Saturday, November 21, 2020
OPINION
East Oregonian
A5
Closed primaries are unconstitutional
KEVIN
FRAZIER
OTHER VIEWS
A
s the dust of the election settles, it’s
easy for Oregonians to pat them-
selves on the back for a relatively
high turnout and a fairly smooth process
of receiving and tallying votes. But Ore-
gon’s democracy isn’t just broken, it’s
unconstitutional.
The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th
Amendment states that no state shall “deny
to any person within its jurisdiction the
equal protection of the laws” nor make or
enforce “any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States.” Under Oregon’s closed pri-
mary system, “free” voters — those unteth-
ered to a major party — are denied equal
protection of the law by being separated and
shut out from the party primary process.
Historically, the Equal Protection Clause
has been used to strike down “separate but
equal” facilities and processes created by
laws that include classifications and cate-
gorizations of individuals. Where the clas-
sification involves a discrete and insular
minority, the Supreme Court has required
the state to show that the questioned law is
narrowly tailored to address a compelling
state interest.
For instance, segregated schools were
declared unconstitutional in Brown v. Board
of Education based on the following logic:
Race is an immutable characteristic, Afri-
can Americans had been subjected to a his-
tory of subordination, and that subordina-
tion included being “fenced out” of political
processes.
Based on that logic, the Supreme Court
set a high threshold for the state to uphold
its racist laws. Recognizing that public edu-
cation lies at the “very foundation of good
citizenship,” the court declared the segre-
gationist laws unconstitutional for expos-
ing children to bad values, stigmatizing
minority children, and inhibiting the ability
of those children to reach their full potential.
The court has likewise struck down laws
that deny access to fundamental rights, like
the right to travel, to all Americans.
Free voters have been denied a funda-
mental right and represent a discrete and
insular minority that is being denied the
right to fully participate, something that is
also at the “very foundation of good citizen-
ship.” These voters are discrete in that they
are very easily distinguishable from those
that are tethered to a party.
These voters are insular in that their inde-
pendence makes their ability to collectively
organize against the majority parties very
difficult. As each election passes, it becomes
clearer the state is subordinating these voters
to a greater and greater extent. Consider that
nearly one million Oregonians were denied
the chance to participate in either party’s
primary in the 2020 election cycle; yet, those
same voters paid taxes that made those pri-
maries happen, and were then left to select
between the primary winners in the general
election.
Parties may argue that the state has a
compelling interest in keeping primaries
closed. Perhaps they’ll claim that open-
ing the primaries will result in cross-ideol-
ogy voting that will undermine the will of
the people. In other words, they spark fears
that somehow enough voters from the other
side will want to undermine the other party
by voting for the less competitive candi-
date. The state is not responsible for advanc-
ing partisan goals. The state’s obligation is
banned from abridging “the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the United States.”
Nothing in the Constitution requires states to
use the tax dollars of free voters to help par-
ties continue their control of our democracy.
The case law on the privileges or immu-
nities that a state must refrain from limiting
suggests that some rights represent “the very
idea of a government republican in form.” In
the 21st century, we have come to recognize
that the opportunity for all to shape their
government is such a right — a right that
must transcend income inequality, partisan-
ship, and social strife. Oregon must end its
closed primary system and ensure all voters
have an equal opportunity to express their
voice in our democratic processes.
The 2020 election at the state level may
have gone smoothly, but that’s only from the
perspective of those who had the ability to
participate in each stage of the process. Ore-
gonians need to make fixing their democ-
racy a priority. Soon Oregon Open Prima-
ries will formally launch its initiative effort
to place a form of an open primary system
on the ballot in 2022.
Receiving the requisite number of signa-
tures, educating Oregonians about the need
for this reform, and rallying an inclusive
and expansive coalition to pass this effort
will not be easy. So, despite the dust of the
last election just beginning to settle, now is
not the time for rest. Instead, it’s a time to
resolve to double down on engaging in our
political system.
———
Kevin Frazier is currently pursuing a
law degree at UC Berkeley. He previously
worked for ECONorthwest as a senior
research analyst. Though he resides in the
Bay Area, Frazier calls Oregon home.
Remembering Pendleton Fire Chief Richard ‘Dick’ Hopper
JACK
REMILLARD
OTHER VIEWS
first met Pendleton Fire Chief Richard
“Dick” Hopper, who passed away on Sun-
day, Nov. 8, when I became a volunteer
firefighter for the department on Feb. 5, 1981.
Chief Hopper met with the volunteers that
evening to explain to us that yes, the volun-
teer firefighters were an integral part of PFD,
and I remember being impressed with his
knowledge of his chosen career. I learned new
words that night, like “apparatus” (nearly any
piece of fire equipment, but mostly referred to
an engine or ladder truck), and could tell he
was the one in charge.
Chief Hopper was only 35 years old when
he was hired as fire chief on Feb. 1, 1980,
which is a fairly young age to take on the task
he was assigned. There had only been two
fire chiefs in Pendleton before Chief Hopper
since 1932 — William “Blacky” Batchelor
and Virgil “Butch” Boyd.
After I was hired in 1985, I soon learned
that Chief Hopper was more of an administra-
tor than a firefighter. Of course, he knew how
I
to manage a fire, but managing the depart-
ment was his primary concern. His attempts
at bringing the department into the “new
world” were sometimes met with resistance
from the troops, myself included. As my
career advanced over the years, however, I
could see where he had made sound decisions
when it came to managing the department,
personnel, budgets, LifeGuard (the first heli-
copter ambulance based out of a fire depart-
ment in Oregon) and the career advancement
opportunities available to all personnel.
Many of us took advantage of these oppor-
tunities and have advanced well during our
careers.
For me, Chief Hopper was an inspira-
tion. Without his “no excuses” attitude, his
high expectations of all of us, or his “do you
want this job or not” speech to me when I
was struggling to find an emergency medi-
cal technician class (since the criteria for me
being hired was that within a year of hire I
had to pass the EMT 3 exam in order to keep
my job), I would not have been able to say
that I am a firefighter — something I am very
proud of. Not to say I always agreed with
him, which of course I didn’t. But I always
knew what he expected and always tried to
accomplish it, albeit sometimes after a butt
chewing, which was something I experienced
a time or two. But that’s another story.
If Chief Hopper had an issue with some-
thing that was performed incorrectly, to put it
mildly, he would definitely get your attention.
But he would never dwell on it. Once it was
agreed you were in the wrong, he expected
that issue to be corrected and wouldn’t bring
it up again as long as it was handled. He could
make me feel pretty bad about a decision I
had made. However, he had a way of mak-
ing me understand that “that’s not how that’s
done, and it won’t be done that way again,
will it?” No sir.
After I was promoted to assistant chief/fire
marshal on April 1, 1998, I really felt under
the gun. After a few nervous months for me, I
could tell his trust in me was, again, an inspi-
ration for me to do my best. I have always felt
if Chief Hopper gave one of us a compliment,
it was well earned. He didn’t give them out
for just doing the job.
As time rolled on, I came to realize his
lack of current training on fire tactics and
strategy could have put firefighters in a
somewhat dangerous situation. I reluctantly
pointed this out to him. He took it well, but I
could tell he felt somewhat embarrassed. He
rarely had shown up to a simple house fire or
other minor alarm, as he expected his officers
to perform the task without his intervention.
I could go on for some time, speaking of
how Chief Hopper felt about the fire service
and what it meant to serve the residents of
Pendleton. His civic pride showed very little
to the public, but I saw things he would do,
as a loyal city employee, that the public could
never see. One thing that sticks in my mind
is when he bought a new pickup about the
same time I did. He bought his in Pendleton,
while I shopped around the Northwest for the
best deal. When we spoke about our buying
pickups, he told me he felt it was only right to
buy in Pendleton, since that is where he lived,
worked and enjoyed the company of others.
He didn’t want anything to do with wild-
land firefighting, because in his words,
“Pendleton is paying my wages, that’s where
I need to be.” Unlike in the last 20 years or so,
where many chiefs, assistant chiefs, captains,
lieutenants and firefighters spend much of the
wildland fire season away from the commu-
nities that hired them.
I was saddened to hear of Chief Hopper’s
passing from his wife, Shirley. To me, he was
the person who made my career what it was.
If not for his trust, guidance, expectations
and, yes, sometimes outdated mode of doing
things, I don’t know that I would have stayed
in the fire service. I’m sure glad I did. Rest in
peace, sir; to me, you’ll always be the chief.
———
Jack Remillard is a retired assistant fire
chief/fire marshal for the city of Pendleton.
Living in interesting times, indeed The importance of reading to kids
BETTE
HUSTED
FROM HERE TO ANY WHERE
Y
ou’ve probably heard that ancient
Chinese curse, “May you live in
interesting times.” If we didn’t catch
the irony initially, the events of 2020 have
forced us to understand. This year seems
to have gone on forever, and now we’re
living with both a raging pandemic and a
president who resists a peaceful transfer of
power to the president-elect.
Interesting times, indeed.
So you probably won’t be surprised to
learn, if you didn’t already know, that the
Chinese have no such expression. It’s just
another case of “someone said they did.”
I read recently that Americans are split
between those living in a world of fic-
tion and those living in the world of real-
ity. Some of the conspiracy theories I read
about seem bizarre beyond belief, but there
are people who do believe them and who
are sure theirs is the real world.
Even the word “fiction” is complicated. It
can mean “a belief or statement that is false,
but that is often held to be true because it
is expedient to do so” or “invention or fab-
rication as opposed to fact.” But it can also
mean literary fiction, which was the focus
of my life as a teacher — stories created
by imagination, whole worlds of people
and events that become real in the writer’s
mind, and then, at least temporarily, for the
reader.
If you’ve ever felt tears coming to your
eyes as you watch a movie, you’ve had that
experience. And we all know characters
who live on in our minds. Huck Finn, Ham-
let, Oliver Twist. Even Harry Potter.
When students asked me if fiction meant
stories that weren’t true, I may have con-
fused them when I’d say no, good fiction is
true — in the deepest sense. Our best sto-
ries help us experience the truth of other
people’s lives. I think of Toni Morrison’s
“Beloved.” Leslie Marmon Silko’s “Cer-
emony.” Maxine Hong Kingston’s “The
Woman Warrior.” Raymond Carver’s sto-
ries, or Grace Paley’s. James Baldwin’s.
Or take the titles in my bookcase. “A
Manual for Cleaning Women,” by Lucia
Berlin. Colson Whitehead’s “The Under-
ground Railroad” — that’s waiting for me,
too. But it’s been a hard week, so I’ll proba-
bly turn to “This is Happiness,” by the Irish
writer Niall Williams, instead.
Research bears it out: Reading fiction
makes you a better person.
My writing group likes to tease me about
trying to change the world. If I could some-
how change the world, everyone would love
to read, fiction and poetry and nonfiction
too, and plays. I suspect that in this world,
no one would believe, even for a minute,
that children kidnapped by NASA 20 years
ago are being held in a colony on Mars.
Someone else who wants to change the
world, or at least wants her students to “go
off and change the world for the better,” is
Althea Huesties-Wolf. Since I met Althea
when she was a student at Blue Mountain
Community College, she has graduated
twice from Eastern Oregon University, most
recently with an MFA in nonfiction writing.
She’s been invited to read at The First Draft
Writers’ Series, and Fall/Winter issue of
EOU’s Mountaineer Magazine features her
work as a CTUIR educator guiding students
in a GED classroom.
According to the article, she asks her stu-
dents to read multicultural fiction — “The
Rabbit-Proof Fence,” “Under the Haw-
thorne Tree,” “Lions of Little Rock” — but
poetry too, and nonfiction. In fact, she made
Jack Underwood’s “Indian Givers: How the
Indians of the Americas Transformed the
World” a major part of the curriculum.
It’s been a while since I read this book,
but I remember being stunned by the
world-changing effects of corn and pota-
toes, not to mention the pattern for democ-
racy and contributions to medicine, agricul-
ture, architecture, ecology. And more, the
gifts ongoing.
On the playgrounds of my childhood,
“Indian giver” meant someone who gave
you somethin, and then wanted it back —
the opposite of what indigenous cultures,
who knew “the gift must always move,”
actually practiced. And what colonialists
did practice, on a regular basis. All those
broken treaties.
Irony again. We’re getting better at rec-
ognizing it, aren’t we?
Kudos to Althea and her students. And
to you, survivor of these interesting times.
Thanks for reading.
———
Bette Husted is a writer and a student of
T’ai Chi and the natural world. She lives in
Pendleton.
DR. SCOTT
SMITH
OTHER VIEWS
F
or generations, we have heard how
important it is to read to children.
It provides adult time that the child
(or children) so often crave. You model
reading and share in the adventure or
learn about the subject matter. There are
so many benefits that impact children and
they will apply them later in their class-
rooms at school and for life.
Taking the time to have your child sit
and read with you has a big impact on
their attention span. Learning to sit and
listen is not a natural behavior. We are
wired to move. Having your child sit and
listen is teaching them and training them
that there are times when you have to
focus on information they might not be so
interested in.
Start off slow. You have to remember
the child wants control and the way this is
accomplished is by getting you off task.
You might have to start with two minutes
of sitting and looking at a book. Then later
in the day or the next day add a minute.
Make each session longer and soon they
will realize they are getting your time.
Later, when they start attending school,
they have an easier time sitting and focus-
ing on what is happening in the classroom.
Again, this is not a natural thing to do but
a taught behavior.
If the child is struggling with pay-
ing attention, having them draw or color
while you read will defeat the purpose of
reading to the child. You have changed
the focus of learning and now are read-
ing for your pleasure, not the child’s
skill-building.
When they draw or color as you read it
appears that you are receiving the behav-
ior you want. They are engaged, however,
they are not engaged in learning to sit and
listen to expand their ability to learn. The
focus of reading to the child is to help the
brain develop skills the child will need
when they are older.
While reading with the child, it is
important to interact with them. Talking
about the pictures and what the characters
are doing or are going to do helps keep
their attention.
Preschoolers are not reading, but
they can listen. Remember, listening is a
learned skill. Talking about what is being
read and discussing it builds understand-
ing or comprehension. Listening under-
standing and comprehension will then
transfer to reading understanding and
comprehension when they are older and in
school.
When children reach the intermediate
grades, we see them often struggle with
comprehension about what they have read.
Quite often, they also struggle with lan-
guage comprehension. We have to build
the child’s ability to comprehend what
they have heard before they will be able to
apply that skill to their own reading.
Often, many teachers feel they
have to focus on reading comprehen-
sion when their students have not yet
acquired the skills of language (listening)
comprehension.
There is no question one of the best
things you can do for a child is to read to
them! If you wish to have a huge impact
on a child’s learning as they get older, it is
key to build their endurance in listening,
reading, and discussing. It may only start
with less than five minutes. Once you let
them draw or color, remember the learn-
ing skill has changed and you are teaching
them that, “If you do not want to do what I
want you to do, it is OK to draw or color.”
Reading and discussing what is hap-
pening builds pathways in their brain
that will later transfer to their own read-
ing comprehension and to life. As you are
out driving with your child and see a lake
you can ask them questions like, “Do you
think there are fish in that lake, like in our
book?”
By doing this, you are taking reading
to your child to a whole new level of infer-
encing and prediction. Who knows, they
might be the child who understands things
uniquely and is able to make changes in
our world we had never thought about.
Keep reading and discussing with your
children.
———
Dr. Scott Smith is a Umatilla County
educator with 40-plus years of experience.
He taught at McNary Heights Elementary
School and then for Eastern Oregon Uni-
versity in their teacher education program
at Blue Mountain Community College. He
serves on the Decoding Dyslexia — OR
board as their parent/teacher liaison.