Printed on: October 11, 2008



Printed on: October 11, 2008Campaign propagandaReceived Sept. 22, cleared Oct. 3It is election year again and the political propaganda has started.I recently received a form letter from the Republicans with a facsimile signature by John McCain. The letter is a good example of using scare tactics and mass propaganda against the Democrats by use of phrases such as "... circumstances so dire," "... their left-wing special interest allies. ... stepping up their cynical campaign of distortions and outright lies."It concludes that if the Democrats win "... your family will face a future of higher taxes, more government spending, socialized medicine, a tried-and-failed energy policy and surrender in Iraq."The party does not want you to research the above statements. A simple fact check shows how this letter is misleading. The Republicans have controlled the White House for eight years and the Congress for seven of the last eight years. From a balanced budget under Bill Clinton, the U.S. now has a budget deficit of $9.7 trillion. The current financial crisis, due to the laissez-faire business attitude by this current administration and its pending bailout, will now require the deficit cap to be $11.7 trillion. We are in a war in Iraq that has cost the U.S. $1 trillion not to mention the over 4,000 U.S. lives lost. Yet we continue the war even though the invasion of Iraq was based on total falsehoods. McCain is nothing more than another President George W. Bush. (Word count: 230)ED MAROHNIdaho Falls1Printed on: August 28, 2009Discourse, not propagandaUsing labels to defame each other does not serve the country's best interests.---When an Idaho teacher walked into her class after President Barack Obama's election and stated that democracy was dead, I was shocked. Her role is to teach objectively, not to promote political propaganda.When kids on a school bus shouted, "Kill Obama," what were the parents teaching them?Yet despite the rhetoric about the death of this country, we are still functioning as a democracy.People need some timeouts instead of uncontrolled anger -- something kindergarten children have learned.Letters to newspapers, e-mails, blogs and talk shows consistently misuse political terms and stand in the way of rational discourse. Take the labels of conservatism and liberalism.Any college student taking a course in political science knows the basic definitions of the two terms and that there is a wide range of meaning on a continuum of various political philosophies. Normally the spectrum of the two American party philosophies falls between extreme right and extreme left as exhibited below. Communism and nazism/fascism are both the antithesis to democracy.Webster's defines conservatism as a disposition in politics to preserve what is established. The dictionary also defines liberalism as a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of man, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties.Our nation needs both for a vibrant and meaningful democracy, not extremes.Being a "liberal" is not bad; however, the far right has vilified that term and made that a mantra for defeating Democrats at the voting booth. Liberalism is not communism, nor is conservatism equal to nazism. But things have gotten quirky with the far right wing of the Republican Party. Look at the labels being used against President Obama. First he was called a socialist, then a communist, and now he's being labeled as similar to Hitler by the de facto leader of the Republican Party, Rush Limbaugh -- a talk show host and entertainer who makes millions by attacking Democrats.His Aug. 6 radio show must have confused his followers, the "ditto heads"; one can't be a communist and a Nazi at the same time.Hitler would probably roll over in his grave to find out that a black man has been labeled akin to him. His master race of white followers tried to exterminate those who were not of the Aryan race -- a misused label by the Nazis.We don't need political propaganda; we need intelligent dialogue with accurate facts.Marohn is a retired businessman who served as an Army captain in Vietnam. You can write to him ecmida@.2Printed on: July 20, 2010Seeking visionary leadershipThe deep budget cuts to education prove that Idaho needs a change at the top, writes Ed Marohn.After 30 years as an executive with a German company of 110,000 employees worldwide, I retired and returned to Idaho -- where I grew up and was educated from grade school through college.I hadn't been back since 1968 -- the year I graduated from the University of Idaho. After serving in the Vietnam War as an Army captain, I earned my master's degree and acquired Dutch language proficiency through the State Department's Foreign Service for my NATO assignment to the Netherlands.I had great opportunities due to my solid education in Idaho. But I now question whether today's youth will have the same educational opportunities after the recent budget cuts.Idahoans should be concerned about its leaders in the state Legislature. With the ruling GOP majority, Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter slashed the educational budget by $185 million, moving from good governance to the dark side of special interests and personal ideological pursuits -- nothing less than a travesty for our youth.In the real world of work, unlike Idaho's GOP fantasy world, education is the key to success. A well-rounded education provided by well-compensated professional teachers is necessary.To be hired by a large corporation -- even entry level -- normally requires a college degree. Without good secondary education, the chances for failing in college is significant. I managed sales forces consisting of both Americans and non-Americans -- all had BA/BS degrees; many had MA/MS/MBA degrees. Many were bilingual, in French, Italian, Spanish, German, Dutch and Portuguese.We live in an international world of more than 6.6 billion people where the U.S. is only 4.6 percent of that total; if we expect young Americans to compete in that arena, they need great education. Slashing budgets and reducing pay to competent teachers move Idaho's kids backward instead of propelling them forward. That's a blatant abuse by our elected officials.Yet the Republican Party can spend hundreds of thousands of taxpayers dollars on the Don Quixote-like adventure of frivolously suing the federal government over the medical reform law and to ensure their own pay raises.The 1.6 million people of Idaho are now under the control of special interest groups and meaningless ideological rhetoric when there should be actual statesmen governing for the good of the citizenry.In business, Otter would have been dismissed for his unfounded and dogmatic decision making. Thus, Idahoans should fire him and those who supported the huge budget cuts to education by voting them out. We need thoughtful dialogue in the state Legislature, not political jargon that occurs when one party completely controls the power.We need a visionary and a leader as governor -- one who seeks the real needs of Idaho and not one's personal agenda.Marohn is a retired businessman and served as a captain of the U.S. Army in the Vietnam War.3Printed on: July 31, 2010The smart thing to doEd MarohnGuest columnistSome may not like health care reform, but it makes good economic sense, writes Ed Marohn.A s a former executive with a major international tire company for 30 years, I paid for medical insurance provided through the company. It was the responsible thing to do -- insuring me, my wife and our two sons.Upon retirement, I continued with medical insurance through my former company, although the premiums are much higher than when I worked. (Note: Many companies don't offer retirement medical insurance, forcing retirees to pay even higher premiums directly to insurance companies.)Those who work and can afford insurance but refuse it pass on the cost to the rest of the population through higher insurance premiums and depletion of tax revenue. Just like mandatory auto insurance, mandatory medical insurance helps economically.A March Idaho AARP study summarizes health care issues:1. Nearly 90 percent of uninsured adults in Idaho work but can't afford health care. (This is a sad fact.)2. Nearly 30 percent of Idaho's Medicare beneficiaries hit the prescription drug "doughnut hole," paying 100 percent of their prescription costs, forcing many to go without.3. More than 100,000 Idaho residents spend upward of 25 percent of their income on health care.More data by congressional districts (both Idaho representatives voted against health reform):A. Rep. Walt Minnick (District 1): 138,000 uninsured constituents; 11,600 older residents hit the Medicare Part D coverage gap (doughnut hole); 1,500 health care-related bankruptcies; and $95 million in uncompensated health care provided to people who lacked health insurance or couldn't afford to pay for it.B. Rep. Mike Simpson (District 2): 126,000 uninsured constituents; 9,400 older residents hit the doughnut hole; 1,100 health care-related bankruptcies; and $198 million in uncompensated care.Label the new law whatever pushes your political button, but the economy would be negatively impacted without it. Health care bankruptcies impact revenue of small businesses, spiraling into court/legal costs. Uncompensated care adds costs to the state and the taxpayer. Working uninsured costs us all. The Republican Party political rhetoric "curtailment of individual rights and socialistic" used against the health reform bill is meaningless and doesn't address the real issue: the growing financial burden that medical costs mean to this nation. We have been debating this issue since the 1950s.July's SmartMoney magazine (Wall Street Journal) debunks this political propaganda: "... death panels, mandatory end-of-life sessions or any of the other horrible but imaginary provisions that all too many opponents of the health care bill have conjured up." (Page 37).Ideological rhetoric doesn't help the person with catastrophic health care bills, leading to depleted life savings and bankruptcy -- while the CEO of the insurance company that makes insurance unaffordable continues drawing millions in salary.Marohn is a retired businessman and served as a U.S. Army captain during the Vietnam War.4Printed on: March 08, 2011Defending the ConstitutionEd MarohnGuest columnistNullification advocates need to stop and think about what they were really proposing, writes Ed Marohn.State Sen. Bart Davis, R-Idaho Falls, took a noble and brave stance to protect the Constitution of the United States rather than give in to the whims of dogmatic and ideological rhetoric by voting against the so-called "nullification" bill. He acted as a true statesman and not a politician pandering for votes.Sen. Davis' position was similar to that of Attorney General Lawrence Wasden, who stated that the nullification process is unconstitutional.Also, constitutional professor David Adler wrote a logical and succinct op-ed in the Post Register on why it is unconstitutional and dangerous to the nation for a state to enact a nullification bill. Those who pushed for the nullification bill should pause and ponder what a Pandora's Box this could have created. The state of Idaho is part of the United States of America. It is not a nation, but a political entity within these 50 states. Certain politicians still spout inflamed rhetoric over states' rights and have misinterpreted the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, creating an overcharged environment.We are all Americans first and foremost with a Constitution that has served us well for over 200 years. And as Americans, we have a responsibility to uphold the Constitution. Upon graduation from college I took the following oath:"I, ____, having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of 2nd Lieutenant____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; so help me God."Not long after, I was in the jungles of Vietnam fighting alongside other Americans and seeing Americans die.This is true for those who fought in Iraq and are fighting in Afghanistan.The oath leaves little doubt of the allegiance to the United States of America and not to a single state.In Vietnam, more than 58,000 Americans died, in Iraq and Afghanistan, the number killed is over 4,000. The number of Americans who died doing their sworn duty to the Constitution grows larger when other past wars are included.Bart Davis should be thanked for his objectivity rather than pummeled during the last few days with threats, calls for resignation and his repentance from those "nullification" individuals who see themselves as the only ones in the right. We need rational and civil discourse -- not vitriol.Marohn is a retired executive with Continental AG.5Printed on: September 27, 2011America's vanishing middle classEd MarohnLocal columnistUntil America embraces meaningful tax reform, the most wealthy among us will continue to thrive while everyone else suffers, writes Ed Marohn.Warren Buffet, one of America's richest people, wrote recently that Congress is coddling the rich to the detriment of America. "Last year my federal tax bill -- the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf -- was $6,938,744," Buffet wrote. "That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income -- and that's actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent."So why do congressmen, particularly in the GOP, push tax breaks to the wealthy? It is simply about power -- and power equates to wealth. One of my favorite quotes was written by Lord Acton in his letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."Look what is at risk for the powerful: The median net worth of members of Congress is $912,000. For American families it is $120,000. (Net worth is defined as assets minus liabilities). Not included in the numbers for congressional members are their guaranteed retirement and medical insurance, something not guaranteed universally for the average American worker (companies' benefits vary and some have dropped pensions and/or medical insurance: 49.9 million workers receive no health insurance).Distributed by income groups, the average annual income per family can be placed in three tiers: the top 1 percent at $1,137,684; the top 2 percent to 10 percent at $164,647; and the remaining 90 percent at $31,244. The top 10 percent control two-thirds of America's wealth.One claim by the GOP is the top tax rate hurts the rich: those earning more than $1 million dollars. However, historically the top tax rates have decreased: in 1945 it was 66.4 percent; in 1965 it was 55.3 percent; in 1982 it was 47.7 percent; and in 2010 it is at 32.4 percent.Another argument for protecting the rich with tax breaks is the "trickle-down economic theory": less taxes generates employment. However, the nation's high unemployment rate is growing at 9.1 percent and tax cuts to the wealthiest are not generating employment or needed pay increases to employees. CEOs now earn 262 times more than the average worker; the CEO earns in one day what it takes the average worker 52 weeks to earn. No wonder our national poverty rate has continued to increase (now at 15 percent or 46.2 million people).Warren Buffet is correct: The rich are truly favored. In the meantime, the decline of the middle class continues and will do so until we have meaningful and equitable tax reform.Marohn is a retired executive with Continental AG.6Printed on: October 11, 2011Class warfare gameReceived Oct. 2Much has been written about Warren Buffett saying he paid a lower tax rate than his secretary. Ed Marohn is among those jumping on this story in his recent column. Using rounded numbers from Marohn's column, Buffett paid $7 million in taxes at an effective rate of 17 percent, meaning he generated a taxable income of $40 million. His net worth is estimated between $45 billion and $50 billion.Much of Buffett's income is generated as capital gains on investments. Capital gains are taxed at a lower rate to encourage investors to accept the risk of investment and boost economic growth. One financial risk we all face is inflation. Our dollars are continually declining in buying power, but tax wise, capital gains are not adjusted for inflation. Recent inflation rates have ranged from 1 percent to 2.5 percent per year. For illustration, a hypothetical billion-dollar investment held three years under a 2 percent inflation rate would have an inflation loss of $60 million.Given more information, we could calculate an effective tax rate for Buffett's net real gain and make a valid comparison to wage earners. Without that information, his effective tax rate could range from 17 percent to more than 100 percent, and his story is misleading and meaningless. Buffett may have paid $7 million in taxes on a net real loss. The story makes an effective sound bite despite being misleading and meaningless, and those playing the class warfare game for political gain will continue to use it. (Word count: 250)Chuck MatthewsIdaho FallsPrinted on: October 07, 2011Class envyReceived Sept. 28Regarding Ed Marohn's "America's vanishing middle class" (Post Register, Sept. 27) it seems Ed and community organizer and President of the United States Barack Obama are of one mind, that demonizing and raising the taxes on successful Americans during a massive economic downturn is good policy. Ed, like Obama, compares apples and oranges when talking about income tax and capital gains tax in another extreme-left attempt to fool Americans. Unless Ed just doesn't know the difference.Ed should send his article to the White House. It could result in a class envy merit badge. Pitting one group of Americans against another is great fun, but I believe people are catching on. I have to wonder if Ed really believes raising taxes in a wrecked economy is good policy, or is he just another statist drone supporting a failed corrupt and incompetent president.Finally I would like to ask ex-exec Ed how this extra revenue to the rat hole known as Washington be spent. Should it be sent to the DOJ to purchase additional $16 muffins? To the BATF to spend on more firearms for Mexican drug cartels? I know, let's send it to constitutional scholar and President of the United States Barack Obama in case he has his eye on another solar energy company. (Word count: 214) 6AFrank Clark AmmonPrinted on: November 02, 2011Idaho's 'F' for transparencyThe legislative per diem dustup tells us that it's time for Idaho's lawmakers to begin disclosing personal financial information, writes Ed Marohn.There is no financial transparency for Idaho state legislators. In fact, the legislators received a grade of "F" for personal financial disclosures, achieving a score of 0 out of 100. This placed Idaho 48th out of 50 states for having weak mechanisms in disclosing to the public the legislators' income, assets and potential conflicts of interest: employment, personal business activities, clients, investments, real property holdings and leadership positions in organizations.In other words, the senators and representatives of the Idaho Legislature have influence and control over the state's funds and the economic well-being of the Idaho citizen without worrying about any appearance of impropriety on their part. This places the Idaho voter in the dark, forcing him or her to re-elect or elect legislators who may be serving their own self-interests and not the citizens of the state.Currently, Idahoans have little knowledge on how much money state legislators earn in their regular life, or their net worth. However, while in session for the three months at the state Capitol, each legislator is paid $16,116 plus expenses, including a housing allotment for those living more than 50 miles from Boise. Also, legislators are eligible for a state pension, which is calculated by adding any per diem and expenses to the salary for pension calculation. Legislators are also allowed to collect state pension while in office even though there are state restrictions that prohibit other state employees from doing the same.The lack of public access to the legislators' finances raises concern on how much personal money is being made based on their political clout. Many of these elected officials are lawyers, businessmen and farmers who are involved in legislative decisions that impact their businesses, law practices and farm operations. This is definitely an environment for temptation to steer laws that favor the personal gain of the Idaho legislator.And if you doubt that legislators would abuse the system, just review the latest news: A Republican senator from Caldwell, living 26 miles from Boise, took extra per diem up to $6,000 ($122 per day for second residence) while staying at his parents' home; another Republican senator from Nampa claimed $2,402 while sleeping in his law office.Legislators in their non-Legislature pursuits undoubtedly make more money than Idaho workers, who are ranked 49th for average annual income per person at $32,257; the national average is $40,584. The average wage per hour in Idaho has slipped 15 percent below the national average for all occupations compared to other states, ranking Idaho at 38th.Do we honestly know for whom the legislators are working? Is it Idaho or them? It is time for mandatory financial transparency with our legislators to ensure ethical governance.Marohn is a retired executive with Continental AG.7Printed on: January 25, 2012Nothing noble about slaveryEd MarohnGuest columnistSome politicians in the Idaho Republican Party are vocal about states' rights and use the American Civil War as the historical precedent to oppose the power of the federal government.With zealousness they label the Civil War as the "War for Southern Independence" -- a name still used by southerners nostalgic for the Old South.Thus, the Civil War is held high as a symbol for the fight for states rights and freedom -- a self-serving justification for nullifying or rebelling against the U.S. Government and federal laws.A historical fact, however, paints a different picture about the secession of the 11 southern slave states: the ugliness of slavery underscored the American Civil War.The Civil War, which started in 1861 and ended in 1865, cost Americans fighting on both sides dearly: 625,000 dead and 412,200 wounded. (By comparison in World War II, 416,800 Americans died.) The American Civil War ended with two key outcomes: (1) secession by the 11 southern states was prevented, confirming its illegality, and (2) slavery was officially abolished, although legalized racism perpetuated segregation until it was abolished by the Civil Rights Act in 1964.When Abraham Lincoln campaigned in the presidential election of 1860, the Republican platform opposed allowing slavery beyond the states in which it already existed. The party of Lincoln also advocated nationalism, denouncing threats of disunion or secession as treason and rebellion.Prior to the new Republican administration taking office on March 4, 1861, seven cotton and slave states initially seceded, forming the Confederate States of America. Outgoing President James Buchanan, a Democrat, and the incoming Lincoln both viewed secession as illegal.In Lincoln's first inaugural address, he reassured the country that he would not allow the nation to be divided but also tried to appeal to the white Southerners to remain in the Union. In response, Alexander Stephens of Georgia, the vice president of the new Confederacy, replied, "Our new Government (the Confederacy) is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition."The fact that 4 million people had been held in slavery for over two centuries didn't bother the Southerners since their cotton industry depended on it. By 1860, the United States was the most powerful nation that still sustained slavery; a hypocrisy by a nation dedicated to freedom.This then begs the question: Why do some Idaho Republicans honor the secession attempt by the 11 southern slave states as a noble event? There is nothing noble about slavery.Marohn is a retired executive with Continental AG.8Printed on: April 17, 2012Moderation, not extremismEd MarohnLocal columnistThe proliferation of American hate groups since the election of Barack Obama is something we should all decry, writes Ed Marohn.The Cold War against communism spanned 46 years from Sept. 2, 1945, to Dec. 26, 1991. With the fall of the Soviet Union, communism died, except in China. But the dialogue from the political far right maintains communism still threatens the U.S. because of liberalism. This promotes an irrational point of view.Terrorism is now the real threat, and it is of the American homegrown variety. The Southern Poverty Law Center reports this is the third year in a row in which the American radical right has expanded dramatically. At the end of 2011, there were 1,018 hate groups. In 2000, there were only 602 hate groups. Idaho alone has 18 radical right hate chapters: Ku Klux Klan (1), Neo-Nazi (2), White Nationalist (3), Racist Skinhead (3), Christian Identity (7) and General Hate (2).The radical right hate groups increased with the election of the first black American president and the economy's demise in 2008. For the radical right, the prospect of four more years of a black American president causes discontent and hate. And it's disconcerting to watch the irresponsible political pandering of these hate-oriented radicals by mainstream politicians at the state and the federal level. By supporting nullification of federal laws, even though it is contrary to two centuries of jurisprudence, and by spouting states' rights to extreme levels such as succession, politicians have helped foster irrationality and hate. We need civil discourse by politicians; we need statesmen -- not charlatans. Bogus positions by the radical right that taxes are illegal, that states can't require driver's licenses or vehicle registrations, and that there is a conspiracy against owning guns have permeated to mainstream America. It would be laughable were it not so dangerous to the American democratic republic. Peter Cohen of the SPLC states: "Extreme rhetoric and threats of violence are in. No accusation or conspiracy theory seems too far out of bounds." Our current elected officials are to blame for allowing such vitriol to continue, capitalizing on the hate to gain votes while not confronting this ridiculousness.The danger is real. In 1995, Timothy McVeigh, a member of the radical right, bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City, murdering 168 Americans. These could have been your neighbors, friends or relatives. And to date, 50 police officers have been killed by radical right hate groups.Going back into history, Hitler's radical right movement (Nazism) in 1933 exploited the fears of Germans over distressing economic conditions with high unemployment and high inflation. By blaming others -- communism, socialism, democracy, liberalism, the Jews and non-Aryans -- the Nazis, and fascism, took over the German democratic government and created a right wing dictatorship.American voters should demand moderation -- not extremism -- from their elected officials.Marohn is a retired executive from Continental AG.9Printed on: May 01, 2012Prosecute all hateReceived April 19After reading Ed Marohn's column (April 17), I get the feeling he is a radical, ultra-liberal activist, as he only names white hate groups while ignoring black hate groups.There is such a hue and cry over the killing of a black teenager in Florida. In the same month, February, a 6-year-old white girl sitting on her doorstep in Chicago was murdered by two black men shooting her as they drove by. Just imagine the hue and cry that the news media would have made if this had been a black girl killed by white men.President Obama and his attorney general refuse to prosecute black hate groups that break the law. Take the Black Panthers, when they tried to intimidate voters by being at a voting precinct carrying clubs. I ask Marohn: Did he ever have a friend killed by a white hate group? I had four friends murdered by Black Panthers. All hate groups should be criticized and prosecuted after breaking laws. (Word count: 165)Daniel P. ScarboroughIdaho Falls9APrinted on: June 03, 2012Why regulation is necessaryEd MarohnLocal columnistThe nation's economic collapse proved that unfettered capitalism is not good for everybody, writes Ed Marohn.There is a mystical belief that unregulated capitalism will remove America's economic ills. Claiming that regulations are stifling economic growth, some assert that capitalism can regulate itself. They endorse that "greed" is good even though the Christian faith labels it one of the seven deadly sins.The problem is that unregulated capitalism is brutal. Ask those duped by Mr. Madoff or by Idaho's version, Mr. Palmer, into losing millions of dollars in bogus investments. Also ask the many millions of Americans whose life savings, IRAs, 401(k_s and home values plunged in 2008 because of the unethical practices of investment firms and banks: Executives received billions in bonuses and salaries by gambling with loan derivatives (unsecured mortgage obligations). This led to the financial crisis and forced government intervention to salvage the country's financial stability. But still the ideological clamor persists for less regulation, pushed by the very same people who caused the current recession.Can capitalism self-regulate? Obviously not, as JPMorgan just weeks ago lost $2 billion in "flawed," "sloppy" and risky derivative trades -- a repeat of what happened in 2008 -- while JPMorgan's CEO was enjoying his millions in salary, bonuses and perks. And once again, as the feds push to impose regulations to prevent this unethical practice, the wealthy power brokers and overpaid CEOs resist the effort -- allied by their bought-and-paid-for members of Congress.The average American has been brainwashed by politicians into accepting the dogma of unregulated capitalism and that to regulate is akin to communism -- even as executive wages soar, receiving in one day what it takes an average worker one year to earn. In the meantime, employees worked longer hours with no pay increase.The Kiplinger newsletter recently stated: "Executive pay is often an early warning sign that something is amiss with a company's board. From Enron to Tyco International, runaway pay and perks told shareholders that the directors who were supposed to serve as watchdogs had instead become the chief executive's lap dogs. That in turn, suggested that these firms were disasters waiting to happen."When the CEO's compensation is vastly greater than all the other managers combined, it says the employees are far less valuable. The irony is that a CEO can only succeed with good employees, and yet these individuals are the ones who are paid far less.There are ethical, honest and outstanding companies run by executives who care about their employees and consumers. These executives earn realistic salaries based on objectives that are tough and demanding -- not guaranteed by cronies on the board; however, there are individuals in business who are not ethical, believing only that "greed" is good.That is why capitalism needs to be regulated.Marohn is a retired executive with Continental AG.10Printed on: July 17, 2012The few protecting the manyTo gain an appreciation for what war means, it might be time to mandate military service for all Americans, writes Ed Marohn.The Fourth of July honors the nation's birthday based on its Declaration of Independence signed in 1776. Also on that patriotic day, those who served in the Armed Forces, especially those who died on the killing fields of combat, are recognized. These dead are given accolades for sacrificing their lives to protect freedoms enjoyed by all Americans; yet the vast majority of Americans have never served in the military. They know little of the sacrifices and hardships the soldier faces. They have no real involvement other than cheering on the troops. It is safer that way -- someone else risking life and limb.In the U.S. Congress, only 20 percent of the members have ever served in the military. Further irony is that many of the nation's war hawks have never served, let alone been in combat. This year again we have a new presidential candidate who was of age in the Vietnam era but avoided the draft with deferments.Do Americans understand the high cost that military personnel pay in terms of death or physical wounds? In Iraq and Afghanistan so far, 6,518 Americans have been killed and 49,008 wounded. In the Vietnam War, 58,156 Americans died and 303,704 were wounded. These numbers are depressing and these terrible statistics affect the lives of loved ones, friends and neighbors for generations.Furthermore, the mentally wounded number, those with PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder), is estimated at 92,000 for Iraq and Afghanistan vets. The Vietnam War produced more than 300,000 PTSD casualties out of 2.6 million who served in that war.But the cost to American lives doesn't end there. Of the total deaths reported in recent times, the number of suicides of active-duty personnel is shocking. In 2009, 20.1 percent of total deaths were suicides; in 2010, 19.8 percent of total deaths were suicides; in 2011, 19.5 percent of total deaths were suicides.Because the U.S. has an all-voluntary military, Americans have lapsed into an attitude of allowing the few to serve and protect the many. The term "war" has been desensitized: Its real meaning doesn't scare anyone and no longer is it considered a last resort for the nation -- a do-or-die situation.Maybe it is time to put a stop to the privileged war hawks who have never served, yet keep leading this nation into conflict; maybe it is time to make mandatory military service for everyone to fully understand what war means. There should be no deferments: rich and poor, privileged and the less-privileged would serve to avoid the lower middle/working class bearing the brunt of war (76 percent came from that demographic in Vietnam).A democracy means the privileged and the rich don't get a free ride. Everyone should serve the country to ensure its success.Marohn, a retired executive from Continental AG, commanded a combat unit with the 101st Airborne Division in Vietnam.11Printed on: August 31, 2012Separating politics and religionPushing Christianity as a national religion would cause problems at home and abroad, writes Ed Marohn.Some argue that the U.S. is a Christian nation. Pushed mostly by the religious right, is this idea a desire to lead America to a Christian theocracy? Theocracy, a nonsecular government, is led by one believed to be in direct contact with God.Currently there are two theocracies: one is Vatican City, recognized as a sovereign state and governed by the Catholic Church -- not secular government; Iran is the other, led by an Islamic cleric.However, if the U.S. became a theocracy, which Christian faith would rule? Statistically, 78 percent of Americans are Christians, but the different beliefs within all religious faiths would not unify this nation.The U.S. has a population of more than 290 million people with these religions by percentage: 26 percent Protestants (Methodists, Episcopalians, Baptists, Presbyterians, Evangelists, Lutherans and minor others); 24 percent Catholics; 1.7 percent Mormon; 0.7 percent Jehovah's Witness; and 0.6 percent Orthodox faiths. Non-Christian faiths are at 1.7 percent Jewish and 0.6 percent Muslims.The rest are classified as 17 percent unaffiliated Americans (agnostics, atheists and unspecified).The world has a diverse population of 6.8 billion people with the following religious percentages: 2.3 billion Christians (Protestants, Catholics and other denominations); Islam has 2.2 billion followers; and the other faiths of Judaism, Buddhism, Hindus and the unaffiliated complete the rest.Thus, theocracies and their nationalistic religions could exacerbate conflicts and wars internationally. Since no national religion can fairly represent the diversity found in the U.S. and other nations, abuses of liberties can occur. The theocracy of Iran, a fundamentalist religious regime, controls its citizens, especially women, with arrests, beatings and imprisonment decided by the Islamic leader; its national religion detrimentally controls free speech and human rights.Fortunately for the U.S., the Constitution promotes the separation of church and state. In the First Amendment to the Constitution, this key premise is asserted: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." And Article VI specifies "... no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." The U.S. is a secular nation with no national religion. The forefathers designed the Constitution with that in mind. To do otherwise would in fact impede the freedom, rights and liberties of Americans by forcing other religions to comply with one national religion.Validation of the separation of church and state was set in 1797, when the United States Senate ratified a treaty with Tripoli which stated in its Article 11: "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."All religious beliefs are personal. Thus, politics should be taken out of religion and religion taken out of politics.Marohn is a retired executive with Continental AG.12Printed on: October 18, 2012Walking the talkToo many politicians talk about sacrificing for country without having done so themselves, writes Ed Marohn.Duty. Honor. Country. These are words that Americans supposedly respect. Next month, Americans will be voting, partly based on their perceptions of how the candidates measure up to these words.Politicians pontificate duty, honor and country with relish, since it is a proven technique to rally voter support by waving the flag, preaching from the podium how he or she is the better person because they are more loyal, more duty bound and more geared to sacrifice for the country. Their opponents are less so, they will say, feeling safe that words are all that are needed to convince voters. But the voters need to know how the candidate has actually performed in life for this country other than using politics to garner personal financial gain and power.Politicians often ask Americans to sacrifice for the nation. President Kennedy stated in his inaugural speech in 1961: "And so, my fellow Americans: Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country."Unlike others, President Kennedy earned the right to say those words by serving in combat in World War II as a young Navy officer even though he came from a rich and powerful family and could have avoided military service. He not only talked the talk, he walked the walk, receiving the Purple Heart and the Navy and Marine Corps Medal, the second highest award by the Navy. His duty was true sacrifice for this nation, an honorable and unselfish act by an individual who wanted to serve his country. After serving the nation in war, he ultimately gave his life for this country when he was assassinated while president.The politicians of today are not universally of the same mold. Only 20 percent of Congress' membership has ever been in the military. Many of them are war hawks and have never seen death in combat, and yet they continue to promote wars (as long as it's the other guy that serves). Now again we have a presidential candidate who intentionally avoided the draft and military service during the Vietnam War. He preaches about Americans sacrificing for this nation, about being more aggressive internationally against potential enemies. The irony is that while over 58,000 Americans died in the Vietnam War, he was in France on a church mission for 30 months. (As an aside --President Obama was only 12 years old when the Vietnam War ended.) While 74 percent of those who served in Vietnam came from the working class, risking life and limb in combat, many well-heeled avoided the war.Politicians must be held accountable for their actions. Their life decisions document their true character and whether they are worthy to hold office.Marohn, a retired executive with Continental AG, served in Vietnam, commanding a combat unit with the 101st Airborne Division.13Printed on: October 26, 2012Missionaries did serveReceived Oct. 18Ed Marohn, you are wrong. TheMormon missionaries have nothing to apologize for. Right now there are about 55,000 missionaries worldwide teaching the Mormon doctrine of the value offamilies and how to care for those families and to obey the laws of their own countries.Don't try to tell me that can't help but bring peace to the world. There was a man named Eldon Hebdon from Jefferson County who returned from a mission in 1944. Called to the Army, he trained in South Carolina, went overseas and was killed on Okinawa.During World War II, there were 800,000 Mormons in the USA; 100,000 served in WWII. Many of the Council of 12, past and present, also served at Okinawa.On Okinawa, my patrol met a pair of Catholic nuns doing the same job as our missionaries. I don't have the words to describe the total pleasure we had to talk to these wonderful women. They had with them a little girl with her arm blown off. My patrol, with tears running down our faces, gave all we had, food, money, etc., to those nuns.No, I will not apologize for Mr. Romney or the missionaries of whatever Christian church they may belong to. I believe they also serve. I saw several so-called soldiers try to get Section 8's to get out. (Word count: 223)Vail Van LeuvenRoberts13APrinted on: November 11, 2012Doing our dutyContrary to what was said and written prior to the election, serving an LDS mission is not seen as a way to avoid military service, writes Reed Moss.Recently on "The View," Whoopi Goldberg, conversing with Ann Romney, seemed to be of the opinion that members of Mrs. Romney's faith try to avoid military service. Ed Marohn, in an Oct. 18 column for the Post Register, made a similar assertion about Mitt Romney. This is not correct. Following are a few examples to the contrary. I cite these particular ones only because I know the facts quite well.My cousin was serving a mission in Texas when Pearl Harbor was attacked. Upon release from his mission, he married the girl he had left behind and lived with her for three months, then went into the Army Air Corps and underwent intensive training to be a turret gunner on a B-17 Flying Fortress. He was allowed to come home and see his newborn son for 30 minutes before he was sent for further training and then on to Europe. On his first flight over Berlin, his plane was shot down.Through the efforts of a devoted mother and a supportive stepfather, his son graduated from law school and eventually became a district judge for the Seventh Judicial District in Madison County. Several years after the war, his father's remains were found and brought home and buried with full military honors in the Ririe/Shelton Cemetery.My brother was serving a mission in Hawaii when Pearl Harbor was attacked. When he returned home, he was drafted into the Army. He was shipped to Europe where his unit fought in the Battle of the Bulge and helped free prisoners from concentration camps.I was sent on a mission to war-torn West Germany shortly after World War II when the Korean War erupted. Upon my release, I was drafted into the Army and was trained to be a "special agent" in the Army Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC), where I was then told that because of my knowledge of the country and my fluency in the German language, I was going to be assigned to V Corps in Frankfurt. There I worked, either in uniform or undercover as circumstances dictated, with the West German police and intelligence services, and with the CIA and FBI countering espionage and sabotage activities of the Soviet Union and East German Stasi because the Cold War had heated up.Serving a mission is considered a duty for young men of my faith. Serving in the military is also considered a duty. Both involve sacrifices. Marriage, education and careers are usually put on hold. But there can even be a special benefit to the military after one serves a mission because thousands of young people return home fluent in foreign languages. Many also seek careers in the intelligence and diplomatic services.Moss is a retired Idaho Falls attorney.13BPrinted on: January 22, 2013A market for lethal weaponsEd MarohnLocal columnistThe National Rifle Association's hard line on gun control is driven by one thing -- profit, writes Ed Marohn.Exploiting the Second Amendment and American civil rights, the National Rifle Association's position against gun control is driven largely by the corporate profits of U.S. arms manufacturers. Founded on November 17, 1871, the NRA's mission was to help improve the dismal marksmanship of Americans after the Civil War. But today the NRA is a 501(c)(3) and a 501(c)(4) organization, allowing it to both operate as a charity under the former tag -- receiving federal tax exemption -- and under the latter to participate in politics and lobbying for the gun industry.NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre, with an annual compensation of $970,000, said, "I mean, the strongest defense of the Second Amendment is the marketplace. And there's no clearer picture about how average American citizens feel about their Second Amendment rights than lines at gun stores all over the country right now because they fear the Obama administration's second term is coming after their freedom." By promoting irrational conspiratorial hysteria that the federal government is after Americans' freedoms, the NRA has helped drive gun sales in a nation that averages 87 gun deaths per day.Former Congressman Joe Scarborough, a Republican, stated that the NRA "... is now a fringe organization. ... What the NRA once was, it no longer is. This extremism is so frightening and so over the line." And former President George H.W. Bush, a Republican, resigned his lifetime NRA membership to protest LaPierre's tirades against law enforcement personnel.A quarter-billion-dollar revenue organization, the NRA is connected to the $12 billion-a-year gun industry: Sturm Ruger handguns in a yearlong promotion gave the NRA a dollar for each gun sold ($1.2 million) and Beretta USA provided $1 million to support Second Amendment lawsuits.The gun industry has business concerns because the demographics point to a potential decrease in gun buyers. "... the industry is trying to think of one new thing to sell to gun owners," says Josh Sugarmann, head of the Violence Policy Center. "They've recognized that the traditional market -- traditional hunting rifles and shotguns -- is saturated. So there's an ever-shrinking market that's buying more and more lethal weapons." Manufacturers need sales to survive.Rather than working with the political leaders and promoting rational solutions to the gun violence that costs America $100 billion annually, the NRA is perpetuating fear of gun control laws. And capitalistically LaPierre blames too few guns for the Connecticut massacre and wants armed guards at every school. One armed guard per each of 132,656 public schools and arming 3.8 million teachers could lead to sales for the gun industry of more than $3 billion -- a windfall for the gun industry.But who pays?The taxpayers will, but not the NRA or gun manufacturers.Marohn is a retired executive with Continental AG.14Printed on: February 08, 2013Distorted viewReceived Jan. 31In the Jan. 22 issue of the Post Register, Mr. Ed Marohn blasted the National Rifle Association for allegedly being "driven by one thing -- profit." He is wrong. Since it was founded in 1871, the NRA has promoted firearm safety and marksmanship in addition to defending the Second Amendment.The evidence of that purpose is seen in the following programs, all sponsored by the NRA (this is not a complete list):First steps pistol course.Basic rifle course.Refuse to be a victim; personal protection inside and outside the home.Hunter safety courses.P.S. Kudos to Peter Young's article "Peacefully repudiating tyranny" (Jan. 26). This man has a strong dose of common sense, which has been observed in previous articles he has written. Keep up the good work. (Word count: 132)Bob HuntingtonArcoPrinted on: January 31, 2013On gun controlReceived Jan. 24Seems ex-exec Ed Marohn was premature with his amusing "A market for lethal weapons," claiming the current firearms-buying enthusiasm is due to the NRA perpetuating fear of gun control. Today, 1/24/13, the ethically challenged Diane Feinstein submitted her massive gun-control bill. I guess the dupes have more on the ball than Ed does.Laughably, Ed quotes one of the MSNBC scholars, a program attempt by NBC to compete with the Cartoon Network. Ed also has a hard spot for individuals and corporations making a profit, much like our president.Concluding, describing the NRA as anything less than an honorable institution defending a constitutional right is going to be a tough sell, but describing our so-called "political leaders" as anything but venal, self-promoting gas bags would be an impossible feat for anyone but Ed Marohn. (Word count: 135)Frank ClarkAmmon14APrinted on: May 05, 2013Standing for equal rightsEd MarohnLocal columnistThis nation is in the process of once again confronting bigotry against one particular group of people, writes Ed Marohn.America is a nation built on freedoms and individual rights. Throughout its history as a republic and a democracy, it has had noble achievements. And many Americans of all ethnicity in uniform have died in wars and conflicts for those sacred values.But America still has more work to do for individual freedoms and civil rights, as shown by history.The Civil War ended slavery, but the South circumvented the 13th Amendment of 1865, which abolished slavery, by imposing segregation making black Americans second-class citizens.Bigotry and racism continued. It wasn't until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 100 years later, that segregation was outlawed, banning discrimination against racial, ethnic, national and religious minorities, and also women. It is ironic that a black could serve his country and die for it but not receive the same rights as a white person. Shamefully, Mississippi recently ratified the 13th Amendment in February 2013, 148 years after it was ratified by the nation. It was a formality, but the taint of racism is there.And women did not get universal suffrage until 1920 with the ratification of the 19th Amendment, 144 years after the Declaration of Independence.Now the U.S. is addressing gay Americans who have been living as second-class citizens. Gays are discriminated against in marriage rights and benefits and are discriminated against in the workplace and schools. Currently, only 21 states and Washington, D.C., prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. Think of a life without the freedoms and rights heterosexuals now possess.Yet resistance to affording rights to gays continues. Recently in Pocatello, its mayor had the tie-breaking vote to make it illegal to discriminate against gays (which Boise, Moscow and Sandpoint already passed) and he voted against it. Hopefully, Idaho Falls will make a more enlightened choice. How can America stand for liberty and justice for all and still discriminate?Fortunately, there is a growing movement to change this. One action took place Friday when Dave McGrath, father of six (two sons are gay), and his son Joe McGrath, recently back from military service in the Mideast, began an 1,800-mile bike road trip from Idaho Falls to the Boys Scouts of America headquarters in Dallas. They will deliver the message that gays should be allowed to join the BSA and to stop discrimination.Dave, a former Army Ranger, was a Scoutmaster for 20 years for the Mormon church and had been in Scouting since he was 8 years old.America should be better than hate, racism, bigotry and gay bashing. Freedom is at stake. This is a nation of diverse people. This diversity contributes to its strength and enriches its communities and way of life.Marohn is a retired executive with Continental AG.15Printed on: June 25, 2013Pushing Idaho into oligarchyEd MarohnLocal columnistOne Republican push to disenfranchise Idahoans was defeated, but another still remains in the party platform, writes Ed Marohn.Bravo! Rational heads at the Idaho GOP summer confab in McCall rejected the plan to vet Republican candidates.However, there is little doubt this proposal will be offered again and again. It is hard to understand why the party that claims there is already too much government has a strong faction that wishes to impose more controls, more rules, and thus deny Idahoans a say in democracy.But then this is nothing new with the GOP in Idaho. The current Idaho GOP platform states in Article I, Section 3, Paragraph C: "We support restoration of the United States Constitution's checks and balances that protect the rights and sovereignty of the states by repealing the 17th amendment."Really? Repealing voters' rights!The 17th Amendment was ratified on April 8, 1913, to provide for direct election of United States senators by the people of the state and not to be appointed by the state legislature. It was done to prevent the corruption by those in power at the state government, who up until 1913 decided who will sit in the U.S. Senate.History proves how corrupt the selection of the U.S. senators by the political bosses had been: In 1899,Montana Democrat Sen. William A.Clark, the powerful copper king of Butte, bought his election by bribing state legislators with $10,000 each. He bragged: "I never bought a man who was not for sale." Supporting Clark was Idaho's own Republican Sen. Weldon Heyburn, who opposed the direct election of U.S. senators.Using unrealistic ideological dogma of state rights to justify the current platform rather than honoring the will of democracy is a step backwards. Realistically, it is hard to imagine the repeal of the 17th Amendment but the fact that it is in the GOP platform is shocking and worrisome. That any political party would intentionally disenfranchise the voters from directly electing their U.S. senators is unconscionable. The indirect election of U.S. senators was a tainted process.The GOP bosses will argue that states rights have been taken away by the 17th Amendment and thus push to repeal it. How nave would the voters be to buy into this argument? Yet, as long as the clear-thinking voters -- Republicans, Democrats and independents alike -- stay uninvolved and uniformed, allowing this madness to continue, Idaho will continue to move more power into the hands of the few, leaving the voter disenfranchised.By any definition, some Republican bosses are pushing Idaho into an oligarchy, where the few rule. Civil dialogue and critical thinking by all citizens is needed and the anointed few in the Idaho GOP should not unilaterally decide what is best for democracy and Idaho.They are not omnipotent even if they sometimes think they are.Marohn is a retired executive with Continental AG.16Printed on: July 02, 2013Supporting founders' vision means dropping election of senatorsM. Ray Johnson100 years ago, the nation made a huge mistake by passing the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, writes M. Ray Johnson.Dang. I had so much to do today, but I can't let Ed Marohn's recent column go without comment. He complains that the current Idaho Republican Party platform calls for the repeal of the 17th Amendment.Let me explain why the 17th Amendment was such a great mistake:Congress consists of two houses: The "People's House" (House of Representatives) has representatives elected directly by the people with the number determined by population. Because the voice of the people changes so quickly and is frequently based on emotion and reactionary thinking, representatives are elected only for two-year terms. This keeps fresh voices in the House and allows for direct response from the people.The "State's House" (Senate) is comprised of two senators from each state without regard to population. The founders prescribed that senators were to be appointed by their state legislatures rather than by popular vote, to assure that the interests of the states were best served. They serve six-year terms to provide for stability and continuity.Note that the people still had a say in the selection of senators through their respective state legislators.With the 17th Amendment in place, however, we now have two people's houses and no state house. The only difference between the two is that senators need only play the election game every six years. But they are now subject to outside influences, such as special interest groups and campaign funding sources, and come under great pressure to support ideas that are contrary to the interests of their states.Here's the main point: Since the enactment of the 17th Amendment in 1913, states' rights have steadily eroded until now they are nearly nonexistent. The federal government essentially runs everything.And don't bother asking the current crop of senators how they feel about this issue. Few (from either party) would want the 17th Amendment repealed because they have become very comfortable raising money and buying their re-election every six years through popular vote without having to please their respective state legislatures.Philosophically, the 17th Amendment was a gigantic step toward dismantling our republic in favor of a democracy. Mr. Marohn freely admits that this is his desire, but it's not mine, nor was it Ben Franklin's.History has demonstrated time and again that democracies eventually crash and burn.Finally, he points out instances of corruption in the selection of senators prior to 1913. As long as mortals are running this nation, there will always be opportunities for corruption.The amendment did not and will not change that. What we need to do is to stay focused on correct principles and fight tooth and nail to defend the republic.The founders had it right. The 17th Amendment should be repealed. 16A.Printed on: July 03, 2013Tyranny of the majorityReceived June 25In opposing those who advocate the repeal of the 17th Amendment, columnist Ed Marohn seems to think he is wiser than those who wrote the U.S. Constitution. The 17th Amendment provided for the election of senators by the people instead of state legislatures.Our government was set up to divide power between the three branches of government and between the states and the central government. Our government was not founded as a democracy in which the majority rules, but as a republic in which individual rights are not subject to majority vote.A democracy is tyranny by the majority.The people were supposed to be represented by the House of Representatives and the states by the Senate. The Senate was meant to cool the passions of the people so that legislation could be passed which did not violate natural rights or equal protection under the law.The 17th Amendment destroyed the balance of power between the states and the federal government, which over the years has caused a greater concentration of power in the central government. It has moved our government towards a democracy, with a consequent erosion of individual rights.The 17th Amendment did not end corruption in the election of senators. Senators are bought and paid for today just as they were before the 17th Amendment was ratified. But it did undermine state rights as protected by the 10th Amendment.The founders of this country were wise men, unlike those today who simply think that they are wise. (Word count: 250)Wallace HoffmanIdaho Falls16BPrinted on: August 13, 2013Anti-discrimination ordinance gets us closer to original American valuesEven 'a little' discrimination in Idaho Falls should not be tolerated by its citizens or the public who draft our laws, writes Ed Marohn.Some 237 years after the Declaration of Independence, this country still struggles to offer total equality to all of it citizens. Currently, the Idaho Falls City Council is working on an ordinance that would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. It is sad that in the 21st century this still has to be done. America, founded on freedom and equality for all, still has work to do.Some oppose granting equal rights to gays and lesbians, labeling such as deviant behavior and saying how this will erode moral and religious values. Quick to jump in for political gains are extreme ideologues exploiting irrational fears and concerns to garner votes and power.It's not surprising that inequality issues still exist. When the Constitution was ratified, it avoided eliminating slavery to satisfy Southern slave owners. Thus, this nation -- founded on freedom and equality -- condemned blacks to slavery. Legalized slavery, based on the ownership of property clause, existed until the conclusion of the Civil War in 1865 and the enactment of the 13th Amendment. Unfortunately, racism remained in the South in the form of segregation, prohibiting blacks to share the same bathrooms, dining counters, schools or even drinking fountains as whites.Blacks became second-class citizens in the south and remained so until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which overturned segregation. But generations of bigotry and hate still exist and the South continues to struggle with desegregation. Racism is still alive.Women were treated as second-class citizens until 1920 when the 19th Amendment, instituting universal suffrage, elevated them. In the world of work, however, women aren't universally treated as equals as many still receive less pay than their male counterparts. Some males believe in misogyny.Throughout, a common thread exists where some, using religious beliefs, cloak themselves in a veil of righteousness, discriminating against others who are different. Violence has been all too common. In 1844, the followers of the LDS faith were persecuted in Missouri, resulting in the killing of their leader, Joseph Smith. Being different threatens others.Hate, prejudices, bigotry and misogyny unfortunately are common in society. The terms "family values" or "religious values" are misused to justify irrational action against those who are different. Intolerance to others who are different can lead to great harm: The Jewish people were killed for centuries in pogroms throughout the world with the most horrific event occurring under the Nazis when 6 million were exterminated.The citizens of Idaho Falls can do better and must ban any form of discrimination. If even "a little" discrimination is allowed through various exemptions, then second-class citizenship is perpetuated. Equality is not a word but a way of life.Marohn is a retired executive with Continental AG.17 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download