TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2021
Baker City, Oregon
4A
Write a letter
news@bakercityherald.com
OUR VIEW
Tracking
homeless
deaths
Oregon can’t understand how acute its homeless
issue is without good information. The state does not
even uniformly track how many homeless people die
each year.
Senate Bill 850 sets out to change that. It has
moved forward in the Legislature. It should become
law.
The bill makes what seems like a relatively small
change. It’s already state law that a report of death is
required to include the person’s address at the time
of death. The bill requires that the report for a person
who was homeless state the person’s address as
“domicile unknown.”
Most counties across the country do not track
homeless deaths. Multnomah County was one of only
68 counties and cities in the United States that did,
according to a 2020 study by the National Health
Care for the Homeless Council.
Formally tracking the deaths more closely will
get us a better understanding of how COVID has
impacted the homeless, as the Oregon Law Center
pointed out in its testimony on the bill. It will also
enable Oregonians to see the impact of homelessness
on the state’s mortality rates.
Jimmy Jones, the executive director of the Mid-Wil-
lamette Valley Community Action Agency of Salem,
told legislators that “the average age of death in the
Salem homeless community is just 52.” The homeless
often have chronic and manageable conditions, but
because they are homeless and have trouble getting
access to treatment and shelter, they die.
Oregon should better track its homeless deaths.
Pass SB 850.
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.
Your views
Culley is right on immigration
I would like to congratulate Steve Culley for his letter,
“America needs immigration control, not immigration
reform,” published in your paper on April 6. Steve’s let-
ter was well-written and to the point on how our federal
government should be handling immigration. At present
Joe Biden is doing nothing to control the ingress at our
southern border with Mexico. I have never seen such a lack
of border control in my lifetime.
Gary L. Johnson
Haines
Face masks are still crucial
protection, but not everywhere
By Mariel Garza
With nearly 40% of people in the U.S.
having received at least one shot of CO-
VID-19 vaccine, you may be wondering
if now is the time that California and
other places ditch the mask mandates
and free the people from the tyranny
of having to breathe in our own smelly
coffee breath.
The answer is: no way. What are you,
a misanthrope?
But also, yes, it is time.
Let me explain. Until we reach the
point where either enough people are
vaccinated against COVID-19 or the
only SARS-CoV-2 variant in circula-
tion is no more dangerous than pink
eye, mask mandates are one of our
best defenses. And since we now know
with confi dence that transmission is
primarily happening indoors, dumping
mandates for enclosed public places
like factories and airplanes would be
reckless.
But it’s entirely reasonable and,
frankly, rational to relax the outdoor
face covering rules as we head into
warmer weather. There’s very little
point in forcing people to continue cover-
ing up to take a stroll down the street,
hike in the park or sunbathe on a beach,
which is still the law in California, when
the risk of infection spreading this way
is so low as to be negligible.
Now before anyone blasts off an
angry note accusing me of being a CO-
VID-19 denier, I’d like to point out that
I was an early mask adopter during
this pandemic, covering up outside even
before it was fashionable. At that time,
scientists weren’t sure how COVID-19
was spreading, and some health offi cials
were actually telling people to not use
masks. But to me it just made sense to
throw up a curtain between the access
route to my respiratory system and the
potentially dangerous microbes in the
air.
It’s pretty clear that some of the
things we thought in the early days of
the COVID-19 pandemic weren’t quite
right. For example, the virus didn’t end
up spreading via surfaces. It wasn’t only
sick people who were capable of spread-
ing infection. Bleach injections were not
promising infection deterrents (to be fair,
only one elected offi cial actually sug-
gested that). And it didn’t spread much,
if at all, in outdoor locations.
“There are estimates that suggest
maybe 1 in 1,000 infections happen out-
side,” Dr. Ashish Jha, a general internist
and dean of Brown University’s School
of Public Health, told National Public
Radio on Wednesday. And those are esti-
mates, rather than documented cases of
transmission.
“There are reasons to believe that
... if you’re just out and about walk-
ing around, it’s probably even much
less than that,” he said, adding that if
transmission is happening outdoors, it’s
more likely in a crowded places, like a
rally, where people are congregating for
extended periods.
Jha is one of a growing number
of public health experts who see the
benefi t of easing blanket outdoor face
mask requirements. It’s a question that
infectious disease offi cials at the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention are
pondering as well.
But not all experts want to see
exposed faces outside anytime soon. The
reason is because, as Chicago internist
Dr. Jay Bhatt put it, “the risk is not zero.”
That may be true, but you know what
else fails to drive the risk of COVID-19
infection to zero? Wearing a face cover-
ing. Getting vaccinated. Leaving the
house. Not leaving the house.
There’s always going to be at least a
slight risk of infection, no matter how
cautious we are. But restrictions are
most effective when they focus on the
riskiest activities rather than trying to
reduce all risk to zero, which is impos-
sible in any case.
It’s also counterproductive to force
heavy-handed restrictions on people
when there’s no evidence they are neces-
sary. It miscommunicates the real risk
for infection to those who aren’t up on the
facts, while just annoying those who are.
Case in point: California health
offi cials decided to shut down outdoor
playgrounds along with all sorts of other
public locations last fall as COVID-19
cases began spiking. But they did so de-
spite the fact that there was no evidence
that monkey bars and swing sets are
COVID-19 vectors, and people knew it.
The backlash from frustrated parents
was so swift and severe (and justifi ed)
that the ill-advised action was almost
immediately reversed. It makes you
wonder how many people decided at
that moment that public health offi cials
just didn’t know what they were talking
about and stopped following any of their
advice.
C’mon, it’s time to ease up on the face
mask rules for outdoors. It’s time to give
the people who have been faithfully fol-
lowing face masks protocols a low-risk
break.
Mariel Garza is a Los Angeles Times
editorial writer.
OTHER VIEWS
Biden: look beyond China for solar panel material
Editorial from The Pittsburgh
Post-Gazette:
During President Joe Biden’s
fi rst week in offi ce he signed an ex-
ecutive order directing the federal
government to, where possible, pro-
cure goods and services within the
U.S. before turning abroad. Later,
when he announced his $2 trillion
American Jobs Plan in Pittsburgh
in March, the president called for
investing $100 billion in solar and
other forms of renewable energy.
These are good ambitions, but
there is a confl ict.
Polysilicon is a key material in
the manufacturing of solar panels.
It’s the substance that generates
electricity from sunlight. The global
solar sector has concentrated about
40% of its polysilicon production
in the Xinjiang province of China,
which is under scrutiny for human
rights violations including forced
labor and “re-education camps” for
its Uighur Muslim population.
The Biden administration must
be aggressive in its championing of
human rights by looking elsewhere
for its solar materials.
This will be no easy feat, as
China produced just over 80% of
the world’s polysilicon in 2020.
There are American manufactur-
ers producing their own materials,
but not nearly enough to keep
up with the increased demand
Biden’s plan calls for if it passes.
Therefore, federal and state
government should buy American
where possible and develop plans
to incentivize domestic polysilicon
production.
Since American production is
not currently up to demand, we
should turn next to other inter-
national manufacturers in places
such as Canada or South Korea,
both of which host polysilicon
producers.
At the same time, the U.S
should use its infl uence as a
potential large-scale customer to
create an international consortium
to pressure the Chinese to abolish
forced labor practices.
Some lawmakers are leading
the way in the public pressure
campaign. Sens. Marco Rubio,
R-Fla., and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.,
have asked the U.S. Solar En-
ergy Industries Association, the
national trade association for solar
energy, how it and its member
companies have responded to alle-
gations of human rights violations
in Xinjiang, asking for details
about how the companies are en-
suring that the materials are not
being made using forced labor.
Additionally, eight Republican
senators have introduced legisla-
tion to ban the use of federal funds
to purchase solar equipment from
Xinjiang. Such a ban could cripple
the U.S. expansion of solar power,
but if no alternative presents itself
and the violations do not stop, it
could become necessary in the
short term.
CONTACT YOUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS
President Joe Biden: The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.,
Washington, D.C. 20500; 202-456-1111; to send comments, go to
www.whitehouse.gov.
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. Baker City offi ce, 1705 Main St., Suite 504, 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. Cliff Bentz (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.
State Sen. Lynn Findley (R-Ontario): Salem offi ce: 900
Court St. N.E., S-403, Salem, OR 97301; 503-986-1730. Email: Sen.
LynnFindley@oregonlegislature.gov
State Rep. Mark Owens (R-Crane): Salem offi ce: 900 Court
St. N.E., H-475, Salem, OR 97301; 503-986-1460. Email: Rep.
MarkOwens@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.
Councilors Lynette Perry, Jason Spriet, Kerry McQuisten, Shane
Alderson, Joanna Dixon, Heather Sells and Johnny Waggoner Sr.
Baker City administration: 541-523-6541. Jonathan Cannon,
city manager; Ray Duman, police chief; Sean Lee, 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.