Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current | View Entire Issue (May 26, 2016)
Page 4A OPINION East Oregonian Thursday, May 26, 2016 Founded October 16, 1875 KATHRYN B. BROWN DANIEL WATTENBURGER Publisher Managing Editor JENNINE PERKINSON TIM TRAINOR Advertising Director Opinion Page Editor OUR VIEW The moon shot Although many are already dollars would be sure to increase arguing about “Clinton v. Trump: results. The Reckoning,” another November But such a windfall clearly has vote may have an even bigger a downside: A recent nonpartisan impact on our lives in Oregon. study showed that the measure Now that enough would amount to signatures have a $600 per person The initiative been gathered, it increase in state looks certain that a next year, would increase taxes signiicant initiative and would depress the state budget the job market and will come before all Oregonians. growth. by 25 percent population How big could The net loss of jobs this thing be? by bringing in would be about It alone would by 2022, about $3 billion 20,000 increase the entire according to the state budget by analysis as well as per year. about 25 percent by reporting by Paris bringing in about $3 Achen from our billion per year. Yes, that’s billion Capital Bureau. The private sector with a B. jobs would see fewer jobs and the Right now it is known as public sector would see more. Initiative Petition 28, but will surely Although its not technically a receive nicknames from both sides “sales tax” — something Oregon before ballots are printed out. We voters have voted down time and suggest “The Moon Shot Measure” time again — this initiative would — it’ll either send the state into have similar effects on state revenue a new stratosphere or blow up and cost to residents. Oregon’s economic engine at liftoff. Proponents will make the case Once the signatures are veriied, that giant corporations aren’t paying the “petition” will drop from the their fair share of taxes in the state, title. This initiative — which would while opponents will describe the require a majority of Oregon voters dire consequences of taking more to pass — would place a 2.5 percent money from the private sector and tax on corporate gross receipts handing it to the state government. sales from the 1,000 or so largest And both sides will spend millions businesses in the state. to get the point across. The extra dollars in the state There are months ahead to study budget would then be shoveled and report about the wide-ranging toward education, public safety and effects of this measure. This heath and human services. Oregon’s newspaper will surely do so. struggling education system is Pay attention when you see currently 39th in the nation, and the those headlines. Read closely and tax dollars it receives per student carefully. Be informed and educated is a measly 38th. Proponents of about the importance of this decision the measure argue that it is no and how it could drastically affect coincidence that those two numbers the future of this state — for good are so similar, and that additional and for ill. 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. OUR VIEW Obama’s new overtime pay rules change the overall mission St. Louis Post-Dispatch T he Obama administration’s new plan to require overtime pay for salaried workers earning up to $47,000 is an understandable but unrealistic reaction to the problem of stagnating wages and a diminishing American middle class. People are working longer hours for comparatively less pay, and something needs to happen to jostle the system back into alignment. But the tight deadlines to implement the new rules don’t match the reality of the American workplace. The Labor Department plans to double previous income limits on overtime pay and impose new rules on employers as of Dec. 1. Instead of receiving a inancial windfall from higher overtime pay, many salaried employees could wind up making less as they go on the time clock. Americans frustrated by the multimillion-dollar salaries being paid to corporate chief executives might react: Heck yeah, it’s about time they had to share the wealth. But there are thousands of small employers — retailers, nonproits and, yes, even local newspapers — that simply cannot afford what this policy demands. The measure comes as President Barack Obama pushes a congressional proposal to gradually increase the minimum wage to $12 an hour by 2020 from its current federal level of $7.25. Note the key difference here: He’s not recommending such a drastic increase all at once. He recognizes that American employers couldn’t withstand the shock. Yet his administration seeks to impose draconian rules on overtime pay, giving employers only six months’ advance notice. The newspaper industry is hardly unbiased on this issue. Across the board, we face a constant struggle to stay in business, whether it’s The New York Times or the Peoria Journal Star. Our staffers push themselves hard, putting in long hours to fulill a demanding mission that serves a public good. The National Newspaper Association, like other industry groups, has long embraced the need for salary adjustments on a graduated basis. “The Labor Department failed to do its job for a decade by creating more graduated adjustments that small businesses could live with. Then it decided to try to force the small-business economy to leap the whole chasm in a single bound,” says association President Chip Hutchison, publisher of The Times-Leader in Princeton, Ky. Under the new rules, the mission will no longer take priority, whether it’s keeping the public informed or performing nonproit work to house the poor or ight cancer. The time clock will dominate all other considerations. And if employers can’t afford it, they’ll either have to reduce salaried full-time employment or go out of business. People running, say, fast-food restaurants who make less than the $47,000 threshold could soon have to adjust their résumés. The hours they accept as an investment to attain valuable management experience could soon disappear. The term “hourly employee” will take on a whole new, and not terribly impressive, meaning. The Labor Department plans to double previous income limits on overtime pay and impose new rules on employers. 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 211 S.E. Byers Ave. Pendleton, OR 97801 or email editor@eastoregonian.com. OTHER VIEWS Is it true what Democrats say about Republicans and voting? A socioeconomic background are s New York Republicans went similarly inhibited from voting when to the polls for their primary ignorant.” April 19, some opponents of Poll taxes, literacy tests, and other Donald Trump clung to the hope that Ted Cruz, or perhaps John Kasich, impediments to voting have been ruled might deny Trump a few delegates unconstitutional by courts or outlawed in some of the state’s congressional by legislation for many years. districts. One reason for that hope Harsanyi is by no means the was New York’s highly restrictive irst conservative to suggest a test Byron voter registration rules, which for voting. After Harsanyi’s article York required party-changers to register appeared, National Review’s Jonah Comment as Republicans many months earlier Goldberg tweeted, “I’ve been making in order to be eligible to vote in the a similar argument for years,” linking GOP primary. Some crossovers who intended to pieces from 2007 and 2014. to vote for Trump, the thinking went, would Others have proposed similar ideas. discover when they arrived at the polls that In March, National Review’s Kevin D. they could not do so. Williamson, a determined The #NeverTrumpers Trump opponent, were hoping, in other words, expressed his hope that the that rules limiting voter constitutional structure of participation might help checks and balances might their cause. somehow stop a Trump Likewise, during the victory, since it is “designed primary season some anti- to frustrate ‘We the People’ Trump Republicans paid when the people fall into close attention to the GOP dangerous and violent error delegate-selection process of the sort with which they in Colorado, Wyoming, are now lirting.” and North Dakota, the The various discussions three states that chose of Trump and voting not to have presidential raise questions about the preference votes in 2016. position conservatives and Winning there depended Republicans have taken on on the participation of a the most contentious voting- relatively small number of highly motivated related issue of recent years, the ight over Republicans who worked through precinct, voter ID. For a long time, conservatives and county, district, and state caucuses. Yes, Republicans have advocated commonsense several thousand Republicans participated measures to ensure the integrity of elections. in conventions there, but there’s no doubt Those measures boiled down to one thing: a Colorado, Wyoming, and North Dakota had voter should be able to prove who he or she is less voter participation than nearly all states when voting. The solution, voter ID, was not with primaries. For #NeverTrumpers, fewer only reasonable but publicly supported and voters equaled higher hopes. approved by the courts — after all, if one has Trump called the system in those states to present ID to board a plane or buy Sudafed, “rigged” and accused some Republican why is it overly burdensome to require the leaders of trying to frustrate the will of the same to vote? voters. “It’s about the voters, it’s not about Democrats have long responded by the bosses,” Trump said the week of the New accusing conservatives and Republicans of York primary, which he won with 60 percent attempting to suppress the vote. Conservatives of the vote. “We’re going to show that it’s and Republicans strongly denied the charge. about the voters. I win all of the time when it’s But now, with the new conservative/ up to the voters.” Republican arguments made in the context Now Trump has effectively clinched the of Trump’s rise — a test for voting, limited- Republican nomination, and one conservative participation elections, condemnations of voice against Trump has radically upped the democracy in general — it’s hard not to ante on limiting voter participation. In a May wonder whether Democrats were right about 20 Washington Post op-ed, David Harsanyi, the other side all along. There are clearly some a senior editor at The Federalist, argued that conservatives and Republicans who dislike the millions of voters are so ill-informed that voters’ choice — Trump — so much that they they cannot be trusted to make responsible would limit the voters’ right to choose. decisions and must therefore be “weeded One last issue. The Democratic charge out” — barred from voting “for the good of of GOP voter suppression almost always our democratic institutions.” came with an allegation of racism — the “By weeding out millions of irresponsible accusation that Republicans were speciically voters who can’t be bothered to learn the trying to disenfranchise minority voters. rudimentary workings of the Constitution, Now, however, conservative and Republican or their preferred candidate’s proposals or voter-limitation talk comes in the context even their history, we may be able to mitigate of Trump’s victories in the GOP primaries, the recklessness of the electorate,” Harsanyi which mostly did not involve minority voters. wrote. So perhaps the best way to describe what is Harsanyi proposed a test for voters along happening is that Trump’s success has brought the lines of the test given to immigrants to the fore an anti-democratic streak that has seeking to become United States citizens. long been present in some conservatives and The test would pass constitutional muster, Republicans. Harsanyi said, because it would somehow ■ “ensure that all races, creeds, genders and Byron York is chief political correspondent sexual orientations and people of every for The Washington Examiner. Poll taxes, literacy tests and other impediments to voting have been ruled unconstitutional by courts. YOUR VIEWS Good and evil switch places when people switch genders “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light and light for darkness … woe to those who are wise in their own eyes.” (Isaiah 5:20-21) To force a policy on our youth where boys who in their own eyes think they are girls are encouraged to use girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms (or visa versa) is to call evil good. This is the policy currently dictated by our president and encouraged by the East Oregonian. According the EO we need to get used to “students stating their gender instead of having it stated for them.” This what happens when we fail to stand for truth and allow the government or the newspaper to call evil good. Our conscience will be compromised. We will no longer know the difference between right and wrong. Darkness will begin to set in and evil will proliferate. This will be the result: Our children will have no protection and confusion will shroud the light of truth, especially sexual confusion in young impressionable adolescents. The most vulnerable, especially those facing gender issues, will be devastated by the social engineering programming of those “wise in their own eyes.” Those convinced to have sex change operations (no other counseling is allowed) are 20 times more likely to commit suicide. You can call evil good and you can call male female, but in the end we are what we are and no amount of social engineering or double talk will change that fact. These are our children, our heritage and our birthright. Time to say “over my martyred body will we allow you to destroy our kids and their future.” Stuart Dick Irrigon Be heard! Comment online at eastoregonian.com.