Letter to the Editor::
In his letter to the editor, Mr. Adam Todd made a valid point. Since he was not present at the "Meet the Candidates" evening, it is hard to know exactly what happened, so he calls for clarification.
Because I was present at the gathering and heard Dan Anderson's comments, I can offer more clarity. At no time did Dan call for a plethora of new regulations. Instead, his only concern was the maintained distance between neighbors and hog confinements. This could well be a concern of many people who are confronted with a hog confinement as a neighbor. Indeed, I can only imagine that Luke Squiers, whom Mr. Todd supports, would be concerned if a hog confinement was too close to his campground. At no time did Dan call for the end of the confinement industry. His only concern was distance.
In addition, Mr. Todd makes the claim that Dan is promoting bigger government, which Mr. Todd "does not advocate in any form." However, in his letter, Mr. Todd looks to institutions like the DNR and the state legislature as having the wisdom and expertise to handle this matter and is happy with their control. It is Dan, who in this case, advocates for smaller government. Dan would take the matter of hog confinement placement and lessen some of the decisionmaking power of government and put that power in the hands of the people who are the neighbors affected by hog confinements.
Mr. Todd's letter is a good example of why it is important to become involved in local politics by attending meetings and by meeting the candidates.