Page 4A
OPINION
East Oregonian
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Founded October 16, 1875
KATHRYN B. BROWN
Publisher
JENNINE PERKINSON
Advertising Director
DANIEL WATTENBURGER
Managing Editor
TIM TRAINOR
Opinion Page Editor
OUR VIEW
Be careful what
you wish for,
college football fans
players. How could they not, when
they are making $7 billion to put on
three playoff games a year?
unmitigated success.
The demise of the NCAA would
Television ratings were through
the roof for ESPN, which spent $7.3 turn college football squads into
semi-pro, minor league teams that
billion to buy the 12-year rights
put very little (if
to broadcast the
importance
College football any)
on academics, and
30 seconds of ad
players may not
space during the
is no longer
even be required to
championship
an amateur
be enrolled at the
telecast sold for
school.
more than $1
endeavor.
Whether the fans
million, and the two
Players should will stick around for
kind of show is
receive a piece that
anyone’s guess. But
Sugar Bowl) were
of the billion
as long as it says
the highest-rated
or Oregon
shows in cable
dollar pie they Oregon
State on the laundry,
TV history. You
can bet that once
have created. we think there
will be plenty of
supporters.
is recorded for
After all, college football is no
longer an amateur endeavor.
take over the top spot.
were winners, coming out of the
playoff system infused with cash.
They received more than $50 million
each — money cobbled from the
this year, just 2 less than most
professional football teams. They
played before crowds that wouldn’t
advertisers and other revenue.
The championship game
coaches, who each make more
than $2 million per year, also did
name from coast to coast. Players
took severely reduced class
schedules during the season. And
how could they not, with all the
practice and the weightlifting and
the travel?
The bowl system, with its obvious
are among the most highest-paid
public employees in their respective
states.
The National Football League
gets a complex, competitive minor
league system where superstars are
created — and they don’t have to
pay a dime for it.
It seems like everyone is making
a buck off the playoff system except
the football players themselves.
rather random way to decide a
national champion. Yet in some
ways it was that unprofessionalism
that allowed the NCAA to remain
in charge and rendered the college
football system sustainable.
and revenue is coming in hand over
anything Americans hold more
sacred than their college football, the
villainy of this exploited labor will
soon reach a breaking point. And the
playoff system will only increase the
speed at which college football as
we know it will crumble.
We don’t think the NCAA, the
hypocritical and outmoded bastion
of college athletics, will still be
around in a decade. We don’t think
college football teams will be either
— at least not how they we know
them today.
We think the NCAA will be
gargantuan river of money away
from the players, who are rightfully
ghost of amateurism and allow
for amateur college football.
University of Oregon this year? You
betcha — no one would argue that.
The real number is probably closer
to $10 million or more. And why
shouldn’t people get paid what they
are worth? This is America after all,
where cashing in on the skills that
set you apart is a big piece of our
national dream.
of the college football playoffs. But
Unsigned editorials are the opinion of the East Oregonian editorial board of Publisher
Kathryn Brown, Managing Editor Daniel Wattenburger, and Opinion Page Editor Tim Trainor.
Other columns, letters and cartoons on this page express the opinions of the authors and not
necessarily that of the East Oregonian.
OTHER VIEWS
Be slow and sure on
The Bend Bulletin
promised that in 2015 he would propose
a bill regulating genetically engineered
crops in the state. Now, he’s getting
exactly what he’ll propose remains
unclear.
Among the issues: whether or not
the state should be able to establish
“control” areas over genetically
engineered crops even if they’ve been
of Agriculture is given that power, it
will be able to create what are known as
“isolation distances” between engineered
and other crops. Isolation distances aim
to prevent cross pollination.
Cross contamination is a big deal
to wheat farmers and others, as the
discovery of genetically engineered
Eastern Oregon demonstrated a couple
of years ago. Oregon’s wheat crop is
worth about $500 million annually, and
most of it is sold in Asia. Asians do not
want genetically engineered foods, and
when the wayward plant was discovered
both Japan and South Korea delayed
purchases until purity could be proved.
It makes sense to do what’s
reasonable to separate the crops, though
deciding just what is reasonable may be
great, that can create real problems; if
they’re too short, that doesn’t solve the
contamination problem.
There’s also concern about who, if
anyone, should compensate a farmer if
a crop is contaminated by genetically
engineered plants. That shouldn’t be
the state’s business, it seems to us. The
state does not compensate a farmer if
the neighbor’s cows damage a crop; it
shouldn’t do so in this case, either.
Coming up with a bill that’s
acceptable to all the segments of the
state’s agriculture industry won’t be
easy, and lawmakers are sure to want
to put their own spin on whatever
the governor proposes. But both the
governor and lawmakers should be more
concerned about getting the new rules
right than getting them quickly.
OTHER VIEWS
The child in the basement
aybe you’re familiar with
Ursula Le Guin’s short story,
“The Ones Who Walk Away
from Omelas.” It’s about a sweet and
peaceful city with lovely parks and
delightful music.
The people in the city are genuine-
ly happy. They enjoy their handsome
market.
Le Guin describes a festival day with
delicious beer and horse races: “An
old woman, small, fat, and laughing,
on some faraway child in the basement.
When we buy a cellphone or a piece of
cheap clothing, there is some exploited
worker — a child in the basement. We
tolerate exploitation, telling each other
that their misery is necessary for over-
David
Brooks
Comment
hair. A child of nine or ten sits at the edge of the
It is an idyllic, magical
place.
But then Le Guin de-
scribes one more feature of
Omelas. In the basement of
one of the buildings, there is
In another reading, the story is a
challenge to the utilitarian mindset so
prevalent today.
In theory, most of us subscribe to
a set of values based on the idea that
a human being is an end not a means.
object. It is wrong to enslave a person, even if
that slavery might produce a large good. It is
wrong to kill a person for his organs, even if
many lives might be saved.
And yet we don’t actually
live according to that moral
Ursula Le Guin
writes of a
perfect city
that enslaves a
feeble child.
Is that a social
contract we can
live with?
room with a locked door and
no windows. A small child
is locked inside the room. It
looks about 6, but, actually,
the child is nearly 10. “It is
feebleminded. Perhaps it was
born defective, or perhaps it
has become imbecile through
fear, malnutrition and ne-
glect.”
Occasionally, the door
opens and people look in. The child used to cry
out, “Please let me out. I will be good!” But
the people never answered and now the child
just whimpers. It is terribly thin, lives on a half-
bowl of cornmeal a day and must sit in its own
excrement.
“They all know it is there, all the people
of Omelas,” Le Guin writes. “Some of them
have come to see it; others are content merely
to know it is there. They all know it has to be
there. Some of them understand why, and some
do not, but they all understand that their happi-
ness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of
their friendships, the health of their children ...
depend wholly on this child’s abominable mis-
ery.”
That is the social contract in Omelas. One
child suffers horribly so that the rest can be
happy. If the child were let free or comforted,
horrible for the child, and some parents hold
their kids tighter, and then they return to their
happiness.
But some go to see the child in the room and
then keep walking. They don’t want to be part
of that social contract. “They leave Omelas;
they walk ahead into the darkness and they do
not come back.”
In one reading this is a parable about ex-
ploitation. According to this reading, many of
us live in societies whose prosperity depends
tragic trade-offs. In many
different venues, the suffer-
those trying to deliver the
greatest good for the greatest
number.
Companies succeed be-
if a whole family depends on
them. Schools become pres-
tigious because they reject
people — even if they put
a lifetime of work into their
-
ing a war on terror accidentally kill innocents.
These are children in the basement of our sur-
vival and happiness.
The story compels readers to ask if they are
willing to live according to those contracts.
Some are not. They walk away from prosperity,
and they make some radical commitment. They
would rather work toward some inner purity.
The rest of us live with the trade-offs. The
story reminds us of the inner numbing this cre-
ates. The people who stay in Omelas aren’t bad;
misery they depend upon. I’ve found that this
story rivets people because it confronts them
with all the tragic compromises built into mod-
ern life — all the children in the basements —
and, at the same time, it elicits some desire to
struggle against bland acceptance of it all.
In another reading, the whole city of Omelas
is just different pieces of one person’s psychol-
ogy, a person living in the busy modern world,
and that person’s idealism and moral sensitivity
is the shriveling child locked in the basement.
David Brooks became a New York Times
Op-Ed columnist in September 2003.
Urusula Le Guin is a recent partcipant
of the Eastern Oregon Word Round-Up in
Mission and the Pendleton Center for the
Arts First Draft Writers’ Series. She lives in
Portland.
YOUR VIEWS
Pendleton city leaders inept,
transparency will show it
Last week’s newspaper published this
incredulous statement, “Communication
between the city and public wasn’t always
strong in 2014.” Our mayor now wants
Pendleton to be known as a “transparent city.”
Keep in mind that “transparent” means to
see through.
There was a plea for community
involvement in the decision-making process
for the necessity of constructing a new
the EO, the city has “a $75,902 contract with
company will go through the motions of
will then be given a contract to design it.
wants to invest in infrastructure for its 40-acre
Industrial Park that cost $12,500 an acre
($500,000) well above the market price for
undeveloped land. There is already an unused
The ineptitude of our leaders is mind-
boggling. The city missed the deadline to put
the $10 million bond on the November ballot
and the mistake was blamed on inexperienced
staff. That same excuse was used when they
made proposals for capital projects such
as the Convention Center expansion and
miscalculated the cost by almost $300,000.
To prove that they are going to be
“transparent” in 2015, they should publish
their debt total including loans from Banner
Bank, interagency loans and the $2 million
airport debt.
Here is an example of Houk’s transparency:
He recently mentioned that the Convention
Center Advisory Board will be disbanded for
lack of participation by its members. He failed
to mention the reason for this.
According to the EO, Commission
commission used to have good attendance
and make frequent recommendations, but
meetings in recent years now boil down to
reports from staff and votes on issues already
decided by the council”.
A city council member recently stated that
“2015 will be a great year of progress.” That
is setting the bar low. One of the city council’s
major accomplishments in 2014 was to change
Quit complaining. Time for a recall
election.
LETTERS POLICY
Jerry Cronin
Pendleton
The East Oregonian welcomes original letters of 400 words or less on public issues
and public policies for publication in the newspaper and on our website. The newspaper
reserves the right to withhold letters that address concerns about individual services and
products or letters that infringe on the rights of private citizens. Submitted letters must
be signed by the author and include the city of residence and a daytime phone number.
The phone number will not be published. Unsigned letters will not be published. Send
letters to Managing Editor Daniel Wattenburger, 211 S.E. Byers Ave. Pendleton, OR 97801
or email editor@eastoregonian.com.