6
CapitalPress.com
Editorials are written by or
approved by members of the
Capital Press Editorial Board.
August 5, 2016
All other commentary pieces are
the opinions of the authors but
not necessarily this newspaper.
Opinion
Editorial Board
Publisher
Editor
Managing Editor
Mike O’Brien
Joe Beach
Carl Sampson
opinions@capitalpress.com Online: www.capitalpress.com/opinion
O UR V IEW
Wyden, Brown do ‘The Sidestep’ on monument
W
e understand the
plight of some Oregon
politicians when it
comes to the national monument
proposed for 2.5 million acres in
Malheur County.
We understand that Sen. Ron
Wyden and Gov. Kate Brown
identify most with Portland and
Eugene.
We understand that in the
political game there is no need
to give a straight answer to any
question that offers them no
benefi t.
But still....
There was a time when even
politicians stood for something.
That’s how they were elected.
They would say what they thought
about a variety of issues important
to the electorate, which in turn
would decide whether to hire them
as their representatives.
Oregon politics, however,
appears to have mutated into
a muddle of ambiguity. This
is a world where there are no
direct answers, and a “yes” or
“no” question is answered with
a monologue that dodges the
question.
In the case of the Owyhee
Canyonlands national monument
proposal in Malheur County,
Wyden was recently asked
whether he supports it. The senator
assured those at an Eastern Oregon
town hall meeting he had told the
Obama administration that area
residents oppose it.
This is interesting in itself,
Oregon has not.
“I didn’t hear an answer,”
Malheur County Farm Bureau
President Jeana Hall told the
Capital Press. “I think I heard a
‘maybe’ somewhere in there.”
Similarly, Brown, who like
Wyden is in the midst of an
election campaign, has been
equally mealy-mouthed.
“While this is ultimately
a federal decision, I have
heard from many Oregonians
with strong views about the
Owyhee,” she said. “There’s
agreement as to the beauty
and uniqueness of the
Canyonlands and disagreement
over whether a monument
designation can best ensure those
characteristics will be enjoyed
because Interior Secretary
Sally Jewell told a U.S. House
committee on March 1 that she
was unaware of any active plan
in the administration to designate
the Owyhee Canyonlands national
monument.
If there are no plans for
the monument, why is the
administration still talking about
it?
Wyden was asked whether he
supported the proposal.
Wyden said it’s his duty to
respect how Oregon residents
vote on issues. Malheur County
residents voted 9-1 against the
monument in a special election
in March. He also said that while
Malheur County residents have
voted on the issue, the rest of
for future generations. I have
communicated those viewpoints
to federal administration offi cials
and will be closely following this
issue in the months ahead.”
It appears to us that Oregon’s
“leaders” have decided it’s too
risky to lead.
The political documentary fi lm
“Best Little Whorehouse in Texas”
includes a song called “The
Sidestep,” which is sung by the
fi ctional governor of Texas. The
chorus goes like this: “Ooh, I love
to dance a little sidestep, now they
see me now they don’t. I’ve come
and gone and, ooh I love to sweep
around the wide step, cut a little
swathe and lead the people on.”
It’s a song all too familiar to a
lot of Oregonians.
Farmland open houses
were ‘disingenuous’
O UR V IEW
By JIM BERNARD
AP Photo/Elaine Thompson File
For the Capital Press
Neither Trump nor Clinton
offer Plan B on TPP
H
illary Clinton and Donald
Trump are running for
president. Their expressed
positions on issues, and the positions
of their respective party platforms, are
easily distinguishable.
Except for trade, where there’s not
much difference between Republican
or Democrat standard bearers. If
farmers and ranchers were to decide
on this issue alone, they would have a
hard time picking the candidate who
best represents their interests.
Trade is the lifeblood of agriculture
in the Northwest and California.
Everything from apples to nuts is
dependent on trade. Eighty percent
of the wheat grown in the Northwest
is bound for Asian markets. Without
access to those markets, producers are
fi nished.
Both sides are for trade — fair
trade. And by that they mean trade
that doesn’t cheat middle class
Americans out of good-paying
jobs. Democrats are also concerned
with foreign labor standards
and environmental regulation.
Republicans want our partners
to respect American intellectual
property and stop manipulating their
currencies.
By those standards, they all say,
many previous deals have been very
bad. And the recently submitted Trans-
Pacifi c Partnership — a 12-nation,
6,000-page behemoth awaiting a vote
in Congress — could be the worst.
Clinton once called TPP the “gold
standard” of trade deals, but last fall
after the deal was written Clinton said
it didn’t meet her standard. Sen. Tim
Kaine, her running mate, was for it
as recently as a week before being
nominated for the vice president slot,
when he promptly came out against
the pact.
Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement partners
Current TPP partners
Potential future partners
Alaska
(U.S.)
Canada
U.S.
Japan
China
Hawaii (U.S.)
Thailand
Mexico
Cambodia
Malaysia/
Singapore
Peru
Vietnam
Brunei-Darussalam
Australia
Chile
New Zealand
Source: aflcio.org
Alan Kenaga/EO Media Group
Courtesy of Zachary Moskow, wikipedia.org
Clinton speaks at an event in Philadelphia
on April 20. TOP PHOTO: The Port of Se-
attle is shown. Neither Republican Donald
Trump nor Democrat Hillary Clinton support
the Trans-Pacifi c Partnership, a 12-nation
trade treaty.
Trump has always been against
TTP, calling it “terrible for America.”
Though China isn’t a party to
TPP, Trump says it gives China
opportunities to get in “through the
back door.” As governor of Indiana
and a congressman before that,
Mike Pence, Trump’s running mate,
has long supported multi-nation
trade deals — including TPP. He
too underwent a post-convention
conversion.
There have been many trade deals
over the years. Some of them were
good, some of them bad. Even in the
best, someone in the United States
loses as other of their countrymen
win.
And it is thus with the TPP. In
granting access to its market to our
farmers, Vietnam will expect more
favorable terms for its manufactured
goods here. What country would make
a deal in which it received nothing in
exchange for its concessions?
Without TPP, what’s Plan B?
Both Clinton and Trump say they’ll
reopen the negotiations on TPP and
other pacts and get a better deal for
America. Maybe, but those kinds
of negotiations take time. In the
meantime, some of our toughest
competitors could get a toehold in
some of our best markets in Asia.
Supporters of TPP, including
President Obama, are still pushing for
a vote on the deal — perhaps after the
election and before the inauguration,
when everyone will be protected from
the voters.
That’s a little sleazy. But, better
to have a deal in hand for the next
president to tweak than allow
our competitors months — and
potentially years — to exploit
our lack of favored standing with
established customers.
Letters policy
Write to us: Capital Press welcomes letters to the editor on
issues of interest to farmers, ranchers and the agribusiness
community.
Letters policy: Please limit letters to 300 words and include your
home address and a daytime telephone number with your submis-
sion. Longer pieces, 500-750 words, may be considered as guest
commentary pieces for use on the opinion pages. Guest commen-
tary submissions should also include a photograph of the author.
Send letters via email to opinions@capitalpress.com. Emailed letters are
preferred and require less time to process, which could result in quicker
publication. Letters also may be sent to P.O. Box 2048, Salem, OR
97308; or by fax to 503-370-4383.
I
t’s worse than “disingenu-
ous.”
That’s the word used
in a story by a local newspa-
per about the so-called public
process the county engaged in
around three recent open hous-
es.
The subjects: changing the
designation of properties from
rural reserves to an undesignat-
ed status to allow them to be
developed — making them far
more valuable in the process.
The three properties at the
heart of this effort include
Langdon Farms south of the
Willamette River owned by the
Maletis Brothers, Springwater
Road owned by Terry Emmert,
and another 400 acres east of
Canby, Ore.
Despite the major impact on
cities and residents, the three
public open houses for citizens
were scheduled the week be-
fore the Fourth of July holiday
with short notice. Only prop-
erty owners within 250 feet of
the proposed study area were
notifi ed.
Affected cities, mayors,
Community Participation Or-
ganizations and hamlets all say
they were not notifi ed. They
were outraged, and I agree with
them.
Thanks to the quick actions
by Friends of French Prairie
and other community organi-
zations in Wilsonville, approxi-
mately 400 people attended the
three open houses. Only one
person spoke in support of this
proposal, Chris Maletis.
That shouldn’t be a sur-
prise. Thousands of citizens
participated in the Urban/Ru-
ral Reserves process to pre-
serve foundation farmland,
prevent urban sprawl and give
certainty to farmers and urban
developers.
After years of court chal-
lenges, the court ruled that
areas south of the Willamette
River were properly designat-
ed as foundation farmland.
Instead of accepting the
court’s and the public’s verdict,
Clackamas County Chair John
Ludlow and commissioners
Tootie Smith and Paul Savas
Guest
comment
Jim Bernard
voted to spend $200,000 to
study employment lands in ar-
eas that have already been de-
cided — and that would benefi t
only a few property owners.
At the same time, those
same property owners have
donated tens of thousands of
dollars to the campaigns of the
chair and those commissioners.
These properties are in the
heart of agricultural land and
have been rejected as urban
land in all previous public pro-
cesses. And for good reason:
Our citizens need jobs close
to their communities where
services already exist; not
on virgin farmland down in
the Willamette Valley, where
communities do not have the
infrastructure to support these
industrial uses — and taxpay-
ers would be on the hook for
paying for them.
Why should this matter to
all Clackamas County citi-
zens? The Clackamas County
Commission adopted fi ve stra-
tegic priorities in Performance
Clackamas. Chief among
these was: “Build Public Trust
Through Good Governance.”
This process does exactly the
opposite.
I personally attended two of
the three open houses. No one I
spoke with received notice from
the county nor did I encounter
even a single individual that
supported the proposal. There
was a work session scheduled
on this subject on Aug. 3.
A vote is not usually called
during a work session, but there
is nothing preventing that from
happening then or at any other
time if a majority of commis-
sioners decides otherwise.
That must not happen.
Instead, we should restore
the integrity of a process that
has raised far too many ques-
tions — and far too few an-
swers about who the county
commission is truly serving.
Jim Bernard is a Clack-
amas County, Ore., commis-
sioner.
Readers’ views
Ecology has not updated test-
Letter writer
ing on sludge for 10 years, yet
critical of
these two have chased the dol-
lar instead of protecting public
candidates
health. Over 200 nitrates were
Mike Letia, a Yakima
County commissioner, and
U.S. Rep. Dan Newhouse
have made the Yakima Valley
the “toilet bowl” of the state.
Both Newhouse and Letia
have supported using toxic
sewage sludge on food prod-
ucts in the Yakima Valley.
Letia, by being on the Ya-
kima Health District bringing
in untested sludge from over
27 locations. Newhouse by
promoting sludge use in his
farming community.
The state Department of
found in wells next to dairies,
yet Newhouse supports not
holding polluters accountable
for their manure.
Will anyone care when
there is no more clean wa-
ter in the valley? The City of
Mabton, Outlook School, pri-
vate wells have been polluted.
Both candidates prefer that
taxpayers pay for the pollu-
tion with their health and their
pockets. Neither candidate de-
serves to be in offi ce.
Jan Whitefoot
Harrah, Wash.