Port Angeles Vote (Just Maybe) on Fluoridation
The Washington State Supreme Court might make it possible for Port Angeles residents to have a vote on water fluoridation.
Two local groups — Our Choice! and Protect Our Waters — submitted petitions to the Port Angeles City Council in 2006 to bring the issue to a public vote. Kitsap County Superior Court and the State Court of Appeals both ruled that the initiatives were not eligible to be placed on the ballot because they dealt with “administrative” rather than “legislative” issues.
On April 30th the State Supreme Court agreed to review those two court decisions. And now a third group, Protect The Peninsula’s Future, is involved. All three groups are being represented by Attorney Gerald Steel of Olympia.
I have nothing personal against fluoride in the water, but there’s no reason this issue shouldn’t be voted on by the public. Squelching these initiatives is the exact kind of high-handed autocratic attitude that causes so much hostility and resentment against local governments.
Two local groups — Our Choice! and Protect Our Waters — submitted petitions to the Port Angeles City Council in 2006 to bring the issue to a public vote. Kitsap County Superior Court and the State Court of Appeals both ruled that the initiatives were not eligible to be placed on the ballot because they dealt with “administrative” rather than “legislative” issues.
On April 30th the State Supreme Court agreed to review those two court decisions. And now a third group, Protect The Peninsula’s Future, is involved. All three groups are being represented by Attorney Gerald Steel of Olympia.
I have nothing personal against fluoride in the water, but there’s no reason this issue shouldn’t be voted on by the public. Squelching these initiatives is the exact kind of high-handed autocratic attitude that causes so much hostility and resentment against local governments.
Labels: Attorney Gerald Steel Olympia, fluoridation Our Choice, Protect Our Waters, Protect The Peninsula’s Future, water fluoridation Kitsap County Superior Court State Supreme Court
posted by Tom Harper at 5:39 PM
5 Comments:
I have nothing personal against fluoride in the water,I don't either, I know folks that have moved here from other areas that had it and then started having all sorts of dental problems after coming here.
Hell, just look at all the fancy high priced dental offices in town, they love it that the city doesn't have fluoride.
Well, there are also those many that can't afford those expensive dentists so end up pretty toothless, not that I suppose they care as long as they have their fancy homes and toys.
We never should have had fluoride crammed down our throats! I hope we get the opportunity to vote on it. I was appalled by how that was handled.
I agree with Anonymous at 9:10. I think fluoride in the water has saved a lot of kids' teeth over the years, but people should have a say on whether it's put in the water or not. It has other side effects that aren't so great. It requires a prescription, which classifies it as a drug -- shouldn't be just dumped into everybody!
Put fluoride in the Port Angeles water... because the residents are too lazy to take care of their own teeth so they need to government to do it for them...
Fluoride isn't good for everyone. In fact, once you're out of the "kid growing stage" it doesn't do s**t for your teeth. And, there have been some studies to show that it can make bones MORE fragile...even in kids. (Areas with natural high fluoridation have increased bone fractures, as well.)
One of the downsides, which may be a case of "good news/bad news" is that men have a higher incidence of male impotence (you know, failure to perform) with high fluoride levels. Now this might be good, as it will reduce the birthrate in this town...but for you guys ....you might want to look into it, and think twice, eh?
Post a Comment
<< Home