Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current | View Entire Issue (May 10, 2018)
East Oregonian Page 4A Thursday, May 10, 2018 CHRISTOPHER RUSH Publisher KATHRYN B. BROWN Owner DANIEL WATTENBURGER Managing Editor TIM TRAINOR Opinion Page Editor Founded October 16, 1875 OUR VIEW SNAP a wild card in new farm bill Republicans in the House Agriculture Committee recently passed a draft of the next farm bill on a partisan vote. As in past years, the issues dividing Republicans and Democrats are the welfare components of the legislation. Democrats want to take back the House and the Senate in November. To accomplish this “blue wave” they’ll need to turn a lot of districts in farm country — districts that voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 election. Both Democrats and Republicans want to protect farmers, so you’d think it would be a snap to pass a new farm bill. It turns out that rather than being a snap, it is wrangling over SNAP — the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — that led to the partisan committee vote. SNAP, what used to be known as food stamps, is a $68 billion a year program that accounts for 69 percent of domestic food programs. SNAP and other nutrition programs make up 80 percent of what we think is inaccurately called the farm bill. Republicans attached language in the new bill that would require most able-bodied SNAP recipients to either work or be enrolled in a work training program to qualify for assistance. That’s a nonstarter for Democrats. We won’t weigh in on the pros and cons of asking those who are getting assistance to make some effort towards employment. But we have trouble seeing the benefits of folding social welfare programs into the farm bill. Decades ago Congress decided to put food stamp and school lunch funding into the farm bill. The thinking goes that urban legislators don’t really care much for commodity subsidies, crop insurance and dairy pricing, but they do care about nutrition programs that impact their constituents. Lumped in with the USDA SNAP electronic benefits cards from around the nation. The program is one of sev- eral non-agricultural programs that make up the lion’s share of the farm bill — and spark the most divisiveness in Congress. welfare programs urban legislators do care about, the farm expenditures seem like small potatoes that aren’t worth a fight. We admit there was probably some logic behind that thinking. But in practice, the thing that was supposed to grease the skids seems to always throw the farm bill off the rails. The 2008 Farm Bill was set to expire in September 2012. In order to avoid running into election season, Democrats who controlled Congress began working on a new bill in 2011. It wasn’t until 2014 that a bill was passed, mostly because of partisan differences on how much to fund nutrition programs. It’s too early to tell if the “2018 Farm Bill” will suffer the same fate. But it is another election year and politics are even more divisive than five years ago. We can’t help but wonder, as we did in 2013, whether farmers and ranchers would be better served by a relatively modest bill that stands on its own than rather than being held hostage by partisan wrangling over welfare spending. OTHER VIEWS Time to end the secrecy O OTHER VIEWS Will Oregon tax plan lead to mischief? By Corvallis Gazette-Times W e’re just a couple of weeks away from May 21, the date when Gov. Kate Brown has summoned legislators for a one-day special session to consider her proposal for lower tax rates for some small businesses. For fans of political posturing, this special session could well turn into a special occasion, as legislators and other elected officials pivot toward November’s general election. For fans of tax reform that could benefit a range of Oregon small businesses, the session might not turn out to be all that special. Here’s the background, if you’re just getting up to speed on this issue: Last month, Brown signed a tax measure, Senate Bill 1528, which was the subject of considerable partisan debate during this year’s legislative session. Here’s what you need to know about the measure: Oregon’s tax code is connected to its federal counterpart, so any tax reform enacted at the federal level, such as the measure passed last year by Congress, generally is duplicated in the state tax system. Last year’s federal tax reform included a provision allowing owners of so-called “pass-through” businesses to deduct as much as 20 percent of their business income on federal tax returns. Since the federal tax system is connected to Oregon’s tax code, owners of those businesses were in line to take the same deduction on their state returns. But the Legislature, without a single vote from a Republican, approved Senate Bill 1528, which breaks the connection between the federal tax reform and the state tax code on this particular provision. The state winds up pocketing an additional $244 million in tax revenue, money that Brown said the state desperately needs. But as Brown announced her intention to sign the bill, she also said she planned to call the Legislature back into Unsigned editorials are the opinion of the East Oregonian editorial board. Other columns, letters and cartoons on this page express the opinions of the authors and not necessarily that of the East Oregonian. session to consider her proposal to give a tax break to sole proprietorships, which had been left out of a previous tax break, passed in 2013. Give the governor credit for what amounts to a clever attempt to thread the tax needle: The state, which faces yet another budget shortfall next year (despite what will almost certainly be record revenue), pockets millions to start filling the gap. Brown’s tax proposal, which is estimated to cost the state about $11 million, doesn’t make that budget hole much deeper. And, maybe most important from the governor’s point of view, she gets to cast herself as a friend to Oregon’s small businesses as she hits the re-election trail, perhaps taking some of the wind out of the sails of her GOP opponent. Brown’s proposal has a couple of problems, though: First, as we’ve noted, an analysis of the proposal suggested that her tax break wouldn’t give relief to that many businesses: About 12,000 tax filers would qualify. That number has increased from earlier analyses, but it still works out to just 4.3 percent of Oregon’s sole proprietors. And now this: An analysis from the Legislative Revenue Office released last week found that Brown’s tax break would mostly benefit those sole proprietors earning at least $200,000 a year. Less than 10 percent of the estimated $11 million tax cut would go to sole proprietors earning less than $100,000 a year. A tax break that benefits mostly the wealthy? That does start to sound like the tax reform measure Congress passed last year — not something that comes from the desk of a governor who’s positioned herself on the front lines of the opposition to President Donald Trump. It all adds to the potential of a mischief- filled special session in two weeks’ time — not the quick one-day event that Brown would prefer. And it all begs this question: Isn’t it time our election officials and candidates got serious about floating plans for real tax reform? Just asking. n Jan. 24, 2017, then-national Hope Hicks, Sam Clovis, Stephen security adviser Michael Miller, K.T. McFarland, Roger Flynn was questioned by Stone, Jeff Sessions, Carter Page, the FBI in his White House office. Erik Prince, J.D. Gordon, Reince The session, focusing on Flynn’s Priebus and Sean Spicer. It would transition talks with the Russian be a public service — actually, it ambassador, led to Flynn pleading is a public responsibility — for guilty to a charge of lying to the committee to release those investigators. He is now awaiting interviews. Byron A good example is about to be set sentencing. York by the Senate Judiciary Committee. But why did FBI agents go to the Comment One of the areas that panel has White House in the first place? We focused on is the much-discussed still don’t know precisely, because June 9, 2016 meeting in Trump Tower. we have only snippets of information from Committee investigators questioned six of the various Trump-Russia investigations. the participants, including Trump Jr., music There’s no reason it should be a big secret, promoter Rob Goldstone and the translator but it is. who heard it all. (The committee received Newly unredacted portions of the House written answers to questions from Natalia Intelligence Committee Republicans’ Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer at the Trump-Russia report say top Justice Department and FBI officials — Sally Yates, center of the meeting.) The transcripts of those interviews remain secret. James Comey, Andrew McCabe and Mary Capitol Hill’s secrecy is nothing McCord — gave “conflicting testimony” about the “primary purpose” for sending the compared to that of special counsel Robert Mueller, whose lawyers recently declined FBI to question Flynn. to tell a federal judge in open court what Some said the reason for interviewing their investigation is about. It happened Flynn was “investigating potentially misleading statements to the vice president,” in a hearing in the case of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who according to the report. Some said it was has been charged with financial crimes investigating “a possible violation of the unrelated to the Trump campaign and the Logan Act.” And some said it was “a desire 2016 election. to obtain more information as part of the In court, Mueller prosecutor Michael counterintelligence investigation” into Dreeben essentially admitted that the May Flynn. 17, 2017, order appointing Mueller and Who said what? It’s impossible to know, stating the subject of the investigation was because the committee has not released just for show. Mueller’s real assignment — the interviews it conducted with each of the factual statement defining the limits of those players in the Flynn affair. And we’re his investigation — remains a secret. “The lucky to know what little we know; the regulations nowhere say that a specific intelligence community originally blacked factual statement needs to be provided out the portion of the report that said Yates, publicly,” Dreeben said. et al, gave conflicting accounts. Even that Mueller got his marching orders, was a secret until the last few days. Dreeben said, in secret conversations with Beyond the specific issue of the Flynn deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein. questioning, the Republican report’s little “The specific factual statement ... was snippets of quotations and characterizations conveyed to the special counsel upon his of testimony leave much untold. They also appointment in ongoing discussions that leave many wondering whether the GOP told the whole story of what its investigators defined the parameters of the investigation.” It was all done in secret. gathered. Federal District Judge T.S. Ellis’ In their minority report, House Intelligence Committee Democrats included incredulous reply was simple: “Come on, man.” Ellis ordered Dreeben to show him the a few passages from interviews with special counsel’s complete assignment. That’s key figures — former Office of National a good thing — but of course, it will happen Intelligence chief James Clapper on his in secret. The public still won’t know. contacts with the press, McCabe on the And that has been the problem with this Logan Act, and more. But of course, the investigation, going back to the beginning. brief passages are just the ones Democrats In February, I wrote that in the Trump- want the public to see. Like Republicans, Russia probe, “Too much material is secret, they leave a lot out. too much is classified, and too many attacks The bottom line is that the public still does not know what many important players are launched and defenses mounted with too have told the House about the Trump-Russia little public knowledge of the underlying facts.” affair. That’s still true, and becoming more so The solution is obvious and simple: every day. Release the transcripts of the committee’s ■ witness interviews. Among others, the Byron York is chief political committee questioned Donald Trump Jr., correspondent for The Washington Jared Kushner, Michael Cohen, Corey Examiner. Lewandowski, Steve Bannon, Rick Gates, 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. 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.
