Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current | View Entire Issue (June 22, 2017)
Page 4A OPINION East Oregonian Thursday, June 22, 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 Election interference not a partisan issue Reports of Russian interference are better protected from interference in future elections. in an American election should Questioning and condemning be concerning to everyone in this a foreign country’s involvement country, regardless of their political should not be conflated as an affiliation. A foreign government attack on our president. Unless an meddling in our sovereignty and independence is not a partisan issue. investigation determines a member of Donald Trump’s campaign And multiple nonpartisan U.S. intelligence agencies, as well as colluded in the interference or that the president obstructed justice intelligence agencies of some regarding the foreign allies, investigation into the have reported that Questioning and matter, he should be Russia attempted innocent. to influence our condemning a presumed No evidence has yet democratic process during the 2016 foreign country’s been presented that either occurred. presidential election. involvement There is It doesn’t matter ample evidence, who won the should not be however, that election. Outside conflated as an Russia attempted interference is an to influence affront to our way of attack on our our election life. It undermines president. and undermine the belief that our democracy. Americans have in That should be our institutions and concerning to everyone, including our government. the president, both political parties Almost as scary as the fact that and every elected official. our country has been under intense, During his testimony before sustained cyberattack is the fact our Congress, former FBI director James population has become so polarized Comey was clear he believes this that some are willing to see their will happen again and again. Russia neighbors as enemies, rather than and other enemies will look for a foreign power actively trying to any means they can to disrupt our manipulate our country for their nation’s free election process, and benefit. cyberattacks are the most efficient This is something that should bring us together. In the face of a real way to do damage covertly. Election interference is not a enemy, we should remember we’re all on the same team, hoping to make party-line issue. It is a threat to all Americans. We should demand our country as safe and prosperous answers from our intelligence as possible. agencies, and implore Congress to We should all want to know get to the bottom of what happened exactly what happened during the and figure out how we can stop it run up to the 2016 election. We from happening again. should all demand the truth so we 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 Stop public financing of sports stadiums The Journal Record (Oklahoma) T here are plenty of federal government programs that manage the money from taxpayers well. Americans want safe water, good highways, and a strong, well-prepared military to keep us safe. But there are programs that leave taxpayers scratching their heads. Two members of Oklahoma’s congressional delegation are trying to correct one such bit of fiscal irresponsibility: the federal subsidization of sports stadiums. According to research by the Brookings Institution, 36 of the 45 stadiums built or renovated since 2000 were financed with public money, typically municipal bonds. Since municipal bonds are tax-exempt, the IRS missed out on an estimated $3.7 billion in revenue. Fifth District Rep. Steve Russell and Sen. James Lankford wrote bills this year to end that practice. Prior to 1953, sports stadiums were privately built. But that year, the Boston Braves moved to Milwaukee in large part to take advantage of a new stadium built with public money and with that the horse was out of the barn. Oklahomans gained nothing when the New York Yankees got a new $2.3 billion stadium in 2009 but paid their share of the $431 million federal subsidy nonetheless. The economic development argument is that a sports stadium is good for business, that the public spends more in nearby restaurants, that more hotel rooms are booked and that the panache of having a major league team carries with it such a powerful intangible benefit that the whole community benefits. Economists disagree. “Few fields of empirical economic research offer virtual unanimity of findings,” economists John Siegfried and Andrew Zimbalist wrote in The Journal of Economic Perspectives. “Yet independent work on the economic impact of stadiums and arenas has uniformly found that there is no statistically significant positive correlation between sports facility construction and economic development.” Oklahoma cities chose the fiscally conservative course; arenas here were built without debt, including the Chesapeake Arena. That good sense can’t be forced upon other municipalities, but when a local government in another state decides paying for a new stadium is a good idea it doesn’t mean Oklahomans should help foot the bill. Russell’s HR 811 and Lankford’s Eliminating Federal Tax Subsidies for Stadiums Act would eliminate the effective subsidy by making it illegal to build stadiums with tax-exempt bonds but they would also make it possible to subsidize stadiums with taxes on tickets and in-stadium purchases. That would shift the burden to the community that benefits, and that’s exactly where it should be. 36 of 45 stadiums built since 2000 were financed with public money. OTHER VIEWS Five more notes on Trump’s current predicament N ot long ago I wrote that the counsel Kenneth Starr and the danger President Trump faces prosecutors who worked for him of from the various investigations misconduct, of leaking, of bias, of into the Trump-Russia matter had all sorts of unprofessional behavior. changed dramatically in recent weeks. Clinton’s lead defense attorney, Now, in just the last few days, the David Kendall — the kind of deeply situation has changed even more. In five experienced Washington fighter Trump ways: could use now — took Starr to court 1. The Mueller office: Investigative over leaks, while the president’s other Byron arm of the House surrogates slammed the prosecutors York The Washington Post reported every day on television. Comment recently that special counsel Robert In other words, when things got Mueller is investigating the president serious, Clinton and his team went to for possible obstruction of justice. The the mattresses against federal law enforcement. possibility of Trump facing legal jeopardy And it worked. It is in no way clear that Trump raises the question that has been part of every could pull off the same thing, but a war on the big Washington scandal involving the White prosecutor may be his only option. House: Can a sitting president be indicted? 4. An ever-expanding investigation The generally agreed-upon answer is no; Just what Trump-related subjects is Mueller impeachment is the constitutional remedy investigating? A better question right now when presidential misconduct rises above a might be what Mueller is not investigating. certain level. That is what would happen with There has been talk of looking at allegations Trump, if it came to that. of money laundering in the So what is Mueller doing, as Trump circle. far as the president himself is And looking at the concerned? The special counsel president’s conversations is known to be investigating with a wide variety of people a number of figures around — not just members of his Trump for possible charges not administration, but friends related to the 2016 election. and whoever Trump might Those figures could certainly have talked to in his nighttime be indicted if the evidence call sessions. And looking at warrants. Michael Flynn’s business arrangements with But as far as the investigation into alleged Turkey, Russia and other places. And Paul Trump obstruction is concerned, Mueller’s Manafort’s business and finances. And perhaps work will end up not in an indictment, but even the Holy Grail of NeverTrumpism: the in the House of Representatives. The House president’s tax returns. And, oh, the allegation is constitutionally charged with originating that used to be at the core of the case, that articles of impeachment. But it does not Trump or his associates colluded with Russians have the investigative powers of the Justice to try to influence the 2016 election. The point Department and, if impeachment is on the is, Mueller can determine the scope of the table, will rely on the evidence Mueller investigation, and if Washington history is gathers. Which makes Mueller’s office, for the any guide, investigations tend to expand, not purposes of Donald Trump specifically, not a contract. prosecutor’s office but the investigative arm of 5. The Comey ‘what if’ the House. A key lesson emerged from the recent 2. Mueller’s team of killers vs. Trump’s testimony of Attorney General Jeff Sessions amateurs? before the Senate Intelligence Committee: Recently a Republican lawyer who supports Without the president’s decision to fire FBI the president and has experience in government Director James Comey, the Trump-Russia emailed an article he had read about the team of investigation would be on a downward prosecutors Mueller is assembling. “This ain’t trajectory. The collusion charge would be good,” he headlined the email, which went on fading for lack of evidence. to discuss the legal stars Mueller has hired. Investigators would be going down side Contrast that, he said in a later conversation, roads involving Flynn and Manafort in to the Trump team, led by Trump personal which the public would have little interest. lawyer Marc Kasowitz and including partner And congressional investigators might even Michael Bowe and Washington legal veteran devote most of their attention to the Russian Jay Sekulow. “I look at this team and think this interference itself, which is the serious issue at is a joke!” the lawyer said. the bottom of this whole thing. The political The reaction is not unusual. As far as radioactivity of the issue would be ticking experience in criminal prosecutions is down, not up. concerned — the kind of experience that But not after Comey. At the Sessions specifically relates to the issues in the Trump- hearing, Democrats had nothing new on Russia case — the Mueller team has a huge collusion. They barely seemed interested. advantage over the Trump team. In that sense, Instead, they focused to a great extent on trying the coming legal fight could be asymmetrical to get Sessions to reveal what the president did warfare. or did not say in private discussions — about 3. Clinton-style attacks on the Comey. prosecutor? On the Democratic side of the hearing Some Trump supporters, most notably Newt — and much of the Republican side, as well — Gingrich, have begun to attack Mueller. Still, at the issue was Comey, Comey, Comey. In the this early date it’s clear that, when it comes to end, it could be that the president’s impatience attacking prosecutors, TrumpWorld has much to get rid of Comey in order to shorten an to learn from the last president who found investigation that he believed to be going himself in deep legal and political trouble, Bill nowhere resulted in a new investigation that Clinton. could last the rest of Trump’s time in office. Clinton and his supporters made an art ■ out of attacking federal prosecutors. The Byron York is chief political correspondent president’s surrogates accused independent for The Washington Examiner. Mueller can determine the scope of the investigation. YOUR VIEWS Fire tax bond higher than advertised by city We now know for sure who’s idea it was to use 14 cents per thousand dollars of assessed value in the pro-May fire bond literature: Paul Chalmers. He is Umatilla County’s director of assessment and tax department, and he should know better. The two bond issues the city of Pendleton used in their propaganda to pass the fire station bond were paid off in May 2016. (So the real tax hike was 62 cents, not 14). In politics you can get away with just about anything. I think this was not telling the truth. And I also asked how many private sector jobs have been produced by the drone program at the airport. The city manger and the airport manager did not know. I guess we are not supposed to ask these kind of questions. I think that is what open meeting are for. Rex J Morehouse Pendleton 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 managing editor Daniel Wattenburger, 211 S.E. Byers Ave. Pendleton, OR 97801 or email editor@eastoregonian.com.
