A4
THE ASTORIAN • TuESdAy, JANuARy 14, 2020
OPINION
editor@dailyastorian.com
KARI BORGEN
Publisher
DERRICK DePLEDGE
Editor
Founded in 1873
JEREMY FELDMAN
Circulation Manager
JOHN D. BRUIJN
Production Manager
CARL EARL
Systems Manager
GUEST COLUMN
Broader perspective needed on river treaty
L
ast May, the U.S. and Canada
began negotiations to modernize
the Columbia River Treaty —
a 1964 agreement that defines the way
both countries share the Northwest’s
greatest waterway.
The treaty required British Columbia
to build three dams in the upper portion
of the watershed and use them to control
river flows to increase hydropower gen-
eration at American dams and prevent
downstream flooding,
primarily in the greater
Portland area. In return,
the U.S. paid about $534
million for the first 60
years of flood control
and agreed for the life of
the treaty to return 50%
GRAEME LEE
of power enhancements
ROWLANDS
to British Columbia.
This annual share of
hydroelectricity, known as the “Cana-
dian Entitlement,” is a theoretical quan-
tity calculated in advance by both coun-
tries as the maximum amount possible
in a system optimized for power gen-
eration. In most years since the 1990s,
this calculation has exceeded actual U.S.
generation due to domestic factors influ-
encing the operation of American dams,
including integration with other power
sources and legal obligations to provide
river flows suitable for struggling fish
populations.
Now that the treaty is up for revision,
public utility districts and others are
insisting that the U.S. negotiating team
led by the State Department must secure
deep cuts to the Canadian Entitlement
— or terminate the agreement.
It’s fair to argue that payments to
British Columbia should be aligned
more closely with actual benefits. How-
ever, those advocating steep reductions
in the entitlement seem to have exagger-
ated the imbalance and have neglected
to consider the treaty’s full context. In
doing so, they may be setting Americans
up for failure, with a one-sided perspec-
tive and unrealistic expectations.
At the Dec. 16 “Treaty Town Hall”
event hosted by the State Department,
Douglas County PUD Manager Gary
Ivory epitomized this misleading nar-
rative when he told negotiators, “we
believe that anything less than a 90%
reduction (of the entitlement) is going to
be a failure on your part.”
This statement implies that the enti-
Wikimedia Commons
The Grand Coulee Dam on the Columbia River in Washington state is one of the 28 dams included in the U.S.-Canada treaty.
tlement is 10 times larger than it should
be. But estimates provided by the bina-
tional Permanent Engineering Board
charged with executing the treaty offer
a different story. Since 2004, the enti-
tlement has on average been just 2.37
times greater than actual generation.
This suggests a reduction of only about
58% to align it with actual power gen-
eration, not the 90% that PUDs have
argued for.
Furthermore, changes to the treaty
will be determined through a complex
multiissue negotiation, which inherently
involves compromise. Canadian water
management does more than enhance
power production and manage flood
risk. It gives the U.S. flexibility to oper-
ate dams especially Grand Coulee — for
other purposes, including irrigated agri-
culture, ecosystem health, commercial
navigation and recreation.
The treaty required British Colum-
bia to flood four of its most ecologi-
cally and agriculturally rich valleys,
forcibly evicting thousands of people
and destroying rural communities. Fur-
thermore, Canadian Basin residents
are still forced to compromise domes-
tic priorities to abide by treaty opera-
tions. The Canadian Entitlement is the
only ongoing benefit British Columbia
receives for this. As such, it is exceed-
ingly unlikely that Canadian negotiators
will agree to provide downstream ser-
vices and concede to American demands
for a drastically reduced Canadian Enti-
tlement. At the same time, the U.S. is
not in a position to easily walk away
from the treaty, as PUDs have suggested
it should do.
By taking such an extreme stance that
is out of touch with transboundary reali-
ties, PUDs are setting an impossible bar
for the U.S. negotiating team to reach. If
the public believes the negotiation is as
simple as playing tough with Canada to
get a better deal for electric ratepayers,
they are going to be sorely disappointed
when they don’t get anything close to
the near-elimination of payments that
PUDs have told them to expect.
Historically, many Columbia Basin
maps have cut the watershed off at
the international boundary. This car-
tographic fragmentation is reflec-
tive of an attitude that persists today,
which believes that the watershed is
best shared through a strict division of
national interests. If we are going to find
an agreement for the future that both
countries can live with, we will need to
reject this divisive philosophy.
Americans and Canadians need to
understand and value all of the interests
at hand, including those of their neigh-
bors across the border.
Graeme Lee Rowlands is a researcher
and contractor who has traveled the
length of the Columbia River and worked
on both the American and Canadian
sides.
GUEST COLUMN
Four questions control legislative session’s fate
F
our questions will determine the
fate of the 2020 Oregon Legislature.
Several days of legislative commit-
tee meetings this week will provide the
first clues to the answers.
1. The big one: Will the Legislature
pass climate change legislation?
After the demise of House Bill 2020 in
the 2019 Legislature, Democrats hoped to
have a new version ready for discussion
and public hearings this fall.
Instead, LC 19, the Senate’s carbon cap-
and-trade bill, got its first
public airing on Monday
— three weeks before the
Legislature convenes for
its 35-day session.
In last year’s session,
HB 2020 lacked the cru-
cial 16th vote among Dem-
DICK
ocrats for passage in the
HUGHES
Senate, despite advocates’
insistence to the contrary.
Senate Republicans were unanimously
opposed. They twice walked out to stymie
its passage. That could happen again.
For a carbon bill to pass, the changes
must be A) adequate to win over at least
one of the three recalcitrant Democratic
senators; B) sufficiently responsive to rural
concerns that Republicans won’t walk out,
even if they don’t vote for it; and C) strong
enough that hardcore Democratic environ-
mentalists still support it.
2. A related question: What will the
tone be?
Especially in the Senate, the 2019 ses-
sion ended in disappointment, disillusion-
ment and disgust. On all sides, there were
misunderstandings and perceptions of bro-
ken promises over HB 2020.
State House Speaker Tina Kotek,
D-Portland, and others counseled that a
timeout sorely was needed and that advo-
cates should spend time hearing the con-
cerns of opponents, especially in rural
Oregon.
The acrimony within the Capitol
extended to back-and-forth complaints
about legislators’ conduct — again, pri-
marily among senators. The Senate and
House conduct committees are expected
to meet this week to continue dealing with
George Plaven/Capital Press
Supporters of cap and trade rally outside the Capitol last February.
those complaints.
In response to a damning report a year
ago by the state Bureau of Labor and
Industries, legislative leaders vowed to
change the Capitol culture, particularly by
doing more to prevent sexual harassment.
But the broader goal of creating a respect-
ful workplace will be extremely chal-
lenging in the political atmosphere of the
Capitol.
The Legislature has revised its person-
nel policies, created an Equity Office and
hired Jackie Sandmeyer as acting legisla-
tive equity officer. Rep. Ron Noble, R-Mc-
Minnville, was among those who praised
Sandmeyer’s appointment based on their
previous work.
In a recent email distributed to legis-
lative folks, Sandmeyer said the Equity
Office “will serve as an independent
resource for anyone who has concerns
related to discrimination, harassment, retal-
iation or general respectful workplace cul-
ture. In that role and as outlined by HB
3377, this office will provide training;
perform climate surveys; oversee exter-
nal investigations; and serve as a place for
individuals to confidentially report con-
cerns about behavior, receive process
counseling, and/or generally inquire about
concerning behavior.”
Meanwhile, national and state election
politics will hang over the session. Even
more than usual, partisans will be angling
to make themselves look good and deprive
others of that opportunity. The filing dead-
line for the 2020 elections is just days after
the session ends.
A number of legislators are seek-
ing reelection. In addition, two high-pro-
file legislators recently resigned to run for
higher office — Sen. Cliff Bentz, R-On-
tario, for Congress, and former House
Democratic Leader Jennifer Williamson,
of Portland, for secretary of state. Outgo-
ing Rep. Lynn Findley, R-Vale, was sworn
in Thursday to fill Bentz’s seat and will
take over his committee assignments. But
as with any organization, any change in
membership affects internal legislative
dynamics. Sen. Mark Hass, D-Beaverton,
is remaining in the Legislature while also
going for secretary of state.
Meanwhile, observers wonder whether
2020 will be the last reign for Senate Pres-
ident Peter Courtney, D-Salem. The lon-
gest-serving president in Oregon history,
Courtney is a moderate. But after the lib-
eral wing gained strength in the 2018 elec-
tions, he was forced to move left. If voters
elect more liberal Democrats to the Sen-
ate in November, they will want one of
their own as Senate president. As a staunch
Democrat, Courtney is unlikely to try to
maintain his presidency through a coalition
with Republicans, although they work well
together.
On the other side of the Capitol,
the House has new Republican leader-
ship, which will affect dynamics there.
Will Republican Leader Christine Dra-
zan, R-Canby, and her team respond
more aggressively to the Democratic
supermajority?
3. The nuts and bolts: What budget
surprises lie ahead?
A major reason that Oregon shifted to
annual legislative sessions was to deal with
any problems in the state’s budget, which
covers two-year periods.
During Legislative Days, legislators
will hear a number of budget updates and
spending requests. It seems that lawmakers
— of either party — never lack for ideas
on how to spend money.
State economists will issue their quar-
terly economic and revenue forecasts on
Feb. 12, estimating how much more money
— or less — the Legislature can spend
during 2019-21 than previously planned.
4. The wild cards: What else could
derail the session?
There remains a solid probability of a
Senate Republican walkout over a climate
change bill.
Usually, something else comes along to
cause a blowup. A proposed firearms stor-
age bill is a candidate. Opponents of child-
hood vaccination mandates are getting
ready in case that legislation comes around
again.
And there are a whole bunch of seem-
ingly innocuous bills — from septic tanks
to hunting licenses — that could morph
into contentious issues.
dick Hughes has been covering the Ore-
gon political scene since 1976.