Monticello mill victims seek help on Utah's Capitol Hill

Bill asks feds to help with cancer screening

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Gen123 Cortez, CO
    Feb. 26, 2013 2:26 p.m.

    In Monticello, cancer has affected many, for example one neighborhood has had 8 victims of cancerous brain tumors, which included the town doctor and his son. There are over 25 lukemia cases where one would be the normal for the population. The town has documented each cancer case as a dot on the town map, and the dots follow the prevailing wind patterns over the town. Not a coincendence! The running total of cancer cases for the small town is over 650. The town was cleaned up in 2000, but many who were exposed are just starting to feel the effects of cancer because of the latency periods for cancer, and possible unknown geneological affects from their exposed parents. These people deserve assistance from the US Government!

  • Gen123 Cortez, CO
    Feb. 26, 2013 2:23 p.m.

    . The government set up three superfund sites to clean up the mill, 450 properties in Monticello, (which is most of the town), and the Montezuma water system that runs through the mill properties. The first two have been completed, but the water will be on the superfund site until 2044, they are monitoring it through $$ studies of the birds and environment. They have given priority to the geological environment but have forgotten the human environment. The Mill was the only one in the US ever owned solely by the US Dept of Energy and everything produced was for Government Use. The enriched uranium was used in the bombs that ended World War II. The victims of this great travesty are truly innocent. When the Utah State Health conducted studys and found that documented cancer cases showed a legitimate cancer cluster for the area, it brought about the cold facts revealing the ugly hand of government operations and the affect it has had on this population.

  • Gen123 Cortez, CO
    Feb. 26, 2013 2:18 p.m.

    The government's actions caused damage to the citizens who lived and worked in Monticello during the time the mill was open 1942-62 and then exposure throughout the following years until all was cleaned up in 2000. The exposure covered several generations. The people who just lived in Monticello, worked and went to school in Monticello were unknowingly exposed the same as the government mill workers. Children, students, teachers, business owners, every family has been affected by the legacy of cancer. The government has provided assistance for those who worked for the government, and even for those who subcontracted in the cleanup for the government as "on-site participants". But the guy who owns the home and property that was cleaned up by the government, who has lived in the contamination for years and raised his children there, is not eligible for any assistance. Their cry is that they were also "on-site participants" and should be treated as fairly. See part two as follows.

  • JSB Sugar City, ID
    Feb. 25, 2013 3:04 p.m.

    @ Aunt Lucy: I hope that I haven’t misinterpreted your comment. It is one thing for people to expect the government to fix everything and build bridges to nowhere in order to subsidize laziness or greed. But if the government’s actions cause to damage to the citizens, then the government should be obligated to cover the costs to repair the damage. In this case, since the government’s uranium mills are the cause of the health issues in Monticello, associated medical costs should be covered by the government. Just like, if through neglect or ignorance I cause damage to you, then I should pay to fix the damage. Consequently, I think that Utah’s representatives should make sure the federal government pays for the damage it caused in Monticello.

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    Feb. 25, 2013 12:13 p.m.

    This is a case where the government absolutely is liable. Conservatives want to see cuts in waste and elimination of pointless, meaningless, non-meritorious programs. They don't want to see people damaged by the government and left to twist in the wind. The government has aboslutely liability in this case and it needs to be taken care of.

  • GEAnthony RAMAH, NM
    Feb. 25, 2013 11:23 a.m.

    Boy, some of the respondents seem a little heartless to me. When a highly disproportionate number of residents per capita come down with cancer something needs to be done. My wife was a downwinder from Monticello and 24 years ago at the age of 47 was diagnosed with colon cancer along with her dad and uncle. Six months after being diagnosed she suffered a very painful death. I would not want to see anyome go through that again. Any help, I'm sure, would be greatly appreciated.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Feb. 25, 2013 10:56 a.m.

    Yet how many of these people are GOP stalwarts who want to cut funding for everything and everyone else?

    How many would support doing away with "useless" federal agencies such as the Atomic Energy Commission or EPA?

  • Swiss Price, Utah
    Feb. 25, 2013 10:25 a.m.

    A question; My malignant tumor of my right paratoid gland was possibly caused by drinking raw milk downwind of the of the nuclear tests in Nevada.
    the problem: I lived in NE Indiana and yes we had fallout fall on us according to the maps.

  • aunt lucy Looneyville, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 7:48 p.m.

    Everyone and every group of people want the federal government to stop spending and start living within its means- as long as it still spends money on their special concern. Time the federal government finds money to fund all these projects our country is still 16 billion in debt. Seems like every race and group as been wronged in the past by our government and money will make it all right. I'm not sure living in the greatest nation in the world is not payment enough.

  • JSB Sugar City, ID
    Feb. 24, 2013 7:41 p.m.

    When the federally-owned Teton Dam failed, the government paid for the damage caused by the flood. Shouldn't the same principle apply in Monticello? Since the federal government owned the property, isn't the government morally responsible for treatment of the health problems associated with the government's actions? Utah's representatives in Washington should make a real issue of this. What are they doing?