Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Observer. (La Grande, Or.) 1968-current | View Entire Issue (May 19, 2020)
Opinion 4A Tuesday, May 19, 2020 The Observer OUR VIEW Time to consider taking politicians out of redistricting O regonians elect pol- iticians to make decisions about the collection of taxes, spending that revenue and policies that shape lives. But perhaps we should be more skeptical when granting politicians the authority to shape voting districts. A proposed ballot measure takes on that one, aiming to take politicians out of polit- ical redistricting. The mea- sure would create a citizen commission to draw the lines. How fair that would be com- pared to how the state han- dles redistricting now is the question. The new census will lead to redrawing of Oregon’s con- gressional and legislative dis- tricts. Legislators in Oregon now redraw those boundaries. That could be putting the fox in charge of the henhouse — at least that’s what the groups supporting a citizen commission argue. The measure has the backing of the League of Women Voters of Oregon, Oregon Common Cause, the Independent Party, The Tax- payer Association of Oregon and others. The measure would amend the Oregon Constitution to establish an independent redistricting commission con- sisting of 12 Oregonians. They would hold public meet- ings across the state and draw up the boundaries with the goal of using an open and fair process, respecting commu- nities and having less parti- sanship and other political law judges would winnow the manipulations. pool of applicants for commis- The proposal takes substan- sion candidates, who would tial steps to keep politicians eventually be chosen by lot. out of it. People would apply The governor could remove for the commission spots. someone from the commis- Basically, paid politicians sion, but only with a two- could not serve on the com- thirds majority of the Senate. mission. People who recently If you are interested, you ran for such offices also could should read the full text of not, nor could their staff. the proposal, not just how Likewise, the measure would we or its advocates summa- bar political consultants. An rize it. The website is www. individual who gave more peoplenotpoliticiansoregon. than $2,700 a year to any com. Supporters are trying to single candidate also would gather enough signatures to be out of the mix. get it on the ballot. There also are require- Gerrymandering began ments to limit the members before it was called gerry- from the two largest political mandering, before the coun- parties and include nonaffil- try’s independence. It’s the iated voters. Administrative idea of drawing a voting dis- trict so it will get a certain kind of candidate elected. The term gerrymandering comes from an 1812 political cartoon satirizing Massachu- setts Gov. Elbridge Gerry for signing a bill that established a partisan district resembling the shape of a salamander. The law redrew state senate districts to ensure Gerry’s party — Thomas Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans — would be strong and John Adams’ and Alexander Ham- ilton’s Federalists would be weak. It worked, and one of the districts resembled the shape of a salamander, thus Gerry- mander was born. The U.S. Supreme Court has been reluctant to decide when partisanship goes too far in gerrymandering. It would require two facets dif- ficult for the courts: defining what is fair and divining the future. What’s a clear test for fairness? Fair to whom? Fair to what? As Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, choosing one “poses basic questions that are political, not legal.” The courts also would have to look at a district and somehow know that in the future the outcomes it creates would turn out to be unfair — by some definition. It’s addi- tionally unclear the founders intended judges to decide such things. These days, leaning on big data, political consul- tants have more tools than ever to draw up districts to get an outcome they want. And if legislators are making the redistricting decisions, voters can hold them accountable, but that could come after new districts are in effect. An independent redis- tricting commission creates a way to try to minimize the influence of some politicians on the process. Commis- sioners still will have to make choices about defining what is fair. They will have to guess if sticking the lines in one place will produce more “fair” out- comes in the future. We don’t know if the commission would be more fair. It might. But it would get more Ore- gonians involved in making important decisions about how they are governed. Drive-in theaters poised to profit from pandemic H ere’s one automobiles.” COVID-19 silver The concept was a success, lining: The drive-in but it wasn’t until 1949, when theater, a uniquely American Hollingshead’s patent was creation, is doing booming overturned, that drive-in the- business again. aters began opening all over I’ve long the country. been nos- “The pop- TOM PURCELL talgic for ularity of SYNDICATED COLUMNIST this won- the drive-in derful spiked after piece of Americana. When I World War II and reached was growing up in the ‘70s, its heyday in the late 1950s my mother and father often to mid-60s, with some packed my five sisters and 5,000 theaters across the I into our massive station country,” reports History.com. wagon to see outdoor movies. “Drive-ins became an icon of America’s first drive-in the- American culture ... .” ater opened on June 6, 1933 Kerry Segrave, author of in Camden, N.J. According to “Drive-in Theaters: A His- History.com, it was the cre- tory from Their Inception ation of Richard Hollings- in 1933,” explains that the head, whose mother found boom resulted from several indoor theaters uncomfort- uniquely American trends in able. His idea, which he pat- the 1950s. ented, was to create “an New highway systems open-air theater” that would allowed entrepreneurs to pur- let patrons watch movies from chase inexpensive farmland “the comfort of their own for outdoor theaters, which patrons could easily drive to. Americans’ love of the automobile also was important. Car designs were bold and creative — the 1957 Chevy is still widely loved as a classic, beautiful design. American cars in the ‘50s weren’t just machines to get people to and from places — they were statements. Amer- icans loved spending time in their cars, including hours at drive-in theaters. And with the baby boom well under way, for many single-income families with more than two children — like my family — the drive-in theater was one of the few entertainment venues they could afford. We attended outdoor movies frequently in the mid- 1970s and it was always a treat. The cooler was packed with soda pop and sand- wiches. The family-size potato chip bag could feed a village. We lowered the tail- gate of our Plymouth Fury station wagon and set up a glorious buffet on it. Soon, the blue sky fell dark and the film projector began rattling. Black-and-white numbers — “5, 4, 3, 2, 1” — flashed onto the screen. Yel- lowed 1950s footage adver- tised hot dogs, popcorn and other concession items we could never get our father to buy. Finally, the feature film — such as “The Love Bug” — would play. The drive-in theater never was as popular in any other country as it was in America. All great things come to an end, however. In 1978, as operating costs grew and rising land values encouraged entrepreneurs to sell to devel- opers, the drive-in theater began to decline. The United Drive-in The- atre Owners Association says only 305 drive-in the- aters now exist — and, boy, are they needed now, as the coronavirus, and its social-distancing mandates, are impeding freedom to be entertained. I trust that many more entrepreneurs, the lifeblood of our economy and the engines that will drive our economic recovery, will invent creative ways to get us to the movies. Large, blow-up screens? Temporary theaters in mall parking lots? How about dinner and a movie in restau- rant parking lots? Where there’s a need, a solution quickly follows, as the American drive-in theater is reinvented all over again. About the Author Tom Purcell, author of “Misadventures of a 1970’s Childhood,” a humorous memoir available at amazon. com, is a Pittsburgh Tri- bune-Review humor columnist and is nationally syndicated.