I’m responding to Mr. Ron Kokish’s reply to my original May 14 letter regarding the attempt by this government to control and possibly censor the Internet.Mr. Kokish, while your letter is well written, and has some valid points, you appear to miss the original point of my letter. Microsoft, Google and Yahoo have all demonstrated support for the so-called net neutrality by this government. I am not sure of the position of HP and Qwest, but Comcast is definitely against net neutrality. Comcast has been embroiled in this situation in part due to the argument that they own “their pipes” in the overall structure of the Internet. They have been attempting to control and throttle bandwidth hogs that have unfairly used Comcast bandwidth, yet charged the same service fees as moderate to light users of the Internet. I do not see a problem with this. A principal argument regarding net neutrality is that Comcast and other ISPs could control the content and websites that users of their services can see and choose to visit in favor of content and services that Comcast desires to provide. This is a valid argument. But I feel this government has entered the situation using the noble concept of net neutrality as cover for something far more insidious and nefarious.I and many others believe this government desires to ultimately control the ability of people to freely and instantly communicate with each other and even censor anything the government feels is objectionable, such as political dissent. This would silence bloggers, political pundits, commentators and even our personal e-mail. Some might think this to be a good idea, until their personal political view is inevitably silenced as well.You mention many of the very sectors of our economy that have already fallen under the control of this government. I believe the Internet is about to succumb to government takeover as well. You mention balance of power and the Constitution. This government clearly does not believe in either. The Dear Leader is on record stating that the Constitution represents negative liberties. Government never innovates. It controls. Especially this administration.Lee PerkinsGlenwood Springs
Two “official” polls have been conducted over the last three years, both generated, and paid for, by HG. Having read both polls, I concluded that both were designed to elicit a prescribed response: pro wilderness (results were 65 percent plus for wilderness).Although both polls were conducted legitimately (RBI Strategies and Research), both were telephone based, and quite verbose. I don’t know about you, but when I am asked to listen to a question and respond with a specific set of answers, I am usually overwhelmed, unless the question is succinct. A listener may focus on a few key words, not the overall question, and the caller’s inflection can sway the answer. Since I didn’t hear these polls, I’m speculating, but after reading each question, while trying to keep an open mind, I would have been apt to reply as “for” additional wilderness, even though I believe our forest has enough.Where the polls were conducted is certainly another point of contention. Most of the calls were to Front Range residents, not to residents in the affected counties, and no information has been listed as to the hours/days calls were made. Four local newspaper polls, while not “official” or “scientific,” were straightforward, primarily covered the affected counties, and were consistently 70 percent plus against HG. What’s the answer? I wish I knew a way to conduct an unbiased poll. Perhaps a collaborative effort in writing the questions, and a prescribed tone with which to read them? Or, a vote on the matter, also with collaborated writing? Since neither of these is likely, our chance(s) to affect this proposal are at the upcoming public forums being held by Congressman Jared Polis:Tuesday, June 1: 5:30-7 p.m. Boulder Public LibraryThursday, June 3: 5:30-7 p.m. Battle Mountain High School, EdwardsFriday, June 5: CMC Breckenridge campusIf you live in Eagle, Summit, Garfield, Pitkin or Gunnison counties, this proposal affects you. Come to one or all of these forums to voice your opinion, and/or go to: http://www.polis.house.gov to let Jared Polis know what you think.John HembelBasalt
Right now, kids have more mercury in their bodies than ever before in history. More kids have asthma than ever before. A significant part of the reason for this is the burning of coal to create electricity. It’s time to try to move away from this dirty resource, which also adversely affects climate change. Fortunately, you have a chance to help do that by voting for Dave Munk for Holy Cross board. Dave will steer our utility in the right direction toward cleaner-burning energy sources. Please vote for Dave via mail-in ballot. Chris LaneBasalt
If you’ve not already received your ballot to elect two board members for the Holy Cross Electric you will shortly. Please vote for Dave Munk. He brings 15 years of experience working with utilities of all sizes to design and implement successful energy efficiency programs. Dave believes Holy Cross Energy would provide the best possible service at the best possible price. He believes delivering the best service means developing strategies and policies that use resources most efficiently while identifying resources that reduce environmental harm.In the other race you have two great candidates to choose from, and either will contribute greatly to advancing clean energy goals on the Holy Cross board. Last, vote no on the geographic re-districting question. It seeks to reduce your ability to shape the future of the Holy Cross board. Jennifer HamiltonCarbondale
Holy Cross Energy recently sent out ballots for elections for board members whose terms are up. I urge Holy Cross Energy customers to vote the incumbents back to the board. If Munk is elected it may cause your energy rates to go up. Holy Cross Energy is one of the highest if not the highest REA in the state to commit so much time and money to green power. Holy Cross Energy is also ahead of the game when it comes to public utilities. We all know that green energy is expensive, and Holy Cross Energy has committed a lot of time and money towards green energy. A vote for Munk would lead to higher energy costs. And Congress is still pushing forward with cap and trade, and if they ram that down our throats like the health care bill our rates will greatly increase. Munk plus cap and trade means higher electricity rates for everyone. Remember: Elections have consequences. We cannot afford a term of Munk. Bob NovessParachute
It’s election time once again for the members of Holy Cross electric. If you pay your electric bill to Holy Cross you are an owner of that company and hold your energy future in your hands. You can determine your future bills, your environment, your power and your democracy. The way to do that is to vote for Dave Munk when you get your mail-in ballot. Dave is a longtime valley resident with a young family and deep experience in energy issues. He is committed to listening to your perspective, increasing Holy Cross’ efforts on efficiency (which save you money) and clean power, which keeps prices stable and our air clean. Also, please also vote for co-opwide elections (a no vote on the ballot question). Board members represent us all, so you should be able to vote for them. There is no disputing that HC has done well for itself and its members. It is now time to take it the next step: Doing great for its members. To do that it needs new leadership. Dave Munk is ideally suited to take that step.Please vote.Artie RothmanCarbondale
After reading Ed Grange’s letter to the editor, I must admit my adage is the simple one – “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. By the wildest interpretation imaginable, there is nothing broke about Holy Cross Energy. In fact, it has one of the most notable reputations in the state and nation as a forward-looking, progressive energy cooperative. That fact is not by chance but rather comes from the high character and responsibility of board, management and employees.The two directors standing for election in June are both skilled, successful, experienced business leaders in their respective communities. They bring those same attributes to the Holy Cross board table each and every month. Campaigning, as we all know, allows the luxury of focusing on high profile issues, but the reality of governance is broad-based, balanced and flexible enough to react to changing circumstances. The current focus on renewable energy, especially solar as it stands today, is probably economically unsustainable over the long haul as subsidization at the federal, state and local level is so substantial. However, CORE, EVAS and Holy Cross Energy have made a commitment over the past several years to back these renewable projects until such time as newer technology or R& D provides efficiencies that make them competitive in the energy matrix. There is no finer color than green especially as we emerge from a seemingly endless winter of snow and cold. Reliability is the number one requirement that Holy Cross strives for so that our members can achieve the varied and uninterrupted lifestyles they choose. Holy Cross Energy has a solid image with its members so give credit where credit is due and vote for Bob Starodoj and Mike Glass.Tom TurnbullCarbondale
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
Roaring Fork Schools volunteers who have already completed a comparable background check through an approved entity would be good to go.