Bergdahl, Death Threats and a Chamber of Silence

Opinion/Engagement Editor Jon Alexander [ 208-735-3246 • jalexander@magicvalley.com ]

• Sunday, March 29, 2015

Bergdahl, Death Threats and a Chamber of Silence

‌I

OPINION

Sen. Mike Crapo says gun rights should extend to all federal lands. • C2

sent a reporter to Hailey on Thursday with some pretty simple instructions: Spend the whole day in town and talk to as many people as you can about Bowe Bergdahl. ‌A hometown soldier who spent five years with the Taliban before he was freed in a controversial prisoner swap last spring, Bergdahl received a hero’s welcome when he was released. City leaders gave speeches. Businesses hung signs. Stickers were plastered everywhere. Children

Matt Christensen From the Editor

waived flags. Yellow balloons. Hugs. Tears.

But all that euphoria is long gone, and now a strange sense of unease hangs over Hailey, a small resort town where just about everybody knows Bergdahl or somebody in his family. On Wednesday, the Army charged Bergdahl with desertion and a more

serious crime, misbehavior before the enemy.

So now what do folks think of Bowe?

Bowe? Bowe who?

There’s nary a soul in Hailey willing to say something – anything – about Bergdahl, at least in the newspaper.

Instead, folks are talking about death threats.

One city leader called and told me she genuinely feared she’d be killed because her photo appeared in the paper. People on the streets Thursday would talk only if their

names weren’t printed.

Even then, they weren’t willing to say much.

A swarm of national media descended on Hailey last spring, and with them came the whackos. The businesses that hung Bergdahl signs were harassed.

People were threatened, and not just his family and friends. Anybody celebrating his release was a target.

Bergdahl’s lawyer called it a “lynch mob atmosphere.”

Meanwhile, our Please see CHRISTENSEN, C2

OUR VIEW

The Tea Party’s Over

‌T

he tea party’s disease is terminal. Rep. Raul Labrador had better jump ship and join the good guys before he becomes another casualty. ‌And, hopefully, leadership in the Legislature is paying attention too.

For the second time in as many months, 212 House Republicans joined Democrats Thursday and Labrador passed a sweeping overhaul of Medicare.

It was needed policy that would assure patients get the care they need and doctors actu-

ally get paid.

But, as is his way, Labrador joined 32 other right-wing Republicans and voted against real governance. It’s an especially curious vote because, included in the bill, was millions for rural schools. Labrador slapped students throughout the 1st Congressional District in the face.

It’s about the debt, staffers said. Bullocks.

It’s about protecting his brand, one he’s parleyed into regular appearances on the networks’ national Sunday talk shows. House Republicans have had enough with the radicals. They realize that, with 2016 elections

over the horizon, the GOP has to prove it can lead.

The rift between Labrador and establishment Republican Rep. Mike Simpson has for years festered just below the surface. Anyone in the know was keenly aware. But the pair feigned solidarity when in the public eye.

But, last month, Simpson carried legislation that avoided a partial government shutdown.

He lead the revolt against the tiny, fringe faction that demanded outsized domination.

That was real leadership. And it infuriated Labrador, who penned an op-ed in the TimesNews blasting his senior colleague. Simp-

ASSOCIATED PRESS‌

ASSOCIATED PRESS‌

son fired back, rightly arguing that anarchy — our word — isn’t governance.

The Labrador/Simpson schism is out there for all to see now. It’s a symptom of a much larger phenomenon.

Centrist Republicans are engaging Democrats to get things done. It’s a potential death knell for the frothing fringe that’s made hay with fear-mongering and destructive dissent.

Now if only this could catch on in Idaho’s Legislature.

Lawmaker’s look to be nailing down a sweeping state budget that doesn’t raise half of what’s needed to fund the highway network. Nor does it boost teacher pay to talentretention levels. “It’s a start,” is the banter around the GOP dominated statehouse.

What they really mean: It’s a go-home compromise, one pitched by intra-cau-

cus opponents House Speaker Scott Bedke and Majority Leader Mike Moyle.

Moyle and his tea party allies demanded tax cuts — again. And tax cuts they’ll get, meaning the vast majority of Idahoans will pay a few hundred bucks more so those making north of $93,000 can enjoy a tax break, according to the Idaho Center for Fiscal Policy, a pro-progressive tax organization.

Who’s carrying the load is the real difference between the new compromise and an earlier iteration. Lawmakers had targeted the poor. Now they’re hammering the middle class to fund gifts for the upper crust. It’s a tired playbook with a long history of questionable results. Adequately funding schools should be a no-brainer, which shouldn’t require government eroding deals.

The tea party’s brand of hate-laced social Darwinism is, thankfully, falling out of vogue in Washington. House Republicans are finally showing the guts to get things done, if only out of political necessity.

That beltway reality will soon filter to the rest of country. U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz’s presidential bid is already a climate change-denying farce and probably the movement’s last instance of real reverence.

Yet the Legislature continues to pander to its intolerant fringe, a faction who recently walked out on a Hindu invocation before the Legislature and spent their lunch break listening to evangelical ministers label all members of Islam terrorists.

The tea party’s over.

For the sake of Idaho, Labrador and the Legislature must see the big picture and get on with governing.

READER COMMENT

Why Teach In Idaho? Teaching Is One Terrific Job

‌O

ver the past month, I’ve talked with several terrific college kids about their plans to become teachers. Two of these young people are former students of mine. ‌All of these college students essentially asked the same question: Why teach in Idaho? My answer was simple. Teaching is one terrific job, period.

And strangely, there’s no better place to teach than Idaho, especially with the new “Career Ladder” bill’s approval.

Public school teaching is a wonderful job. I’ve had two other long-term jobs and, for my money, nothing

matches the intriguing difficulty and the powerful satisfaction of teaching. I’m still frustrated when some days in the classroom are a complete disaster, some assignments fall flat and some students resist every attempt to be helped. But I’m also still amazed that learning is so much fun, that most students, even my most reluctant students, jump in with both feet when real problems are worked on with appropriate guidance, and that I can be this tired and this exhilarated at the same time.

Now for the harder part of the argument: Why teach in Idaho? Part of the answer is that Idaho is a good

Jeff Roper Declo High School

place to live, a state small enough that it encourages folks knowing folks across cultures and ideologies.

But without a living wage, my argument about teaching in Idaho is weak. And Idaho’s teachers have not been making a living wage. I started teaching 14 years ago at $25,000 and I have managed to advance on the pay grid, with my BA plus 69 college credits, to $41,000, not much for the hours and effort demanded.

Even worse, beginning

teachers today are stuck at $31,750 for years, even with a master’s degree. But thanks to the new career ladder bill that is nearing approval, pay is improving.

The new system will move talented first-year teachers up the new pay grid to $50,000 in eight to 10 years.

This is a dramatic improvement over our current frozen at $31,750 system.

Teachers in the middle, like me, will see a quicker advancement to $50,000 and above. Finally we can now say to new teachers, within a decade you can be making in the mid $50s – that may not sound terrific, but it’s actually a livable wage for a superbly

rewarding job.

I am sure this career ladder system will help us recruit the hundreds of talented new teachers we will need in the next few years.

The career ladder system does require something more from us teachers. We will be evaluated using a demanding state framework for teacher evaluation and, without a proficient rating, we won’t advance on the pay grid. Additionally, if at least a majority of our students don’t meet achievement or growth targets, which we will have a say in creating, we again won’t advance.

These are hoops that are manageable and, I would argue, even appropriate, but

hoops nonetheless.

Yet I believe the evaluation system will help us improve as teachers, help us talk about what works in the classroom and give us a structure for helping struggling teachers improve.

And I believe our students will grow if we are doing our job, despite all the social and economic head wind that blows in the face of so many students.

So why teach in Idaho?

Because the job is terrific, the state is an excellent place to live, and the salary is getting appreciably better. Not a bad list, indeed.

Jeff Roper is an English teacher in Declo.

C2 • Sunday, March 29, 2015

The Forming GOP Race

‌W

ith Ted Cruz announcing and Rand Paul and Marco Rubio soon to follow, it’s time to start handicapping the horses and making enemies. ‌No point in wasting time on the Democratic field. There is none. The only thing that can stop Hillary Clinton is an act of God, and he seems otherwise occupied. As does Elizabeth Warren, the only Democrat who could conceivably defeat her.

On to the GOP. First Tier: 1. Marco Rubio.

Trails badly in current polls, ranking seventh at 5 percent, but high upside potential.

Assets: Foreign policy looms uncharacteristically large in the current cycle, and Rubio is the most knowledgeable and fluent current contender on everything from Russia to Cuba to the Middle East. The son of Cuban immigrants, he can break into flawless Spanish (so can Jeb Bush) and speak passionately about the American story in a party that lost the Hispanic vote by 44 points in 2012.

Liabilities (in the primaries): His Gang of Eight immigration apostasy, though his current enforcement-first position has wide appeal.

Second, after Barack Obama, will voters want another first-term senator with no executive experience? (Same for Cruz and Paul.)

Major appeal: Fresh, young, dynamic persona is a powerful counterpoint to Clinton fatigue.

Odds: 3-1.

2. Jeb Bush. The consensus favorite (though I remain a bit skeptical). Solid, soft-spoken, serious, with executive experience and significant achievements as governor. What he lacks in passion, he makes up for in substance. And he has shown backbone in sticking to his semiheretical positions on immigration and Common Core.

Obvious liability: His name. True, it helps him raise tens of millions of dollars, but it saddles him with legacy and dynastic issues that negate the inherent GOP advantage of running a new vs. old, not-again campaign against Hillary.

Odds: 7-2.

3. Scott Walker. A fine record of conservative achievement. Has shown guts and leadership in taking on labor unions and winning three elections (five if you count proxy elections) against highly energized Democrats.

Good, rousing speech in Iowa, but has stumbled since, flubbing routine questions on evolution and patriotism, then appearing to compare the Islamic State to Wisconsin demonstrators. Rookie mistakes, easily forgotten — if he learns from them.

Pandered on ethanol and fired a staffer who complained about Iowa’s unwarranted influence.

Sure, everyone panders to Iowa, but Walker’s

Christensen Continued from C1

politicians went silent, stuck their fingers in the wind and pivoted quickly to use the prisoner swap as a grenade against the president.

Raul Labrador, who doesn’t even represent the community, was the only member of Idaho’s congressional delegation to call off the hoard.

Charles Krauthammer Washington Post

calling card is standing up to pressure.

Most encouraging sign: ability to maintain altitude after meteoric rise. Numbers remain steady. And his speeches continue to impress.

Odds: 4-1.

Second Tier 4. Chris Christie.

Some politicians have their one moment.

Christie might have missed his in 2012 when his fearless in-your-face persona was refreshingly new. Over time, however, in-your-face can wear badly. That plus Bridgegate cost him traction and dropped him out of the first tier.

Biggest problem: being boxed out ideologically and financially by Jeb Bush for the relativelymoderate-governorwith-cross-aisle-appeal slot. 12-1.

5. Ted Cruz. Grand, florid campaign launch with matching rhetoric.

Straightforward baseoriented campaign. Has developed a solid following. Could break out, especially in debate. 15-1.

6. Mike Huckabee.

Great name recognition, affable, popular. But highly identified with social/cultural issues — how far can that carry him beyond Iowa and evangelicals? 15-1.

7. Rand Paul. Events have conspired against him. Obama’s setbacks and humiliations abroad have created a national mood less conducive to Paul’s non-interventionism. His nearly 13-hour anti-drone filibuster would not fly today. Is trying to tack back, even signing the anti-Iran-deal letter of the 47 senators. Strong youth appeal, though outreach to minorities less successful thus far.

Bottom line: High floor of devoted libertarians; low ceiling in today’s climate. 30-1.

Longer Shots 8. Carly Fiorina. Getting her footing. Given current societal taboos, she is best placed to attack Hillary and has done so effectively. Can she do a Huckabee 2008 and, through debates, vault to the first tier?

Unlikely. But because she’s talented and disciplined, not impossible. 50-1.

9. Ben Carson. Polling high, but is a novice making cringe-worthy gaffes, for example, on the origins of Islam and on gay choice (“a lot of people who go into prison go into prison straight, and when they come out, they’re gay”).

And not knowing that the Baltic States are in NATO. Truly good man, brilliant doctor, great patriot. But not ready for the big leagues. Chance of winning? Zero.

Others: Bobby Jindal, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and John Kasich — still below radar. If they surface, they’ll be featured in the next racing form.

Hailey was left to fend for itself as the Bergdahl case became just another political weapon in Washington.

So perhaps it’s no surprise that now Bergdahl has been charged, people are even less willing to chime in.

Bergdahl’s critics call him a traitor, a soldier who not only abandoned his post but colluded with terrorists.

In his own defense,

READER COMMENT

The Annual Chance to Give

‌I

t’s fair to say that we live in a fairly conservative state, where the values of independence, freedom and selfreliance tend to shape public policy. Regardless of where you find yourself on the political spectrum, there’s no denying that government in Idaho at the state and local levels is relatively small compared to many places.

Where government services and the social safety net are limited, a vibrant nonprofit sector, like the one we have an Idaho, fills the void, touching most people’s lives in a myriad of ways. ‌Chances are, you interact with Idaho’s nonprofits regularly as you go through life. This weekend, you might visit a museum, go to a play or attend church, thanks to the nonprofit organizations that make those activities possible.

When you check out books at the library, you can tip your hat to the nonprofit foundation that purchased those books and supports your library. Perhaps you’re

Janice Fulkerson Idaho Nonprofit Center

planning to send your child to a nonprofit daycare or a summer camp. If you’re a senior or have relatives who receive hand-delivered meals, tax preparation assistance or participate in classes or activities offered by local nonprofits, then you know the work of nonprofits. And maybe you have a four-legged, furry friend in your house, courtesy of a nonprofit animal group.

Frankly, it’s hard to imagine life in Idaho without everyday encounters with the thousands of nonprofits that serve and strengthen our communities. Nearly every week, at every stage of life, almost everyone in Idaho benefits from having a nonprofit fill a need that no other sector of society can or will address. Without these organizations, the fabric of our communities would quickly become

threadbare.

A few years ago, we decided to celebrate and elevate the nonprofit sector as a whole, recognizing that it’s all of these organizations together that improve the mental, physical and spiritual health of our cities and towns. It is this vast constellation of organizations, what former President George H.W. Bush referred to as “a thousand points of light,” that we seek to both honor and support with an event called Idaho Gives. Debuted in 2013, Idaho Gives is a 24-hour giving blitz that taps into the generous spirit and sense of connectedness of Idaho’s citizens. Once again this year, more than 500 nonprofits from every corner of the state will be participating in Idaho Gives – raising awareness of the vital work they do and asking you to help in fulfilling their mission by lending financial support.

Last year, we raised nearly $800,000 together in a single day; this May 7, we

expect that as awareness of Idaho Gives continues to grow, the total number of dollars Idahoans give to nonprofits will also grow.

The impact we make in a single day is tremendous, not to mention the message we send about our nonprofit sector: these organizations matter and we believe in and support them.

For the thousands of Idahoans who have participated in this event the last two years, the decision hasn’t been whether to give, but rather how many groups to support. To see so many groups at idahogives.org spanning so many different categories and doing so much good, it can be hard to limit your giving to just one group. The good news is you don’t have to pick only one.

Just a $10 donation can turn into thousands of dollars for the nonprofits you support. On May 7, Idaho Gives.

Will you?

Janice Fulkerson is the executive director of the Idaho Nonprofit Center.

READER COMMENT

Safeguarding the Second Amendment

‌S

ome lands and water managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are open for hunting, and there are a small number of authorized shooting ranges, but much of the millions of acres managed by the Corps are off limits to lawful possession of firearms. Not only is this a violation of the intent of the Second Amendment, but also it is inconsistent with laws and regulations governing lands managed by other federal agencies.

This problem must be fixed to uphold Americans’ Second Amendment rights. ‌Legislation I introduced to resolve this issue and align the firearms laws governing Corps-managed lands with those governing other federal lands recently advanced in the U.S. Senate. My legislation, S. 263, which would restore Americans’ fundamental right to bear arms on lands managed by the Corps, was included in the Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act of 2015. A Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee recently held a hearing to discuss the Sportsmen’s Act, which is expected to

Bergdahl issued a lengthy statement last week painting himself as the victim of repeated merciless torture. He was tied spread-eagle and blindfolded for months.

He was chained to a bed and beaten with a copper cable. Later, he was kept in a cage like an animal.

He tried a dozen times to escape.

His lawyer plans to argue that Bergdahl left his post to report on

soon head to the Senate floor. But, I need your help in keeping this legislation in the Sportsmen’s Act. According to data compiled by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, the Corps is responsible for 12 million acres of land and waters, including 422 lake and river projects with recreation, 92,844 campsites, 7,700 miles of trails and 3,544 boat launches. Under current law, a person may carry a weapon in a national park as long as consistent with the firearms laws of the surrounding states.

However, those very same rights are not extended to Americans who hunt, camp or fish on land controlled by the Corps. This effectively denies citizens their Second Amendment freedoms when on Corpsmanaged lands.

Enabling Americans to carry firearms on land managed by the Corps will

allow law-abiding citizens to protect themselves and provide needed consistency across federal lands that will reduce the complication of tracking where one federal agency’s land management jurisdiction ends and another begins.

The Supreme Court, in District of Columbia v.

Heller, affirmed that the Second Amendment is an individual right and the right to an operable firearm for self-defense. This right should apply on all lands managed by the federal government. Moreover, a federal district judge in Idaho agrees. The case, Morris v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, was brought by plaintiffs in western Idaho who use Corps managed lands for recreation, including camping. The plaintiffs challenged the regulation as being an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment. In October, the court found that the regulation was unconstitutional and banned the Corps policy, unfortunately, only in Idaho.

Burdening law-abiding citizens of this country with additional Second

Amendment restrictions is not the answer to safeguarding the public. Americans’ Second Amendment rights must be restored to lands managed by the Corps, and my legislation included in the sportsmen’s package achieves this necessary goal. However, during the EPW Subcommittee hearing, it became clear that the bill faces intense opposition from Senate Democrats who want to strip the Second Amendment protections from the underlying bill.

Please help me in stopping this legislation from being stripped from the Sportsmen’s Act. I encourage all those who are interested in this issue to sign the petition at http://www. crapo.senate.gov/contact/ second_amendment.cfm to end the ban on firearms possession on millions of acres of federal land and pass along information to all you know about actions to protect our Second Amendment rights.

Together, we can push this legislation that would end this unconstitutional ban and safeguard Americans’ Second Amendment rights across the finish line.

misconduct in his unit and was captured before he came back. Essentially, he was absent without leave, not a deserter.

I don’t know who or what to believe. A military court will determine whether Bergdahl committed crimes.

It’s an incredibly complex situation that’s as intensely personal as it is sweepingly philosophical. Bergdahl, arguably a naïve young man from

central Idaho, is forcing us to ask big questions about American foreign policy post 9/11. The people of Hailey have become casualties in the debate.

But the charges against Bergdahl have changed nothing for me. All I really know is this: Bergdahl is a human being, an American, who is now home. Regardless of the circumstances that led to his imprisonment, we

should be able to find content in that without having to worry some nut job will harm us.

Staying silent only fuels a fringe that threatens violence through a misunderstood sense of patriotism. You can quote me on that.

Mike Crapo U.S. Senate

Christensen is editor of the Times-News. Reach him at 208-735-3255 and mchristensen@ magicvalley.com.