Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 24, 2018)
Page 4A East Oregonian Wednesday, October 24, 2018 CHRISTOPHER RUSH Publisher KATHRYN B. BROWN Owner DANIEL WATTENBURGER Managing Editor WYATT HAUPT JR. News Editor Founded October 16, 1875 OTHER VIEWS The materialist party D onald Trump and the other care, health care and health care,” populists around the world J.B. Poersch, of the Democratic- have transformed politics in aligned Senate Majority PAC, told three gigantic ways. First, they told CNN. a different narrative. Their central The Wesleyan Media Project story is that the good, decent people recently surveyed the political of the heartland are being threatened landscape and came out with a by immigrants, foreigners and other report called “2018: The Health Care David outsiders while corrupt elites do Election.” It found that a majority Brooks of recent pro-Democratic political nothing. Comment Second, Trump and the other ads featured health care. Sixty-one populists have overturned the percent of recent pro-Democratic traditional moral standards for how ads in U.S. House races have been on health leaders are supposed to behave. He’s care. challenged basic norms of honesty, Democratic candidates like Sen. Claire decency, compassion and moral conduct. McCaskill are hammering home the same He unabashedly exploits rifts in American point in debates. Republicans tried to take society. away coverage for pre-existing conditions. Third, they have ushered in a new In normal times, there’s good reason to conversation. In the 20th century the big run on this issue. Millions of families are debate was big government versus small plagued by inadequate insurance coverage. government. Now, as many have noticed, If you’re trying to win a swing voter in the core debate is open versus closed. Do Arizona, it’s a bread-and-butter issue that you favor basic openness, diversity and has appeal. pluralism, or do you favor closed ethnic But the Democratic campaign is nationalism? inadequate to the current moment. It offers Along the way Trump has challenged no counternarrative to Trump, little moral America’s basic identity as a nation of case against his behavior, no unifying immigrants. He’s challenged the American- argument against ethnic nationalism. In led postwar international order. politics you can’t beat something with In short, Trump and the other populists nothing. Democrats missed the Trumpian have transformed the GOP and thrown down upsurge because while society was dividing a cultural, moral and ideological gauntlet. into cultural tribes, they spent 2008 through This election is the Democrats’ first 2016 focusing on health care. Now that the opportunity to push back against a upsurge has happened, they are still pinioned thoroughly Trumpified Republican Party. It to health care. is a remarkable opportunity to realign the Worse, the Democratic strategy simply electorate, since polls continually show the revives the old 1980-2008 playbook. It’s percentage of the country that buys Trump’s Democratic spending promises versus ethnic nationalism is in the low 40s. Republican tax cuts. This familiar, orthodox So how, at this crucial moment in history, argument pushes left and right back into have the Democrats responded? their normal categories. It destroys any “The top three issues this year are health possibility of a realignment. We’ve learned a few things about the Democratic Party. First, it’s still fundamentally a materialist party. The Trumpian challenge is primarily a moral and cultural challenge. But the Democrats are mostly comfortable talking about how to use federal spending to extend benefits. Some Democrats want to spend a lot more (Medicare for all, free college education), and some want to spend less, but their basic instinct is that national problems can be addressed with more federal money. Their basic political instinct is that you win votes by offering material benefits. Second, we’ve learned that when Democrats do raise a moral argument, it tends to be of the social justice warrior variety. The core argument in this mode is that the oppressive structures of society marginalize women, minorities and members of the LGBTQ communities. It turns out that if your basic logic is that distinct identity groups are under threat from an oppressive society, it’s very hard to then turn around and defend that society from authoritarian attack, or to articulate any notion of what even unites that society. You can appeal to women as women and to ethnic groups as ethnic groups, but it’s very hard to make a universal appeal to Americans as Americans, or defend the basic American norms that Trump calls into question. It’s a messaging vulnerability that Democrats have imposed upon themselves. Democrats still seem likely to win the House, because Trump is so effective at driving away voters. But Democrats are blowing the political opportunity of a lifetime. They seem to be getting little traction in red states and now may end up losing ground in the Senate. Instead of drawing disaffected voters away from the GOP, they seem to be pushing Republicans back to Trump. ■ David Brooks has been a senior editor at The Weekly Standard, a contributing editor at Newsweek and the Atlantic Monthly, and he is currently a commentator on “The New- shour with Jim Lehrer.” Investigation into investigators could end if Democrats win House R epublicans on Capitol Hill 3) The unusual circumstances have added enormously to surrounding the formal beginning of the FBI’s counterintelligence the public’s understanding of what happened in the Trump-Russia investigation into the Trump investigation. They’re still doing campaign. it. But it will come to a screeching 4) The troubling deficiencies in halt if the GOP loses control of the the FBI’s application for a warrant House in next month’s midterm to wiretap onetime Trump campaign Byron elections. figure Carter Page. York The driving force behind the 5) The anti-Trump bias of some Comment revelations is House Intelligence of the top officials in the FBI Committee Chairman Rep. Devin investigation. Nunes. But a number of other Republicans in 6) The degree to which the dossier’s the House, including Reps. Trey Gowdy, John allegations spread throughout the Obama Ratcliffe, Bob Goodlatte, Jim Jordan, Mark administration during the final days of the Meadows and others have also played critical 2016 campaign and the transition. roles. (In the Senate, Judiciary Committee 7) Obama officials’ unmasking of Trump- chairman Sen. Charles Grassley has done key related figures in intelligence intercepts. work, but the most progress has been made in 8) The fact that FBI agents did not the House because House rules make it easier believe Michael Flynn lied to them in the for the majority to work around minority interview that later led to Flynn’s guilty plea opposition.) on a charge of lying to the FBI. Among the things Americans know about 9) The role of the opposition research the conduct of the Trump-Russia probe that firm Fusion GPS in the Trump-Russia they would not have known had Nunes and probe. his colleagues not tackled the subject: And more. 1) The important role that the incendiary Nunes and his colleagues learned these allegations in the still-unverified Trump things — and told the public about them — dossier played in the FBI’s investigation of over the determined opposition of the FBI, the Trump campaign. the Justice Department and Democrats, both 2) The fact that the dossier was on the Intelligence Committee and in the commissioned and paid for by the Hillary larger House. Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party. In fact, it would not be an overstatement to say the FBI and Justice Department fiercely resisted the investigation. They withheld materials, dragged their feet, and flat-out refused to provide information to which congressional overseers were clearly entitled. Sometimes disputes were settled by the intervention of House Speaker Paul Ryan on Nunes’ behalf. Sometimes they weren’t. Nunes and the others performed a public service by investigating something no one else was investigating. The Senate Intelligence Committee conducted the big, bipartisan, flagship congressional probe into the Trump-Russia matter. Special counsel Robert Mueller, with full law enforcement powers, investigated Russian meddling, whether any Trump people were involved and the question of whether the president attempted to obstruct the investigation. But no one wanted to investigate the investigators, even though their conduct cried out for scrutiny. The work is not yet done. These days, a joint group from the House Judiciary and Oversight committees is conducting interviews with several figures in the Trump-Russia matter. In addition, Nunes and other Republicans are still urging President Trump to release additional parts of the Carter Page surveillance application that they say will contain new revelations. None of this has been bipartisan. The work has been done by Republicans and opposed by Democrats. And if Democrats win control of the House, as a number of polls suggest they will do, it will stop immediately. If Democrats win, Rep. Adam Schiff, who has opposed nearly everything Nunes has done, will become chairman of the Intelligence Committee. Rep. Jerrold Nadler will head the Judiciary Committee. And Rep. Elijah Cummings will take over the Oversight Committee. This month Schiff wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post broadly outlining the new direction Democrats would take. In the Intelligence Committee, Schiff promised to investigate aspects of Trump-Russia that committee Republicans would not — a move that would target the president, but also likely duplicate the work of other investigators. Schiff also mentioned what he said were “serious and credible allegations the Russians may possess financial leverage over the president, including perhaps the laundering of Russian money through his businesses.” The Judiciary and Oversight Committees would also abandon their current paths and focus directly on the president. If they win, Democrats will of course be fully entitled to investigate what they want; that’s part of what is meant when it is said that elections have consequences. ■ Byron York is chief political correspondent for The Washington Examiner. YOUR VIEWS Walden’s failed leadership is dangerous I have a gut-wrenching photograph etched into my memory: Greg Walden stands with Paul Ryan on his right and Trump on his left. In his hands he holds the bill to repeal Obamacare, which he is presenting to Trump. More than 20 million Americans, including many, many thousands in our Second District, would lose their health care if this bill had passed. Obamacare is not perfect — nothing as huge and serious as universal health care is perfect in its first iteration. But the solution is not to gut a program that is working, but rather to work together to identify weaknesses and correct them so as to strengthen the system — not destroy it. This would be in the best interest of all Americans. The Obamacare repeal attempt is an example of a thought process and approach that is foolish, retrogressive, simply party- line, and destructive to the needs of us, the ordinary people of our district. Is Walden’s sort of “leadership” what 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. we want for our district? Do we want more straight party-line rather than thoughtful representation to meet our needs? I think not. We do not need this sort of work on our behalf and we can do better. We need a representative who actually represents us and our best interests, and we surely do not need more poor judgment of this quality — the issues we are facing are far too large and important. Let’s get a fresh perspective and a new outlook to represent us. McLeod-Skinner can do the job. Andrew A. Clark Pendleton Murdock works hard as commissioner I have had the privilege to work on community projects with George Murdock over the last several years. George is an extremely capable administrator and is making a positive difference in our area. He is involved in many aspects of our community because he genuinely cares about the quality of life in our area. George has the experience and knowledge that is required to be successful in working at the highest level for the welfare and safety of all. He is a hardworking, dedicated public official that has a proven track record of accomplishments. I fully support the re-election of George Murdock for Umatilla County commissioner. Fred Bradbury Pendleton Walden has our best interests at heart We have the opportunity to vote for Rep. Greg Walden, sending him back to Congress to continue to represent us through these continuing challenging times. We need his hard working, experienced voice of reason, as well as his seniority in Congress, to balance extreme positions so often offered as solutions. We may not all agree with all positions taken by our elected representatives, but we expect them to exercise good judgment to benefit our society as a whole. Many of today’s issues are complex and require a high level of experience and expertise to navigate to generally fair conclusions. There are forces that seem to take extreme positions and are unwavering, simply as a means to achieve their ends instead of general good. We are asking our representatives to fairly represent us, recognizing our diversity, in this climate of extreme positions. Greg is working hard and getting a lot done. In addition to voting for tax cuts, improving forest management practices and improving care of veterans, Greg also voted for a measure that would have provided legal status and a pathway to citizenship for all 1.8 Million DACA kids who were eligible for deferred action under President Obama’s administration. We are thankful for Congressman Greg Walden’s past service and look forward to his continuing judgment in the best interest of our democracy. Please join us in voting for Greg Walden. Mike and Diana Henderson Hermiston 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.
