Page 4A
OPINION
East Oregonian
Thursday, May 12, 2016
Founded October 16, 1875
KATHRYN B. BROWN
DANIEL WATTENBURGER
Publisher
Managing Editor
JENNINE PERKINSON
TIM TRAINOR
Advertising Director
Opinion Page Editor
OUR VIEW
Transgender rules
are controversial
— for now
Last week the Oregon Department departments throughout the country,
although many are currently
of Education released 15 pages of
compiling them as state legislatures
guidelines regarding transgender
debate their own transgender rules.
students.
Transgender rights are the
Among the recommendations:
issue du jour, and any rules
Oregon students should be able
and regulations are bound to be
to use the names, pronouns and
controversial.
bathrooms they
Clearly legislators
want. In addition,
transgender females
If you think it is are much more
in political
should be allowed to
dificult to come interested
points and creating
play girls sports and
those controversies
transgender boys
to terms with
— and installing
allowed to wear
transgender
sexual organ
tuxedos to prom.
at the door
In general, students
youth, try being detectives
of every bathroom,
should be able to
present themselves
a transgender apparently — than
solving real
as the gender of
youth.
problems.
their choosing.
And there are
“A student who
plenty of things to
says she is a girl
discuss regarding transgender issues,
and wishes to be regarded that way
throughout the school day should be including high suicide rates, high
unemployment rates, high sexual
respected and treated like any other
assault rates and more. Actual
girl,” reads the document. “So too
with a student who says he is a boy.” problems. If you think it is dificult
to come to terms with transgender
The guidelines were requested
youth, try being a transgender youth.
months ago after controversy at
Clearly, bringing those
Dallas High School, where the
Oregonians out of the shadows will
principal let a transgender male use
take some getting used to. As will
the boys locker room. There was an
students stating their gender instead
uproar from parents who demanded
of having it stated for them.
the student be banned from the
But schools are best suited to
changing room. These guidelines
creating an understanding and
will not soothe the controversy, at
supportive environment and
least while transgender students are
introducing our youth to people who
regarded with suspicion and fear.
are different than them. Or perhaps
The explicit guidelines are
not so different after all.
relatively rare among education
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
Environmentalist suit
smacks of sour grapes
The (Medford) Mail Tribune
n environmental group that iled
ethics complaints against State
Rep. Sal Esquivel and two other
lawmakers over statements they made
about a wolf delisting bill is howling up
the wrong tree.
Esquivel, R-Medford, along with
Reps. Brad Witt,
D-Clatskanie, and
Greg Barreto, R-Cove,
were advocating for
House Bill 4040,
which afirmed the
Oregon Fish and
Wildlife Commission’s
decision to delist
the gray wolf from
Oregon Endangered
Species Act protection.
The bill passed the
House, then the
Senate, and Gov. Kate
Brown signed it into
law.
Cascadia Wildlands
iled a complaint against the three
lawmakers alleging they violated rules
that prohibit legislators from making
false statements about legislation. The
group says the three claimed the bill
would not preclude a court challenge of
the delisting decision. In fact, the group
maintains, a Legislative Counsel review
of the bill after it passed the House
found it did preclude court challenges,
and the state Appeals Court cited the bill
when it dismissed the group’s lawsuit
last month.
Esquivel says he was going on what
he knew of the bill at the time, and did
A
not intentionally mislead anyone.
A reading of the bill in its various
incarnations as it made its way through
the Legislature is confusing to say the
least. As originally introduced, the bill
appeared to clearly say anyone could
petition the Wildlife Commission
to change the status of a species,
and to ile a court challenge if the
commission failed to
act as requested. The
amended version that
eventually passed
the House replaced
that language, but the
inal version doesn’t
explicitly forbid court
review, either.
In any case, many
things are said about
many bills, by many
people, in the heat of
a legislative session.
We don’t disagree that
legislators should do
their homework and
know what they’re
talking about, but over the course of a
session, some of those statements are
bound to be less than precisely accurate.
This complaint smacks of sour
grapes. The environmental group came
out on the losing end of legislation
and irst got mad, and now is trying to
get even. This threat to the legislative
process may or may not lead to an
ethics violation, but if interest groups
can ile complaints over every alleged
misstatement, it likely will lead
to limiting debate and discussion,
effectively closing off the public even
more from the state’s decision-makers.
If interest
groups can ile
complaints over
every alleged
misstatement, it
will likely lead to
limiting debate
and discussion.
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 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.
Be heard!
Comment online at eastoregonian.com
OTHER VIEWS
What does Paul Ryan want
from Donald Trump?
S
peaker Paul Ryan, the Republican
to set aside belittlement and appeal to
Party’s highest-ranking oficial,
higher aspirations, appeal to what is
stunned the political world
good in us and to lead a country and
Thursday when he announced he
a party to having a vast majority of
Americans enthusiastic about choosing
does not now support his party’s
a path.”
presumptive presidential nominee,
Concern over divisions along
Donald Trump, and might not ever do
cultural or racial lines was also likely
so.
behind Ryan’s assertion that the GOP
“I hope to support our nominee,”
Byron
is “the party of Lincoln, of Reagan,
Ryan told CNN’s Jake Tapper. “I’m
York
of Jack Kemp.” Yes, Ryan’s inclusion
just not ready to do that at this point.
Comment
of Kemp, a man of far smaller
I’m not there right now.”
stature than Lincoln and Reagan,
The interview left one basic
had something to do with the fact that Kemp
question unanswered: What does Ryan want?
Put another way, what could Trump do to help was Ryan’s mentor. But Ryan also included
Kemp, the famously self-styled “bleeding-
Ryan get there?
heart conservative,” to project an image of
The short answer is that Trump must unify
Republican inclusiveness, an ideal to which
the Republican Party. Ryan used the words
GOP leaders, including Trump, should aspire.
“unify” or “uniied” a total of 27 times in the
So in the end, it appears
interview; it’s clearly a hugely
Ryan’s message to Trump
important thing to him. But
was: We don’t have to agree
what, precisely, that means is
on entitlements or trade, but
not clear.
you’ve got to tone it down on
Gleaned from a long
matters of race and culture if
conversation with someone
you want my support.
familiar with Ryan’s thinking,
Ryan was as surprised
this is how Ryan approaches
as anyone else by the speed
the situation:
with which the Republican
Ryan and Trump obviously
have huge policy differences: on entitlements, presidential contest came to an end Tuesday
night. Ryan thought the battle between Trump
trade, immigration, and much more. They’re
and Ted Cruz would stretch all the way to the
important; entitlement reform, in particular, is
a goal to which Ryan has devoted much of his California primary on June 7 and perhaps to
a contested Republican convention in July.
career in the House. But as important as they
So the speaker didn’t have a plan for what
are, Ryan doesn’t expect Trump to convert to
to say when the race abruptly stopped. He
Ryanism.
didn’t have a long time to think things through
“I’m not saying he’s got to support my
policies,” Ryan told Tapper. “You always have before the CNN interview.
Ryan’s stand carries signiicant risk. With
policy disagreements. Heck, Mitt Romney
no competition, Trump is going to win more
and I had policy disagreements. So that’s just
primaries, and pile up more votes, by the time
natural, and it’s too much to ask someone to
of the convention. If Ryan changes course
change their policy views that they were duly
and supports Trump without some truly
elected on, on some policy dispute.”
Ryan suggested he’s looking for something meaningful concession from the nominee,
Ryan will look weak. If he opposes Trump,
bigger from Trump. He referred to the GOP’s
he’ll anger a lot of people in his own party.
“principles” 16 times: “I think conservatives
At the moment, Trump does not appear
want to know, does (Trump) share our values
inclined to accommodate Ryan. Shortly after
and our principles on limited government, the
the CNN interview aired, Trump released a
proper role of the executive, adherence to the
statement saying, “I am not ready to support
Constitution,” Ryan said.
Speaker Ryan’s agenda. Perhaps in the
I asked the person familiar with Ryan’s
future we can work together and come to an
thinking what that meant. If speciic policy
agreement about what is best for the American
differences — entitlements, trade, etc. — are
people. They have been treated so badly for so
not violations of principle, then what was
long that it is about time for politicians to put
Ryan talking about?
them irst!”
The person pointed to the times Ryan has
In addition, in some cases, Trump has a
felt the need to publicly rebuke Trump in
majority of Republican voters on his side.
the last several months. There was Trump’s
For example, exit polls from GOP primaries
temporary Muslim ban proposal; his refusal
have shown strong support for temporarily
in one interview to disavow David Duke and
banning Muslims who are not U.S. citizens
the Ku Klux Klan; and Trump’s acceptance,
from entering the U.S. In Pennsylvania, 69
or even encouragement, of violence at his
percent of GOP primary voters supported the
campaign rallies. Those were the things that
disturbed Ryan enough for him to speak out at proposal. In New York, 68 percent supported
it. In Florida, the number was 64 percent.
the time, and those are the things that trouble
In Georgia, 68 percent. In Ohio, 65 percent.
Ryan enough to withhold support of Trump.
Michigan, 63 percent. Texas, 67 percent. And
“We’re talking about identity politics
in Ryan’s home state of Wisconsin, 69 percent
— that’s what he was referencing,” said the
person familiar with Ryan’s thinking. “Identity supported it.
That’s about 2/3 support among Republican
politics is what Paul was getting at. He spoke
out against the Muslim ban, against allowing a primary voters across the country for a
proposal Ryan called “not what this party
culture of violence at some of these campaign
stands for, and more importantly ... not what
events, against the Duke comments. He’s
this country stands for.” If Ryan were to
just saying our party deserves a leader who is
committed to unifying, not dividing, our party urge Trump to back down from the proposal,
and our country. We’ve always said we would Trump’s response might be: I won, and this
guy is making demands?
disagree on policy.”
■
“It’s time to go to from tapping anger to
Byron York is chief political correspondent
channeling that anger into solutions,” Ryan
for The Washington Examiner.
said on CNN. “It’s time to set aside bullying,
Ryan is looking
for something
bigger from
Trump.