Debate heats up for Sen. District 7

Voters from across Mineral County gathered in at Superior High School Wednesday evening for a Lincoln-Douglas style debate that gave people a chance to hear what issues are most important to the candidates.

Perhaps the most heated debate of the evening revolved around campaign statements made by Democrats about Senate District 7 Republican Candidate Greg Hinkle.

Democrats have circulated literature stating that Hinkle has said he will work to get rid of federal funding of state initiatives in Montana if elected.

Hinkle denied that he intends to cut all federal funding to the state of Montana.

“Folks, those are a distortion of the truth. You can’t get rid of federal funding. There are some things that we need federal funding for,” Hinkle said.

Hinkle went on to say that while not all federal funding would be in his crosshairs as a senator, some funding sources would be. He continued to say that due to funding problems he perceives in the federal government, the state and county would lose money anyway and Montanans need to wean themselves off of federal money.

Hinkle quoted himself: “‘County government will have to reevaluate needs, not wants, and trim budgets accordingly.’” He went on: “And by the way, state government is going to have to do the same. Federal funds are beginning to dry up and I think it is time to begin the process of weaning ourselves off federal government as much as possible.”

Paul Clark, the Democratic candidate for the Senate District 7 Seat, said that while federal funding may diminish in the future, things like education, care for veterans and other important services provided with federal funding need that money and should not be cut.

Hinkle accused Clark of using negative campaign techniques.

“If you look right here,” said Hinkle while holding up a flier distributed by Democrats. “He says my opponent has pledged to vote against any federal funding of state programs including programs that help seniors make ends meet. That’s hogwash. That’s negative campaigning, folks. I did not say that. And nowhere have I even implied that.”

However, in a primary debate held in Mineral County, Hinkle told voters ““I will not vote for any federal funding of state programs.” [See letters to the editor, pg. 4]

Clark said after the debate that he was concerned people would get the wrong idea about the accusations Hinkle has made regarding his campaign.

“It’s a credibility issue, because I’m being accused of twisting and distorting things,” Clark said.

Hinkle also said that he planned to push for alternative energy, specifically in encouraging Montanans to have their own private energy systems, independent from the state’s power grid.

Hinkle also touched on lowering property taxes in Montana.

“Property taxes hinder growth and we all know that if you do some improvements on your property, what happens? Your taxes go up. I am of the persuasion the opposite should happen. You improve your property, your taxes should go down,” said Hinkle

Clark told voters that he wanted to support public schools and that he would never vote for school vouchers.

“So I’m not going to in a situation like we have in our counties, support something like school vouchers and the reason is because it would take money away from our local communities and our schools. It’s as simple as that,” Clark said.

Clark also said that he wanted to reach across the aisle to work on issues that affect all Montanans.

“I don’t see these things as Republican and Democrat. I heard Greg say a lot of things that apply to me,” Clark said.

In the debate between incumbent Republican Gordon Hendrick and first-time candidate Cindy Grimm for the Montana House District 14 seat, the two candidates continued to be just as gracious towards one another as they have since they began campaigning.

“Gordon has been supportive, nice and his kindness has really helped me to do this, something that I’ve never done before,” said Grimm at the opening of her speech.

Both Grimm and Hendrick said that they would push to bring the logging industry into Mineral County and Montana in a bigger way.

“The forest doesn’t just manage itself, and has a huge impact on the people that live and work in and around it,” Grimm said.

Grimm went on to say that ensuring access to rivers and streams is essential to Montana and tourism in the state.

“Access to the forests, rivers and creeks is essential to this sort of income,” Grimm said.

In his speech, Hendrick said that he was not convinced that tourism is the best industry for Montanans.

“We have tons of self-service jobs out here for tourism. I don’t think that tourism is the lifesaver for the state of Montana, it’s agriculture,” Hendrick said.

Grimm said that she would like to build educational systems by giving more control to local schools as well as giving them access to up-to-date technology and materials.

Hendrick also touted his close ties to education, mentioning the time he has spent working with the Superior school system. He also mentioned his vote against a bill that would have allowed people to teach in Montana schools without teaching credentials.

Grimm said that she would represent seniors in the community for advocating for programs like meals on wheels, low income housing and prescription drug programs.

Hendrick touched on a bill he is working on that would provide more money for the county’s public health nurse.

“We’re the gray tsunami,” Hendrick said.

In the debate between Mineral County Commissioner candidates Duane Simons, a Democrat, and Curtis Cochran, a Republican, both pushed for increased logging in Mineral County.

Simons said that the county should support the 18-point economic plan put forth by the Missoula Area Economic Growth and Development Corporation to help save the logging industry in Montana, and bring more money into the county.

“Money, or the lack of it, has always haunted Mineral County due to its over-abundance of federal lands,” Simons said.

The pair agreed that while the abundance of Forest Service lands in Mineral County provides challenges for the people that live here, it also creates a unique opportunity for employment through the timber industry and forest management.

Cochran said that he would like to work to bring more money to the Forest Service in Mineral County, bringing more jobs to the area.

“I can remember 30 years ago when they had twice as many employees. We had a work center in St. Regis with 30 kids every summer. You just don’t see the Forest Service Jobs that we used to have,” said Cochran.

Simons told the audience that he also wants to work and make sure that planning work in Mineral County is overseen effectively.

“If the Mineral County Commissioners cannot make well-thought-out plans for the growth of our county, all of Mineral County will pay the price,” Simons said.

Cochran told the crowd that he wanted to work to bring new businesses into the county to bring in more jobs. He mentioned discussions he had had with friends about bringing a fish hatchery and a food distribution center to the county.

Both candidates for Mineral County Commissioner have been spending time in meetings with the commissioners over the past month as their schedules permitted them to, in order to learn more about the issues affecting the county.