[Vision2020] Fwd: MCA Debates

[A Latah County Constituent]

I agree Mr. Solomon.

A candidate's willingness to openly discuss and debate issues important to 
his/her constituents reflects heavily on that candidate's integrity or lack 
thereof.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

> What Mr. Trail continues to avoid discussing is whether he is willing 
> to debate UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. I have twice proffered the 
> invitation to debate under mutually agreed upon terms. On the first 
> occasion he refused, then he reversed himself and agreed to meet in 
> the MCA debate, then reversed again and withdrew. He has yet to reply 
> to my second invitation, preferring to hide behind his party's smoke 
> screen generated to confuse the issues regarding the MCA event.
> 
> I have never concerned myself with the organizational/partisan 
> make-up of any group willing to host a discussion of issues of 
> concern to voters of this county. I will gladly present myself in 
> front of any assembly no matter what their agenda or affiliation 
> (schedule permitting). All are citizens who vote in this district and 
> grasping fully everyone's concerns and questions is a most important 
> aspect of representing this district fairly in the Legislature.
> 
> Still waiting, Tom.
> 
> Mark Solomon
> 
> 
> 
> At 12:08 PM -0700 10/24/04, Tom Trail wrote:
> >>>Visionaries:   There has been a great deal of discussion concerning the
> >
> >   MCA debates.  This is my reply to Bruce Livingston.
> >
> >>>
> >>>Bruce--It has been an trying time I believe for everyone involved in trying
> >>>to work out arrangements for the MCA debates.  We have the greatest respect
> >>>for MCA and it's goals.  However, it is the only organizing group 
> >>>with a specific political agenda.  MCA's charter clearly states 
> >>>that one of the
> >>>organizations goals is to sponsor and endorse candidates.  All of the other
> >>>organizers of the other 15 other debates are non-political.
> >>>
> >>>Even the Presidential Debates are organized by non-political 
> >>>organizations with
> >>>no political aims unlike MCA.  The Moscow League of Women Voters is a good
> >>>example.  Even with a non-political sponsor, the last Presidential debates
> >>>took considerable time and at least 30 pages of agreed upon 
> >>>protocol.  So one
> >>>of our concerns was the "political" nature of MCA.  We recommended that
> >>>Nathan Alford and the Daily News serve as the organizing sponsor 
> >>>of the It is my understanding that Mr. Alford and the Daily News 
> >>>accepted.
> >>>This would have met our criterion of a truly "independent" 
> >>>sponsoring organization.  However, the criticism from MCA was that 
> >>>Mr. Alfred and the
> >>>Daily News was "too independent."    I talked with Nancy Chaney, a 
> >>>MCA member over a week ago, and she said having Mr. Alford and the 
> >>>Daily News handlethe debate sounded like a good idea to her.
> >>>
> >>>The situation became complicated with MCA President Lois Blackburn 
> >>>questioned
> >>>the integrity of Jeff Harkins and the Moscow Lions Club for 
> >>>sponsoring two debates.  Jeff specifically asked Mark Boehen of 
> >>>the Moscow Lions Club to serveas the moderator to avoid any 
> >>>possible conflict that might have been perceivedas partisan.  I've 
> >>>been a member of the Moscow Rotary Club for 30 years and all
> >>>of our service clubs are non-partisan.   Ms. Blackburn's response 
> >>>further mudded the waters.  Mr. Harkins integrity was questioned, 
> >>>and he has been
> >>>threatened that he would lose votes if he didn't participate. I've also
> >>>received several similar phone calls.  The last caller simply said, "If you
> >>>don't participate, we'll get you."  I will not be participating in 
> >>>the debate
> >>>because of the reasons outlined above, and with threats of 
> >>>punishment for not
> >>>attending.  Mr. Bennett will also not be attending.
> >>>
> >>>The entire affair has not been well managed and we have been unable to 
agree
> >>>upon the protocols which would allow us to participate in the debate.  
Rules
> >>>for debate format orginally conveyed to GOP candidates were 
> >>>changed.  Exclusion of unopposed candidates was also not 
> >>>acceptable since they as elected officialsaddress the same issues 
> >>>as candidates with opposition.  I hope we have learned a lesson 
> >>>from this experience.  Both Mr. Harkins and
> >
> >   I have continued to get harassing phone calls.
> >
> >>>
> >>>Rep. Tom Trail
> >
> >--
> >Dr. Tom Trail
> >International Trails
> >1375 Mt. View Rd.
> >Moscow, Id. 83843
> >Tel:  (208) 882-6077
> >Fax:  (208) 882-0896
> >e mail ttrail at moscow.com
> 
> _____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> 


---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
           http://www.fsr.net/