WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2019
Baker City, Oregon
4A
Write a letter
news@bakercityherald.com
EDITORIAL
Coming
in from
the cold
A cold wind will likely be blowing Thursday, but
there is no reason why anyone in Baker County
should not sit down to a steaming hot Thanksgiving
meal among pleasant company.
This holiday is a favorite for comedians, who often
employ the Thanksgiving dinner table as the ideal
setting for jokes about family dysfunction. Humor
aside, the point is that this is a day when families
gather.
But of course not everyone will have a chance to
celebrate with relatives.
We are fortunate, though, to live in a community
with a goodly number of generous residents — people
who, on occasions such as Thanksgiving, seek to
ensure that everyone, whatever their circumstances,
has a chance to share good food and companionship.
Your options on Thursday include:
• Inaugural NE Oregon Regional Thanksgiving
Day Gathering & Potluck, Churchill School Dance-
hall, Broadway and 16th streets in Baker City, 1 p.m.
to 5 p.m.
• Free Thanksgiving dinner at the Calvary Baptist
Church, Third and Broadway streets in Baker City, 3
p.m.
• Thanksgiving dinner at the New Bridge Grange,
noon. In addition to a dinner provided by the Grange
featuring turkey, ham, potatoes and gravy, every-
one is invited to bring a side dish and dessert, and
then stay after dinner for games including pinochle,
dominoes, Yahtzee, Monopoly and other games that
participants bring.
For many people it’s a daunting prospect to attend
an event at an unfamiliar venue, one where you
probably won’t know anybody.
But those who overcome their trepidation might
receive something more in exchange for their cour-
age than just a nice meal. A friendship is a gift that
continues to enrich your life long after you’ve forgot-
ten how good the pumpkin pie tasted.
— Jayson Jacoby, Baker City Herald editor
Letters to the editor
• We welcome letters on any issue of public interest.
Customer complaints about specifi c businesses will
not be printed.
• The Baker City Herald will not knowingly print
false or misleading claims. However, we cannot
verify the accuracy of all statements in letters to the
editor.
• Letters are limited to 350 words; longer letters will
be edited for length. Writers are limited to one letter
every 15 days.
• The writer must sign the letter and include an
address and phone number (for verifi cation only).
Letters that do not include this information cannot be
published.
• Letters will be edited for brevity, grammar, taste
and legal reasons.
Mail: To the Editor, Baker City Herald,
P.O. Box 807, Baker City, OR 97814
Email: news@bakercityherald.com
Punishing financial success
“The demonization of wealth in this
country is mind-blowing. Now all suc-
cess is scrutinized. Merely to succeed,
especially fi nancially, invites scrutiny,
judgment, abuse.”
That statement didn’t come from a
conservative pundit or a Wall Street
banker. It came from none other than
actor Alec Baldwin, a liberal activ-
ist with strong ties to the Democratic
Party. When the man who plays Donald
Trump on “Saturday Night Live” double
balks at the over-the-top, anti-wealth
rhetoric coming from many of the
Democratic presidential candidates
these days, there’s clearly some trouble
ahead.
Elizabeth Warren, chief anti-success
antagonist, is pushing a wealth tax.
Last week, sounding as if it were her
civic duty, she started running a wealth
tax ad, outing the net worth of four top
business leaders while disparaging
them personally.
Not to be outdone in taxing the rich,
Bernie Sanders has even raised the
idea of a “wealth registry.” What could
possibly go wrong with putting federal
bureaucrats in charge of defi ning and
designating success and thereby who
makes the list?
In August, Forbes published a list
of the net worth of all presidential candi-
dates. Not surprisingly, Trump came in
fi rst, with an estimated wealth of $3.1
billion. But what is more interesting is
the fact that most of the current top tier
of Democratic presidential candidates
can hardly call themselves middle class.
Budding populist Warren can claim a
net worth somewhere in the neighbor-
hood of $12 million, Joe Biden comes
in at $9 million and Sanders at $2.5
million.
Add the wealth of billionaires Michael
Bloomberg and Tom Steyer and multi-
millionaires John Delaney and Michael
Bennet, and you’ve got the makings of
one blockbuster hedge fund. Pete But-
tigieg may be surging in Iowa, but his
meager net worth of $100,000 puts him
at the bottom of the pack fi nancially.
But for all the Democrats’ anti-wealth
rhetoric coming from the campaign
trail, amazingly, fi ve of their presidential
candidates have gotten contributions
from 30 or more billionaires. Kamala
Harris took the top spot with contribu-
tions from 46 billionaires. Of the leading
candidates, Biden takes the prize with
44 billionaires giving to his campaign,
with Buttigieg right behind with 39 bil-
lionaire supporters.
Even Warren and Sanders managed
a few uber-rich contributors.
DAVID WINSTON
The truth is the loudest voices argu-
ing the moral imperative of wealth re-
distribution are, in fact, wealthy, at least
by most people’s defi nition of the term.
If the Democrats running for president
spend the next year talking about all
the evils foisted on the American people
by the wealthy, most of them would be
talking, in effect, about themselves. It
won’t take long for middle-class voters
to fi gure this out.
Calling out hypocrisy
In a Pittsburgh focus group back
during the tax reform debate of 2017,
an independent voter zeroed in on mil-
lionaire socialist Sanders’ anti-wealth
hypocrisy and personal tax rate:
“Bernie Sanders, who’s preaching all
this, he pays 13%. ... I’m like, ‘How can
you preach anything? You’re not paying
what I’m paying.’ I don’t fault anybody
for having money. I think that’s great.
But they should pay at least what we’re
paying.”
There has long been frustration
and anger over profi t levels in certain
industries and dissatisfaction over pay
disparities between media stars and
professional athletes and other worthy,
underpaid professions like teachers and
nurses. The American people don’t look
kindly on excess, and they are no fans
of Wall Street or Hollywood. Arguments
over income inequality defi nitely have
resonance outside the Democratic base.
But beyond far-left circles, there doesn’t
appear to be a burning, organically
grown movement to redistribute other
people’s money.
What I do hear a lot more from voters
is deep skepticism of politicians like
Sanders and Warren, as that Pittsburgh
voter described, “preaching” about
wealth redistribution to fund more
“free” government programs, which
voters know won’t be free at all. This is
made all the more hypocritical by the
levels of personal wealth enjoyed by the
presidential candidates promoting those
concepts.
Centrist, middle-class voters are
rightfully suspicious of politicians telling
them that a million dollars is OK but a
billion dollars isn’t. This approach lets
these wealthy candidates tell voters,
“You’re OK, but I’m OK too.” What they
miss is that they are making the wrong
argument.
People aren’t against success. Eco-
nomic improvement isn’t lowering the
income of someone else but being able
to increase your family’s income. They
want fairness, yes, and an opportunity
to rise, but most are more interested in
getting from $75,000 to $90,000 a year
or $100,000 to $125,000. They want
the chance to succeed. And experience
and instinct tells them that tax-the-rich
schemes somehow always make their
way to the middle class, directly or
indirectly.
Waving the red fl ag
There are still some Democrats,
however, who see the inherent fl aw in
this kind of economic warfare, ginned
up to drive more division and fund new
trillion-dollar government programs.
Rahm Emanuel warned his fellow
Democrats in a recent Politico op-ed that
Democratic candidates who won tough
contests in 2018 and 2019 “spoke to is-
sues that middle-class voters face every
day” and “didn’t embrace pie-in-the-sky
policy ideas or propose a smorgasbord of
new entitlements.”
He then posed a critical question:
“Why aren’t our leading presidential
candidates looking to replicate that suc-
cess?” before going on to say, “There’s a
gaping disconnect between that success-
ful playbook and the strategic choices on
display during the ongoing presidential
primary debates.”
Emanuel understands that these
“strategic choices on display” may put
Democrats in danger of making this
a historic economic election with the
issue of wealth distribution, driven by
wealthy Democratic candidates, at the
center of it all.
Ultimately, economic arguments
and taxes will return this country to its
center-right roots faster than almost
any other issue I’ve observed over time.
Given what’s coming out of the prima-
ries, this Democratic fi eld of mostly mil-
lionaires has chosen a class-based strat-
egy, pitting American against American
based on wealth, not understanding
that by doing so they will inevitably
push the debate to the economic playing
fi eld, where Republicans have a distinct
advantage — if they are willing to
defend their economic principles.
David Winston is the president of The
Winston Group and a longtime adviser to
congressional Republicans. He previously
served as the director of planning for
Speaker Newt Gingrich. He advises Fortune
100 companies, foundations and nonprofi t
organizations on strategic planning and
public policy issues, and is an election
analyst for CBS News.
CONTACT YOUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS
President Donald Trump: The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania
Ave., Washington, D.C. 20500; 202-456-1414; fax 202-456-2461; to
send comments, go to www.whitehouse.gov/contact.
U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley: D.C. offi ce: 313 Hart Senate Offi ce
Building, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C., 20510; 202-224-3753;
fax 202-228-3997. Portland offi ce: One World Trade Center, 121
S.W. Salmon St. Suite 1250, Portland, OR 97204; 503-326-3386;
fax 503-326-2900. Pendleton offi ce: 310 S.E. Second St. Suite 105,
Pendleton 97801; 541-278-1129; merkley.senate.gov.
U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden: D.C. offi ce: 221 Dirksen Senate Offi ce
Building, Washington, D.C., 20510; 202-224-5244; fax 202-228-2717.
La Grande offi ce: 105 Fir St., No. 210, La Grande, OR 97850; 541-
962-7691; fax, 541-963-0885; wyden.senate.gov.
U.S. Rep. Greg Walden (2nd District): D.C. offi ce: 2182 Rayburn
Offi ce Building, Washington, D.C., 20515, 202-225-6730; fax 202-
225-5774. La Grande offi ce: 1211 Washington Ave., La Grande, OR
97850; 541-624-2400, fax, 541-624-2402; walden.house.gov.
Oregon Gov. Kate Brown: 254 State Capitol, Salem, OR
97310; 503-378-3111; www.governor.oregon.gov.
Oregon State Treasurer Tobias Read: oregon.treasurer@
ost.state.or.us; 350 Winter St. NE, Suite 100, Salem OR 97301-
3896; 503-378-4000.
Oregon Attorney General Ellen F. Rosenblum: Justice
Building, Salem, OR 97301-4096; 503-378-4400.
Oregon Legislature: Legislative documents and information
are available online at www.leg.state.or.us.
State Sen. Cliff Bentz (R-Ontario): Salem offi ce: 900 Court
St. N.E., S-301, Salem, OR 97301; 503-986-1730. District offi ce:
P.O. Box 1027, Ontario, OR 97914; 541-889-8866.
State Rep. Lynn Findley (R-Vale): Salem offi ce: 900 Court
St. N.E., H-475, Salem, OR 97301; 503-986-1460. Email: Rep.
LynnFindley@oregonlegislature.gov
Baker City Hall: 1655 First Street, P.O. Box 650, Baker City,
OR 97814; 541-523-6541; fax 541-524-2049. City Council meets
the second and fourth Tuesdays at 7 p.m. in Council Chambers.
Mike Downing, Loran Joseph, Randy Schiewe, Lynette Perry,
Arvid Andersen, Ken Gross and Doni Bruland.
Baker City administration: 541-523-6541. Fred Warner Jr.,
city manager; Ray Duman, police chief; John Clark, fi re chief;
Michelle Owen, public works director.
Baker County Commission: Baker County Courthouse 1995
3rd St., Baker City, OR 97814; 541-523-8200. Meets the fi rst and
third Wednesdays at 9 a.m.; Bill Harvey (chair), Mark Bennett,
Bruce Nichols.
Baker County departments: 541-523-8200. Travis Ash,
sheriff; Jeff Smith, roadmaster; Alice Durfl inger, county
treasurer; Stefanie Kirby, county clerk; Kerry Savage, county
assessor.