Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current | View Entire Issue (July 10, 2015)
Page 6A OPINION East Oregonian Friday, July 10, 2015 OTHER VIEWS Founded October 16, 1875 KATHRYN B. BROWN Publisher JENNINE PERKINSON Advertising Director DANIEL WATTENBURGER Managing Editor TIM TRAINOR Opinion Page Editor OUR VIEW Tip of the hat; kick in the pants A kick in the pants to the group of four pre-teen boys who started a ¿UHWKDWEXUQHG(XJHQH¶VKLVWRULF&LYLF6WDGLXPWRWKHJURXQG According to the Eugene Register-Guard, the three 12-year-olds and one WHQ\HDUROGIDFHFKDUJHVWKDWLQFOXGH¿UVWGHJUHHDQGVHFRQGGHJUHHDUVRQ burglary, criminal mischief and reckless endangerment. Eugene police said after the arrests that the boys had ignited debris with a lighter in the stadium’s press box and WKH¿UHTXLFNO\JRWRXWRIKDQG7KH\ may not have intended to burn down the stadium, and panicked and ran off when WKH¿UHVWDUWHG The inferno destroyed one of the few remaining wooden ballparks in America, resulting in a sad loss to the state’s athletic history. The future criminal case against the four boys will no doubt bring additional losses. %XWRQWKHÀLSVLGHWKHQDWLSRIWKHKDWWRHYHU\RQHZKRPDGHWKH )RXUWKRI-XO\KROLGD\DVDIHRQHLQRXUDUHD ([SORGLQJÀDPPDEOHÀDPHVRI¿HU\¿UHDUHQRWWKHEHVWWKLQJWRVKRRW LQWRRXUERQHGU\¿HOGVDQGIRUHVWV6RNXGRVWRWKRVHZKRKHOGRIIVNLSSHG WKH¿UHZRUNVWKLV\HDURUWRRNSUHFDXWLRQV that kept our residents and our region from going up in smoke on America’s birthday. <HVDUHD¿UHGHSDUWPHQWVDQGGLVWULFWVZHUH plenty busy on the Fourth. That’s part of the gig. But they did a great job of getting small ¿UHVRXWTXLFNO\DQGPDNLQJVXUHWKHELJ shows went off without a hitch. But local residents deserve plenty of credit too, for toning down their celebrations and also for being considerate and thoughtful for the dangerous drought that surrounds us. Let’s hope next year is lush and green, the wheat and veggies are big DQGKHDOWK\WKHVWUHDPVDUHIXOODQGWKH¿VKDUHWRR7KHQZH¶OOKDYHWKH opportunity to make up for this year and show America how much we really care. 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 Different driving rules makes sense for rural Oregon The (Albany) Democrat-Herald Maybe you’ve noticed this as well, but it seems as if every time the Legislature meets, it spends more time than it should pondering the way that the rest of us drive. This is likely a result of all the time legislators spend on the road between Salem and their homes, and we should emphasize before we continue that we’re sympathetic to these road warriors. Since they’re racking up some serious mileage, it’s no wonder that legislators get to think long and hard about the bad habits of other drivers. (Just as we’re sure that our own driving behavior is beyond reproach every time we slide behind the wheel, we’re certain that every legislator is a model of driving purity, hands locked in the 10 and 2 positions on the steering wheel and never even being tempted to check why the cellphone is constantly ringing with new texts.) The logical result is that every OHJLVODWLYHVHVVLRQJHWV¿OOHGZLWK proposals likely meant, in some way, to show these idiot drivers on the road how things should be done. Most of these proposals get shot down, as they should, in the course of the session. This year’s session also has included a variety of measures meant to change the way we drive. But the surprising thing is that some of these measures survived the cut and are headed to Gov. Kate Brown. And the real surprise is this: They’re worthy of support. The Legislature recently backed a bill that would raise the speed limits from 55 to 65 mph outside the city limits in Central and Eastern Oregon. Interstate 84 from The Dalles to Idaho would rise to 70 mph, as would all of U.S. 95 in Oregon’s southeast corridor. These changes are overdue. Anyone who’s spent any time driving on the eastern reaches of Interstate 84 knows the experience of counting the minutes until you leave Oregon so that you can speed up just a bit. These are wide-open stretches; raising the speed limit so that it’s more in sync with the speed limits in Washington state and Idaho simply makes sense. The Legislature also backed a bill that allows self-service gasoline late at night in counties with no more than 40,000 residents. The idea is to allow motorists low on fuel in lightly populated areas the chance to get gas without waiting for a station to open. It’s a small crack in the state’s ban on self-service gasoline, and, truthfully, it’s a crack that’s not likely to get any bigger any time soon. But the measure did generate some light-hearted soul searching, including this Twitter message from mid-valley Sen. Sara Gelser: “Today I voted for limited self-service gas in extremely rural areas late at night. Am I still a real Oregonian?” But legislators wisely shot down a bill that would have designated the left lane on four-lane highways as a passing lane and allowed police to ticket motorists ZKRIDLOHGWRPRYHRYHUIRUIDVWHUWUDI¿F These slowpokes in the left lane are annoying, to be sure, but it still seems extreme to label their behavior illegal. Will slippery slope follow &RQIHGHUDWHÀDJEDWWOH" S ome conservatives have seen was just 29 percent support, while 68 efforts to remove the Confederate percent oppose. EDWWOHÀDJIURPWKHVWDWHKRXVHLQ Broken down by race, 26 percent Columbia, South Carolina, and also of whites approve of renaming streets, from other public places around the while 71 percent oppose. Among South, as the beginning of a slippery blacks, 33 percent approve renaming slope in which roads and landmarks streets, while 63 percent oppose. QDPHGDIWHU&RQIHGHUDWH¿JXUHVDUH Then the pollsters asked whether the changed, monuments are removed, and public supports “removing tributes to Byron DVLJQL¿FDQWSDUWRI$PHULFDQKLVWRU\LV those who fought for the Confederacy York obscured from view. from public places.” Whites strongly Comment “The Left’s 21st century agenda: oppose the idea, with just 21 percent expunging every trace of respect, supporting removal and 75 opposing. recognition or acknowledgment of Americans Blacks are evenly divided, with 49 percent in who fought for the Confederacy,” tweeted support and 50 percent in opposition. Weekly Standard editor William Kristol There’s no region in the country in which on June 23. “It’s our own mini-French a majority supports removing those tributes. revolution, expunging history in a frenzy of 6XSSRUWLVMXVWSHUFHQWLQWKH1RUWKHDVW self-righteousness.” 29 percent in the Midwest, 24 percent in There are clearly some who would like the South, and 24 percent in the West, with to do just that. David Brooks, the New York majorities around 70 percent opposed in every Times columnist, recently region. advocated removing Robert Solid majorities of both E. Lee’s name “from most political parties oppose schools, roads and other removing tributes, as well. institutions, where the name Sixty-three percent of could be seen as acceptance Democrats, 69 percent of of what he did and stood for independents, and 85 percent during the war.” of Republicans oppose. “This is not about Opposition is also fairly rewriting history,” Brooks even among age and income argued. “It’s about shaping groups. the culture going forward.” The numbers suggest That’s the talk in that when it comes to the elite circles. But a new debate over the place of the poll suggests that most Civil War in contemporary Americans, white and black, life, there is the Confederate YLHZWKHÀDJGLIIHUHQWO\ EDWWOHÀDJDQGWKHQWKHUHLV from other memories of the everything else. In response Confederacy and are not to the question, “Do you, on board for the wholesale yourself, see the Confederate removal of names and ÀDJPRUHDVDV\PERORI monuments commemorating Southern pride or more as those who fought for the a symbol of racism?” 57 South in the Civil War. percent of respondents say )LUVWWKHÀDJ$QHZSROOE\&11DQG 6RXWKHUQSULGHSHUFHQWVD\UDFLVPDQG¿YH ORC International, asked 1,017 adults whether percent say both equally. they favor or oppose “removing Confederate Inside those numbers, 66 percent of whites ÀDJVIURPJRYHUQPHQWSURSHUW\WKDWLVQRWSDUW VD\WKHÀDJLVDV\PERORI6RXWKHUQSULGH of a museum.” A majority, although not an while 25 percent say it represents racism. For overwhelmingly one — 55 percent — favors blacks, the numbers are completely different: removal. Inside those numbers, 50 percent SHUFHQWVD\WKHÀDJLVDV\PERORI6RXWKHUQ of whites and 73 percent of blacks support pride, while 72 percent say it is a symbol of removal. UDFLVP1RRWKHU&RQIHGHUDWHUHPLQGHU²QR Majorities in all the nation’s regions except Lee Highway, no Fort Hood, no war memorial the South favor removal, and the South itself is — produces the kind of lopsided reaction that split almost evenly, with 49 percent in support WKHÀDJGRHV and 50 percent in opposition. That could change, of course. The public The poll was taken from June 26 to June 28, FRQYHUVDWLRQKDVEHHQQHDUO\DOODERXWWKHÀDJ after an intense national discussion about the in the days since the murders in Charleston, and SODFHRIWKHÀDJLQSXEOLFOLIHLQWKHDIWHUPDWK might at some point turn to the broader issue of of the Charleston shootings. Confederate memory. But for now, if the new Then there is the question of roads, opinion numbers are accurate, there’s no public landmarks, monuments and institutions. First, consensus for a mini-French Revolution. the pollsters asked whether the public supports Ŷ “renaming streets and highways named after Byron York is chief political correspondent &RQIHGHUDWHOHDGHUV´1DWLRQDOO\WKHUHVXOW for The Washington Examiner. Will roads and landmarks named after Confederate figures be changed, monuments removed, and a significant part of American history obscured from view? YOUR VIEWS USFS should hold forest plan meetings in more locations Circumvent: I came across this word recently, and now it sticks in my already FOXWWHUHGKHDGWKHGH¿QLWLRQDURXQGWRJHW the better of, or prevent by craft or ingenuity). I feel the workshops being facilitated by High Desert Partnerships are a platform to circumvent the overwhelming negative response to the Blue Mountain Forest Plan Revision. Over 1,300 comments were received ZLWKSHUFHQWGLVDSSURYDORIWKHSODQ,¿QG it alarming no workshops are scheduled for Union or Baker County. Repeatedly, Forest Access For All (FAFA) has requested public meetings with the Forest Service and voiced our dislike of the workshop scenario. Once again this agency appears to suffer hearing loss. Baker County commission chair Bill Harvey is working to arrange a public meeting. Last year FAFA spent thousands of dollars presenting meetings and encouraging people to speak and write concerns on the proposed Blue Mountain Forest Plan Revision. FAFA members traveled across Eastern Oregon throughout the summer months. The efforts of dedicated members combined with others generated over 1,300 comments. Finally, late in the fall, 11 counties made the right move and rejected the proposed forest plan. Something worked. Be aware when you attend these workshops. It is imperative you stick to your message. A piece of information came out of the John Day meeting that to me was very alarming. The forest supervisor responded to the crowd with the insinuation that, when push comes to shove, the Forest Service doesn’t need to respond to any of our concerns. Once again, engagement with the Forest Service would indicate we are dickering over a preconceived conclusion with the illusion public concerns have been addressed. At the very least we need language in the Blue Mountain Forest Plan that preserves and protects our present level of access. That would be a fair beginning for dialogue. Road closures through the back door of projects needs to stop. To date 14 workshops have been scheduled, none in Union or Baker counties. I want endless meetings and comments to end, but request two more, one in Union and one in Baker County, preferably at a time and date working people can attempt to attend the meetings. LETTERS POLICY Wanda Ballard Baker City The East Oregonian welcomes original letters of 400 words or less on public issues 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. Send letters to 211 S.E. Byers Ave. Pendleton, OR 97801 or email editor@eastoregonian.com.
