Page 4A
OPINION
East Oregonian
Thursday, January 21, 2016
OTHER VIEWS
Founded October 16, 1875
KATHRYN B. BROWN
DANIEL WATTENBURGER
Publisher
Managing Editor
JENNINE PERKINSON
TIM TRAINOR
Advertising Director
Opinion Page Editor
OTHER VIEWS
An open letter
from Malheur
refuge staff
By Malheur National Wildlife Refuge staff
D
ear Friends,
Many have asked us to
comment on the ongoing situation
at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. We
have refrained because we care deeply for
the community, and want to ensure our
words do not inÀame
an already heated
situation. However, we
believe it is important
that our views and
position are known.
We believe many in
the media (as well as
those sympathetic to
the illegal occupiers)
were surprised to hear
that the community —
while frustrated with
the Hammond situation
— did not leap to the
support of the militants.
We are not
surprised.
For over 100 years, our refuge
employees have been members of this
community. We study, watch our kids
play basketball, worship, commune, and
interact with our fellow Harney County
citizens — not as a ‘we vs. they,’ but as
an ‘us.’
In a community with nearly 40 percent
of working adults engaged in some form
of government, we are all touched or
involved in the public process. In Harney
County, that means we talk. We have
cups of coffee. We have arguments.
Together we knit our brows, and together
we knit scarves. We understand what
those in Washington, D.C., and those
currently occupying the refuge don’t
understand: that Harney County isn’t
afraid of tough talk.
We can have effective disagreements
and either ¿nd resolution, ¿nd
compromise, or simply agree to disagree.
But we do it with respect for the rule
of law, and know that our areas of
agreement and cooperation are in¿nitely
more powerful than
the differences we
may face. Mostly,
we face those
differences together
with open dialogue
and open gates — not
intimidation and
threats. We have access
to each other, because
we are not afraid to
confront dif¿cult
situations or have
dif¿cult conversations.
It pains each of us
that we are missing
our obligations to
you — as church leaders, as 4-H advisers,
as friends, and as school volunteers. We
hope to be back soon and pick up where
we left off.
From the bottom of our hearts, we
thank you for your support. We know
(as you do too) that it is not our refuge
that has been occupied. This is Harney
County’s and America’s refuge.
We are excited to be part of the
eventual healing process for our
community. We believe that this dif¿cult
situation will lead to even stronger bonds
between the refuge and the community
that has supported us. We feel for you,
because we are you.
We will get through this because We.
Are. Harney. County.
We can have
effective
disagreements
and either ind
resolution, ind
compromise, or
simply agree to
disagree.
Can Bernie Sanders change
dynamics of Democratic race?
D
ES MOINES — It’s pretty
a winner. (Notice Briggs said “do well”
clear things have changed in the
in Iowa, not “win.”) Sanders has always
Democratic presidential race
conceded that as a senator from a nearly
when Hillary Clinton does a sky-is-
all-white state, he doesn’t have deep
falling routine for donors.
roots in African-American politics. But
“There are not one, but two new
he’s tried hard to reach out, stressing not
public polls out this week that have
just his record but civil rights work that
us down in Iowa,” Clinton campaign
goes back to student days.
manager Robby Mook wrote in an email
I suggested to Briggs that all that
Byron
to small contributors Thursday. “Now,
reaching out hasn’t paid off, since black
York
you should always take public polling
Democrats still seem strongly behind
Comment
with a grain of salt. But if you thought
Clinton. “It’s not that it hasn’t worked,”
this race wasn’t going to be close, well,
Briggs answered. “People didn’t know
it is. This isn’t me claiming the sky is falling —
about it.” If Sanders wins early contests, the
these are just the facts.”
theory goes, later-state Democratic voters, black
Of the six polls taken most recently here
and white, will take a look at him. And that’s
in Iowa, Sanders leads in the two Mook
where, again theoretically, the dynamic changes.
mentioned — by Quinnipiac
Truth be told, that still
and ARG — while Clinton
seems unlikely to happen.
has progressively smaller
But it seems less unlikely
leads in the others. Back in
than it did a few weeks ago,
December, Clinton’s margins
which explains Clinton’s
over challenger Bernie
increasing attacks on
Sanders in the polls were 18
Sanders. It also explains
points, or 14 points, or 22
the emergence of Chelsea
points. Today, they’re two or
Clinton, who is pretty much
three points.
universally admired by
The bottom line is that
Democrats, as one of the
in Iowa, Clinton’s lead
attackers. Chelsea’s hit on
over Sanders is within the
Sanders’ health proposal
margin of error, and in
— that it would somehow
New Hampshire, she trails
enable Republicans’ efforts
Sanders by several points.
to repeal Obamacare —
Which leads to a question:
struck a lot of Democrats as
Could Clinton’s entire theory of the race be
not just out of character, but Àat wrong, as well.
wrong?
Still, as a sign of Clinton anxiety, it was
The theory is this: Of course Clinton wants
pretty accurate. “I think they’re panicking,”
to win Iowa and New Hampshire, but if she
Briggs said of the Clinton campaign.
doesn’t, she will still win the nomination
Things are moving fast; Iowa Democrats
because the race will move on to South Carolina are choosing quickly. In The Des Moines
and other states with a signi¿cant black
Register poll, 70 percent of Hillary
population. African-Americans are a critical
supporters, and 69 percent of Sanders
part of the Democratic coalition, and Clinton is
supporters, say they’ve made up their minds.
undeniably strong with them. So in the long run, Just a month ago, those numbers were quite a
she will win.
bit smaller. More minds will be made up each
It’s a persuasive theory; Sanders has tried and day.
failed to make any real inroads into Clinton’s
“Voters will caucus in Iowa in 18 days,
black support. But now there’s the question:
and the Sanders campaign is outspending us
If Sanders were to vanquish Clinton in the
on TV,” Mook wrote in that alarmed email
¿rst two contests of the campaign, would that
to small donors. “Hillary’s been ¿ghting for
change the dynamics of the race?
families for decades — if you’re with her, this
“It does change the dynamics of the race,”
is the time to show it.” Mook then asked the
Sanders spokesman Michael Briggs told me
recipient to “Chip in $1 now.”
by phone from a campaign event at Dartmouth
It’s not surprising to see a campaign send
College. “If you do well in Iowa and notch a
out a poor-little-old-me appeal, asking for
victory in New Hampshire, you’re going to see
donations to ¿ght a big, bad opponent. But for
Hillary Clinton, the unstoppable, inevitable,
more and more people take Bernie’s campaign
Democratic nominee-in-waiting, to say that
seriously, and that will change the dynamics.”
about Bernie Sanders? Now, that’s a change.
But how speci¿cally? The theory — the
Ŷ
hope — is that the work Sanders has done trying
Byron York is chief political correspondent
to connect with black Democrats will start to
for The Washington Examiner.
pay off if Sanders comes out of the early states
If Sanders wins
early contests,
the theory
goes, later-state
Democratic
voters, black and
white, will take a
look at him.
OTHER VIEWS
The folly of ‘taking back’ the American West
By TED WILLIAMS
Writers on the Range
D
o 700 million acres of national parks,
national monuments, national forests,
national wildlife refuges and Bureau
of Land Management units belong to you and
your fellow Americans? No, according to the
increasingly popular notion in the West that
it’s time for states to “take back” federal land.
“Taking back” property of Alaskans and
Floridians and everyone between is even
a plank in the GOP platform. A resolution,
entitled “In Support of Western States Taking
Back Public Lands” reads: “The Republican
National Committee calls upon all national
and state leaders and representatives to exert
their utmost power and inÀuence to urge
the imminent transfer of public lands to all
willing Western states.”
Taking back something that never
belonged to you presents multiple problems,
not the least of which is semantics. But this
has never discouraged proponents whose ¿rst
order of business is to ignore constitutional
law.
Here’s a fact they don’t want you to
know: As a condition for entering the
union, Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana,
New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington,
Wyoming and Nevada disclaimed all legal
right and title to unappropriated public lands.
Nevertheless, in 2015 state lawmakers
in the West introduced 37 grossly
unconstitutional bills promoting seizure of
lands belonging to all Americans. Utah’s
Legislature has gone so far as to appropriate
$2 million supposedly to oversee the land
grab. And a commission of Utah legislators
has voted to spend $14 million suing the
federal government for control of public
lands.
The bills and litigation can’t possibly
succeed, but that’s not their intent. They’re
designed as messages to the U.S. Congress.
That’s where the danger lies.
The messages are
getting through. Last
February Sen. James
Inhofe, R-Okla., introduced
the “Federal Land Freedom
Act of 2015,” which
would transfer to the states
management of energy
production on millions of
U.S. acres.
In March the House
and Senate passed a joint
nonbinding resolution to
help states seize and sell
America’s public lands.
The same month Rep.
Mark Amodei, R-Nev.,
introduced a bill that would
authorize his state to sell
your land.
Presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz,
R-Texas, introduced legislation in 2014
that would have prohibited the federal
government from owning more than half the
land within one state.
On the stump in Nevada last June,
presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.,
drew thunderous applause when he declared:
“I’d either sell or turn over all the land
management to the states.”
Leading the ovation, and granted a
private audience by Paul, was take-back-
the-West folk hero Cliven Bundy, who has
intentionally trespassed his cattle on BLM
range for more than two decades, amassing
$1 million in unpaid grazing fees (almost
four times more than the 16,000 other BLM
grazing leasers combined).
In March 2014, when BLM agents ¿nally
mustered the resolve to impound Bundy’s
cattle, he summoned a
300-man “militia” that ran
them off at gunpoint. They
then returned the cattle.
Neither Bundy nor his
militia has been prosecuted.
The Department of
Homeland Security had
it right when it warned
that Bundy’s “perceived
success likely will
embolden other militia
extremists.” Jerad and
Amanda Miller attended
Bundy’s felonious standoff
and spewed support for
his cause on Facebook and
YouTube (getting “likes”
from the National RiÀe
Association, Rand Paul and Ron Paul).
Three months later the couple shot to
death two cops and a civilian in Las Vegas.
Then, on Jan. 2, 2016, an armed militia,
led by Bundy’s sons Ammon, Ryan and
Taking back
something
that never
belong to you
presents multiple
problems,
not the least
of which is
semantics.
Mel, broke into and occupied the Malheur
National Wildlife Refuge Building in Oregon,
vowing to kill anyone who jailed two
arsonists convicted of purposely setting ¿re to
BLM land where they’d poached deer.
Anyone who wonders what Western
states would do with U.S. land should
consider what they’ve already done with it.
In exchange for relinquishing all claims on
public property new states were awarded
“trust lands.” Trust lands have generally
been used to create revenue via oil and gas
extraction, logging, mining and outright sale.
For example, of Nevada’s original 2.7
million acres of trust land only 3,000 acres
remain. In Colorado you can ¿sh and camp
on virtually all federal land and hunt on most.
But you can’t hunt, ¿sh or camp on most
state land because it’s reserved for extractive
industry.
The attempted heist of your land in the
West is about one thing only — private
pro¿teering. If it succeeds, it will mean
no-trespassing signs and death to much of
your ¿sh and wildlife.
Ŷ
Ted Williams is a contributor to Writers
on the Range, an opinion service of High
Country News. He serves as Conservation
Editor for Fly Rod & Reel magazine.
LETTERS POLICY
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 newspa-
per reserves the right to withhold letters that address concerns about individual ser-
vices 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.