Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 7, 2016)
Page 4A OPINION East Oregonian Wednesday, September 7, 2016 Founded October 16, 1875 KATHRYN B. BROWN DANIEL WATTENBURGER Publisher Managing Editor JANNA HEIMGARTNER TIM TRAINOR Business Ofice Manager Opinion Page Editor OUR VIEW The right to review Here in Umatilla County, we’ve public’s sentiment, the voice can be changed. got weak mayors — and that’s no The East Oregonian spent six disrespect to Phillip Houk, David Drotzmann or the other elected leaders months of this year arguing the public’s right to know what the of our towns. It’s by design. The city charters call for a mayor to Pendleton councilors and mayor had be elected and paid a small stipend for to say about City Manager Robb Corbett in his annual review. The their service, which can entail as little initial request was denied, but after as a couple of meetings a month. In Pendleton and Hermiston the mayor’s taking the request to the district attorney’s ofice we oficial duties during inally got to view the the council meetings The annual evaluation. include keeping There were few everyone on the city manager surprises, and in agenda and casting review by the our estimation the a vote in the case council gave Corbett of a tie — a rare city council a fair review — he’s occurrence in both is the voice a steady hand who towns. doesn’t like to Outside of of the people rufle feathers, even council chambers, however, they are the evaluating the though sometimes it’s necessary to embodiment of the city’s highest rufle feathers. His city they represent, strengths outnumber cheering the town at paid employee. his weaknesses, and events, meeting with he should strive to dignitaries from other governments, businesses and interests develop better communication with and speaking on behalf of their city in the people of Pendleton. And we agree with the council that he has made other public forums. progress on that front. The day-to-day operation of the Most likely based on the DA’s city is left to the city manager, a paid ruling, the city of Hermiston quickly position that serves at the pleasure of turned over Byron Smith’s review the council and mayor and oversees when it was requested, just a week the city’s various departments and after it was given in August. Smith operations. The city manager’s has been in Hermiston for two years performance is reviewed annually by now and was roundly praised for his the elected representatives. accomplishments in that time, while The short arithmetic is that the being directed to focus on the Eastern annual review is the voice of the Oregon Trade and Event Center, the people evaluating the city’s highest new senior center and several other paid employee. The council and priorities in the coming year. mayor are then evaluated directly by These are the kinds of things voters every four years if they choose the public needs to hear. And while to run for re-election. Corbett and Smith surely hear There are pros and cons to having an indirect link between the voters and regular criticism — constructive and otherwise — from the citizenry, it only the person at the full-time controls of carries real weight if their bosses on a city. But the system only works if the council reiterate it. the city manager is treated with the While the city council and same level of scrutiny as a candidate mayor are paid a pittance for the making a case for re-election. responsibility they bear in leading That means the voters must know their towns, their words in this what their voice is saying in these valuable annual exercise of evaluation evaluations, down to the speciic are as important as their votes in the criticism and commentary. And if council chambers. the commentary doesn’t match the 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. CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES Sen. Ron Wyden Rep. Greg Walden Washington ofice: 221 Dirksen Senate Ofice Bldg. Washington, DC 20510 202-224-5244 La Grande ofice: 541-962-7691 Washington ofice: 185 Rayburn House Ofice Building Washington, DC 20515 202-225-6730 La Grande ofice: 541-624-2400 Sen. Jeff Merkley Gov. Kate Brown Washington ofice: 313 Hart Senate Ofice Building Washington, DC 20510 202-224-3753 Pendleton ofice: 541-278-1129 160 State Capitol 900 Court Street Salem, OR 97301-4047 503-378-4582 OTHER VIEWS Incredible shrinking Obamacare D uring the debate over suggests their health has improved. Obamacare, both supporters But it does mean Obamacare is and opponents assumed not what we thought it would be. the giant law would transform the It’s a much more modest add-on to American health care system. The the pre-existing system. Sarah Kliff supporters argued that the system put it well in Vox: “Obamacare’s would help Americans purchase insurance expansion is on the path to health insurance through carefully looking like other safety net programs regulated state exchanges. President we know, offering limited services David Barack Obama envisioned a day when Brooks to a predominantly low-income consumers could shop for health population.” Comment coverage “the same way you’d shop Kliff quotes former administration for a plane ticket on Kayak oficial Michael Adelberg: or a TV on Amazon.” “The exchange population In 2010, the — 85 percent of which Congressional Budget qualiies for inancial Ofice estimated there assistance — looks a lot like would be 21 million the Medicaid population. And with it, we’re seeing the Americans using the start of the Medicaid-ization exchanges by now. Many of exchange plans: narrow supporters argued that networks with no frills.” the exchanges would Again, this is not bad. eventually replace But we’d have had a very the current dominant different debate if we knew employer-based system. the law was going to be a The promise of discrete government effort Obamacare was that it to subsidize health care for would foster competition more poor people. For one and offer lower premiums thing, Democrats would while covering tens of have probably paid a much millions of Americans smaller political price if their effort wasn’t without, as Obama often put it, adding a dime billed as an extravagant government grab to the deicit. to take over the nation’s health care system. Unfortunately, most of the exchanges are The administration imagined something in serious trouble. As many critics pointed transformational; it ended up with something out at the time, the law is poorly designed signiicant but incremental. to induce younger, healthier people to get There are also lessons for people who into the system. The penalties attached to think about policymaking. First, designing the individual mandate are too weak. The technocratic systems that will actually work subsidies are too small. The premiums are too is really hard. Second, designing effective costly. The deductibles are too high. Many technocratic systems that can pass politically doctors aren’t participating in the networks. is really, really hard. Third, designing Only about 12 million people are in politically plausible technocratic systems in a exchanges. More important, the exchanges country divided on fundamental philosophy is are attracting sicker, poorer people, who drain hardness on stilts. money, and are not attracting the healthier Philosophically, Obamacare tried to people who pour money in. split the difference between European-style Many insurers are suffering catastrophic government coercion (the individual losses and pulling out. As James Capretta mandates) with a traditionally American of the American Enterprise Institute has respect for competition and freedom of choice noted, Aetna has lost $430 million since (the exchanges). January 2014 on insurance plans sold through But lawmakers couldn’t stomach a law Obamacare and is withdrawing from 11 of involving forceful coercion (punishing its 15 states. United Healthcare has lost $1.3 penalties to make the young take part) billion on the exchanges and will cut its and they couldn’t stomach a more purely participation to three states from 34. market-based system. They wound up with a That means less coverage; 24 million nonfunctioning compromise. Americans still lack health insurance. That From here on out the health care debate means less competition. Before too long, will return, but in polarized form. Democrats a third of the exchanges will have just one are already really pushing for the public insurer in them. That also means higher option, a heavier state player. Republicans premiums. Blue Cross Blue Shield has are pointing out that technocrats are bad at requested a 62 percent increase for next designing dynamic systems and the insurance year in Tennessee and an average 65 percent markets should work more like traditional increase in Arizona. Some experts put the markets. The next president will have to deal national requested increase at 23 percent. with all this, especially if the exchanges go The exchanges are also producing less into a death spiral, even though the subject has coverage. The insurers that are staying offer been basically ignored in the campaign. pared-down restrictive plans that look more It will be hard to govern after a campaign like Medicaid. about nothing. Does this mean Obamacare is failing? ■ No. The law has produced many positive David Brooks’s column on the Op-Ed page outcomes across the health care world. of The New York Times started in September More than 20 million more Americans have 2003. coverage because of it, and the evidence The administration imagined something transformational; it ended up with something signiicant but incremental. YOUR VIEWS Trump listening to the witch doctors Letter writer Stuart Dick’s premise that this election is about globalism vs. the American people is an imaginative but unpersuasive reading of the signs of the times. Is he bewitched? When Donald Trump asked the witch doctors “What’s your prescription to make America great again?” they prescribed a large dose of fear to generate a huge vote of hate. They identiied America’s most pressing problem as over-population due to illegal immigration and a timid foreign policy. Their proposed solution was to build a border wall and make Mexico pay for it, deport illegals, and kill more in war. Send our young people to die in never- ending wars against dark-skinned foreigners. Build more bombs not bridges! Torture terrorists! Gin up hate! Donald took great delight in that advice. To gin up hate Donald calls all political opponents names and says Hillary is guilty of caring about dark-skinned people and of being corrupt. In fact, Donald says Hillary is “the most corrupt candidate ever.” Can anyone name even one corruption conviction for Hillary? Without hard evidence that could prevail in a Supreme Court decision, allegations and accusations of corruption and criminal activity are not persuasive because they deny the foundation of our legal system: that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty! In America, legal indictments require proof of legal wrong-doing. Who knows our legal system better than our top law-enforcement agency, the FBI? They examined the evidence against Hillary in her so-called email scandal and recommended against indictment. Yet arrogant political opponents and media pundits without law degrees continue to promote the false narrative that anyone other than Hillary would have been indicted and convicted. Evidence means nothing to partisans, paranoids and haters. Millions continue to cheer the witch doctors’ prescription. Millions more weep! While demagogue Donald daily sows seeds of hate and division, the witch doctors are convulsed with demonic laughter. Tom Driscoll Poulsbo, Wash. Request for clemency for Hammonds Dwight and Steven Hammond are the Oregon ranchers serving ive years in a federal prison for ires that burned some 140 acres of BLM land. Steven is 46 and a father. Dwight is 74 and a father and grandfather. Additionally, the Hammond family has paid $400,000 to the BLM in a separate settlement with regards to these ires. They were convicted as terrorists. This is just wrong. How can you prosecute people as terrorists when they aren’t terrorists? These men are family men, Americans, and ranchers. They are making a home and living off the land they own. They are manufacturing food to feed others. Here is what they were found guilty of: In 2001 a prescribed weed burn got away from them and accidentally burned 139 acres of BLM adjacent to their property. In 2006 there was a raging wild ire, caused by lightning, that was threatening their ranch/homes, and winter feed. They lit a “back ire,” which spread to BLM land and burned one acre. Judge Michael Hogan said the ive years was “grossly disproportionate” to the crime. Mr. Ward, range conservationist, reported that the 2001 ire “improved the rangeland conditions on BLM.” BLM employee Mr. Maupin reports numerous times the BLM has lit ires that jumped to private land. No compensation to the ranchers for burned/lost cattle, feed, structures, etc., was ever paid. The president may grant pardon for federal crimes under Article II, Section 2 of the US Constitution. I URGE you to please ask President Obama to do this. Surely they have been punished enough. Karen Wilde Arlington 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 let- ters 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. Un- signed 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.
