Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Observer. (La Grande, Or.) 1968-current | View Entire Issue (March 12, 2022)
Opinion A4 Saturday, March 12, 2022 OUR VIEW Judge right to block real estate ‘love lett er’ law S o-called real estate “love letters” aren’t exactly a major free speech issue. But it’s not surprising that Oregon’s unique new law partially banning these messages quickly ran into trouble on First Amendment grounds. U.S. District Judge Marco A. Hernández last week issued a preliminary injunction blocking the law, which the Oregon Legislature passed in 2021 and Gov. Kate Brown signed. It took eff ect Jan. 1, 2022. Hernández made his ruling in a lawsuit fi led in November 2021 by the Pacifi c Legal Foundation on behalf of the Total Real Estate Group of Bend. Oregon State Rep. Mark Meek, a Democrat from Clackamas County and a real estate agent, promoted the law. It deals with letters that hopeful buyers sometimes send to a seller, using real estate agents as intermediaries, as a way to try to entice the seller to choose the letter writer’s off er. The law doesn’t prohibit prospective buyers from writing such letters, or from sending them directly to a homeowner. The law prohibits real estate agents who represent a seller from passing on such letters to the seller. Meek and other supporters said they were con- cerned that such letters could include personal details about the prospective buyer, such as race, gender or sexual orientation, that might infl uence the seller’s decision about which off er to accept. Proponents of the law contend this situation would violate the federal Fair Housing Act, which prohibits discrimination in housing based on fac- tors such as race and sexual orientation. This is a legitimate concern, to be sure. But the notion that such letters would truly lead to discrimination is diffi cult, if not impos- sible, to prove. In any case, the mere potential for a letter to contribute to discrimination is not suf- fi cient to meet the appropriately high threshold that the First Amendment sets to ensure Ameri- cans have the right to freely express themselves, regardless of the topic or the forum. Daniel Ortner, an attorney for the Pacifi c Legal Foundation, made that point in a statement about the preliminary injunction. “Love letters communicate information that helps sellers select the best off er,” Ortner said. “The state cannot ban important speech because someone might misuse it.” Hernández acknowledged in his decision that the purpose of the new law is worthwhile. The judge cited Oregon’s “long and abhorrent history of racial discrimination in property ownership and housing” that in the past explicitly blocked people of color from owning property. But the judge also rightly concluded that the law is too broad, prohibiting this type of letter in general rather than outlawing specifi c subjects. Oregon law- makers, Hernández wrote, “could have addressed the problem of housing discrimination without infringing on protected speech to such a degree.” That’s an interesting point. However, it’s hard to imagine that any such restriction on this type of letter, even one with a narrower focus than the current law, would pass constitutional muster. The preliminary injunction will remain in eff ect until Hernández makes a fi nal decision on the lawsuit. Oregon offi cials, including Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum and Real Estate Commissioner Steve Strode, both named as defendants in the lawsuit, should concede that the new law, how- ever well-intentioned, is too general in its restric- tions on free speech to stand. There’s no reason to spend public money defending against a lawsuit that stands on a legal foundation as formidable as the First Amendment. Average standardized test scores should be celebrated EVELYN SWART OTHER VIEWS T he story “Legislators push for money to train Oregon teachers in the science of reading” (lagrandeobserver.com, March 1) inspires me to comment. I suspect that there are far more adults who read very little than there are children who struggle to learn to read. Perhaps we should spend as much eff ort and resources to increase adult reading as we use on children learning to read. About 25 years ago the Legis- lature in another state decreed that teacher training institutions must incorporate instruction of phonetic methods in their language arts cur- riculum. I was hired to implement phonics instruction at one of the state universities. Prior to this assignment, I was employed in the state education department working in curriculum and instruction. My comments are based on these experiences as well as years of experience teaching in the classroom. Regarding the science of reading, my experience tells me that children of normal intelligence should have few problems learning to decode language. The decoding process can be accomplished by most students in the fi rst three grades. After that, reasoning and under- standing the reading content is EDITORIALS Unsigned editorials are the opinion of The Observer editorial board. Other columns, letters and cartoons on this page express the opinions of the authors essential for success. Discussion, a variety of reading content and stu- dents’ past experiences in and out of the classroom are meaningful for learning and doing well in school and on tests. Legislators and journalists need to know the meaning of the term “grade level” and what standard- ized tests were intended to accom- plish. It is my understanding that an important purpose of these tests is to improve the level at which large groups of students understand what they read. It is expected that when they know student test scores, teachers and curriculum developers will upgrade instruction and the reading level will be raised. During my career, I asked curric- ulum developers and the test devel- opers how they come up with “grade levels.” I wanted to know why grade- level textbooks seem to increase in diffi culty over the years. The expla- nation I received was that it is done by a certain process. Large samples of students at diff erent levels are given a standardized test, and the average performance of the students at specifi c age levels becomes the “grade level.” Curriculum specialists develop textbooks and instruc- tion using the averaged levels, or “grade levels.” Textbook compa- nies revise their textbooks every few years; they are purchased by school districts and implemented in classrooms. At the same time, classroom and not necessarily that of The Observer. LETTERS • The Observer welcomes letters to the editor. We edit letters for brevity, grammar, taste and legal SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION Subscription rates: Monthly Autopay ...............................$10.75 13 weeks.................................................$37.00 26 weeks.................................................$71.00 52 weeks ..............................................$135.00 reasons. We will not publish consumer complaints against businesses, personal attacks against pri- vate individuals or comments that can incite vio- lence. We also discourage thank-you letters. STAFF SUBSCRIBEAND SAVE NEWSSTAND PRICE: $1.50 You can save up to 55% off the single-copy price with home delivery. Call 800-781-3214 to subscribe. teachers are taking courses to learn new eff ective instruction techniques for student success. The conclusion that I draw is that when curriculum materials and classroom instruction is upgraded, learning is enhanced and “grade levels” are upgraded. As student performance on standardized tests increase, it raises the average grade level and higher expectations of students. Thus, higher expectations result in increased student learning. I would suggest that parents should not be unduly dismayed by standardized testing averages in their children’s school district. Stan- dardized tests are not an appropriate way to understand an individual stu- dent’s progress. They are intended to gauge the average progress of large numbers of students, and to assess the progress of instruction in the state or nation. Legislators can use the informa- tion to assess the need for resources to improve statewide learning levels, not to punish poor performing districts. A school district that maintains average test scores over the years should be celebrating a resounding success. Districts with lower stan- dardized testing averages can use the overall information to determine the need for resources and training. ——— Evelyn Swart is a retired educator who was born in 1936. Her retirement is devoted to writing and community volunteering in Joseph. Anindependent newspaper foundedin1896 www.lagrandeobserver.com Periodicals postage paid at Pendleton, Oregon 97801 Published Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays (except postal holidays) by EO Media Group, 911 Jefferson Ave., La Grande, OR 97850 (USPS 299-260) The Observer retains ownership and copyright protection of all staff-prepared news copy, advertising copy, photos and news or ad illustrations. They may not be reproduced without explicit prior approval. COPYRIGHT © 2022 Phone: 541-963-3161 Regional publisher ....................... Karrine Brogoitti Multimedia journalist.........................Alex Wittwer Interim editor ....................................Andrew Cutler Home delivery adviser.......... Amanda Turkington Assistant editor .................................... Ronald Bond Advertising representative ..................... Kelli Craft News clerk ........................................Lisa Lester Kelly Advertising representative .................... Amy Horn Reporter....................................................Dick Mason National accounts coordinator ...... Devi Mathson Reporter............................................Davis Carbaugh Graphic design .................................. Dorothy Kautz Toll free (Oregon): 1-800-781-3214 Email: news@lagrandeobserver.com POSTMASTER Send address changes to: The Observer, 911 Jefferson Ave., La Grande, OR 97850 A division of