Thursday Apr. 24, 2014
Comments on:
Daines was among 67 Republicans in the House that voted against the measure
Let’s be civil.
The Flathead Beacon encourages vigorous discussion and lively debate, but we will delete comments that attack other readers, make accusations we can’t verify, stray too far off topic, criticize local businesses (call them if you have a problem), accuse someone of a crime, use profanity or are simply judged to be in bad taste. We don’t always have someone moderating comments, so we ask for your help: If you see a comment that violates these ground rules, or you simply deem it offensive, please e-mail webmaster [at] flatheadbeacon.com.

The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.

  Newest First
By kalispelling bee on 01-04-13 @ 12:09 pm
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
40 up | 54 down


That’s shameful.
By Mark W. on 01-04-13 @ 1:42 pm
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
52 up | 24 down


Here you go, bee.  Knock yourself out.

https://sandynjrelieffund.org/index.html
By montanaeasy56 on 01-04-13 @ 8:26 pm
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
34 up | 35 down


I suspect this hypocrit will vote to continue the welfare programs for east side farmers and
corporations…but not for people who live in blue states. America is becoming politically SCARY.
By Westside2 on 01-05-13 @ 1:57 am
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
33 up | 33 down


God help us if we have a natural disaster here in Montana!
By Gabby Johnson on 01-05-13 @ 6:03 am
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
31 up | 37 down


So Daines is saying to those who paid premiums into the Federal Flood Insurance program that
when you file a claim, you won’t get a dime?
Seems to me he needs to go back to school and learn what a contract is.
By ride4fun on 01-05-13 @ 7:38 am
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
25 up | 33 down


Totally agree with you Gabby…..let’s hope Mr. Daines doesn’t have a natural disaster happen to
his home.  Might change his viewpoint.
By montanaeasy56 on 01-05-13 @ 9:27 am
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
17 up | 33 down


This guy reminds me of Marlenee. Those around at the time remember what a champion
Marlenee was for the timber industry. At every turn he did all he could to stop “frivilous”
lawsuits from environmental whackos when they would appeal a timber sale. he called those
folks, “unAmerican”, nazis, etc. But when the F.S. put up a sale adjacent to land that he owned
down near Bozeman, guess who was one of the first to file a “frivilous” lawsuit to stop the
timber sale….none other than the self-professed “champion” of the timber industry. Daines will
be the same way. He is the exact repilca of what America is becoming. The only time most in
this country get excited about an issue is when it DIRECTLY affects them…otherwise screw the
rest of the people….“I don’t want my tax dollars going to help those idiots on the eat coast or
the west coast…those people chose to live there….THEY need to pay for their decisions”...How
many times have you heard your neighbors say that?
By mooseberryinn on 01-05-13 @ 5:40 pm
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
26 up | 8 down


Where are the Insurance companies who issued the policies?
By Mark Phillips on 01-05-13 @ 9:23 pm
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
7 up | 21 down


Jeez AlcesAlcesScatAuberge, The policy holder for flooding is you. Every good conservative I know is a
freak for contracts. Pay up.
By Craig moore on 01-06-13 @ 10:53 am
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
17 up | 3 down


I look at the “No” vote as an appeal for a time out.  Congress can schedule additional votes
any time it wants.  The Federal Flood Insurance Fund was $20B in the red before Sandy.  Now it
is about $30B.  Here’s why the time out is important:  Fix the problem!!!!!

As to those that argue just pay the claims because there is a contract, guess what?, when a
commercial insurance company is broke claims go unpaid.  There is NO commercial insurance for
flood risks.  The federal fund was to fill the hole.  Now,  how about a conversation to return
the fund to solvency and sustainability before exacerabating the problem which is a microcosm of
what’s wrong with government spending?  THEN, let’s replenish the fund.
By Gabby Johnson on 01-06-13 @ 3:32 pm
READERS RATED THIS COMMENT:
8 up | 14 down


I tend to agree that the federal government should not be in the insurance business.
One thing’s for sure, the “debate” about climate change would end once the number crunchers
assessed real risk from scientific data and set premiums accordingly.
A couple trillion dollars worth of coastal and inland flood-prone property would become
uninsurable, food prices would soar without crop insurance and every nuclear power plant in the
country would have to shut down immediately.
 
Kellyn Brown
Kellyn Brown10h
@kellynbrown
Governor Weighs in on Barry Beach Clemency Application | Flathead Beacon http://t.co/MPQ0KXsiEc
Dillon Tabish
Dillon Tabish12h
@djtabish
Grappling with Technology Demands, Kalispell Schools Seek Funding Boost http://t.co/cy4o52myFO
Molly Priddy
Molly Priddy11h
@mollypriddy
MT Gov. Steve Bullock sends letter to Parole Board, largely supportive of Barry Beach's petition for commutation of sentence. #mtpol
Tristan Scott
Tristan Scott15h
@tristanscott
Meet the law firm behind W.R. Grace and scores of other notable Montana cases. http://t.co/PXTGJGoYdH
Flathead Beacon
FB Headlines10h
@flatheadbeacon
Governor Weighs in on Barry Beach Clemency Application http://t.co/fePORvxmT4