A4 BAKER CITY HERALD • THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2022
BAKER CITY
Opinion
WRITE A LETTER
news@bakercityherald.com
Baker City, Oregon
EDITORIAL
OHA mask
decision is sensible
I
t appears that we have more to look forward
to this spring than buttercups brightening the
forests and sagelands, and the fi rst day when it’s
comfortable to stroll outdoors in short sleeves.
Th e Oregon Health Authority (OHA) an-
nounced on Monday, Feb. 7, that the state’s in-
door mask mandate for public places will end no
later than March 31. Th e mask requirement for
schools will end on that day. And although the
mask mandate for public transportation, includ-
ing school buses, is determined by the federal
government, the current requirement extends
only through March 18.
Th e OHA timeline strikes a sensible balance.
Th e data clearly show that the record-setting
surge in COVID-19 cases resulting from the
omicron variant has peaked. Statewide, new cases
dropped by about 40% over the past week, and by
about 30% in Baker County. Th e number of peo-
ple being treated in hospitals for COVID-19, once
forecast to eclipse by a large margin the record set
during the delta variant surge in early September
2021, has stayed below that level and is also declin-
ing, albeit at a slower rate than case totals.
Th e indoor mask mandate, not including
schools, could end before March 31 if the num-
ber of hospitalized COVID-19 patients dips to
around 400 (the number was 1,072 on Monday,
Feb. 7).
Extending the mask requirement for schools
through March 31, rather than ending it imme-
diately and leaving each school district to decide
its policy, is reasonable. Masks, and in partic-
ular cloth types, off er limited protection, to be
sure. But it strains credulity to think that strong
compliance with the mask requirement, along
with frequent sanitation and other precautions,
hasn’t contributed to most districts, including
Baker, being able to maintain in-person classes
throughout the omicron surge. Baker Super-
intendent Mark Witty has credited masks with
helping schools stay open. A premature end to
the mask requirement would hardly be welcome
if it resulted in a spike in infections that closed
schools or led to cancellations of sports and other
extracurricular activities. Our students, who have
borne a greater burden than many adults during
the pandemic, and done so without resorting to
hysteria or hyperbole, deserve better.
Conversely, there seems to be no legitimate
reason to continue the mask mandate once the
omicron surge is not only waning but eff ective-
ly over, as appears likely by the end of March, if
not sooner.
Th e OHA’s announcement is a refreshing
example of state offi cials recognizing how sig-
nifi cantly the situation has changed, and for the
better, during the pandemic.
Th e combination of vaccinations and protec-
tion through natural infection denies the virus
the ready supply of susceptible people it had
before. To ignore that even unvaccinated resi-
dents who have contracted COVID-19 have a
signifi cant level of immunity is to ignore science,
and would serve only to infl ame the unfortunate
animosity that has marked the past two years.
Although omicron is more likely than previous
variants to, in eff ect, evade the protection aff ord-
ed by vaccination, the vaccines continue to greatly
reduce the chances that you’ll get seriously ill or
die. Critics who cite the rate of breakthrough cases
as proof that vaccines “don’t work” are engaging in
unscientifi c hyperbole. A majority of people who
contract omicron, and who end up in the hospital
or the morgue as a result, are unvaccinated.
When it comes to masks in schools, we know
that COVID-19 poses a dramatically lower risk of
causing serious illness in children. And although
they can of course contract and spread the virus,
the much higher vaccination rates among old-
er, more vulnerable people, both statewide and
in Baker County, create a formidable level of
protection for them. Maintaining that barrier
for that group will likely become the focus for
public health eff orts in the future as we adjust to
COVID-19 as being something less than a crisis.
Th e OHA announcement doesn’t mean masks
will disappear starting April 1. Businesses and
other venues could decide to continue to require
masks. We should respect business owners who
choose to do so.
— Jayson Jacoby, Baker City Herald editor
YOUR VIEWS
CONTACT YOUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS
The real train danger is
having school next to tracks
President Joe Biden: The White
House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.,
Washington, D.C. 20500; 202-456-
1111; to send comments, go to
www.whitehouse.gov.
I would like to comment on a
couple of recent events concerning
the train whistle. On Feb. 1, 2022,
the Baker City Herald published
an editorial about the “Quiet Zone
assessment.” In that article, it was
stated that “the Federal Railroad
Administration has approved more
than 900 quiet zones in the past 15
years or so.” It goes on to say “the
reason quiet zones are so common
is simple ...” I have fact checked that
statement and found out that there
are approximately 128,000 public
railroad crossings across America.
Quiet zones are not common.
My other comment is on the
recent 5-car train derailment on
Jan. 28, 2022, just outside of town.
Thank goodness it was minor and
did not happen in town. But some-
day it could happen next to the
South Baker Intermediate School,
then people might wake up to the
real danger to the little kids. The
safety hazard to the children is not
the train whistle, it is the school
being located next to the railroad
tracks. The Baker School Board
had the opportunity to close that
school several years ago, but chose
not to do so at that time.
Roger LeMaster
Baker City
Editor’s note: Many quiet zones
encompass multiple individual
railroad crossings.
U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley: D.C. office:
313 Hart Senate Office Building, U.S.
Senate, Washington, D.C., 20510;
202-224-3753; fax 202-228-3997.
Portland office: One World Trade
Center, 121 S.W. Salmon St. Suite
1250, Portland, OR 97204; 503-326-
3386; fax 503-326-2900. Baker City
office, 1705 Main St., Suite 504, 541-
278-1129; merkley.senate.gov.
U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden: D.C. office:
221 Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C., 20510; 202-224-
5244; fax 202-228-2717. La Grande
office: 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. office: 1239 Longworth House
Office Building, Washington, D.C.,
20515, 202-225-6730; fax 202-225-
5774. Medford office: 14 N. Central
Avenue Suite 112, Medford, OR
97850; Phone: 541-776-4646; fax:
541-779-0204; Ontario office: 2430
S.W. Fourth Ave., No. 2, Ontario, OR
97914; Phone: 541-709-2040. bentz.
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. Lynn Findley
(R-Ontario): Salem office: 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 office: 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 Jason Spriet,
Kerry McQuisten, Shane Alderson,
Joanna Dixon, Heather Sells, Johnny
Waggoner Sr. and Dean Guyer.
Baker City administration: 541-
523-6541. Jonathan Cannon, city
manager; Ty Duby, police chief; Sean
Lee, fire chief; Michelle Owen, public
works director.
Baker County Commission: Baker
County Courthouse 1995 3rd St.,
Baker City, OR 97814; 541-523-
8200. Meets the first and third
Wednesdays at 9 a.m.; Bill Harvey
(chair), Mark Bennett, Bruce Nichols.
Baker County departments: 541-
523-8200. Travis Ash, sheriff; Noodle
Perkins, roadmaster; Greg Baxter,
district attorney; Alice Durflinger,
county treasurer; Stefanie Kirby,
county clerk; Kerry Savage, county
assessor.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
• We welcome letters on any issue of public interest. Customer complaints about specific 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.
• Writers are limited to one letter every 15 days.
• The writer must include an address and phone number (for verification only). Letters that do not in-
clude 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
COLUMN
Every Supreme Court nominee
deserves firm opposition
BY RAMESCH PONNURU
In the days since Justice Stephen Brey-
er’s plan to retire went public, some
Republicans have been putting out the
word that they do not plan a big fight
over his replacement. But it’s a mistake
for them to stand down, especially be-
fore President Joe Biden has even an-
nounced a nominee.
Their impulse is understandable. Bat-
tles over Supreme Court nominations can
be bitter and ugly. And this is one Repub-
licans will probably lose. Democrats can
probably maintain enough unity to con-
firm a nominee. Sens. Joe Manchin and
Kyrsten Sinema may have angered their
party over spending bills and the filibus-
ter, but they have voted for Biden’s judges
without any fuss.
Also, peace-minded Republicans reason,
the stakes are low. Breyer’s replacement
won’t change the balance of the court.
Some Republicans, notably Lindsey Gra-
ham, hew to the old-fashioned view that
presidents deserve deference on their judi-
cial nominees so long as they demonstrate
that they are competent, even-tempered
and mainstream. He voted for both of
President Barack Obama’s nominees to the
Supreme Court.
He shouldn’t have. The norm of defer-
ence, which is nowhere in the Constitu-
tion, has inevitably and justifiably eroded
as judges have assumed a greater and
greater policymaking role and the par-
ties have come to disagree sharply about
that role.
That’s why past Republican efforts to
sue for peace in the judicial wars have
come to naught. After bruising fights
over Republican nominees to the Su-
preme Court from 1987 to 1991, Senate
Republicans largely voted to confirm
Democratic nominees Ruth Bader Gins-
burg and Breyer himself. But the next
time Republicans had the White House,
Democrats launched a series of filibusters
against many of their judicial nominees.
Each party blames the other for its role in
a cycle of escalation and retaliation. But
that cycle could hardly be averted once
judges became such powerful forces in
our politics.
Biden has said that any justice he ap-
points would satisfy a “litmus test” (he en-
dorsed the phrase) on Roe v. Wade. They
have to give him some sign, that is, that
they will block legislatures’ attempts to reg-
ulate abortion — even though nothing in
the text, original understanding or struc-
ture of the Constitution denies them that
power, and even though constitutional
scholars of varying views on abortion have
scoffed at Roe’s reasoning.
The Constitution gives Biden the power
to nominate anyone he wants to the high
court. But it also gives senators the power
not to be complicit in his decisions. Repub-
licans who believe that judges should rule
in a way that brings us closer to the actual
Constitution, as nearly all of them say they
believe, should have no qualms about exer-
cising that power.
Roe itself may be overruled later this
year. But the broader debate about judicial
power will continue and evolve. It would
be shortsighted for senators who like the
current balance of the court to be compla-
cent. The justices have life tenure, and they
can spend years in the minority before
casting a string of decisive votes.
And while it’s likely that anyone Biden
nominates will get confirmed, it’s not guar-
anteed. Biden might misjudge the toler-
ance of Manchin and Sinema for a left-
wing nominee, or the nominee might turn
out to have unexpected vulnerabilities. The
Democrats’ majority is so small that con-
trol of the Senate could conceivably flip
any week.
Opposing confirmation should not
mean searching for character flaws or
scandals in the nominee’s past, or inventing
them. It ought, however, to include making
the case that a judge’s job, when interpret-
ing and applying the law, is fundamentally
a matter of obedience rather than inven-
tion. For example: When the people, acting
through Congress, have decided to forbid
universities that take public money from
discriminating among applicants based on
race, it is not a judge’s job to second-guess
that decision.
This view of judging is sufficiently
compelling to the public that even past
Democratic nominees have felt obliged
to voice it. During her own confirma-
tion hearings in 2009, Justice Sonia So-
tomayor insisted that judges should not
“make law” — leading to widespread
grumbling among progressives. Repub-
licans ought to use this year’s hearings
to further discredit any more grandiose
conception of the judicial role.
Republicans should be eager to extend
this debate, especially if the alternative is
for the Democratic Congress to have ex-
tra time to pass lavish spending bills. It’s
not as though Senate Republicans have
something better to do with their own
time than to engage on the core questions
of self-government that Supreme Court
nominations now raise.
Republican voters can’t reasonably ask
Mitch McConnell and his Senate col-
leagues to defeat Biden’s nominee. They
can reasonably ask them to try.
Ramesh Ponnuru is a Bloomberg Opinion
columnist. He is the editor of National Review,
a contributor to CNN and a fellow at the
American Enterprise Institute.