A4
East Oregonian
Friday, May 24, 2019
CHRISTOPHER RUSH
Publisher
KATHRYN B. BROWN
Owner
ANDREW CUTLER
Editor
WYATT HAUPT JR.
News Editor
JADE McDOWELL
Hermiston Editor
Founded October 16, 1875
OUR VIEW
Stanfield decision to invest in education a good one
tanfield voters made the right
choice this week when they
approved an $18 million bond.
The bond — and a $4 million match-
ing grant from the state — will help
fuel a series of projects, including a new
wing at the middle school and replacing
modular units used now for students.
Voters will get a good deal for their
$18 million.
School district officials say the new
bond will help boost safety at the mid-
dle school while also providing funds
for new windows at the secondary
school. A new parking lot at the elemen-
tary school, along with renovations and
improvements to career and technical
education areas and asbestos removal,
will be completed with the funds.
Paying taxes — for streets, city and
county services and other amenities —
are a fact of life but nowhere are tax dol-
lars better spent than in education.
No one likes to pay more taxes. But
when voters do decide they will ante up
more money they need to be assured
those funds are going to be well spent.
There is already too much finan-
S
EO file photo
Stanfield Elementary School principal Lacey Sharp, right, talks with citizens last year about
changes that would be made to the school’s entryway if a bond is passed. Earlier this week,
Stanfield voters approved an $18 million bond. The bond — and a $4 million matching grant
from the state — will help fuel a series of projects, including a new wing at the middle school
and replacing modular units used now for students.
cial waste in government. Examples of
waste with taxpayer money are legion
and, all too often, easy to find.
What makes the decision by Stanfield
School District patrons so significant is
the money will go to needed improve-
ments. The district clearly targeted what
taxpayer funds will be used for. They
explained and justified the need and
voters accepted those answers in good
faith.
All of that is a good example of pub-
lic servants doing their due diligence
when it comes to communicating with
voters. That is never an easy task. We
are all different, all face different mon-
etary challenges and we all look at the
world from our own unique perspective.
Which means when public officials
ask for money out of our wallets they
have a duty to ensure that the justifica-
tions for more taxes are clear.
Stanfield school district officials
made a good case for more money.
Instead of simply going through the
motions and standing before taxpayers
with their hand out, they instead articu-
lated the need.
Investments in education pay off in
the future. That is a fact. Whenever we
can promote and finance improvements
to school districts the community, as a
whole, prospers. The long-term impacts
of a good education — in Stanfield or
Pendleton or Eugene — help the state
and the nation. It is always hard to jus-
tify more taxes. But in this case the
Stanfield School District did what all
districts should do when they ask for
more funds: They were upfront and jus-
tified the need.
OTHER VIEWS
Voters should get a say on death penalty
bill redefines the crime of aggravated
murder (the only crime in Oregon stat-
bill before the state Legislature
utes that can be punished by death), so
that it includes acts of terror that kill two
that would dramatically cur-
or more people. The bill has been revised
tail the cases in which the death
so that it includes two other instances in
penalty could be applied passed the state
which a defendant could be sentenced
Senate on Tuesday and now heads for the
to death: cases in which the victim was
House.
under the age of 14 or in which a defen-
But in the House, the bill might well
dant killed another inmate while serving
run into a major roadblock: Speaker of the time for a murder conviction.
House Tina Kotek has said in the past she
Other offenses that currently qualify as
believes such a major revision in Oregon
aggravated murder under state law, such
capital punishment laws should go before as killing someone during the course of
the state’s voters. She said this week that
a rape or robbery, would be reclassified
she would need to read the latest ver-
as another type of murder, and the maxi-
sion of the measure, Senate Bill 1013,
mum punishment for those would be life
before making a final decision — but it
in prison without the possibility of parole.
certainly is true that the speaker has the
The proposed legislation also would
power to stop a bill from advancing in the change one of the four questions juries
Legislature.
must decide when considering whether to
Here’s a case where Kotek is right:
impose a death sentence. Oregon jurors
This is something that the state’s citizens now must determine whether a person
deserve a chance to consider.
guilty of aggravated murder is at risk
To be fair, Senate Bill 1013 is a well-
of being a danger in the future. The bill
crafted and clever bit of legislation. The
would remove that question, which is fine:
Corvallis Gazette-Times
A
It’s an unfair and unscientific duty to ask
jurors to tackle.
The bill passed the Senate on Tuesday
on a largely party-line 18-9 vote. Among
mid-valley legislators, Sen. Sara Gelser,
a Democrat, voted in favor of the mea-
sure; Sen. Fred Girod, a Republican, voted
against it.
For a bill that has drawn a measure of
attention this session, the floor debate in
the Senate on Tuesday was remarkably
restrained: Only Sen. Floyd Prozanski, the
influential Eugene Democrat who’s led the
charge on the bill, spoke.
The main argument opponents have
raised against the bill — and the very
point that Kotek is pondering — is that
such a major change to state law on capital
punishment should be referred to voters.
And that’s what the Legislature should
do.
The verdict of Oregon voters over the
last century on capital punishment has
been mixed: Capital punishment was out-
lawed by voters in 1914 and then reen-
acted in 1978. Three years later, the state
Supreme Court ruled that the death pen-
alty was unconstitutional, paving the way
for a 1984 initiative in which voters reaf-
firmed capital punishment.
Since then, though, the topic has been
rarely revisited in Oregon. After then-
Gov. John Kitzhaber imposed a mora-
torium on capital punishment in 2011,
he made a halfhearted effort to goad the
Legislature into action, but the proposal
didn’t gain any traction. Gov. Kate Brown
has said that she plans to continue the
moratorium, but hasn’t taken much of an
active role on the issue.
Oregon hasn’t executed a prisoner since
May 1997; the state has 32 men and one
woman on death row.
It’s very possible that the opinions of
Oregonians have changed since that 1984
initiative, as the national debate over the
death penalty has taken intriguing twists
and turns in the 35 years since then. But
there’s only one way to find out for sure.
The Legislature should let voters decide.
YOUR VIEWS
Hinkle provided a great living
for families
My mother and father, Leo and Helen
Koffler, moved to Umatilla County in 1951.
My dad, after starting his railroad career in
the Dakotas, moved here for a good job with
stability. He worked at the Hinkle Rail Yard
for more than 30 years, retiring with a good
pension.
The UPRR at Hinkle allowed my parents
to raise five children. We settled in Echo with
all of us graduating from high school there.
The salary and benefits were reasonable. The
work was honest. My dad was a telegrapher
before the time of computers. He typed up
train orders and handled other office duties.
He typed using only his two index fingers and
he was the fastest typist I have ever seen. He
worked with many other folks, Deke Stensrud,
Bert Rozema and Nelson Pate to name a few,
who provided for families, filled the schools
with kids and added to the economy of the
area.
Now I read that the bosses in Omaha are
gutting the workforce at Hinkle, probably tied
to some corporate plan to make additional
profits and boost stock price by economizing,
centralizing and laying people off. I under-
stand it. It’s an all too common game plan. I
don’t have to like it.
The problem is I still have friends that
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.
work at Hinkle. They are five, 10 or 20 years
into a career and busy raising their own fam-
ily. They will find other work. There are lots
of jobs around the area. Will they have the
right training? Maybe not. Will the pay and
benefits be as good? Probably not.
Let’s hope many of the jobs being created
in the area feature longevity, stability and a
future. I think that is a tall order.
George Koffler
Hermiston
U.S. leaders, economists
acknowledge climate change
reality
Letter-writer Stuart Dick dismisses
the threat posed by human-caused global
warming.
However, it’s important to note that 58 for-
mer U.S. national security leaders, including
35 admirals and generals, sent a letter on cli-
mate change to President Donald Trump. This
extraordinary letter states: “Climate change
is real, it is happening now, it is driven by
humans, and it is accelerating.” These senior
military and national security leaders also
assert that “climate change is a direct threat to
the national security of the United States,” and
that addressing it should be seen “as a threat
reduction issue, not a political one.”
Over 3,500 economists, including 27 Nobel
Prize-winners and top economic advisers to
presidents of both parties, have endorsed a
plan to fight climate change. Their “Econo-
mists’ Statement on Carbon Dividends” advo-
cates putting a steadily rising price on carbon
dioxide emissions and returning the money to
the American people.
This statement concludes that the price sig-
nal will encourage technological innovation
and steer our economy toward a low-carbon
future. Returning the revenue to households
will shield consumers from rising energy
prices, and “the majority of families, includ-
ing the most vulnerable, will benefit finan-
cially.” A border carbon adjustment would
protect U.S. competitiveness and encourage
other nations to adopt their own carbon pric-
ing systems.
A bipartisan bill embracing these prin-
ciples has been introduced in the House of
Representatives — the Energy Innovation
and Carbon Dividend Act. Let’s reach across
divides and provide U.S. leadership in the
fight to slow climate change.
Terry Hansen
Hales Corners, Wisconsin
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 the editor to
editor@eastoregonian.com,
or via mail to Andrew Cutler,
211 S.E. Byers Ave.
Pendleton, OR 97801