ANDREW CUTLER
Publisher/Editor
KATHRYN B. BROWN
Owner
WYATT HAUPT JR.
News Editor
JADE McDOWELL
Hermiston Editor
THURSDAY, JANUARY 7, 2021
A4
Founded October 16, 1875
NOTE TO READERS
The East Oregonian editorial on Tuesday,
Jan. 4, “Bentz has bright future in Congress”
was written before our editorial board be-
came aware of Rep. Cliff Bentz’s Dec. 15, 2020,
statement in a letter to House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi, stating he supports GOP efforts to
investigate election irregularities.
We find this alignment with the so-called
“sedition caucus” intent on overthrowing the
election deeply alarming. Bentz has declined
to comment on how he planned to vote on
Jan. 6, before rioters shut down the U.S. Cap-
itol. We urge him to join with the Republican
members of Congress who respect the choice
of American voters, and allow for the peaceful
inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden on
Jan. 20.
OUR VIEW
Single-payer
plan in the
works for
Oregon
Pondering electric bikes and nonmotorized roads and trails
A
state task force is meeting regularly,
charged by the Oregon Legislature
to figure out how a single-payer
health care plan might work in Oregon. It’s
a big deal.
Single payer is often called “Medicare
for all.” It would be a lot like Medicare in
that everyone would have the same health
insurance plan, though people get to choose
where they get care.
Could it be an improvement? Yes.
There’s sure room for improvement. But
there are also complicated problems to sort
out, and others that such a program could
create.
The first obstacle is public opinion. Try
telling people: Your health plan is going
away. And we have some new taxes. The
new system will be better. Your state gov-
ernment will get it right just like always!
Oregon’s Joint Task Force on Universal
Health Care is looking at the big questions.
How would Oregon pay for it? How much
care is the “right” amount? How would eli-
gibility work if people come to the state?
Would it be allowed under federal law?
This week the task force takes on
the issue of the federal ERISA law. The
Employee Retirement Income Security Act
of 1974 sets standards for retirement and
health plans in private industry. ERISA
also sort of creates a roadblock, stopping
states from experimenting with health care
reform.
If a single-payer option was created
in Oregon, it might be challenged under
ERISA. Employers that are self-insured
might argue that a state, single-payer plan
funded by a payroll tax would put pres-
sure on employers to drop their cover-
age for their employees or they would be
effectively paying twice. That happened in
Maryland and the plan was struck down,
according to documents for this week’s
meeting.
It’s not clear that Oregon would stick to
that script. What Oregon would likely do is
seek a waiver from the federal government
from certain requirements of ERISA. If that
was granted, one problem could be solved.
As problems go with creating a sin-
gle-payer system, dealing with ERISA may
be one of the easier ones. It would be a mis-
take for legislators to assume that because
there are clear Democratic majorities in
both houses of the Legislature and in Ore-
gon’s top elected offices that Oregonians
are ready for a state takeover of health care.
That’s still a tough sell.
Smaller steps would probably be smarter
than one big swooping change, to build
trust and to build government compe-
tency. We’re not saying that’s what the state
should do. Just that it would be smarter.
BILL
ANEY
THIS LAND IS OUR LAND
magine it’s early September and you
hold a coveted Mount Emily archery elk
tag. After a restless night, you rise three
hours before dawn and drive 45 minutes
to a trailhead where you are happy to see
no other vehicles. Loading up your hunt-
ing pack and bow, you walk past a closed
road gate for a 3-mile hike into your secret
elk hunting spot, far from the disturbance
of motor vehicles. You and the elk have an
affinity for this place, and the quiet and soli-
tude it provides.
The eastern horizon is just starting to
turn pale pink as you near the familiar sad-
dle where elk trails cross the still dark ridge.
Ears, eyes, nose — all senses are on full
hunting alert when you become aware of
the crunch of tires on the road coming up
quickly from behind. You are no longer the
only human in these woods.
A bicyclist, also carrying a pack and
hunting bow, glides effortlessly past you on
the steady uphill grade. Other than the tires
rolling over the ground, the only sound you
hear is a low whir.
You’ve just been overtaken by a hunter
on an e-bike, a bicycle powered by an elec-
tric motor. You curse under your breath,
realizing that this hunter has invested less
boot leather and effort than you, and slept
more last night, while accessing the same
remote backcountry.
This scene plays out more and more on
our public lands as land managers and for-
est users sort out the latest development
allowing more people to easily access the
deep backcountry. As owners of these pub-
lic lands, we should be thinking about this
I
new tool and how it impacts our natural
resources and recreational pursuits.
To be clear, this is not about Wilder-
ness with a capital “W.” By law, federally
designated wilderness areas are off-limits
to mechanized travel of all sorts. E-bikes,
ATVs, motorcycles, mountain bikes and,
yes, even wheeled deer carts are not permit-
ted in wilderness. This is not really open for
debate, although some people are using this
as part of a fallacious slippery slope argu-
ment against allowing e-bikes on public
trails and roads.
More than 90% of federal land in Oregon
and Washington is not designated wilder-
ness, but not all this area is treated the same.
Some areas are not open to any motor vehi-
cles, some are open only to motorcycles and/
or ATVs, and some are open to motor vehi-
cles only in certain seasons (like snowmo-
bile trails or dry season ATV trails). Where
do e-bikes fit? Are they just an easier and
faster cousin of mountain bikes? Or are they
more like quiet motorcycles and only appro-
priate where motor vehicles are allowed?
To work through this puzzle, it helps to
understand why some areas are closed to
motorized travel in the first place. I see two
broad sets of reasoning. First, reducing dis-
turbance provides areas of security for wild-
life and a place for humans to find quiet
and spiritual renewal. Traffic, noise, safety,
security and solitude are all good reasons to
have areas far from motor vehicles, and as
our ambitious archery hunter knows, such
areas can hold more elk.
Second, natural resource damage can
occur when the rubber meets the mud, cre-
ating rutting and erosion, impacts to soils
and sensitive vegetation, and in general
tends to put mud in the crick. Motor vehicles
are among the worst culprits.
So where do e-bikes fit? They are quiet,
less powerful and slower than motorcycles
or ATVs. Still, our early-rising bow hunter
would argue that his or her solitude and
backcountry experience was ruined by this
technology. And while e-bikes can’t do the
same kind of damage to soils, water and
vegetation as motorcycles or ATVs, they can
probably do more damage than mountain
bikes or foot traffic.
The biggest impact of e-bikes may be the
way they allow easier access into the deep
back country. Motorcycles, three-wheel-
ers, four-wheelers, side-by-sides and e-bikes
each represent an incremental evolution
of technology with impacts that we may
not fully appreciate at first. Opportunities
for solitude and adventure should require
some commitment of time, energy and dis-
comfort, and whether it is new ultralight
backpacking gear, satellite communica-
tions or vehicles, people are using technol-
ogy to get further, and more easily, into the
backcountry.
As land managers wrestle with e-bikes
and the next new type of vehicle, it helps
to have a bright line of distinction. For
example, with respect to designated wil-
derness areas, mechanized equipment is
not allowed. Wheeled equipment is mech-
anized and wheels don’t belong in wilder-
ness. Simple.
I suggest there is another useful bright
line with respect to e-bikes. If it has a motor,
it is a motorized vehicle. Roads, trails and
areas that are open only to nonmotorized
travel should be off limits to e-bikes because
they have a motor. Simple, clearly under-
stood and without nuance.
Stick to the established standard and
keep motorized vehicles out of nonmotor-
ized areas, no matter how quiet. This is bet-
ter for backcountry, better for wildlife, and
better for the pursuit of peace and quiet.
———
Bill Aney is a forester and wildlife biolo-
gist living in Pendleton and loving the Blue
Mountains.
cies Die” in 2018. They note that democ-
racy no longer dies with a revolution or
coup, but with the slow, steady weaken-
ing of critical institutions, the judiciary,
the press, and the gradual erosion of
long-standing political norms.
Trump’s behavior, with the support of
many Republicans, is the biggest threat
to our democracy since World War II.
Chuck Wood
Pendleton
But the continuation of this perfor-
mance still depends on the acceptance
of proven and medically unanimous pro-
cedures enacted by the state. Such pro-
cedures, even though mandated, are not
100% enforceable, but we only need
review examples where they are either
not in place, or have been neglected, to
observe soaring contagion, overwhelmed
hospital facilities, and rapidly increasing
mortality. Most of us do not want that for
Oregon.
No system is perfect, and business
should work with public health services
to discover ways to innovate and safely
continue their activities. The media
reports almost daily examples of these
occurrences.
Importantly, this is not a basis for
political divide. This is not about consti-
tutional rights, or the last election. It is
about defeating the pandemic. We have
the knowledge of the methods required to
best contain the virus and now the vac-
cines to suppress it. With some patience,
and a level of trust, there is a rational
way forward.
Donald Fisher
Powell Butte
YOUR VIEWS
Trump’s behavior a threat
to democracy
I remember sitting at the kitchen table
with my two daughters 40 years ago tell-
ing them, “This is a very special day.”
It was Jan. 20, and we were watching
the inauguration of the president of the
United States. I emphasized it was a spe-
cial day because we were one of the few
countries to have a peaceful, orderly and
respectful passage of presidential power.
The girls, now grown women, won-
der, “What happened to that democratic
process?”
Never in my wildest dreams could I
imagine a narcissistic, serial-lying dem-
agogue refusing to relinquish presiden-
tial power. Trump has taken a timeout
from playing golf and ignoring the pan-
demic to motivate 140 members of the
House and 12 senators to contest the
election that he lost, stoking insurrection
and the far right to arm up and protest on
Wednesday, Jan. 6.
Harvard professors Levitsky and
Ziblatt spent 20 years studying the death
of democracies in Europe and Latin
America and published “How Democra-
Oregonians support you,
governor
Despite the harangues of a couple
hundred uninformed, misguided, and
radicalized protestors in Salem on Jan.
1, I believe the overwhelming message
to Gov. Kate Brown and Oregon public
health authorities is that the vast major-
ity of Oregonians support the measures
taken to control the spread of COVID-
19. Oregon’s rank as 45th among the 50
states in terms of infection rate is a testa-
ment to the success of state policies and
the assumption of responsibility in the
absence of national leadership.