Solutions needed
Dear Editor:
I was heartened to see the Three Rivers Hospital (Brewster) levy approved overwhelmingly by our voters. We recognized the critical need to continue emergency services.
At the same time, we should not forget that we need a long-term solution for our rural health needs. They go far beyond emergency care. We turned down one major hospital proposal before, mainly (in my mind, at least) because it narrowly focused on expanding a single hospital.
Let’s get moving soon on overall planning to come up with a better proposal the voters can support. I know this has started. Some very good people are working on it. Let’s hope it continues.
Randy Brook
Twisp
The AI threat
Dear Editor:
It takes 1 minute and 42 seconds to drive past a new 700-acre data center in Wisconsin, at 70 mph. Picture such monstrosities along the Methow or Columbia Rivers. Even darkness won’t conceal them, illuminated as they are with harsh, prison-like security lights.
This is our future if U.S. House candidate Amanda McKinney wins in November. Already she’s taken more than $775,000 from big tech donors, and says, “It is absolutely imperative that we win the AI war.” AI can’t work without data centers, so expect to see them sprouting like poisonous weeds if McKinney gets in. Data centers employ very few workers but consume vast quantities of electricity and water — up to 5 million gallons per day, about the same amount used by a city of 50,000 people.
Imagine explaining such an ugly, incessantly-humming, night-sky-destroying blight to your grandkids, or why we elected someone willing to pollute our air with diesel exhaust from data center backup generators. Vast banks of them must be tested constantly, emitting thousands of pounds of fine particulate pollution into surrounding communities.
The tech titans are pouring money into McKinney’s campaign and they’re not doing it to be nice. They expect results. I don’t know about you, but the idea of letting people like Elon Musk or Peter Thiel shape the future of our region makes me sick. Please think carefully before you vote in November.
Ken Bennett
Twisp
Overcoming outside money
Dear Editor:
Washington’s Congressional District 4 primary campaign was flooded by out-of-state dark money to ensure that Amanda McKinney was the Republican candidate who prevailed. Super-PACs largely funded by AI and cryptocurrency interests spent over $2 million in her support.
Following the money is mind-bending. Super-PACs circulate money amongst themselves in what looks to be a shell game to hide the sources, but it is largely from billionaires such as Marc Andreessen and Kenneth Griffin. Now, ahead of the November general elections, their massive resources will be deployed against McKinney’s opponent, John Duresky.
Separately, McKinney’s campaign collected $1.1 million — over 60% of it from out-of-state. Her website and voters’ pamphlet statements contain the usual MAGA catch phrases and wedge issues but say nothing about affordability, health care, or any challenges faced by ordinary people.
In contrast, John Duresky has no super-PAC support, but he has tirelessly crisscrossed the district, including coming here, to meet voters and hear their concerns. He published his phone number in the voters’ pamphlet and encouraged voters to call him directly. His major issues, including affordability, jobs, and access to health care, are focused on the concerns of ordinary citizens. He is also passionate about reforming the Supreme Court, term limits, corruption, and getting dark money out of politics. Duresky’s hard work is paying off. As reported by MSN, McKinney spent $89 per vote she received while Duresky, raising $154,000, spent $5 per vote. He finished less than 5% behind McKinney.
Are you satisfied with the direction this country is going under Republican control? If so, vote for McKinney. She will faithfully vote as her party tells her to, executing the billionaires’ agenda. If you are alarmed by the largest budget deficit in history, unnecessary wars, and the shredding of the Constitution, help end Republican control of Congress.
Duresky is a strong candidate but he needs your help right now. The flood of outside money will become a deluge ahead of the November elections. Donate generously, volunteer, talk to friends and neighbors. Act as if the future of our country is at stake, because it is.
Gina McCoy
Winthrop
371,000 miles is enough
Dear Editor:
Apparently, what our national forests need is more roads. Because 371,000 miles just isn’t enough.
That is how many miles of road the U.S. Forest Service, nearly eight times the length of the entire Interstate Highway System. Yet the USDA is now proposing to rescind the 2001 Roadless Rule, removing nationwide protections from roughly 45 million acres of national forest.
For those of us in the Methow, this is not an abstract public-lands debate. We know what wildfire costs. We know what it is like to watch smoke settle into the valley for weeks, check burn maps, lose business during peak summer months, and wonder which road might become the way out.
According to the National Interagency Fire Center, human-caused fires accounted for 88% of U.S. wildfires during the 10-year period ending in 2023. A peer-reviewed 2026 study found wildfire ignition density roughly four times higher near roads than in inventoried roadless areas and concluded that building roads into roadless areas is likely to result in more fires.
So opening currently roadless forests to more roads means increasing human access to places where human access is already a major predictor of wildfire ignition. After the fire seasons this valley has lived through, deliberately increasing that risk seems less like land management and more like tempting fate.
Then there is recreation. Rescission could affect areas containing more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 backcountry climbing routes, 768 miles of whitewater, and nearly 11,000 miles of mountain biking. In the Methow, outdoor recreation is not just something we do. It helps pay the bills.
The Roadless Rule was adopted after 1.6 million public comments, about 95% supporting roadless protections. It is time to speak up again.
Comments are due Sept. 21. It is possible to submit one in about 90 seconds at OutdoorAlliance.org/take-action. That’s less time than it takes to put on ski boots and discover you left one glove in the house.
If you care about the recreation economy that helps keep this valley alive, or simply think we should avoid making wildfire risk worse, take the 90 seconds. Tell USDA to keep the Roadless Rule.
Carry Porter
Mazama
‘Climate bomb’ a threat
Dear Editor:
Research has shown that climate change, including increased heat, extended drought and a thirsty atmosphere, has been a key driver in increasing the risk and extent of wildfires in the western U.S. during the last two decades.
In the upcoming Nov. 3 general election for Congress in our congressional district, there is a stark contrast of opinions between Democratic candidate John Duresky and MAGA Republican Amanda McKinney concerning climate change.
McKinney supports using liquified natural gas (L.N.G.) and Duresky supports using clean energy in our future, which saves us money and effectively combats climate change by reducing carbon emissions.
Bill McKibben, a leading climate journalist who spoke to our community in February about the urgent need to transition from fossil fuels to clean energy has stated: “The buildout of L.N.G. exports on America’s Gulf Coast (as planned by the Trump Administration) is probably the biggest single carbon bomb on the planet.” Covering Climate Now, Jan. 18, 2024.
In a study done by Robert Warren Howarth, a professor of ecology and environmental biology at Cornell, he stated that “ending the use of L.N.G. must be a global priority.” His study suggests that L.N.G. exports may be worse for the environment than burning coal.
The Nov. 3 election for our next U.S. House Representative could have a major impact on future wildfires in the Methow Valley.
John Duresky supports clean energy and Amanda McKinney supports the use of a climate bomb, L.N.G.
Vote for John Duresky on Nov. 3.
Tom Jones
Winthrop
Duresky in 4th
Dear Editor:
I have seen 90 birthdays come and go. If I am fortunate enough to be alive in November, I will vote for John Duresky for 4th District Representative in the U.S. Congress. The 4th District is huge and diverse. Congressman John Duresky will be good for all in the 4th District.
Georgene Fitzgerald
Brewster
