Page 4A
OPINION
East Oregonian
Thursday, August 31, 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
The most important niche
Ten years ago, the word
“niche” occasionally came up in
conversations — usually those about
foreign words no one could define.
Today, niche is a common term.
It describes how businesses carve
out a small portion of a market as a
specialty. Especially in agriculture,
farmers, ranchers, processors and
retailers all seem to be looking for
just the right niche. Especially for
small-scale operations, a niche is
an important part of any business
plan. No small farm or processor
could ever produce the same crop or
product as a large one and hope to
compete. The economies of scale are
always on the side of the big guys.
But if the right niche can be
carved out, size doesn’t matter. In
fact, in the case of many niches,
small is better.
Microbreweries are a perfect
example of how niches work.
Every consumer knows the large
players among breweries. They
produce such international brands as
Budweiser, Miller and Coors, which
they sell by the truckload.
A microbrewery, however, is
selling more than good beer in
large quantities. It’s selling a much
smaller amount of many unique
beers. Beers can have unusual
flavors such as berries, honey,
chocolate and vanilla. These and
others are added to styles such as
pale ales, pilsners, porters, stouts,
lagers and hefeweizens.
A recent stroll through a
neighborhood supermarket found
142 distinct types and styles of
microbrews for sale in addition to
the mainstream brands.
This creates the triple benefits of
allowing small breweries to survive
— and even thrive — in a world
of brewing goliaths. At the same
time, the added niches generate
demand for different types of
ingredients such as hops and barley,
benefiting farmers. And finally, the
proliferation of microbreweries
benefits large brewers, too, as
consumers will also try their many
types of beers.
OTHER VIEWS
EO Media Group File
When it comes to micro-breweries,
the more choices, the better. The
proliferation of niches allows small
and large farmers, ranchers and pro-
cessors to flourish.
That same principle is being
applied to nearly every sector of
agriculture. Whether it’s meats,
vegetables, nursery stock or even
Christmas trees, growers, marketers
and retailers are carving out niches
for their crops.
One type of niche is
certifications such as organic,
biodynamic and salmon safe. Other
niches are kosher, halal, local,
artisan and hand-made. Others are
gluten-free, vegan, GMO-free,
grass-fed and everyone’s favorite,
sustainable. How crops are sold
is also a niche. CSAs, U-pick,
roadside stands, niche grocery
stores and even meals-in-a-box are
all gaining popularity.
All of which is good, and
provides consumers with many
choices, depending on their
preferences and how much they can
afford to spend.
Which brings us to another niche,
the largest of all. It’s the niche filled
by the vast majority of farmers and
ranchers, who provide Americans
— and much of the world — with
healthful, plentiful and affordable
food.
It is a niche that none of us could
do without.
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
Modernize flood insurance
The Times and Democrat
of Orangeburg, South Carolina
T
wo years ago, a tropical system
was in part responsible for record
flooding in region that followed
more than 20 inches of rain in some
localities. In 2016, the early autumn
brought Hurricane Matthew, and while
damage here was more from wind than
rain, flooding was still a factor.
As is being shown again with
Hurricane Harvey in Texas, flooding
is a huge threat to people and property.
And every time there is flooding, there
is the painful outcry from some that they
did not know their homes and property
were not covered by insurance for flood
losses.
Flood insurance is separate from a
homeowner’s policy and varies in cost
by the location. The more flood-prone a
place, the higher the cost.
But this hurricane season, flood
insurance itself is at risk.
Flood insurance for millions will
soon dry up if Congress fails to fix
the federal program responsible for
paying their claims, writes Joshua Saks,
legislative director of the National
Wildlife Federation.
The National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP), which serves as the
first line of defense against flood damage
for more than 5 million policyholders
nationwide, is $25 billion in debt and
struggling to remain viable. The program
is in need of reform, and the deadline
is rapidly approaching for Congress to
renew the program before it expires at
the end of September.
Repairing the NFIP is imperative for
the policyholders it serves, especially
since severe floods are becoming
increasingly unpredictable, dangerous
and deadly. Thankfully, there are several
steps that lawmakers can take to cement
the program’s long-term viability and
benefit policyholders and taxpayers
alike. Saks cites the steps:
▪ Create an opportunity for more
private flood insurers to enter the
marketplace. Currently, the flood
insurance program does not do enough
to bolster competition. Doing so would
result in lower rates and better coverage
for consumers, making rebuilding easier.
▪ The House Financial Services
Committee recently took an important
step toward achieving this goal by
passing a series of bills to reauthorize
and reform the program, including
bipartisan legislation aimed at providing
private insurers an opportunity to enter
the flood insurance marketplace. The
Flood Insurance Market Parity Act
will encourage the development of a
private flood insurance market while
giving states the right to regulate flood
insurance.
▪ Make other reforms that will help
solidify the NFIP’s long-term success.
One of these is to ensure that the most
accurate risk-assessment tools, as well
as modern technology, are being used
to update flood maps. This will help lift
the burden off of property owners for
determining their own flood risks, and
will give more flexibility to the NFIP
and private insurers to offer rates that
reflect the risk that a property faces.
▪ Enhance storm-mitigation efforts.
This will go a long way toward making
communities more resilient and
better able to withstand major storms.
Financial assistance should be made
available to low-income property owners
to assist them with strengthening their
property. Offering incentives, such
as reduced insurance rates, will also
encourage proactive measures that will
prevent damage and save lives while
reducing recovery costs.
▪ Strengthen infrastructure and update
building codes. Studies show that every
$1 spent on mitigation efforts leads to $4
in reduced future disaster costs. Taking
proactive mitigation efforts would not
only save lives, but would prevent costly
property damage in the future.
Congress is taking steps to make
many of these reforms, but as Saks
points out, time is running to pass
comprehensive legislation. Without
action, Americans may be unable to
recover following the next disaster.
Trump vs. the filibuster
P
resident Trump brings an
employees instead of leaders elected
outsider’s perspective to the long
on their own and not beholden to the
debate over the Senate filibuster.
president. Plus, Congress is not only
An overwhelming majority of the
a separate branch of government, it is
Senate disagrees with his desire to kill
the first branch of government; a united
the filibuster, which means he doesn’t
Congress can remove the president,
have a prayer of winning. But he’s not
while it doesn’t work the other way
entirely wrong, either.
around. Nevertheless, Trump whacks
Set aside Trump’s sledgehammer
away at some of the lawmakers he will
Byron
tweets directed at Majority Leader
need to pass his agenda.
York
Mitch McConnell. In private
One point heard often in the
Comment
conversations, Trump has made a
debate is that Trump can rail all
reasonable and sophisticated case
he wants about the filibuster, but
against the filibuster. Not only has the
the real problem is that he couldn’t get 50
filibuster been eliminated for appointments,
Republicans to vote with him on Obamacare,
Trump has noted, it has also been eliminated
and changing the filibuster rules wouldn’t
(through the process of
change the result. That’s
reconciliation) for some of
probably not entirely
the most important things
accurate. The House had
the Senate does — that is,
to craft its bill specifically
for the budget and related
to accommodate the
bills it passes each year.
Senate’s reconciliation
So now, after all those
requirements — meaning
changes, what remains of
it was shaped by the
the filibuster is somehow
filibuster. The Senate
supposed to be sacred
had to craft its bill with
and can never be changed
the same considerations.
again?
Senate drafters had to
Trump’s question not
leave provisions that
only recognizes the reality
might have gotten 50-plus
of former Majority Leader’s Harry Reid’s
votes out of the bill in order to stay within
nuclear-option destruction of the filibuster for
reconciliation rules. In short, the House and
appointments, and McConnell’s extension of
Senate bills were fundamentally shaped by
that to Supreme Court nominations. It also
the filibuster, and the filibuster was very much
takes into account the reality of reconciliation, a part of Obamacare reform’s defeat in the
by which, a generation ago, the Senate killed
Senate.
the filibuster for budget-related bills, allowing
Now, stonewalled by McConnell, Trump
those measures to pass on a simple majority
might look for a compromise that moves
vote. In other words, the filibuster has been
him closer to his goal. Indeed, short of fully
steadily whittled down — by the Senate itself, eliminating the filibuster, Trump could
of course, and not by a headstrong president
propose getting rid of the 60-vote standard
— so why can’t the Senate do it again?
on motions to proceed, streamlining voting
Trump doesn’t have the slightest chance,
on procedural matters, and other initiatives.
of course. In May, when the president called
Those might not succeed either, but at least the
for an end to the filibuster, McConnell said,
president would have tried.
“There is an overwhelming majority on a
Hypocrisy is often at play when it comes to
bipartisan basis not interested in changing
the filibuster; senators in the majority oppose
the way the Senate operates on the legislative
the practice, while senators in the majority
calendar. And that will not happen.”
support it. But there is also a principled,
In return, Trump has railed against
consistent position on the filibuster. Veteran
McConnell and Senate tradition. Recently
senators like McConnell know that while they
the president tweeted, “If Senate Republicans
might be in the majority now, they could be in
don’t get rid of the Filibuster Rule and go to a
the minority next year. They know a lot of bad
51 percent majority, few bills will be passed.
bills might have become law had the filibuster
8 Dems control the Senate!” A month ago,
not existed. So many of them protect the
Trump tweeted, “The very outdated filibuster
filibuster whether they’re in charge or not.
rule must go. Budget reconciliation is killing
The president is an outsider who shares
Rs in the Senate. Mitch M, go to 51 votes
none of those concerns. But that doesn’t
NOW and WIN. IT’S TIME!”
mean he doesn’t have a point. The Senate
It would be an understatement to say
has changed its rules, including those on
McConnell is not convinced, and he has
supermajorities, many times over the years.
essentially ended the discussion with his
And in the future, it might change them again
over-my-dead-body pronouncements.
— in Trump’s direction.
One of the problems in the Trump-
■
McConnell relationship is that Trump tends
Byron York is chief political correspondent
to treat leaders in Congress as if they are his
for The Washington Examiner.
Stonewalled by
McConnell, Trump
might look for a
compromise that
moves him closer
to his goal.
YOUR VIEWS
Walden has wasted his years
in office — should be replaced
Oregon’s mighty District 2 is the seventh
largest in the nation, and makes up more than
two-thirds of our entire state. Congressman
Greg Walden was first elected to represent
us in 1998 following 10 years in the Oregon
Legislature and six years as Representative
Denny Smith’s chief of staff in the United
States Congress.
With that kind of resume and political
experience one might expect District 2 to get
some kind of a return on our investment — as
in a tangible benefit for us, the people whom
actually live, work and raise families in the
district.
I am sorry, but I don’t see it. Greg
Walden represents the interests of the
telecommunications, pharmaceutical,
insurance and fossil fuel industries.
His salary paid by us, the taxpayers, is
nothing compared to the millions he has
collected from out of state corporations and
Washington insiders, and his voting record
shows it.
Greg Walden has essentially run away
from his own health care bill — which threw
thousands of kids, grandparents and young
mothers off the Oregon Health Plan and
rewarded the super rich with massive tax cuts.
But wait, there is more.
As chairman of the powerful Energy &
Commerce committee he is pushing fossil
fuels infrastructure while dismissing solar and
wind. At the risk of overstating the obvious,
“sun and wind” is what we have.
Net neutrality is next, with hearings
scheduled in September. Greg Walden’s
biggest donors are lined up to cash in. We will
pay for content, delivery and access. No one in
this district is going to benefit.
Congressman Walden, you have wasted 20
years in Washington, D.C., enriching yourself
at our expense. Your tired phrase “growing
the economy” actually originated with Bill
Clinton in 1992. Lack of imagination and
leadership are not particularly valued in the
rural west — where heart and competence
actually matter.
Michael Byrne
Democratic candidate,
Oregon Congressional District 2
Parkdale
Some county residents stand
with George Anderson
I want to thank you, George Anderson, for
your letter to the “Your Views” section of the
East Oregonian.
You stated that the EO wrote an editorial
having no praise for the Eastern Oregon Trade
and Event Center or its existence.
I, like many others, am here with you,
George.
Tom Harper
Hermiston
LETTERS POLICY
The East Oregonian welcomes original letters of 400 words or less on public issues
and public policies for publication. 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 211 S.E. Byers Ave.
Pendleton, OR 97801 or email editor@eastoregonian.com.