I began writing this yesterday, and his post today hits many of the highlights.  This post has been altered to reflect his.)

 Matt Singer tells us:

There's a really funny dynamic setting up in Helena that can be seen  from afar (a 30,000 foot perspective really can be useful at times). The  tea party Republicans, having run and won on a platform of limited  government and economic development, are largely dedicating themselves  to invasions of personal freedom and the advancement of pre-Civil War legal theories. That's when they're not undertaking full-fledged assaults on the U.S. Constitution.

He is so right and so wrong.  There is nothing remotely, or certainly not really, funny about this dynamic. It actually makes clear what many of us have been warning of for some time now.  The Tea Party faithful and their toadies among (even more main stream) Republicans don't care one whit about limiting government.  They see government as control over a person's life.  They don't want to alleviate that.  They want to co-opt it.  I don't care whether it's out of fear or moral righteousness; that's truly beside the point.  They don't care what you think.  As many have discovered from their own children (or likely their own behavior) even the bestest of conservative upbringing can lead to 'bad thoughts'.  Thinking is subversive, so though they will give lip service to liberal education and media, they really don't care any more.  What they want is exactly what they are acting out in the Montana legislature.  They want control of your life from birth to death.  There must be order and by GOD they are going to force it upon us.

To save me a ton of typing, which I'm really not very good at, I urge you to go review the list of Republican sponsored bills  to the Montana Legislature that CFS has posted at 4 & 20 Blackbirds.  He ranges well into the attempts to stop the people of Montana from choosing their own destiny, but there are a few specifics I would highlight:

HB 280 and SB 176 both restrict in some way a women’s right to choose.

SB 116 aims to take away a person’s right to decide how to end their own life.

These bills are aimed directly at controlling how people behave, how people live. There is no other will behind them.  Women will be "well behaved" according to their betters, and those who hurt shall be forced to continue hurting ... that last  one blows my mind.  According to Tea Party darling Greg Hinckle, the elderly, infirm and terminally in pain folks of Montana should not have the ultimate choice over their own life, which is when to end it.

Don't get me wrong.  The attacks against women are not something I have or ever will avoid writing about.  But tomorrow, Hinckle's travesty of justice comes to committee, and should be discussed.  It would be vain to do so without a touch of context from the State Senate President, Jim Peterson.  After all, he was the one who wants to tell Montana what our code of conduct should, no, WILL be.  We are cowboys, and our code is the Code of the West, according to Big Jim.  What he thinks must be codified in state law is this:

(1) Live each day with courage.

    (2) Take pride in your work.

    (3) Always finish what you start.

    (4) Do what has to be done.

    (5) Be tough, but fair.

    (6) When you make a promise, keep it.

    (7) Ride for the brand.

    (8) Talk less and say more.

    (9) Remember that some things aren't for sale.

    (10) Know where to draw the line.

"nothing in Montana Supreme Court precedent or Montana statutes indicating that physician aid in dying is against public policy."

Note that quote well.  That is exactly what Hinckle is attempting to change.  He wants to change "public policy" based on a Teabagger sensibility that they know best what is for "us".  We don't get to choose.  They will tell us what we will choose, and that is the code of the West.  Oh wait ... no it's not.  Not even remotely.  What was that line?  Oh yeah:  Know where to draw the line.  Don't bother, Montanan.  Hinckle will draw it for you.  And you will have no say in the matter.

And that's the problem with the Tea people.  They want what they want and will tell you to conform.  They are like the Home Owners Association from Hell.  They will protect the resale value of their lives by taking the value from yours.  Don't kid yourselves that they duped fiscal conservatives into voting for their "control everything about others" agenda. People knew what they were voting for.  Montanans aren't stupid, just often misdirected.  So that's our task.  To inform Montana that people like Hinckle, Skees, Warburton, Burnett, and Knox don't give one salient crap about you is really the noblest task of us all, and is truly the Code of the West.  Be tough but fair, remember that somethings aren't for sale, and always ride for the brand, the Montana brand.  Otherwise, the weak will force those things on you.

Free Will

by: Rob Kailey

Mon Feb 07, 2011 at 18:00:26 PM MST

Just to gently annoy JC, ~wink~, and vainly attempt to remind the Tea Party of what they're supposed to be all about:

Free Will

Especially dedicated to Knox, Warburton, Skees and Hinckle.  May they kindly remember that Montanans choose their own lives, not have it chosen by those fools.

GOP, Please Don't Throw Us in That Briar Patch!

by: Matt Singer

Mon Feb 07, 2011 at 11:32:05 AM MST

More hilarious than this, though, is their belief that they've got a smart political strategy: bringing these third-rate bills into a fight with the Governor. Here's a case in point: aid in dying. Greg Hinkle is moving a bill to end Montana's currently legal practice of allowing people with terminal medical conditions to seek a physician's aid in ending their life. I'm not sure there's a better example of a personal freedom than maintaining an honest choice in whether we want to live or die. Despite that, Hinkle continues to advance his bill (surprisingly, he provides no exceptions for sheriff's who disagree or for people who choose death-by-spear). Rumor is that the Montana GOP is quite excited to pass this bill to face a veto by Governor Schweitzer.

All I can say: Please don't throw us in that briar patch. Like many of these issues, the GOP is at odds with the people of Montana. I know that they won a big election last fall, but they're also stupid to be looking forward to any fight with the Governor. By my calculations, Republican House members earned about 203,429 votes in 2010. Schweitzer received 318,670 votes in his last election, just for comparison.

Schweitzer has a bigger microphone and a more trusted brand in newspapers than any individual member of the legislature. That's just reality. Sorry, GOP, but if you pick a fight with the Governor, you're probably fighting above your weight. Smart money says you lose. Badly.

Constitution Caucus is a Joke, Possibly an Illiterate One

by: Matt Singer

Tue Jan 18, 2011 at 11:37:05 AM MST

But let's forget the federal Constitution for a second, because there is fairly little in there that actually constrains the power of state governments to be activist (there are provisions, like the 14th Amendment, that limit their ability to do pernicious things like discriminate). So the question on these matters is what the Montana Constitution dictates.

The Montana Constitution famously dictates "All persons are born free and have certain inalienable rights. They include the right to a clean and healthful environment..." The right to a clean and healthful environment isn't just in the Constitution. It's the second right listed, right after self-government and popular sovereignty.

In fact, the Constitution later mandates "The state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations." Regarding education, the Constitution says, "It is the goal of the people to establish a system of education which will develop the full educational potential of each person. Equality of educational opportunity is guaranteed to each person of the state."

Cody Bloomsberg ought to schedule follow up interviews with Kerns and anyone else who considers herself or himself part of this "Constitutional caucus" and get their read on the Montana Constitution, the primary document they have obligations to represent and enforce. My guess is that we'll see their inability or refusal to read the initial intent very quickly.

Freedom and autonomy. Its yours to keep.

by: Carla

Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 16:48:52 PM MST

Full Disclosure: I am the Online Community Builder for Compassion & Choices

There's a lot of frustration in the country right now around the big issues we're facing. Part of that frustration stems from people believing that it's tough to be heard above the din of the rest of the nation. Whether it be on taxes or health care or war, it can seem impossible to have a substantive impact on policy.

Not so at the local level, especially in Montana. When citizens here write letters to the editor or make personal contact with their legislators, its seen and heard.  It makes a tremendous impact.

Compassion & Choices believes that it's your right as a Montanan to make your own decisions around end-of-life care.  This includes the right for mentally-competent, terminally-ill patients to get a prescription from their doctor and take it at a time and place of their choosing: to die with dignity and at peace.

We're making it super easy to write a letter to the editor of your local paper about your support for Death With Dignity for Montana. You can use our handy media widget to submit to up to 5 of your local papers.

Why does this matter? Legislators in these towns read their local papers. They're looking to see what you think. Let your legislators know that you want the government and politicians left out of your health care decisions.

What are they smokin' in Helena?

by: Doug Coffin

Sun Nov 21, 2010 at 14:58:38 PM MST

Lewis was present when the Gov pointed out in public at his budget-rollout press conference that Lewis was making more as a state employee when he retired (about $110K) than the cap that he is proposing for current state workers ($80K). Hypocracy? Embarrassment? Shoulda been.

But Lewis has hung with his ugly duckling and now he has the support of the home-town newspaper. Yup, the editorial board of the Helena IR drank Lewis' Kool-aid and gave his brainstorm legs with a "gee isn't this intriguing" editorial in today's (Sunday's) paper. Is Sarah Palin subbing as a ghost writer for the IR?.... or perhaps the Beckster? It sure seems quintessentially FOX Newseque.  

Rookie Picks: Bill Harris (HD 30)

by: johncbacino

Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 10:38:36 AM MST

More specifically?

Harris thinks voters didn't know what they were voting for. First, this is an amazingly condescending attitude towards voters. Thanks for the votes, idiots. Second, taking his pompous proposition for granted, would it not be equally applicable to his election?

Harris accuses the CI-161 campaign of being an astroturf operation. What does a cursory examination of the records show? It was a small donor, in-state operation whose Billings sponsor mortgaged his house to help fund expenses. This is about as homegrown as it gets. No really, what could possibly be more grassroots? I suppose he could have been screen printing the signs in his garage.

Ok, why really?

Oh snap, new regulations are gonna affect the outfitting business Harris owns! I guess taking away one's state-sponsored monopoly would be kind of a drag.
Who else didn't like CI-161? The NRA, Chamber of Commerce, and Safari Club International, and of course the Montana Outfitters and Guides Association. Wait, who was supposed to be astroturfing? You think any at these organizations mortgaged their house(s)?

Rep. Elect Harris's parting thoughts on the voters:
"They don't understand"
"people really don't know"

I don't want to give away my recruiting strategy, but I know there's a Rookie Pick spot for anyone who requests a bill to give voters a second chance to review the part of the ballot Harris was on.

Citizens United Comes to Montana

by: Matt Singer

Mon Oct 18, 2010 at 19:33:05 PM MST

The Citizens United case is a remarkable example of the right-wing majority on the Supreme Court deciding law rather than settling a case. The independent expenditure in question in Citizens United was mostly financed by individuals (as I understand it, corporate financing would round to 0% of the budget pretty clearly) and didn't even actually specifically advocate against Hillary Clinton's election.

Additionally, Justice Kennedy wrote for the majority that the government's anti-corruption interest did not hold sway.

Let's compare that to the facts on the ground in Montana where three plaintiffs appear. The first two are interesting examples:

• Montana Shooting Sports Association. I've been under the impression that MSSA is an individual membership organization, so I don't even think the ban on corporate spending would apply to them..
• A local small business in Bozeman. This is a corporation that exists basically for liability purposes. The owner argued simply that he wanted to be able to use his business as a disclaimer in ads instead of his own name because he thought it would carry more weight. I'm not sure that creates a legal right to incorporate and use a random name for political argument whenever one chooses, but whatever.

That's their explicit strategy. As Debra Bonogofsky, a Republican who was targeted by WTP in a legislative primary in June, highlighted, the Montana state investigator looking into Western Tradition Partnership found that they have been soliciting funds from "officers of several foreign corporations." Toward what end? Their own words can speak for themselves:

"Our success won't depend on which party is in power," the presentation [WTP] said. "Politicians get the message loud and clear when their colleagues get beaten in the ballot box."

Fortunately, the Montana Supreme Court has a chance to revisit this decision if Steve Bullock chooses to take this fight upstairs.

Montana's Own Glenn Beck: Senator Greg Hinkle

by: Matt Singer

Fri Oct 15, 2010 at 08:19:42 AM MST

Here's what we might call the nut graf (it's a double entendre):

More recently, the Montana Supreme Court gave doctors who participate in aid in dying a potential defense to criminal prosecution. When doing so, the Court described aid in dying in terms of a doctor providing the means for a patient's death, but not directly participating in that death. This is physician-assisted suicide, not euthanasia. But how long will that distinction be remembered? The term "aid in dying" also means euthanasia. (Emphasis added.)

Senator Hinkle also provides a single link to prove that aid-in-dying laws are "a recipe for abuse." That link is to an article that has absolutely no data about any indication of abuse in Washington or Oregon. It is simply meaningless speculation.

In his defense, though, he is clearly just not very smart.

Things Change Slowly...Until They Change Quickly

by: Matt Singer

Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 13:40:09 PM MST

Nationally, Pew finds opposition to same-sex marriage dropping below 50%. We just faced a frustrating setback on Don't Ask, Don't Tell, but it was a failure of process, not of lack of votes.

My prediction -- we're about to see a fairly rapid end of state-endorsed discrimination against the LGBT community (although the Trans community faces a higher barrier here than their cohorts) and recognition of same-sex relationships.

2010 Essential Races - Who Would You Support?

by: The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee

Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 15:43:30 PM MST

Let's try something different:  Which legislative races do you care about?

Out of over 6,000 state legislative districts up for grabs this year, we've chosen 40 key races to highlight on our 2010 "Essential Races" list.  These are 40 critical races that we anticipate will show which way the political tide is turning this fall.

But we recognize our own limitations. There are plenty of other key races all across the country -- so we're asking for your help in identifying them.

For the next few weeks, we'll be accepting nominations from the public for 10 additional state legislative races to be added to our 2010 "Essential Races" list.

The Social Wars Heat Up

by: Matt Singer

Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 09:21:46 AM MST

Give jhwygirl a read as well as she looks at the fact that the Montana GOP is clearly fissuring on this topic. In fact, as noted elsewhere, the Bozeman Mayor taking such a lead on this topic identifies as (although he's not elected as) a Republican.

There's a third interesting story this week, namely an analysis piece about the difficulties the Tea Party has faced as it has become embroiled in social policy.

Wearing my pundit hat, what is most fascinating watching all of this is how the popular ground has so clearly shifted on equality issues. The GOP is fractured. Media and pundits are wondering how they could be so out of touch. Prominent individuals in their party are chastising the GOP for being out of touch with mainstream views. This is a notable shift. It also makes it far more likely that in this next session, we'll see a unified Democratic caucus on at least some equality legislation and a fractured GOP caucus on the same issues.

Where will we make progress? It may simply be bringing state statutes into line with rulings in Gryczan and Lawrence v. Texas. But I think there's a good chance of something bigger -- including LGBT individuals in the state's anti-discrimination laws or some form of relationship recognition. We may even have some very unlikely suspects lining up to testify.

Finding Anecdotes and Solving Problems

by: Matt Singer

Mon Aug 30, 2010 at 11:50:48 AM MST

Interesting story today, forwarded to me by Eric Feaver, that focuses on a fairly small number of public employees with large pensions while downplaying the more typical numbers. The headline focuses on one retiree who gets over $100,000 from the system, but here's the real nut:

However, for all retirees the mean was $16,484 in the PERS and $22,631 in the TRS and $12,238 for the median in the PERS and $22,546 in the TRS, according to the report.

MEA-MFT is promoting a plan to require longer terms of work in the system to qualify for full retirement benefits and some other reforms to make the system work better. I'm not deeply familiar with them, but the state would be wise to work with these stakeholders, not beat up on them.

Separately, the larger question of socking away money (either through large public accounts or private individual accounts) in the stock market as a plan for retirement has its shortfalls. Check out this chart of the Dow Jones Industrial Average for the past decade to get a sense of just what might be problematic with relying on the stock market for perpetual growth.

Putting more money into a place that seems to be short on actual investment opportunities of late won't lead to growth. It will lead to more bubbles and more pain as people watch their portfolios collapse. I'm skeptical in general of the value of pushing more people in to 401Ks. Part of Social Security's good sense is to operate as a ponzi scheme that captures long-term productivity gains. We can't run all of our retirement operations like that, but we may need to run more of them.

Will PhRMA Be Treated the Same as Medical Marijuana?

by: Matt Singer

Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 12:44:41 PM MST

Another key change recommended by the panel would prohibit a doctor from being paid or soliciting pay from caregivers and dispensaries. It also would be illegal for a physician to hold an economic interest in a business if that doctor certifies the "debilitating medical condition" that allows a patient to participate in a medical marijuana program.

Sands said statistics show that many physicians have authorized medical marijuana cards for a small number of patients. However, she said there are a handful of doctors who have approved medical marijuana cards for many, many people.

If a doctor has a financial incentive to overprescribe marijuana, my hunch is that the worst that happens is too many pot smokers have a quasi-legal way of smoking pot. Conversely, when physicians have financial incentives to order additional tests and drum up business for hospitals and their own practice, we see insane health care inflation.

If there is a place where we need to be least worried about this sort of abuse, it is probably in the medical marijuana world. At least, that's what I think. Of course, I'm down to legalize, regulate, and tax, so my position on this may not mesh with everyone. But there are far more serious problems facing this state.

Ideas for '11

by: Matt Singer

Fri Jul 09, 2010 at 09:56:16 AM MST

It also seems apparent that some medicinal marijuana reform of some sort will be taken up, probably with 15 competing proposals. I'm curious what the economic impact would be of seriously dialing back this recently flourishing industry. Taxation of marijuana may be one of the most popular proposals as a way to shore up the budget a bit.

The state has a number of other bill drafts pending. A number of these are "generally revise" titles that don't reveal what is happening. Bruce Tutvedt (R-Flathead) has 5 tax reform bills. Yikes. I can only presume he wants to knock our budget further out of balance by giving rich people and oil companies more tax breaks. Maybe I'll be surprised.

Ron Erickson has requested a bill to abolish the death penalty. Montana's Senate made history in '09 as the first Republican-controlled chamber in the nation to vote to repeal the death penalty. The bill will probably face success in that chamber again. The House is more likely to be in play depending on who controls it this fall.

John Brueggeman wants to dig into outsourcing.

On the health care front, Jim Shockley wants to amend the Constitution to create freedom in choosing health care coverage. Will that be a positive right? Bruce Tutvedt is also moving on the health care front, pushing for more tax credits and introducing a bill to allow out-of-state insurance companies (presumably unregulated by the Montana State Auditor) to sell policies in Montana. Depending on how that is structured, it might be a smart bill. If it just turns us into a race-to-the-bottom on the insurance front, we'll end up with Montanans paying lots of premium dollars to out-of-state companies who will then screw people out of health care when they need it.

Brueggeman is also looking out for Montana's pasttime with one bill to allow the shipping of wine into the state and a second bill to revise microbrewery and microdistillery laws.

Back on the crazy front, Greg Hinkle, who thinks the State of Montana should keep you from taking your own life also thinks sheriff's should have to authorize federal searches, seizures, and arrests. I presume that would also apply to the Border Patrol, which seems to run counter to the modern conservative movement's anti-Brown tendencies. I'm guessing it also runs afoul of that other darling of the tea party movement: the U.S. Constitution.

Proving that legislators have a sense of humor, Senator Jim Keane (D-Butte) wants to charge a fee for PowerPoint presentations to committees. This might have the great side effect of encouraging people to use the far superior Keynote (loophole!).

Senator Dave Lewis has a resolution calling for US withdrawal from the United Nations, which would make hosting that body in New York awkward.... I'll also consider this to be a New World Order conspiracy, since it would be a silly move that would give up our veto authority at the UN. It may actually make the United Nations more effective at its mission.

Debby Barrett is taking a stand for hunter rights by seeking a bill to prohibit "harassment" of licensed hunters. That may have a First Amendment problem.

Alright, that's all I can handle. What else are people hearing about or think should be dropped in the hopper?

TX Oil Companies Try to Kill CA Clean Energy Legislation

by: NRDC Action Fund

Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:33:22 AM MST

Why should you care?  Let us count the ways.

Doing the right thing unexpectedly trumps politics

by: Montana Cowgirl

Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 17:19:36 PM MST

Last month you read here that Senator Ryan Zinke (R-Whitefish) had been considering pushing the ball forward on the international effort to save the Flathead and Glacier National Park from degredation created by proposed coal mining operations in Canada.

The word on the street up in the Whitefish, where this issue looms extremely large, is that Zinke will introduce a bond measure in the state legislature to accomplish this.  At the bottom of all of this is the filth and effluent and goo that would run off into the river and into the Montana Flathead valley if the Canadian mining were to go forward.  Max has been talking about it for 30 years but has never actually done anything about it. Tester doesn't seem much engaged at all.

Schweitzer got an MOU signed, but the progress stopped there because of the lack of a federal appropriation.

The Flathead Beacon is now reporting that there may be hope for moving forward with what it calls "the historic agreement banning natural resource development along the North Fork Flathead River, signed by Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer and British Columbia Premier Gordon Campbell" in spite of previously deadlines and current obstacles.

In a May 26 posting, the blog Left in the West reported on a rumor that Whitefish Republican state Sen. Ryan Zinke was planning to introduce a bond measure in the next Legislature to compensate the B.C. mining firms for their sunk costs if an agreement had not been reached on the payment by then. Reached last week, Zinke said he hasn't been involved in any negotiations and would need to learn more about the issue, but that he would contact Schweitzer to discuss such a measure if it is still necessary next year.

"I haven't talked to the governor's office on options, but it's not out of the realm of possibilities and I'd certainly consider it," Zinke said. "If we can't figure something out, then I would work with the governor to move on something."

Kudos to Sen. Zinke for giving a damn about his district and his willingness to work with the Governor to come up with a solution even though they aren't of the same political party.  Of course it's a smart political move on his part too, given that his name is in the mix for GOP gubernatorial candidate in 2012, as Jay notes below.

Eye on 2011: $400 Million Gap

by: Matt Singer

Tue Jun 15, 2010 at 11:12:42 AM MST

But Washington, DC, seems cowed by short-term deficits and is willing to accept lots and lots of pain in order to avoid offending hypocrites like Congressman Rehberg, who supported deficit spending during good times only to oppose it when we need it (actually, this isn't so much hypocritical as it is stupid or opportunistic).

Regardless, we've got some painful options in Montana. One proposal I saw would make up less than 1/3 of the gap by cutting state support for education by roughly 1/3. That lost money would presumably be made up by either massively jacking local property taxes, consolidating classrooms, or simply killing children perhaps. I'm not sure how we ask schools to take 15% cuts to their budgets without significantly decimating their mission. Perhaps an "expert" on the right can inform me.

There are another set of options that need to be on the table -- eliminating the oil tax holiday; cracking down on high-income folks, especially non-residents, who got great tax breaks out of the Martz Administration; and maybe even a real estate transfer tax on high-end property sales.

The reality is that we can make some cuts, but we already run this state in a pretty lean fashion. I had a 1.5 hour wait at the DMV recently. I'd hate to turn that into half a day over budget cuts.

There will be a lot of meaningless rhetoric thrown around about waste in government. Here's my advice for anyone who honestly is aware of waste in government -- share your information with the Governor's office, with your legislator, and with MPEA and MEA-MFT. These folks will be looking more than anyone to eliminate true waste this year in order to move resources into valuable programs.

But vague sentences about waste don't actually help anyone find it. And if we just pull out a chainsaw and start cutting in the hopes of eliminating waste, my sense is that we'll cut a lot of damn important stuff out as well.

Update -- And here's Paul Krugman explaining why more stimulus is a good idea since many folks seem to think that we need to piss our pants over deficits these days.

Understanding Death With Dignity for Montana

by: Carla

Fri Jun 11, 2010 at 13:01:42 PM MST

Montana is preparing to have an important public policy discussion about the rights of terminally-ill citizens to request medication from their physician to achieve a peaceful and dignified death at the time of their choosing.

Compassion & Choices-Montana believes its extremely important to provide the public with accurate information on this issue. Thankfully, so does the Missoula Independent:

Legislators on both sides are eager to clarify the Montana Supreme Court's December ruling that gave physicians a legal defense in prescribing life-ending medication to terminally ill, mentally competent patients. Proponents point to legislation already on the books in Oregon and Washington that provides strict criteria for the practice-psychiatric evaluations, written consent observed by an impartial witness, etc.-as a good starting point for building on the court's decision.

Hinkle's talking points are, shall we say, less researched. He's claimed for weeks that physician-assisted suicide will wrongfully endanger patients who might actually survive their illness. Even patients with stable HIV and years to live could receive a prescription, he says, and he's gone on record stating that once medication is prescribed, a patient's life is out of his or her hands. Death is under the control, he says, of a doctor or family member.

Hinkle couldn't be more wrong. Physician-assisted suicide is a voluntary alternative for those suffering extreme pain or indignity at the end of life. In 2009, doctors in Oregon prescribed life-ending medication to 95 patients, only 53 of whom elected to take it. The majority of those were already in hospice care.

Fortunately, Montana residents can get accurate, factual information on Death With Dignity, as Hamilton resident Pat Tucker notes in her Letter to the Editor of the Queen City News.

Terminally ill, mentally competent adults are very capable of making informed decisions about their care.  They don't need the government telling them how to live and they definitely don't need the government telling them how to die.

Get more information on Death With Dignity and keep track of the latest on the issue, join us on Facebook.