Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current | View Entire Issue (May 3, 2017)
Page 4A OPINION East Oregonian Wednesday, May 3, 2017 Founded October 16, 1875 KATHRYN B. BROWN Publisher DANIEL WATTENBURGER Managing Editor TIM TRAINOR Opinion Page Editor MARISSA WILLIAMS Regional Advertising Director MARCY ROSENBERG Circulation Manager JANNA HEIMGARTNER Business Office Manager MIKE JENSEN Production Manager OUR VIEW Difficult decisions await legislators on education issues Oregon legislators are in a quandary — their table is filled with a projected $1.6 billion deficit despite record revenues, and they face the stiff challenge of crafting a balanced budget that also meets demands from voter-approved measures from last November’s general election. Three statewide measures approved by voters with overwhelming margins carry a collectively hefty sticker price of about $363 million through the two-year budget cycle. Two of those have a direct impact on education funding. Measure 96 is a constitutional amendment that passed with a whopping 83 percent voter approval and mandates 1.5 percent of net lottery proceeds, or about $9.5 million a year, be dedicated for veterans services. The Legislature cannot change that mandate and is required to fully fund it. Measures 98 and 99, though, were statutory education initiatives rather than constitutional amendments. Even though each passed by a 2-to-1 margin, the laws enacted through the two measures are subject to legislative change, and most likely will be because without new tax revenue they would siphon already limited funds available for pre-existing educational needs. Measure 98 was aimed at dropout prevention and increasing graduation rates with more vocational and technical education and college prep for students. It has a $150 million annual cost, or roughly $800 per high school student, if fully funded. Measure 99 directed the Legislature to use up to $22 million a year from lottery proceeds to provide stable funding for Outdoor School. Lottery proceeds already partially fund education and also earmarks money for statewide economic development. It’s probable the veterans services mandate and any Outdoor School funding will tap into the money set aside for economic development rather than cut into the limited lottery pie used for education. Legislators say funding for Measure 98’s implementation is far more troublesome. As state Sen. Mark Hass, D-Beaverton, told The Associated Press, “The voters indeed have spoken on this issue. But they spoke without writing a check.” In Gov. Kate Brown’s suggested budget, she proposed cutting the $300 million for Measure 98 in half, while the legislative budget co-chairs have proposed trimming it by a third. While the money for veterans services is mandatory, the other two measures remain alive and whole, too. Last week, amid legislative maneuvers as a deadline for action passed, an effort in the House kept Measure 98 funding intact while a move in the Senate backed by the teachers’ union to turn it into an optional grant failed — a least for now. The final decision on funding won’t be determined for some time, and no doubt there will be plenty of maneuvering still to come. We’d like to see that funding be directed as voters demanded, but we also realize the harsh budget reality legislators are facing. We’ve also advocated strongly for controls on spending. While legislators begin the process of cutting costs they should be looking hard at the largest expenses of health care and the bloated Public Employees Retirement System. As we advocated Tuesday, those costs must be controlled for Oregon’s long-term financial health. Importantly, though, state leaders — and most certainly Gov. Brown — need to show leadership by reaching out to Oregon businesses, corporations and organizations that pledged to be supportive of more equitable business taxes when the corporate tax proposed in Measure 97 was defeated and when state expenses are brought under control. Legislators, together with the public employee unions, need to rein in the PERS costs. It’s time to initiate those talks now rather than later. Oregonians have too much at stake to lose — now and in the future — for the status quo to remain intact. Getting business and the unions involved in revenue generation and cost cutting is a solution sitting on the table with the potential of solving the perplexing problems all Oregonians will face when legislators start making the tough decisions of whittling state services and programs, including the educational initiatives the voters overwhelmingly said are needed. 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 School vouchers aren’t working, but choice is B etsy DeVos’ favorite education attended by high-achieving students, policy keeps looking worse. which is easy to measure. But that’s Last week, the Education akin to concluding that all of LeBron Department, which she runs, released James’ coaches have been geniuses. a careful study of the District of Unlike most voucher programs, Columbia’s use of school vouchers, many charter-school systems are which she supports. The results were subject to rigorous evaluation and not good. oversight. Local officials decide which Students using vouchers to attend a charters can open and expand. Officials David private school did worse on math and don’t get every decision right, but they Leonhardt reading than similar students in public are able to evaluate schools based Comment school, the study found. It comes after on student progress and surveys of other studies, in Ohio and elsewhere, teachers and families. have also shown weak results for vouchers. As a result, many charters have flourished, To channel President Donald Trump: Who especially in places where traditional schools knew that education could be so complicated? have struggled. This evidence comes from top The question for DeVos is whether she’s academic researchers, studying a variety of an ideologue committed to prior beliefs places, including Washington, Boston, Denver, regardless of facts or someone who has an New Orleans, New York, Florida and Texas. open mind. But that question doesn’t apply The anecdotes about failed charters are real, only to DeVos. It also applies to all of us but they’re not the norm. trying to think about education, including Douglas Harris, a Tulane professor, says her critics. And the results from Washington the difference between charters and vouchers are important partly because they defy easy boils down to “managed competition” versus ideological conclusions. the “free market.” Susan Dynarski of the Before diving into those results, I want to University of Michigan talks about charters’ make two broader points. First, education isn’t successfully combining flexibility and just another issue. It is the most powerful force accountability. Joshua Angrist of MIT says, for accelerating economic growth, reducing “Flexibility alone is not enough.” poverty and lifting middle-class living Crucially, many charters are open to all standards. Well-educated adults earn much comers, which means their success doesn’t more, live longer and are happier than poorly stem from skimming off the best. And the educated adults. When researchers try to tease schools’ benefits extend beyond test scores out whether education does much to cause to more meaningful metrics, like college these benefits, the answer appears to be yes. graduation. Second, the highly charged debate over The District of Columbia study highlights education often lapses into misleading the charter/voucher contrast in a neat way. caricature. On one side of the caricature are The voucher results look so weak — even defenders of traditional public schools, who worse than elsewhere — partly because the believe in generous funding, small class sizes city’s charters are so strong. That is, voucher and teacher training. On the other are so-called recipients are being compared with children at reformers, who believe in vouchers, charter higher-performing public schools than in the schools and standardized tests. past, and the voucher schools aren’t keeping Unfortunately, this caricature mixes several up. ideas that do not necessarily go together. In It’s an argument for a political compromise: particular, it conflates vouchers (coupons that fewer vouchers, more charters. let parents use their tax dollars for private If you’re a progressive, I realize that this schools) with charter schools (public schools compromise may make you squeamish. that operate outside the usual bureaucracy). Progressives often prefer to spend more on Hard-core reformers, like DeVos, traditional schools — which are still crucial — support vouchers and charters. Hard-core and to trust them. traditionalists oppose both. The rest of us But I would encourage you to look at the should distinguish between them, because full evidence with an open mind. Charters their results differ. have the potential to help a lot of poor children Vouchers have been disappointing. They in the immediate future, and it’s hard to think are based on the free-market theory that of a more important progressive goal. parents will choose good schools over bad As for DeVos, I hope she is similarly open ones. It’s a reasonable theory, and vouchers to new facts. It seems a reasonable expectation can have benefits, like allowing children to for somebody whose title is secretary of leave dangerous schools. education. For the most part, though, identifying a ■ good school is hard for parents. Conventional David Leonhardt is an op-ed columnist for wisdom usually defines a good school as one The New York Times. YOUR VIEWS Don’t break promise to cancer patients From the start of this health care debate, our lawmakers have repeated the promise that discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions will not be allowed. In fact, Rep. Greg Walden introduced the Pre-Existing Conditions Protection Act of 2017 earlier this year, and was quoted in his own press release saying “we need to guarantee our health care system works for all Oregonians. I am committed to protecting patients living with pre-existing conditions, period.” However, the latest amendment to the American Health Care Act goes back on that promise. It allows states the option of waiving the ban on health status rating if they have a high-risk pool — ushering in a patchwork health care system where people can be charged more for having pre-existing conditions and cancer patients could be priced out of the market. States could waive the requirement that health coverage must include Essential Health Benefits, leaving cancer patients and survivors with no guarantee that chemotherapy, prescription drugs, prevention services or hospitalization would be covered. These moves would return us to a time when individuals with pre-existing conditions like cancer would essentially be denied coverage in certain states. As an American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network volunteer in Oregon, I urge Congressman Walden to stand by his promise and vote against the AHCA and the MacArthur Amendment. Paula Messenger Hermiston Keep the meadowlark as Oregon state bird Please do not remove the western meadowlark as Oregon’s official state bird. State Sen. Frank Girod, predictably from a west-side district (Stayton), introduced a resolution to replace the meadowlark with the osprey. The meadowlark, while found throughout Oregon, is primarily identified with more thanr half the state in the grasslands and pastures east of the Cascades. Once again, a west-side legislator has devised yet another ham-fisted grab giving short shrift to a bird that, for many, defines a way of life on the east side. Anyone who has ever woken up on a sunshiny morning in the Baker Valley or along the base of the majestic Steens can never forget the time nor the place of hearing, according the Cornell Lab of Ornithology, its “buoyant, flutelike melody ringing out across a field.” After 90 years of Oregon history, for Sen. Girod, it’s all about the momentary whim of a “beauty pageant” maneuver to replace a bird special to Oregonians and increasingly rare with a common species. Sen. Girod claims the choice of our state bird is “unoriginal.” This is false for, had he bothered to review history, the reality is exactly the opposite. Oregon and Wyoming were actually the first to designate the meadowlark as their respective state bird in 1927. Then four other states, Nebraska, Montana, Kansas and North Dakota, followed our pioneering designation by establishing the meadowlark as their state bird between 1929 and 1947 following the adage that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Keith K. Daellenbach Portland Pendleton lacking business focus City hall has again proved itself not business-friendly. With the current trend of business closings in Pendleton, you would think the city would bend over backwards to encourage those remaining to expand or upgrade existing facilities. Take some time, city council members, and visit our local Caterpillar dealership. Ask them their opinion of trying to deal with city hall. Here’s another good one. Four brave souls on the city council had the guts to say “no” to another city hall giveaway. The Pendleton Development Commission, better known as our city council, just gave the Pendleton Downtown Association $55,000 to promote the downtown area, duplicating the mission of the Chamber of Commerce and Travel Pendleton. The PDA promises they’ll save the city $25,000 a year in parking enforcement in the downtown area by developing a new plan with self-enforcement. Being as how the current ordinance isn’t enforced and hasn’t been for several years, I really don’t expect any savings. Since my arrival to Pendleton in 1951, there have been numerous parking plans that always seem to eliminate spaces on Main Street. I shudder every time I hear there is a new plan in the works. I’d be happy if the city could just keep the street lights at Main and Brownfield Park working. The PDC has been told and expressed the fact itself that the most common reason businesses fail is under-capitalization. They’ve totally disregarded this fact by enabling the PDA by giving them $55,000 just to keep its head above water. That’s quite a price to pay for a few flower baskets and another parking plan. It kind of makes you wonder if those councilors that voted “yes” have any business experience whatsoever. Then there’s that Rivoli Theater again. I have to apologize for not including the rest of the coalition as owners. The fact is that they, as well as the Downtown Business Association, seem to think that as 501(c)3 nonprofit corporations they have some special right to city funding. I must have missed that in the city charter. Another public apology is in order to the fire chief. Due to previous commitments, I’m unable to volunteer in fixing that somewhat stellar installation of those Christmas lights on Main Street for which he claims credit. I would, however, offer to purchase a chainsaw if the city would decide that removal of those trees would solve a myriad of problems. And to Mr. Kindle, the Vert is a city treasure that needs maintenance and some attempt at self-funding. Though I’m not much into symphony music, I have enjoyed the choir performances and most recently Dancing With the Stars. Sorry I missed you. Rick Rohde Pendleton
