VIEWPOINTS
Saturday, June 5, 2021
East Oregonian
A5
STEVE
FORRESTER
WRITER’S NOTEBOOK
Let’s
relearn
how to live
together
I
t is a curse to live in an era you do
not understand. It is a fair bet many
Oregonians, across the political
spectrum, harbor that anxiety.
In the recent Oregon election, five
Eastern Oregon counties voted in favor
of joining Idaho. This is a movement
that’s been around for a while. Although
differing from the concept of the State
of Jefferson, conceived in 1941, to form
a new state from counties in southern
Oregon and Northern California, it flows
from the same sense of marginalization.
Oregon is not unique in how its
economic and political cultures are
frequently divided. Joel Garreau gave
the most complete explanation of this
reality in his 1981 book, “The Nine
Nations of North America.” State
borders are artificial lines that group
together populations with discordant
priorities. If we were starting from
scratch, all state lines might bear little
resemblance to what they are.
As with the State of Jefferson, Idaho
annexing elements of Eastern Oregon is
unlikely to occur. It would take agree-
ment within the Salem and Boise state-
houses, as well as in Congress. Approval
of such a reconfiguration would give
license to an avalanche of similar efforts
around the country, setting a precedent
few state and national leaders would
welcome.
While I don’t think the Idaho plan
is good for Oregon, I understand the
emotional motivation among Eastern
Oregon voters. An author of the separa-
tion concept, Mike McCarter, of La Pine,
has said: “Rural Oregon is in an abusive
relationship with Willamette Valley.”
McCarter is the former president of the
Oregon Agribusiness Council and the
Oregon Association of Nurserymen.
Much of what chafes at rural people
is Salem’s and Portland’s ignorance of
what lies east of Hood River. That even-
tually comes down to natural resources
management.
Animosity toward Salem revolves
around how land uses are prioritized.
In the broadest terms, Oregonians who
live beyond the state’s northwest urban
center too often are made to feel like
bumpkins for pursuing the economic
opportunities at hand, which despite
impressive diversification often still
revolve around agriculture and wood
products.
Conversely, the state’s urban zeitgeist
is to see other Oregonians as mired in
an outmoded attachment to traditional
extractive industries — and under the
sway of Trumpist grievances.
One does not have to live in the broad,
dry expanse of Eastern Oregon to feel
the brunt of Salem’s ignorance. Here
at the mouth of the Columbia River,
Salem’s myopia was apparent in 2012
with former Gov. John Kitzhaber’s need-
less, scientifically baseless and bone-
headed attack on gillnet fishermen. Gov.
Kate Brown has lacked the guts to undo
Kitzhaber’s stupid policy.
Meanwhile, Oregon’s largest city has
become a place many of us no longer
recognize. For me, the transformation
began years ago when The Oregonian
debased its product. Like it or not, a
metropolitan area is a media center. But
that is no longer the case with Portland.
The riots and vandalism have
given downtown Portland, sheathed
in plywood, an ugly and bereft look.
The city’s weak political leadership
has enabled a catastrophe that has gone
on about a year, perpetuating a sense
of a place not in control of itself, and
certainly in no position to lecture or
dictate to others.
The divisiveness illustrated by the
Greater Idaho idea is part of a larger
nostalgia for the decades immediately
following World War II, when Oregon
viewed itself as overcoming petty
differences in the pursuit of sensible
accommodations that generated mutual
success. Like most nostalgia, this rosy
view minimizes the hard negotiations —
and occasional hard feelings — that set
the stage for a prosperous and egalitarian
period of progress.
Rekindling these conditions requires
a deliberate and well-executed process.
Respectful discussions coupled with
concrete follow through are what it will
take to bridge Oregon’s urban-rural
divide.
While each of the 36 counties can’t
go its own way, or find greener political
grass across the Idaho border, Orego-
nians can and must do a better job of
listening to one another.
———
Steve Forrester, the former editor and
publisher of The Astorian, is the presi-
dent and CEO of EO Media Group.
Taking the center desk
PHIL
WRIGHT
FROM THE NEWSROOM
I
never set out to be a newspaper
reporter, but then I built a career in
journalism as a reporter for the East
Oregonian.
I didn’t set out to be an editor. But a
couple of years ago I was growing a bit
weary of rushing to the next terrible car
crash, house fire or worse. Circumstances
in life and my career aligned, and the EO
Media Group in late 2019 presented me
with the opportunity to be the editor of
The Observer in La Grande.
I did not just jump at the offer. I had to
give it a good think and talk it over with
people I trust. One question I got: Did I
really want to be working as a reporter for
the next 20 years?
I found the answer was no. So I left the
EO for the new gig.
That was a turbulent ride of about 18
months for a lot of reasons, and having a
bloody pandemic didn’t help. While that
was hard work, my time at The Observer
helped me hone skills outside of just
reporting.
My friend and colleague, EO reporter
Antonio Sierra, asked me some time ago,
I don’t recall just when, if I ever gave
thought to being an editor at the EO.
Rather than being the editor of the East
Oregonian, I was far more interested in
helming the newsroom.
I was fortunate as a reporter to work
with some solid editors who oversaw the
news content. The best who sat in the
newsroom’s center desk coached me and
other reporters, guiding us to produce
deeper coverage and more meaningful
“I SUSSED OUT
THE PROS AND
CONS AND FOUND
TAKING THE
CENTER DESK HAD
BEEN TUGGING AT
ME A LONG TIME.”
news. That job appealed to me.
So in May, East Oregonian editor and
publisher Andrew Cutler asked me to
meet for breakfast. The EO’s news editor
was leaving, and Andrew wrote a new job
description for the post. He asked me to
read it over, but with me in mind.
There were a lot of bullet points on that
document, but it boiled down to working
with East Oregonian reporters to develop
stories and features. I had a couple of
weeks to think about coming back to the
place I started in reporting, but this time
as its news editor.
I sussed out the pros and cons and
found taking the center desk had been
tugging at me a long time. I also often
agree with Andrew on the direction of
news, and when we don’t, he listens to my
differences. So here I am.
This is not the EO as I left it, but then,
what places are like they were in 2019?
Two years that seem like a decade ago.
Our reporters have been working remotely
for more than a year. We still meet via
video. Our news staff is smaller now and
also younger.
Those are challenges, sure, and I’m in
a transition to this role, but I already feel
more like a teacher or coach, and I dig
that.
I dig, too, the enthusiasm I see in this
newsroom. This bunch is dedicated and
hungry. They want to report local news
that matters. My role is to help them do
that better, and I relish that.
And taking the center desk here, at the
hometown paper where I earned my bones
in this field? Yeah, that’s about as good a
homecoming as a guy can hope for.
———
Phil Wright is the news editor of the East
Oregonian.
What country will this be for my grandson’s family?
JANET
WHITNEY
OTHER VIEWS
M
y grandson and his wife, who
have been living and working in
Europe for almost three years,
are here visiting family. They are young
and bright, with backgrounds in econom-
ics and health care. Ready to begin a
family, the question arises of where to put
down roots.
The country they currently live in
provides safety and security for its citi-
zens: child care, health care and educa-
tion. Basic subsistence provides a
security that frees people to make healthy
life choices. Contrary to being on the
dole, people there work as hard as in any
country.
Foremost in our family discussions is
the challenge to democracy we struggle
with today in the United States. The last
administration has upended our sleepy
approval of ourselves and our country.
The former president has put our shadow
side on the table; we must now deal with
our racism, painfully and honestly. As we
come to grips with the reality of racism,
inequality and the myths we have perpet-
uated about the American dream, we are
asking hard questions.
Our history confirms that injustice
harms both the oppressed and the oppres-
sor. We all suffer, in a variety of ways,
the consequences of bigotry and hate.
Unfortunately, politicians in Congress,
paralyzed by fear over loss of power and
wealth, make up the majority of a Senate
that is able to block attempts to change
direction. Their vision is small and mires
us in stagnation. The elections of 2022
will tell us more about how many Ameri-
“IT IS UNCLEAR
TO US AND TO
MANY WHETHER
DEMOCRACY WILL
SURVIVE, AND
THAT IS SCARY.”
cans buy into this fearful mindset.
Voter suppression is underway, an
attempt to limit voter access for people
of color. We are forced to put our atten-
tion on random acts of violence rather
than random acts of kindness. We fail to
understand that infrastructure includes
people and not simply bridges and roads.
And so on.
It is unclear to us and to many whether
democracy will survive, and that is scary.
Why would a young couple, who are
lucky enough to have choice, choose to
live in America? What do we offer in the
way of resiliency and hope?
Maybe the incentive to help explore a
more creative vision is enough motiva-
tion. People worldwide believe that we
are a country that can do it. And maybe
we can, with political will. Maybe we
can grow our vision by electing more
ethnically and racially diverse, informed
people to make healthy decisions for
our country, decisions that offer safety,
opportunity, and exclude no one. Maybe
we can agree that we want all our chil-
dren to have safe housing and a good
education.
My grandson and his wife want to raise
their children among family. It is import-
ant to have the support of grandparents,
aunts and uncles. Privilege allows them to
act on the hopes of refugees and immi-
grants here and everywhere who have the
same dream.
Will we act on hope and use the demo-
cratic privilege we currently have to work
for causes and elect people who believe
that all individuals and families in Amer-
ica and elsewhere deserve shelter, health
care, education and equal opportunity?
Without that, how can any of us make
good choices for our children, all of
whom are precious?
———
Janet Whitney lives in Bend.