Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Baker City herald. (Baker City, Or.) 1990-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 13, 2020)
MONDAY, JANUARY 13, 2020 Baker City, Oregon 4A Write a letter news@bakercityherald.com OUR VIEW Public records proposal The Oregon Legislature created the offi ce of Public Records Advocate in 2017, and Ginger McCall was appointed to the post in January 2018 by Oregon Governor Kate Brown. One year and nine months later, McCall was gone, having resigned in protest over interference from some on Brown’s staff. Now lawmakers, with the advantage of hindsight, are doing what they should have done in the begin- ning. They’re proposing changes in the current law that will give the Public Records Advocate and Public Records Advisory Council the independence they need. Members of the state Senate’s Interim Committee on General Government and Emergency Prepared- ness will get its fi rst formal look at the draft legisla- tion when it meets Monday. All in all, what’s being proposed fi xes most of the fl aws that McCall’s departure exposed. The Public Records Advocate will be independent, appointed by the Public Records Advisory Council and subject to hiring and fi ring only by the council. Too, the council itself will have the right to support or oppose legislation as well ask to ask lawmakers to introduce legislation for it. That’s particularly important. In her resignation letter to the governor, McCall said she had been pres- sured by members of the governor’s staff to represent the governor’s interests, even when they confl icted with those of the advocate and the council. Worse, she was told not to tell anyone about the request. The proposed changes would make it clear to all that the advocate and the council are, in fact, inde- pendent, not answerable to the governor or any other elected offi cial. One problem still remains in the law, however, and lawmakers should address it in the proposed legisla- tion. Of the 14 members of the Public Records Advi- sory Council, nine represent government agencies or public employees’ labor unions; three are journalists and one is a member of the public. At the very least, the council should have as many members of the press and public as it does of government. Unsigned editorials are the opinion of the Baker City Herald. Columns, letters and cartoons on this page express the opinions of the authors and not necessarily that of the Baker City Herald. 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 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. Strategic thinking about Iran Watching President Donald Trump give his Iran speech on Wednesday, my mind fl ashed back to a visit to Tehran just before the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. Senior Iranian offi cials were openly nervous — fearing they would be next after Saddam Hussein on America’s hit list. They spoke in whispers about the need for a deal with the U.S. A few weeks after the Iraq war began, Iranian reformers sent a message to Washington proposing a “grand bargain” in which everything was on the table: Iran’s support for terrorism, its nascent nuclear program, even its threats to Israel, in return for an end to sanctions and U.S. guarantees that ruled out regime change. That overture was ignored, and President George W. Bush went on to denounce Iran as part of “the axis of evil.” Much has changed since then, with Iran’s nuclear program much further along and its regional power immensely enhanced since the failed 2003 war. Yet I was listening for any inkling that Trump had interest in trying to leverage Qassem Soleimani’s killing into talks between Washington and Tehran. The hints were there, but the substance headed in a very different direction. Which is one big reason why I believe we are only in a lull before we enter Phase Two of the post-Soleimani “war.” Although both sides chose not to escalate militarily — with Iran appar- ently aiming retaliatory missiles so that they would avoid harming U.S. soldiers — new long-term battle lines are being drawn. This is not a war in conventional terms. On Iran’s part, the paramount goal in Phase Two is to drive U.S. forces out of the region (which was Soleimani’s ultimate objective), thus enhancing their regional power. “What matters is that the presence of America TRUDY RUBIN ... should come to an end,” Iran’s Su- preme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told a crowd of clerics on Tuesday. The Iranian effort will center fi rst on squeezing Iraq to send American troops home. The Iraqi parliament — domi- nated by pro-Iranian Shiite factions — has already called, in a nonbinding vote, for U.S. forces to leave, but the fi - nal decision will be up to a weak acting prime minister, Adil Abdul-Mahdi. The pressure on him is huge. Iran will no doubt task its proxy Shiite militias within Iraq to make it so diffi cult for U.S. forces to conduct their missions that they are largely confi ned to bases (without causing casualties). If American soldiers are forced out, Teh- ran will then dominate Iraq and Syria, and pro-Iranian militias will come to dominate Iraq’s army. Soleimani’s dream will have been achieved despite his death. Trump’s goals are more contradictory. Although he made clear he doesn’t want another military confl ict, he also repeat- ed demands that Iran totally abandon its nuclear program and regional role. Yet there was little sign, despite Soleimani’s death, that the White House had a new strategy to force Iran to obey, beyond the hope that the Tehran gov- ernment will collapse from within. However, there were intriguing hints in Trump’s speech that he is seeking cover to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq. (This was clearly indicated when a Pentagon letter to that effect was leaked this week, only to be retracted and described as just a draft.) The president called on NATO al- lies, along with Russia and China (all signatories to the Iran nuclear deal from which he withdrew the United States) to “break away from remnants of the Iran deal.” And he said he would ask NATO “to be much more involved in the Middle East process.” But those allies aren’t likely to join an ultra-hawkish U.S. effort that reeks of regime-change fantasies. Britain, France, and Germany were rudely rebuffed by Trump when they begged him to negotiate a follow-on nuclear deal with their help, while keeping the old deal in place. Nor will NATO members, insulted so often by Trump, send more of their troops to Iraq to help him please his electoral base by bringing his troops home. Not when Trump refuses even to keep them in the loop when making key decisions in the region. And forget about help from Moscow or Beijing. So the president must decide. If he wants allies’ help, he will have to heed their concerns about a new nuclear deal. And if he wants to negotiate with Tehran (with chances slim to slimmer), he would need to send skilled diplomats to conduct backdoor diplomacy rather than set policy by tweet. Moreover, however distasteful, he would have to convince Tehran that regime change was not his goal, and offer some sweeteners, such as sanctions relief, to get the regime on board. In the meantime, he needs to stop insulting Iraqi leaders with threats to sanction them or charge for U.S. occupa- tion bases. Instead he’d do well to fi nally invite Prime Minister Abdul-Mahdi to Washington and fi gure out how to support Iraqi factions who don’t want to kick U.S. troops out. Iran is playing a long game, a three- dimensional set of chess, which re- quires strategic thinking in the White House. Not the same kind of thinking required to play golf. Trudy Rubin is a columnist and editorial- board member for the Philadelphia Inquirer. Readers may write to her at: Philadelphia Inquirer, P.O. Box 8263, Philadelphia, Pa. 19101, or by email at trubin@phillynews.com. OTHER VIEWS Editorial from The Los Angeles Times: It’s great that the Arizona-based U-Haul company cares about the well-being of its more than 30,000 em- ployees. It’s commendable that it has adopted programs and offered benefi ts to promote their nutrition, fi tness and overall health. But its newest “well- ness” policy for employees goes way beyond the promotion of good health and into the land of creepy intrusion. Starting Feb. 1, the company says it will no longer hire people who use nicotine, or at least that it will do so in the 21 states where it is legal to have such a policy, which does not, thank- fully, include California. Job applicants will have to disclose whether they smoke, vape or chew nicotine prod- ucts and must agree to be tested for nicotine as a condition of employment. The company says it won’t be test- ing employees initially, but will likely begin nicotine screening sometime in the future in the states that allow it. Current employees are not subject to the new policy, at least not yet. U-Haul executive Jessica Lopez told the Arizona Republic that health of the workforce is the paramount reason for the policy, and that any decrease in health care costs for the company is a “bonus.” Well, perhaps. But if the company’s goal were simply to improve the health of employees, wouldn’t it make more sense to require nicotine users, whether they’re new ones or old ones, to participate in nicotine cessa- tion programs? Simply barring people from working at the company doesn’t actually improve anyone’s health. Furthermore, why are nicotine users the only people singled out for this dra- conian step? What unhealthy behavior will be targeted next? Will U-Haul decline to hire employees who drink sugary soda or eat cookies, to do their part to fi ght the obesity epidemic? What other private behaviors will be declared verboten? We’re skeptical that this policy will prompt job seekers to quit smok- ing, which is notoriously diffi cult. More likely they will apply for work elsewhere or lie and hope they don’t get caught. That could be a diffi cult choice for low-income people who are statistically more likely to be smokers. Furthermore, the fact that the policy only applies to new employees sets up a double standard that seems likely to sow discontent and resentment among the workforce. U-Haul is not the only company to adopt strict anti-nicotine policies for employees; Alaska Airlines did so 35 years ago, but this kind of discrimina- tion is still rare enough to be startling and concerning. And while we can see the actuarial appeal of such a move — tobacco use is a known health hazard that comes with productivity and health care costs — smoking is also a legal activity. It is mean-spirited to discriminate against people who are suffering from an ad- diction (all the more so since quitting often requires the use of less-lethal forms of nicotine delivery such as patches or gum, which are also strictly prohibited under U-Haul’s misguided policy). U-Haul should revoke this discrimi- natory policy and go back to promot- ing its workers’ health in a positive manner.
