A4 BAKER CITY HERALD • THURSDAY, JUNE 30, 2022
BAKER CITY
Opinion
WRITE A LETTER
news@bakercityherald.com
Baker City, Oregon
EDITORIAL
Baker needs
24/7 police
patrols
B
aker City residents deserve to have police
patrolling their neighborhoods 24 hours a day,
seven days a week. Needing to call in an off-
duty officer in an emergency, which inevitably leads to
delays that can put people in danger, is not acceptable.
That has to be the starting point for the discus-
sion the Baker City Council and other officials began
during the council’s meeting Tuesday, June 28.
Councilors decided to schedule a work session on
the topic in September.
The matter came to the public’s attention sooner
than city officials planned. Last weekend social me-
dia posts claimed that the police department, start-
ing Aug. 23, would cease patrols between 3 a.m. and
7 a.m. daily.
Police Chief Ty Duby and City Manager Jonathan
Cannon met Monday morning, June 27. Duby ac-
knowledged that ending 24-hour patrols is a possibil-
ity, and that department data show the 3 a.m. to 7 a.m.
period has relatively few calls that warrant an imme-
diate police response.
Duby said he had asked a department employee to
put together a draft schedule based on 10-hour patrol
shifts rather than the current 12-hour shifts, a change
that would curtail patrols from 3 a.m. to 7 a.m. Duby
said that proposed schedule was mistakenly released
as an actual pending schedule.
Duby told councilors Tuesday that he and Cannon
always intended to discuss the situation with the city
council before changing the patrol schedule.
The social media posts thrust the issue to the top of
the council’s agenda Tuesday — and rightfully so.
Reducing police patrols by any amount is a signifi-
cant change in public safety, and one that demands a
robust public discussion in which residents have am-
ple opportunities to express their opinions.
This is even more vital given that the city council
just recently agreed to Cannon’s plan that drops am-
bulance service from the city fire department’s duties
(Baker County has hired a private ambulance com-
pany to replace the city) and reduces the fire depart-
ment’s workforce from 16 full-time equivalents to
10.5.
Duby told councilors Tuesday that maintaining
24-hour patrols is a challenge even when the police
department is fully staffed with eight patrol officers.
The city has six now, with one officer in training and
the city looking to hire another soon. The department
also has three sergeants, two detectives and the chief.
The problems Duby described in a Monday, June 27
interview aren’t easy to dismiss.
To maintain 24-hour patrols, officers often have to
work overtime. Sometimes they’re not able to take
compensatory time off when they ask for it.
“They’re overworked,” Duby told councilors.
He said the work schedule has contributed to offi-
cers resigning, saying the city has lost one or two offi-
cers on average for more than a decade.
That’s hardly ideal. Although the city needs to have
24-hour patrols, achieving that goal by pushing offi-
cers to the point that they leave town is no bargain.
We need to consider the well-being of the officers who
protect us.
The solution might well require the city to boost
the police budget to hire more patrol officers. Duby
said as much Tuesday, telling councilors “it all comes
down to money.”
Regardless, city residents, having recently seen the
city council oversee major cuts in the fire department,
are likely to object, vociferously, to further reductions
in public safety.
As they should.
— Jayson Jacoby, Baker City Herald editor
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 ev-
ery 15 days.
• The writer must include an address
and phone number (for verification
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 Her-
ald,
P.O. Box 807, Baker City, OR 97814
Email: news@bakercityherald.
comw
COLUMN
How old is too old to govern?
BY NICHOLAS GOLDBERG
I
n last week’s issue of New York maga-
zine, two photos of Sen. Dianne Fein-
stein are laid out side by side.
In the first, from 1971, she is smiling
broadly, hair bobbed, wearing pearls —
the first female president of the San Fran-
cisco Board of Supervisors. She’s about 38
years old.
On the facing page is Feinstein today,
half a century later, in almost the same
pose and pearls, but now her face is deeply
lined, her shoulders hunched, her expres-
sion substantially less joyous. She looks
irritated. The caption: “The oldest sitting
U.S. senator.”
It should go without saying, of course,
that there’s no shame in getting old. Each
of us, if all goes well, will someday get
wrinkles and our hair will thin and, over
time, our strength and vitality will decline.
But Feinstein, who turned 89 last week,
has kicked off a heated national debate by
refusing to step down from her job even as
people begin to clamor about her age and
competence.
And she is hardly alone among her
peers in clinging to power as she ages. Fa-
mously, Ruth Bader Ginsburg sat unbudg-
ingly on the Supreme Court until she died
at age 87. (Remember how she fell asleep
during the State of the Union address in
2015?)
There’s House Speaker Nancy Pelosi,
who is 82 and apparently going strong.
Sen. Mitch McConnell is 80, and he’s wait-
ing to become Senate majority leader
again if Republicans win control in No-
vember.
Incumbency turns out to be a very
pleasant place, and power an aphrodisiac
that is difficult to give up — to the point
that the word “gerontocracy” has suddenly
become common.
Is this a problem? I think it is. In Fein-
stein’s case, it is especially so because of
the parade of reports on her cognitive di-
minishment, including a San Francisco
Chronicle article in which sources de-
scribed her memory as “rapidly deteriorat-
ing” and a New York Times story that de-
YOUR VIEWS
Supreme Court’s abortion ruling
disrespects women, families
With its poorly reasoned ruling in
Dobbs, the radical majority of the Su-
preme Court stripped away the consti-
tutional rights and choices of at least
half of US citizens to manage their own
health care.
The decision overturning Roe vs
Wade shows a shocking disrespect for
women, families, and legal precedent. It
allows state government to make wom-
en’s health care choices, not the woman
in consultation with her doctor, family,
and, if desired, her spiritual advisor. It
harms women and families in 26 states
who have banned or extremely limited
choice, even in cases of rape and incest
in some states. It has a disproportionate
impact on poor women who can’t af-
ford to travel.
Alito’s “originalist” reasoning was
made up to achieve his ideological
ends, based on norms in 1789. In 1789
women were essentially the “property”
of men, had no right to vote, and states
could approve of humans being en-
slaved.
How can we channel our grief and
anger in a positive way?
Right now: Boycott businesses in
states that have denied or severely limit
women’s rights to choose an abortion
and related procedures. I will no longer
vacation or shop in Idaho, Texas, Flor-
ida, and states who deny women consti-
tutional rights.
History shows boycotts work. Boy-
scribed her increasing “befuddlement.”
But even beyond the issue of cognition,
isn’t there a point at which we all become
slower, less relevant and less attuned to the
changing world around us?
I realize that people live longer these
days and that some people are more com-
petent than others as they age (and that
voters theoretically take that into account
at the polls). But I still think it’s troubling
to be led by so many people who came of
age in a distant, nearly unrecognizable era.
At some point, government becomes scle-
rotic, stagnant and backward-looking and
requires new blood.
The two most prominent exemplars
of the trend are Donald Trump and Joe
Biden. In 2017, Trump was the oldest per-
son ever to become president. He was 70.
Four years later, that record was smashed
by his successor, Biden, who was 78 when
he was sworn in.
And now — and this is the mind-bog-
gling part — both Trump and Biden are
thinking of running again.
Call me ageist, but I’m not the only one
worrying about this. A recent article said
that Democratic leaders all over the coun-
try are concerned about Biden’s age, vigor
and political viability and that many don’t
want him to seek another term. If he were
to win, he would be 86 at the end of it.
Trump would be 82.
A recent YouGov poll found that 58% of
Americans support an age limit for elected
officials.
And it’s not just the presidency. Eleven
sitting U.S. senators were born while
Franklin D. Roosevelt was president. Thir-
ty-three senators are 70 or older. Only one
is under 40. (The median age in the U.S. is
38.1 years.)
Studies suggest that between 15% and
25% of people over 65 suffer from mild
cognitive impairment. But physical prob-
lems also need to be considered. Many re-
member when an ailing 92-year-old Sen.
Robert Byrd (D-W. Va.) was rolled onto
the Senate floor in his wheelchair to vote
for Obamacare. (He missed 40% of the
votes that year.)
One way to address these problems
would be to enact an upper age limit for
public officials. The Constitution already
sets lower limits. You have to be at least 25
to become a member of the House of Rep-
resentatives, 30 to be a senator and 35 to
be president.
Congress in 1986 made mandatory re-
tirement ages for most professions illegal
in an effort to fight age discrimination. But
certain sensitive jobs — including in some
cases, judges — are exempt. Presumably
elected officials could be exempted too.
Or maybe that’s going too far. Maybe we
don’t want to force out people who are still
performing at a high level. In that case, we
could simply require candidates or sitting
government officials to undergo a thor-
ough nonpartisan medical review to assess
their physical and mental health after, say,
70.
Or we could enact term limit laws. Sen-
ators, for instance, might be held to two
six-year terms. That wouldn’t be an age
restriction, but it would clearly reduce the
number of older senators.
Otherwise, there aren’t too many ways
to nudge people out. (Political scientist
Larry Sabato told the Washington Post
about Sen. Ted Green of Rhode Island,
who finally retired in 1961 at age 93 when
his staff “forgot” to file his reelection pa-
perwork.)
In 2019, former President Jimmy Carter
— who is still legally entitled to one more
term if he chooses to run again — pointed
out that presidents need to be intellectu-
ally flexible and attuned to new ideas and
acknowledged that he couldn’t have han-
dled the job even at age 80.
“I hope there’s an age limit,” said Carter,
who is now 97.
But there isn’t.
Which is why, for the moment, we have
to rely on the good sense of our leaders to
know when they’ve served long enough,
and to get out of the way when the time is
right.
cotting companies and events was key
to overcoming apartheid in South Af-
rica in the 1990s.
Elect federal and state representatives
to codify Roe to restore women’s pri-
vacy rights to manage their own bodies
and healthcare.
Support an impeachment inquiry
into the three illegitimate justices who
lied under oath in their Senate confir-
mation hearings. They said that Roe vs
Wade was settled precedent and law.
They joined the radical majority to kill
this “settled precedent” and violated
their promise under oath.
Vote for and contribute to candidates
and organizations that expressly sup-
port a woman’s and families’ right to
choose.
Mary Tomlinson
Baker City
ply not true. There are a lot of different
world-wide events that have shaped us
in recent decades. If Christianity was so
perfect in the earlier days, why did people
like me have to grow up with whites only
signs everywhere?
No, what we have here is a swelling of
evangelical Christian power in this coun-
try attempting yet another coup. There
is no irony lost on the fact that you’re the
same people that supported and voted for
a fascist like Donald Trump. This is not
about God. It’s about religion and poli-
tics mixing together. Something we were
warned NOT to do.
It is the responsibility of citizens like
myself to remind you where those lim-
its are. You have the freedom to practice
your religion of choice. But, you may
not place yourself in a position of domi-
nance simply because most people here
are Christian. Keep your religion in your
pants. It’s a private matter between you
and what made you. It has no place in the
halls of power.
And the Ten Commandments? They
were lifted from ancient Egyptian texts
that predate the Bible. Because religions
are composed of the various religions that
came before them. Judaism and Christi-
anity are no different. I’m a researcher by
nature. When I researched Jesus, there
was nothing in the historical record.
Nothing. And if Jesus wasn’t real, what are
we to make of a religion that comes in his
name and wants to assume power?...
Dan Collins
Baker City
In America, religion and politics
are not supposed to mix
A response to a letter written by Mr.
Fox on June 25.
You’re a Christian nationalist. You
probably don’t see yourself that way but
you are. You want what the Islamic Tali-
ban wants. Yes you do. You want the rest
of us to live under a religion you like.
Where that religion becomes the law of
the land.
You’re trying to tie the decline of this
country to the restrictions placed on your
religion of choice. Once again, this is sim-
Nicholas Goldberg is an associate editor and Op-Ed
columnist for the Los Angeles Times.