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