1st Disclaimer: I am not a member of any political party. I personally agree and disagree with aspects of both Republican and Democrat platforms.
2nd Disclaimer: I took notes during and after this interview. Since the conversation was not recorded, I gave a site business card to the interviewee and offered them to contact me if they felt I misquoted or mischaracterized them.
I sat in the back of the Republican convention and watched Butch Otter work the crowd with smiles and handshakes for a long time. People would sneak looks at him, and their looks had a sense of awe. It’s obvious many people view the suave Butch Otter as the current Idaho Republican Rock Star (he even has the best hair of any Idaho politician).
I was on my way out to lunch when Mike Adams introduced me to Butch. We shook hands, Mike explained the IdahoFallz.com blog and confirmed Butch would be able to talk with me later that afternoon. Later that afternoon, as the convention was winding down to deciding officers, we found a couple chairs in the lobby and discussed the following issues.
My first question was if he was familiar with Net Neutrality legislation? (To the uninitiated, net neutrality means any website will be delivered at the same speed and priority as every other site; proposed legislation will allow telcos and cable companies to charge websites more to be delivered faster than others.) Butch replied yes, and said the House of Representatives had just passed a bill allowing FCC authority to set rules and rates for higher broadband speeds. Butch insisted it only applied to “the fastest speeds”. I am extremely familiar with current broadband availability, so I clarified if the rules apply to current broadband or some future broadband technology; Butch acknowledged it applied to current and future technology.
I said I did not know all the particulars about the subject, but I heard many say this will create a toll system on the Internet. Only the big pocket companies will be able to pay for the fastest speeds, and millions of smaller websites (like IdahoFallz.com) will be forced to having their sites take longer to load. This could effectively kill of the Internet’s great equalizing ability, and stifle innovations. Butch replied that broadband providers have enormous investment to rollout services, and that bigger websites ought to pay for their fair share of the broadband load they cause.
I said many critics have pointed out that broadband is paid for on both ends, at website output and consumer ends. Bandwidth is extremely expensive, which is why even before this legislation video is only released by the biggest companies. Consumers already pay for their Internet connections, and pay more for the speed at which they want to be able to surf the Internet. Butch admitted he didn’t know all the particulars, but felt it was good legislation.
I felt very exasperated by this. If he didn’t know all the particulars, especially basic counter-arguments like I have heard, why did he vote for it? I admit I don’t know everything about net neutrality, but I listen to a lot of smart guys who do (John Dvorak for example), and the smart industry people are saying this legislation is bad news for the Internet and the economy. I have heard it said this legislation passed because Republicans typically get funded by telephone and cable providers, while Internet companies typically fund the Democrats.
I asked about Medicaid funding in Idaho. I heard Mitt Romney had done an unprecedented thing in Massachusetts by covering everyone with health insurance, and Butch if he planned to do something similar in Idaho. He said he was not familiar with what Romney’s plan, but that he planned to introduce a means test to Medicaid eligibility. Butch said Idaho currently does not means-test applicants, so Medicaid is paid out regardless of income. He said a means test will cut costs by ensuring only those who need the economic assistance will get it. Butch further said if they are proven to need the economic help that they should then get it also in the form of education, job skills, etc. Butch did not elaborate on this topic.
I asked what he planned to do about illegal immigration. I pointed out that it’s a complicated subject especially in Idaho, where illegal immigrants cause a financial burden, but also strengthen our agricultural economy. Butch said previous governor Phil Batt had it correct when he observed there is no labor shortage, just shortage of willingness to pay wages.
Butch elaborated, confirming he would prohibit public schooling and Medicaid for illegal immigrants. He said there’s a minimum medical care that is necessary to stabilize patients, but that after that minimum stabilization occurs he planned to have illegals deported immediately, even straight from the hospitals. We discussed the effects of farms having to pay more for labor, and Butch said he would rather pay more for hamburgers than more taxes for illegal immigrants using government services.
I asked Butch about any economic factors in a gay marriage ban. I asserted I’m happily married and definitely not a gay-rights advocate, but I could care less what other people do in their lives. I cited the previous post at IdahoFallz.com that pointed out gay marriages do not strain hetero-marriages, that in fact a hot girl at Wal-Mart will strain a traditional marriage more than a gay couple (Butch laughed hard at that). Butch admitted that beyond married couple healthcare benefits, there were not many economic costs to gay marriages.
Butch said the reason for a gay marriage ban is more spiritual, that religiously only a man and a woman can be acknowledged to be married. He cited the difference of knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing, but he could see I wasn’t on the same page with him. He said he could tell I was a good, red-blooded American, I replied sure, that I had served in the National Guard. Butch replied he had also, and gave a “116th Cav-Huah!”.
He asked what if someone said they wanted to change our flag colors from red, white, and blue to yellow, green, and whatever different? I said no, it would not be acceptable. He said it’s the same thing with gay-marriages, that marriage just spiritually wouldn’t be the same if gay people could do it also. He pointed out that civil unions enable gay couples to do all manner of legal things that traditionally married couples can do. I confirmed that while Butch opposed gay marriages, that he felt civil unions were acceptable because they took care of those legal needs.
My impression of Butch Otter is that he’s extremely charismatic and friendly. He is absolutely an Idaho guy and I have no doubt he would work hard as Idaho’s governor. I agree with his solutions on illegal immigrants and Medicaid means-testing. I am still not convinced either way on the gay-marriage ban (it seems if they are trying to prevent spiritual problems that is a church issue not a state issue). I was really disappointed on his vote against net neutrality and by his follow-up admission that he didn’t really know all that much about it.
Popularity: 5%
Related posts:
It WAS all he had to say about it!
:@:)
Loading ...
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska recently made a complete arse of himself and exposed how badly informed politicians are about net neutrality issues in a recent speech.
I’ve heard his speech by itself and laughed at his fumbling, but this video puts it into context.
Obviously, net neutrality legislation is yet more industry-written legislation and an example of our national agenda being set by corporate interests.
I liked my conversation with Butch Otter on most counts, but I’m still and perhaps even more disappointed now with his party-line support of this ill-conceived legislation.
Maybe you should talk to Butch’s people again and see what his position is. Just because a part position is one thing, Arnold S. in CA, and Rudy G. (NYC) have shown us two examples of GOP members who do not do everything the way Pat Robertson and others would have them do. Arnold’s refusal to send National Guard troops to the border…..well, you decide.
But, maybe Otter (and Brady, for all I know), are not well versed in this particular area. I’m not and need to read more about it. Right now, I don’t have the time for in depth reading, so rely upon summaries, like those found on IdahoFallz.Com to educate me a little bit.
Just don’t jump to conclusions to fast about any politician who may not have researched a subject far enough to know what he/she would do. Otter has shown his independence (in Congress) from the GOP.
If only the politicians (every party) would say, “I don’t know the answer to that question. What resources would you recommend I read?” Can I call/e-mail you in a week to tell you my official position?” However, I guess the math machine is probably running in every politican’s head: am I gaining or loosing votes by doing this and how many people realy will see what I say?
Anyway, Joe, please keep us updated about this legislation and what it means to us right now, probably in the future and how you see us potentially making our current elected officials address this issue.
I was perusing some of Idaho’s wikipedia entries, and was surprised to see this allegation about our current governor’s moral conduct:
“Otter won the Miss Idaho USA title in 1991 and represented Idaho in the Miss USA [February] 1991 pageant.
…
During her year [1991] as Miss Idaho USA, Otter met Idaho’s then-Lieutenant Governor of Idaho Butch Otter, and the two became romantically involved, despite the fact that Otter was already married.
After dating for years, the two married in Meridian, Idaho on August 18, 2006. In January 2007, Otter became Governor of Idaho. Otter divorced his former wife Gaye Simplot, daughter of potato magnate J.R. Simplot, in 1992 but the marriage was only annulled by the Catholic Church in 2006.[1]”
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori_Easley
Is this true? The dates sound like they would be right, but it is surprising to not hear about this from our media. Or especially to not hear this issue from our moral majority republican party.
I have no idea whether it’s true – but as you alluded to, it might NOT be surprising that our local media hadn’t picked it up.
SPEAKING of local media picking and choosing – I’m so disgusted by it that I’ve stopped listening to it. Not ONCE did ANYBODY in the Idaho Falls area admit to having heard the clip from GWB’s comment on Feb 14 – “Money Trumps Peace sometimes”. Not ONE local person I know of ever HEARD of that until I enlightened them.
I’m curious. Did the story about BYU students having a sit in against Dick Cheney’s appearance as a graduation ceremony speaker manage to make it onto local news media? Did it get a two second sound bite or was it an actual story that the news gave @ LEAST enough time as it gave to how “bad” Al Gore is for using electricity in his own home?
Juuuuuuuuuust wondering.
As for Butch – er – Otter – I would be mildly interested in knowing more about this (I didn’t vote for the guy but hey, since he’s hired – I have a vested interest in his choices).
Otter is in Cuba this week. While he is down there he should do some investigating on Cuba’s Biological Weapons Lab…maybe we can sell them some potatoes to make a killer gas or something. I am sure Butch would be willing to do this to make a buck.
Better yet, we can toss them some wolf pelts for keeping warm in the winter – I have never been to Cuba myself but my friend who used to live there says it CAN get a bit chilly in the winter @ times.
This way, The Butch-Man can have his “first” bullet in the wolf of his choice and gift it too!
How spiffy!
I suppose this is getting slightly off topic. I STILL don’t know if the rumor about which this topic began is based in truth. I have ASKED a few people, but all have shrugged and said “I don’t know.
The story of the BYU sit in was in the Post Register
Thanks!
Isn’t the Post Register owned by Jerry Brady? My source said it was not in the Post Register but those of you in Idaho Falls get a slightly different Post Register version than we North of Rexburg do. It’s called the “Upper Valley Edition”. They say “Both papers are identical, the UVE just has a different classified section and ad spots” – but that is NOT always true. I remember one month when I compared the two versions and day after day – the UVE had SHORTENED versions of many stories, and often “page 2″ stories were not even included in the UVE.
That’s why I stopped buying the Post Register – I could not have the version I wanted delivered.
What about tv? Radio? Was this story given any decent airplay?
I’ve seen a HUGE difference in local “news” and the news I get from sources outside the local areas.
That’s why – when it comes to Butch Otter’s story – I’m not so sure we’ll find an accurate one locally.
TWIMC:
I’ve been alerted to this thread. Two comments:
1. The Post Register’s ownership is divided like this: Jerry Brady and his immediate family, 30 percent; Jack Brady (Jerry’s brother) and his immediate family, 30 percent; Post Company employees, 40 percent.
2. The Upper Valley edition of the Post Register contains precisely the same content as the regular ediion. The only differences are in the placement of some of the stories. Page two is exactly the same every day, without exception.
Roger Plothow
Editor and Publisher
Post Register
“It’s the exact same just the layout is different” is the same line I was given six years ago.
It was MOST CERTAINLY NOT the same content.
I went so far as to purchase IF copies and compare them, and I invited the woman on the phone who I compplained to to do the same – she ASSURED me there was no difference) – in one case there was a story in the IF edition regarding a Water Master – in the UVE in its place was a story about a returned missionary. I did NOT find either of these stories swapped out on different pages of the two versions. I went so far as to copy and send these pages TO the PR and never heard a word (this is six years ago, I do not remember what the woman I spoke to was named.
In another case there was a story in the IF edition about an auto accident on I15, it was five paragraphs long. In the UVE it was one paragraph long, and the remaining space was filled with an advertisement.
In a third case – the IF edition had a page dedicated to the Home Show – and in the UVE there was no such page – in its place was an interview with local people.
PLUS – I never got a flyer for my friend’s little shop when she opened it (in Idaho Falls).
I complained and was told “Advertisements are placed based on zip code”.
They ARE (or @ least were) different enough that I got disgusted and left.
You can tell me until you’re blue in the face that these papers are the same but when I was receiving mine – they WERE NOT. I assure you. It was consistently not “the same” enough as to discourage me. And when I asked if I could get the IF edition delivered they said “no”.
So I quit the paper. I LIKED The IF edition because that was where I got my local entertainment info. – and yes indeedy – much of it was NOT in any way shape form or layout – in the UVE.
It IS possible enough people quit the paper as to cause the PR to re-think their strategy. (MANY of us who live up here do the bulk of our shopping in IF – I’m going to IF tomorrow as a matter of fact).
Perhaps now the two editions are “the same” – but make no mistake about it – they were NOT six years ago, and if you want second and third and tenth opinions on that from a few of us who live up here – I’ll ask them to come on and back me up on this.
I stand by what I said – the two papers were NOT “the same” when I recieved them appx. six years ago.
It was not my intent to call your memory or claims into question. I don’t dispute your recollection. I can say, without question, that the two editions contain the same content today. That is not necessarily true of advertising, however — advertisers tell us where they want their advertising distributed and we follow their instructions. We have had success with our Upper Valley edition, though I regret you did not share the enthusiasm of others. I encourage you to give the PR another try.
Kindest regards, Roger
I wish our political leaders were as proactive at addressing questions and concerns as our local media.
The PR, River City Weekly, IF Magazine, and a local news channel have all been great at responding to people here.
I should note the exception: Idaho Falls Mayor Jared Fuhriman has extended his ear to all local media if they have questions about the city that he can answer (or find out). Apparently to the point that Paul Menser can even ask about the mayor’s hair gel. 8^)
Do politicians not respond because they consider themselves above a ’stupid blog’ (note that Neal Larson has started a blog), or do they figure they only have to answer to their core voters anyways?
Roger -
I do not enjoy the UVE of the PR, I liked the PR MUCH better before my zip code forced me into getting an edition I don’t like, full of coupons for businesses I don’t frequent.
I had been an avid PR reader for seven years and STILL would be to this day were it not for the fact that I was FORCED into the UVE. I disliked the lay-out, I disliked that the stories were not the same, I disliked that I don’t TRUST that the article I’m reading isn’t a truncated version of the original.
I appreciate your offer – but for the reasons above, I won’t go back. Not unless I could get the non-UVE, which I’ve been told I can’t.
They say “both editions are the same” – but I say “If that’s so – WHY did the PR even start an UVE?”
Thanks for your time!
Joe -
I think politicians are busy people and don’t OFTEN wish to give the impression that they will be there to answer “every” blogger’s questions, or “every” person’s concern. I can’t answer how unworthy a blog might be in their mind – but in MY mind if I were a politician I would probably just put up my own blog and on a weekly or monthly basis answer all questions posed to me (by “all” questions I mean all similar questions).
Just a thought.
As for Butch Otter – I can’t speak for what goes on in the mind of a state LEADER who makes irresponsible comments (which gets nationwide coverage) regarding wolves – a creature which, whether he likes it or not, is considered endangered. By making flippant comments about being the first to get a “wolf tag” he helps make Idahoans look ignorant to outsiders. He DOES represent us after all. Then the whole lot of us Idahoans wonder why the rest of the country won’t “stay out” of Idaho’s “business”.
Never once does it dawn on most people that it might be because Otter’s thoughtless comments reflect poorly on his constituents.
In this regard – I can understand where maybe he is being encouraged to talk less. Maybe THIS is why you’re having trouble getting responses from him. Maybe not. Just a guess.
They say “both editions are the same†– but I say “If that’s so – WHY did the PR even start an UVE?â€
That’s easy – increased revenue. Upper Valley businesses will pay more for advertising that is targeted at their region, and IF businesses don’t necessarily see a benefit from UV advertising.
I think politicians are busy people and don’t OFTEN wish to give the impression that they will be there to answer “every†blogger’s questions…
Consider also: (1) jumping into a thread like this invites responses – if one doesn’t check back very frequently, it can give the impression that one is unresponsive. And if one does check frequently, it can consume one’s free time very quickly, as some here know too well. (2) most people who run for office (like I did) realize how easily something one writes off the cuff can be misinterpreted or even deliberately twisted. Imagine trying to defend everything you’ve ever written that’s been archived somewhere… During the campaign, I managed to get on the wrong side of several folks here with what I thought were neutral and factual comments. They saw it differently – I don’t agree with them, but I can sort of see how they got there. All in all, responding to blogs has a fairly high risk factor.
They say “both editions are the same†– but I say “If that’s so – WHY did the PR even start an UVE?â€
That’s easy – increased revenue. Upper Valley businesses will pay more for advertising that is targeted at their region, and IF businesses don’t necessarily see a benefit from UV advertising.
————–
Which is another way of saying – The papers are NOT the same.
The contention has been that I was told – repeatedly – “both papers are the same”. They aren’t. Some of us find that enough of a turn off that we have, indeed, turned off.
Period.
Being told (as I have) “you’re wrong – both editions are the SAME” is an insult to our eyes and brains.
Quote -
The Upper Valley edition of the Post Register contains precisely the same content as the regular ediion. The only differences are in the placement of some of the stories.
————————–
Not the same. If they were – I’d still be getting the PR. Being forced into an edition I don’t like then being told “it’s the same” has sent me away.
As for responding to blogs – I agree with you. It has happened to everybody I know (whether we’ve run for office or not) that what we’ve written and how it was intrepreted have been as if they are from two different planets.