April Hailstones

Here we are almost into May, and the temperature is in the high fifties... 

...and we get hailstones the size of lima beans!

Where else but in Idaho?

How Idahoans Can Tell Spring Has Arrived

Harbingers of spring in the Gem State:

The Counter-Offensive Begins

Via the Idaho Health Freedom Act, signed into law last week, the Idaho legislature directed the attorney general, Lawrence Wasden, to  "seek injunctive and any other appropriate relief as expeditiously as possible to preserve the rights and property of the residents of the state of Idaho, and to defend as necessary the state of Idaho, its officials, employees and agents in the event that any law or regulation violating the public policy set forth in the Idaho health freedom act...is enacted by any government, subdivision or agency thereof." Hence, notwithstanding that the experts think it's pointless, Idaho has joined 12 other states in filing a lawsuit against the federal government to block implementation of Obamacare.   

The plaintiff states filed a 23-page complaint today in the federal district court for the Northern District of Florida.  They seek declaratory and injunctive relief: a declaration that the 2,409-page law is unconstitutional; and an injunction against its enforcement.  Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 sum up the constitutional issues:

2. The Act represents an unprecedented encroachment on the liberty of individuals living in the Plaintiffs’ respective states, by mandating that all citizens and legal residents of the United States have qualifying healthcare coverage or pay a tax penalty. The Constitution nowhere authorizes the United States to mandate, either directly or under threat of penalty, that all citizens and legal residents have qualifying healthcare coverage. By imposing such a mandate, the Act exceeds the powers of the United States under Article I of the Constitution and violates the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution.

3. In addition, the tax penalty required under the Act, which must be paid by uninsured citizens and residents, constitutes an unlawful capitation or direct tax, in violation of Article I, sections 2 and 9 of the Constitution of the United States.

4. The Act also represents an unprecedented encroachment on the sovereignty of the states.... 

 The two district judges in the Northern District of Florida, Pensacola Division, were appointed by Reagan and Bush the Elder, respectively, so let's hope the forum was well-chosen and that this action will get a fair hearing.  We shall see where this goes.

The 13 plaintiff states are: Alabama, Colorado, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Washington.   Some of these plaintiffs have left very few fingerprints in the annals of rock-ribbed Republicanism (with a capital "R"): Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Washington are all blue states.  This reflects a point Rush Limbaugh made yesterday: the bipartisanship in the debate over Obamacare has been on the side of the opposition. 

How pointless would this exercise be, I wonder, if all the states -- or even just a simple majority -- joined the suit.

March 4, 1863: Idaho Territory

147 years ago today, Abraham Lincoln took time out from dealing with the Civil War to sign into law an act of Congress creating the Idaho Territory.  The territory contained what are now the states of Idaho, Montana and most of Wyoming.  Its first capital was Lewiston, Idaho.

But then, in 1864, the capital moved to Boise -- and has stayed here ever since.  To make it up to the bereft citizens of northern Idaho, Idaho's land grant university -- the University of Idaho, my law school alma mater -- was situated in Moscow, the seat of Latah County.  

Incidentally, Latah County is the only county in the entire nation that was created by an act of Congress.  

It's Been One of Those Months

LEX NON ORITUR EX INJURIA
The law does not arise from a mere injury. 
...except in Idaho.

LEX NON FAVET DELICATORUM VOTIS
The law does not favor the wishes of the dainty.
...except in Idaho.

LEX NON PATITUR ABSURDUM
The law does not suffer an absurdity.
...except in Idaho.

LEX NEMINEM COGIT AD VANA SEU INUTILIA PERAGENDA
The law compels no one to do vain or useless things.
...except in Idaho.

LEX NON CURAT DE MINIMIS
The law does not care about trifles.
...except in Idaho.

A Bill to Watch

SB-1270, popularly known as the "freedom of conscience" bill, was introduced in the Idaho Senate on Friday.  Its co-sponsors are: Sen. Chuck Winder; Sen. Leland Heinrich; Sen. Russell Fulcher; Rep. Thomas Loertscher; Rep. Erik Simpson; Rep. Raul Labrador; Rep. Joe Palmer; and Rep. James Ruchti. 

The bill would create a new section in Title 18, Idaho's criminal code, immunizing from liability health care professionals who refuse to engage in specified activities that violate their consciences.  It went to the Senate State Affairs Committee today.  This is the text of the bill:

AN ACT RELATING TO ABORTION AND CONTRACEPTIVES; AMENDING CHAPTER 6, TITLE 18, IDAHO CODE, BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION 18-611, IDAHO CODE, TO DEFINE TERMS, TO PROVIDE FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE FOR HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS, TO PROVIDE IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY, TO PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION AND TO PROHIBIT DISCRIMINATION; AND PROVIDING SEVERABILITY.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Idaho:
SECTION 1. That Chapter 6, Title 18, Idaho Code, be, and the same is hereby amended by the addition thereto of a NEW SECTION, to be known and designated as Section 18-611, Idaho Code, and to read as follows:
18-611. FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE FOR HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS. (1) As used in this section:
(a) "Conscience" means the religious, moral or ethical principles sincerely held by any person.
(b) "Health care professional" means any person licensed, certified or registered by the state of Idaho to deliver health care.
(c) "Health care service" means an abortion, dispensation of an abortifacient drug or drugs that may act as abortifacients, human embryonic stem cell research, human embryo cloning, euthanasia or assisted suicide.
(d) "Provide" means to counsel, advise, perform, dispense, assist in or refer for any health care service.
(2) No health care professional shall be required to provide any health care service that violates his or her conscience.
(3) Employers of health care professionals shall reasonably accommodate the conscience rights of their employees as provided in this section, upon written notification by the employee. Such notice shall suffice without specification of the reason therefor.
(4) No health care professional or employer of the health care professional shall be civilly, criminally or administratively liable for the health care professional declining to provide health care services that violate his or her conscience.
(5) It shall be unlawful to discriminate against any health care professional based upon his or her declining to provide a health care service that violates his or her conscience, unless the accommodation of a health care professional’s conscience rights creates an undue hardship on the employer. If an employer determines that an undue hardship is created, the employer shall make an effort to work with the affected health care professional to find a reasonable accommodation of the health care professional’s conscience rights.
(6) The provisions of this section do not allow a health care professional or employer of the health care professional to refuse to provide health care services because of the patient’s race, color, religion, sex, age, disability or national origin.
(7) Nothing in this section shall affect the rights of conscience provided for in section 18-612, Idaho Code [refusal to perform abortions], to the extent that those rights are broader in scope than those provided for in this section.
SECTION 2. The provisions of this act are hereby declared to be severable and if any provision of this act or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance is declared invalid for any reason, such declaration shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this act.

This bill is by no means perfect.  I, for one, regret that the bill dignifies abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, cloning and physician-assisted suicide with the title of "health care services": words shape thoughts, and rhetorical concessions, regardless of their political expediency, have consequences.  Also, the bill does not go far enough.  There is no protection for health care professionals who refuse in conscience to provide other services the Church teaches are morally reprehensible, such as artificial insemination and fertilization procedures and artificial contraceptives.  Could this conspicuous omission be the result of the indifference of too many Catholics to the Church's firmly-held teachings on these subjects?  There is no doubt that for decades, we Catholics have been lying down on the job.

Despite these flaws in SB-1270, it is still a step in the right direction.  Let it be the first of many steps in the right direction. 

Note to Idahoans: your legislators need to hear from you!

Autumn Is Here

You know summer is well over when irrigation season ends. The canals are running dry; winter will soon follow.

Right-Wing Extremists Unite: The Boise Tea Party

The organizers of today's Tea Party estimated over a thousand in attendance, including your humble correspondent, her aunt and her cousin. A pretty sizable mob of right-wing rabble, headed by a bunch of flag-waving bikers, marched from the Boise Depot, down Capitol Boulevard and gathered at Capitol Park to listen to music and speakers. It wasn't as big a crowd as the one that gathered in Washington, D.C., but attendance far outpaced anything liberal protest organizers have ever been able to drum up in Boise since I've lived here. Nevertheless, although there was some press coverage, I didn't see any news crews at Capitol Park.

Unfortunately, the Statehouse is under renovations, and fenced off, so there weren't any really good vantage points to take pictures from; but I did get lots of good shots. The hardest part was to choose from among them.

Some dangerous extremists.

Veterans in the crowd.


Davy Crockett and Benjamin Franklin pose for the cameras.

From across the centuries, Patrick Henry addresses the rally: his famous "Give me liberty or give me death" speech before the Second Virginia Convention, March 23, 1775.

Patriotic pooch.

Protesters sign the Declaration of Independence. See a familiar signature at top left of the signature sheet, big enough for the Messiah to see without corrective lenses?

Here it is again, just in case you can't.


Next installment: dangerous right-wing extremists exercise their First Amendment rights.

Boise Tea Party: Right-Wing Extremists Exercise their First Amendment Rights

Every protest rally has its cranks, and the Boise Tea Party was no different. But, as Zombietime out of the Bay area documents, a liberal rally is almost all cranks. The vast majority of the protest signs at their shindigs are either pre-printed and mass-produced by liberal/anarchist attack groups, or homemade by illiterates, full of obscenities, incoherent phrases and copious spelling errors. By contrast, nearly all the signs I saw at the Tea Party -- most of which were homemade -- were pretty good, and some were quite clever. I saw a couple of rambling and hard-to-read signs (not including those of two counterprotesters that I saw) but no obscenities, and nothing that looked like it was executed by a kindergartner on crack.

Some samples:

This guy must have a pretty high tolerance level if his first time being ashamed of his President wasn't the Clinton era -- making Obama REALLY bad.

Violating the separation of Church and state on public property by citing to the Bible. Incidentally, the rally opened with a prayer in which -- horror of horrors -- Jesus Christ was invoked in a public park!!!

One of many signs calling for term limits:

The "Don't Tread on Me" symbol -- the one the Obama administration thinks is a banner of domestic terrorism -- was everywhere.

Almost all the bikers -- all of whose bikes, incidentally, were all shined up and in excellent condition -- had "Don't Tread on Me" flags.

There were quite a few signs calling for no government funding of abortion. Here was one of the best:


The Obama logo was widely lampooned:

ACORN was also targeted. The sign on the right below: "The Liberty Tree Did Not Grow from an ACORN."

Next to the "ACORNS ARE NUTS" sign: "HONK If I'm Paying Your MORTGAGE!"

The mainstream Obamabot media, weighed down with its many offenses against republicanism (with a small "r") did not escape notice:

Three of my personal favorites:

Liberals -- especially those with power and influence -- are always saying that "speaking truth to power" is an act of virtue, and that dissent is the highest form of patriotism and the greatest act of love for one's country. On this occasion at least, they have a point.

URGENT Prayer Request

Please stop and pray for the safe return of the Idaho soldier who is now in the hands of the Taliban.

Pfc. Bowe R. Bergdahl, 23, of Ketchum, Idaho, went missing from his base in eastern Afghanistan on June 30th. This picture is from a Taliban propaganda video.

This is a case for St. Joseph.

Remember, O most chaste spouse of the Virgin Mary, that never was it known that anyone who implored your help and sought your intercession were left unassisted. Full of confidence in your power, I fly unto you and beg your protection. Despise not, O Guardian of the Redeemer, my humble supplication, but in your bounty, hear and answer me. Amen.

Ascension Thursday Sunday

The Diocese of Boise, which encompasses the entire state of Idaho, and is a suffragan of the Archdiocese of Portland, is among those in which the feast of the Ascension is observed on the seventh Sunday of Easter. Yesterday, the priest who offered the Mass I attended for Ascension Thursday Sunday gave a homily in which, to the general acclaim of the congregation, he (a) held up to ridicule those who think the feast of the Ascension should be celebrated on its proper day; (b) gave the "excellent" reasons why the feast has been transferred to the Sunday following; (c) treated us to his theory on why some bishops will not transfer the feast.

Father told the story of a visitor from another diocese who called the parish office to ask about the Mass schedule for Ascension Thursday, and became indignant when told that we do not celebrate Ascension Thursday in this diocese, declaring that in her home diocese, the feast is celebrated on "the proper day." This was supposed to be funny. Father explained that the reason the feast was transferred was because so many people were not attending Mass on Ascension Thursday; and as it is an important feast, and it's good for people to celebrate the Ascension, it is better to transfer it to a day when people will attend Mass. He gave us the benefit of his opinion that the reason some bishops will not transfer the feast is so they can take up an extra collection. All of this was greeted with laughter and approval.

The feast was transferred about fifteen years ago, so I no longer have any independent recollection on this point, but just to begin with, I question the truth of the assertion that people were not attending Mass on Ascension Thursday. I have never heard the sound of crickets in the church on other holy days of obligation that fall on weekdays. Ash Wednesday and Easter Triduum services are always standing room only, even though these fall on weekdays and are not days of obligation. Furthermore, there are plenty of people going to Mass every day, whether they have to or not. The late Msgr. Donoghue's 7:00 a.m. daily Masses were nearly always packed to the rafters; and since St. John's Cathedral started offering First Saturday Masses at 8:30 a.m., so many people have been attending that this Mass had to be moved from the tiny day chapel up to the main Cathedral. In such circumstances, I don't see why people should suddenly stay away in droves on Ascension Thursday.

Even if it is true that people were skipping Ascension Thursday without a good reason, that would seem to have been the cue for priests and bishops to do something other than relieve the faithful of a requirement they were failing to take seriously. What mother dispenses her kids from the requirement that they go to school, just because they don't want to do it? Yet, on the admission from the pulpit of a priest who supports the transfer of the feast, this is exactly what has been done -- to the considerable discredit, it seems to me, of those responsible for obtaining the indult. Should priests and bishops not have viewed a widespread failure to attend Ascension Thursday Mass as a symptom of spiritual infirmity, and tried to incite their flocks to greater zeal, and rekindle the ardor that had cooled to the point of making people feel easy in their consciences about shirking a serious obligation? Is it not a sign of sloth on their part that they chose instead to lower their expectations to the point where they were already met?

Or perhaps it was sloth mixed with contempt for the Great Unwashed. Quite honestly, the explanation for the transfer of the feast is downright insulting. The message is that we, the laity, are incapable of being held to the minimal standard of having to observe a holy day of obligation during the week. This is one of the outstanding fruits of elitist snobbery within the hierarchy, brought to us precisely by those who claim to be champions of the teachings of Vatican II. Is catering to mediocrity really what the fathers of the Second Vatican Council had in mind when they sought to place greater emphasis on the dignity of the laity and their mission in the world? How did we ever get such a crop of bishops and priests who have so much contempt for the souls under their care?

The Novena between the Ascension and Pentecost is under way. The Holy Spirit came to lift us out of the mud and misery that we are of ourselves, without the help of grace. I vote we make the restoration of Ascension Thursday, and the lifting of ourselves out of mediocrity, one of our intentions.

Taxed Enough Already!

Five hundred Tea Parties in fifty states -- including Idaho. There is a tea party in Boise today at the Capitol. I cannot, alas, attend due to my work schedule, but I herewith register my support.

Decreasing the Surplus Population

Everybody agrees it wasn't okay for Scrooge to hate the poor and the helpless. It wasn't okay for him to be in favor of prisons and workhouses. Most of all, it wasn't okay for him to be in favor of decreasing the "surplus population" of the suffering poor.

But what is unacceptable for a character of fiction is apparently acceptable for the people's elected representatives. And so we have the under-the-radar, blandly-named S1114, which passed unanimously in the Idaho Senate on March 3d. This bill would allow the withholding of treatment in cases where such treatment is deemed "medically inappropriate" or "futile" -- notwithstanding the directive, advance or otherwise, of a patient or his representative. Consider the following new language proposed to be added to existing law (emphases added):

WITHHOLDING OR WITHDRAWING HEALTH TREATMENT – VOLUNTARY ETHICS COMMITTEE REVIEW.

(1) If the attending physician believes that the treatment requested by a patient, the patient’s advance directive or the patient’s surrogate decision maker is medically inappropriate or futile, the attending physician or health care facility in which the patient is admitted may request that an ethics committee of the health care facility review the facts and circumstances to determine if the requested treatment is medically inappropriate or futile.

(2) The ethics committee shall be comprised of at least two (2) physicians, and such other persons as the health care facility shall appoint. The attending physician may appear at the ethics committee meeting to explain the facts and circumstances of the case but may not participate as a member of the ethics committee.

(3) The patient or his legally authorized surrogate decision maker shall be given the opportunity to attend the ethics committee meeting and explain the basis for his or her request for treatment. The patient or surrogate decision maker shall be given prior notice of the ethics committee meeting at least twentyfour [sic] (24) hours before the ethics committee meeting unless the patient or surrogate decision maker waives such prior notice. The patient or surrogate decision maker shall not be entitled to be present during the ethics committee’s deliberations. [Sounds rather like a criminal proceeding, doesn't it?]

The ethics committee shall provide to the patient or surrogate decision maker a written explanation of the ethics committee’s determination.

(4) If the ethics committee agrees with the attending physician that the treatment requested by the patient, the patient’s advance directive or surrogate decision maker is medically inappropriate or futile, the attending physician and health care facility shall take reasonable action to assist the patient or surrogate decision maker to arrange the patient’s transfer within fifteen (15) days to another health care provider selected by the patient or surrogate decision maker who is willing to assume the treatment of the patient. The health care facility shall provide reasonably necessary lifesustaining [sic] treatment within the capacity and capability of the health care facility until the patient is transferred or until the expiration of the fifteen (15) day period described above, whichever occurs first. Following the patient’s transfer or upon expiration of the fifteen (15) day period described above, whichever occurs first, the attending physician and health care facility shall not be obligated to provide additional treatment that has been determined to be medically inappropriate or futile by the ethics committee. The patient or his surrogate decision maker shall remain responsible for the costs incurred in transferring the patient to another health care provider in addition to the cost of any health care provided prior to the transfer.

(5) If the patient or surrogate decision maker disagrees with the ethics committee determination, the patient or surrogate decision maker shall cooperate with the health care facility to arrange the transfer of the patient to another health care provider within fifteen (15) days following the ethics committee determination. The patient or surrogate decision maker may petition the district court in which the health care facility is located to lengthen the time to effect an appropriate transfer; provided however, that the district court shall extend the time only if the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there is a reasonable probability that the patient or surrogate decision maker will be able to transfer the patient to another qualified health care provider who is willing to provide the treatment requested by the patient or surrogate decision maker within the extension requested by the patient or surrogate decision maker.

(6) If an ethics committee has determined that the requested treatment is medically inappropriate or futile, but the patient is later readmitted to the health care facility within six (6) months following such ethics committee determination, the attending physician may rely on the prior ethics committee determination and withhold or withdraw treatment consistent with the prior ethics committee determination if the attending physician and one (1) physician member of the ethics committee determine that the patient’s condition either has not improved or has deteriorated since the prior ethics committee determination and that the prior ethics committee determination still applies to the patient’s condition, and they document their conclusion in the medical chart.

Notice, however, the ease with which patients may be -- shall we say -- permitted to die. A "surrogate decision maker" -- that is, a person empowered to make care decisions on behalf of a patient who is incapable of making decisions for himself --

shall not have authority to consent to or refuse health care contrary to the patient’s advance directives or wishes expressed by the patient while the patient was capable of consenting to his own health care[.]

Furthermore, a court-appointed guardian of a patient MAY consent to the withholding or withdrawal of treatment ("other than appropriate nutrition, hydration or medication") where:

(b) The respondent [patient] is chronically and irreversibly comatose;
(c) The provision of such treatment would merely prolong dying, would not be effective in ameliorating or correcting all of the respondent’s lifethreatening [sic] conditions, or would otherwise be futile in terms of the survival of the respondent; or
(d) The provision of such treatment would be virtually futile in terms of the survival of the respondent, and the treatment itself under such circumstances would be inhumane.

Notice, too, that although a court-appointed guardian may not withhhold "appropriate" nutrition and hydration; and although the bill in its terms purports not to legalize or condone euthanasia, the bill clearly contemplates that "artificial nutrition and hydration" -- defined as "supplying food and water through a conduit, such as a tube or intravenous line, where the recipient is not required to chew or swallow voluntarily, [not including] assisted feeding, such as spoon feeding or bottle feeding" -- may be withdrawn:

Individuals caring for a patient for whom artificial lifesustaining [sic] procedures or artificially administered nutrition and hydration are withheld or withdrawn shall provide comfort care as defined in section 39-4502, Idaho Code.

"Comfort care" is defined as "treatment and care to provide comfort and cleanliness" as well as "dignity. It is not clear how this is possible for persons who are dying of hunger and thirst, but then can we expect the legislature to think of everything?

For the moment, let's pass over the utter moral bankruptcy of this proposed legislation and turn to some practical matters. Is this proposed legislation less likely to create more problems than it solves, or more likely? Is it less likely to spawn endless litigation -- notwithstanding the immunity clauses, which are not set forth here -- or more?

The late Fr. Richard Neuhaus once made the point (in Death on a Friday Afternoon) that a mark and effect of our fallen nature is that we make things so much harder than they need to be, or should be. Couldn't we take most of the complications out of these issues by just simply hewing to the Natural Law that has been handed down to us, rather than trying to force the square pegs of life and death and their attendant realities into the round holes of our whims?

Wouldn't it be much, much, much easier to just restore LIFE as the default setting?

H/T The Redoubtable One.

The Morning Commute

I just learned something new this morning: Franklin Road between Cole and Vista, and most of Capitol Boulevard, qualify as "back streets" not worthy of snow and ice removal. There was not one grain of sand or drop of de-icer even in the intersections: it was a skating rink all the way into downtown. Coworkers slipping and sliding in from various parts of the valley reported similar conditions.

The Ada County Highway District is in charge of winter road maintenance. No wonder so many people have signs in their front yards showing "ACHD" in a circle with a line through it.

Must Be Caused by Global Warming

So it's 22 degrees and overcast right now in Boise, and we're not expected to break freezing for at least the next week. People are breaking out the heavy winter gear all over the country. Vegas just got snow for the first time in 30 years.

Didn't Al Gore just say something funny about global warming?

Prestige WITH Merit

It's been a long time since a priest has been raised to the rank of Monsignor in this diocese. But now we have several new Monsignors -- and one of them is

-->Fr. -- whoops, I mean, Msgr. John Donoghue above, about whom you have previously read in this space. Msgr. Donoghue has been a priest for well over half a century, and served as the administrator of our diocese the last time we were between bishops. The man has come near to death several times in the last year or two, but the fight has not gone out of him yet. He still offers Mass weekday mornings at 7:00, even though he is now too weak to make it to the church without help, needs a walker (not only to walk, but also to carry his oxygen tank), and must celebrate sitting down. (Take note, all you young priests and seminarians who don't like getting up early.)
Congratulations to Msgr. Donoghue on this well-deserved honor. Even though we know he doesn't set nearly as much store by this as he does by the even greater honor he hopes to win when he finally reaches the end of his labors.

Creeping Toward Winter

A sure sign that autumn is here, and the mercury on the thermometer will soon be dropping, even amid summer heat's last hurrah: the end of irrigation season.

Dozens of irrigation canals like this one, and countless ditches, run all over Southern Idaho, and even the city of Boise. When the water starts flowing, you know the grays of winter will soon give way to green, growing things; when the water recedes, you know winter is on the way back. The Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District's main artery shuts down today; by this time next week, the canals and ditches will all be dry.

After weeks of whining and moaning about the heat (oppressive for Idaho, hovering around 100), pretty soon now we'll be able to settle back into our usual routine of whining about the cold.