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.