A4
BAKER CITY
Opinion
WRITE A LETTER
news@bakercityherald.com
Thursday, November 3, 2022 • Baker City, Oregon
EDITORIAL
Climate
change, and
the cost of
keeping warm
W
ith the coldest weather in more than half a year
forecast to intrude on Baker City this week,
residents who rely on natural gas to warm
their homes and businesses got the financial equivalent of a
slushball to the face.
The Oregon Public Utility Commission (PUC) approved
a request from Cascade Natural Gas to boost rates by 25.1%
for residential customers starting Nov. 1.
The increase is even larger for commercial customers
(30.1%) and industrial customers (33.8%).
According to the PUC, this rate hike will not fatten the
bottom line for Cascade Natural Gas, which has three main
service areas in Oregon — Baker City, Central Oregon, in-
cluding Bend, and parts of Umatilla and Morrow counties,
including Pendleton.
The increases are part of what PUC calls a “Purchased
Gas Adjustment” or PGA. The basic idea is that natural gas
companies can request rate increases to cover higher prices
for the gas they buy on the wholesale market.
Natural gas futures climbed to a 14-year high in August,
up 70% since late June.
The PUC also approved PGAs for Oregon’s two other nat-
ural gas providers — Avista (18.4% increase for residential
customers) and NW Natural (14.4% increase for residential
customers).
Mark Hanson, a spokesman for Cascade Natural Gas,
cited several factors that contributed to rising prices for nat-
ural gas and this year’s unusually large rate hikes.
Some factors were in effect unavoidable. Russia’s invasion
of Ukraine this past winter and the continuing war, for in-
stance, prompted sanctions against Russia from U.S. and
Europe. Russia responded by reducing gas imports to Eu-
rope, resulting in greater demand from Europe for liquefied
natural gas imports from the U.S. The rising demand itself
pushes prices higher, but it also has contributed to natural
gas inventories dipping, a situation that industry experts say
also tends to inflate prices.
A PUC report also cited a June 8, 2022, fire at America’s
second-largest liquefied natural gas export facility near Gal-
veston, Texas, as a price factor.
But the bigger bills that will arrive in Baker City mail
boxes and inboxes this winter — about $15 more per month
for a typical residential customer, according to PUC — can’t
be blamed solely on a war and a fire.
America’s campaign to curb climate change also bears
some of the responsibility.
Another significant source of the rising demand for
natural gas is producing electricity. With many coal-fired
power plants closing because burning coal produces larger
amounts of carbon dioxide than other fuels — Oregon’s last
coal-burning plant, in Boardman, shut down two years ago
— natural gas has been tapped to supply the lost megawatts.
Hanson said the demand for natural gas to produce electric-
ity reached record highs during this past sizzling summer.
Unfortunately, America’s illogical disdain for nuclear en-
ergy means the country inevitably had to turn to natural gas
to supplant coal.
The outlook is somewhat more promising. Hanson said
natural gas production should continue to increase, and by
next year it could catch up with demand, potentially push-
ing prices down in 2023.
Ultimately, this coming winter, when frigid Baker City
mornings will no doubt prompt some residents to weigh the
expense against the comfort of an extra degree or two on the
thermostat, will serve as a reminder that combating climate
change, worthwhile endeavor that it is, sometimes comes
with an immediate cost.
For information about bill payment assistance options,
newly available utility discount programs, and the Bud-
get Pay Program that equalizes bill payments across win-
ter and summer months, contact Cascade Natural at 888-
522-1130 or view information online at www.cngc.com/
customer-service/low-income-assistance-programs/.
— Jayson Jacoby, Baker City Herald editor
OTHER VIEWS
Biden claims he signed a bill on student loan amnesty
EDITORIAL FROM
THE LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
P
resident Joe Biden in
August unveiled the
vote-buying scheme
known as student loan forgive-
ness. Two months later he has
forgotten the particulars.
During an on-camera in-
terview released Sunday, Oct.
30 with the left-wing group
NowThisNews, the president
begins talking about his loan
amnesty plan.
He tells the activists that
they “probably are aware, I just
signed a law” on student debt
relief that Republicans are chal-
lenging in court. He goes on
to say that “it’s passed. I got it
passed by a vote or two, and it’s
in effect.”
As blunders go, this one is
vintage Biden. His economic
agenda has been a model of con-
fusion, and the incoherence now
spills over into the president’s
student loan policy.
In fact, Biden signed no such
law because Congress passed no
such law, which is why his ac-
tions are now being challenged
ruled that the states did not have
in court. Rather than go through standing to sue, but he acknowl-
the legislative branch, the presi-
edged that the case raised “im-
dent did an end-around, relying portant and significant” issues.
on a 20-year old
A day later, the
law that gives
U.S. Cir-
The president’s unilateral Eighth
the secretary
cuit Court of
move — which would Appeals stayed
of education
certain pow-
the lower
eliminate $10,000 of
ers to rewrite
court’s ruling
loan terms
debt for most borrowers until further
during national
review and or-
— faces several legal
emergencies.
dered the ad-
It’s worth not-
obstacles, including a ministration to
ing that Biden
take no more
lawsuit by six states.
declared the
action on the
pandemic to be
plan until the
Last week, a federal
“over” well be-
legal case is de-
judge ruled that the
fore the forgive-
cided.
ness plan went
The White
states did not have
into effect.
House re-
standing to sue, but he sponded by
The presi-
dent’s unilateral
acknowledged that the downplaying
move — which
the stay. It is
case raised “important “important to
would elimi-
nate $10,000
and significant” issues. note,” an ad-
of debt for
ministration
most borrow-
statement said,
ers — faces several legal obsta-
“that the order does not reverse
cles, including a lawsuit by six
the trial court’s dismissal of the
states. Last week, a federal judge case, or suggest that the case has
merit. It merely prevents debt
from being discharged until
the court makes a decision. We
will continue to move full speed
ahead in our preparations in
compliance with this order.”
Putting aside the legal debate,
Biden’s $400 billion giveaway
is an affront to those who met
their obligations, those who
paid their way through college
and those who never enrolled at
all. It sends precisely the wrong
message regarding the impor-
tance of personal responsibility
and does nothing to reform the
very loan programs that brought
us to this point in the first place,
ensuring a repeat in the years to
come. In short, like most of the
president’s agenda, it’s a mess.
From a legal perspective,
Biden’s actions on student loans
raise important constitutional
questions involving presidential
authority and the separation of
powers. These are issues that
merit adjudication, a process
highly likely to produce an out-
come that the administration
won’t embrace.
COLUMN
10 common myths about American politics
BY MICHAEL REISCH
T
he media frequently justify their elec-
tion coverage with claims that a vital
democracy needs a well-informed
public. Unfortunately, their coverage often
repeats long-standing myths about politics
that undermine this worthwhile goal.
Here are 10 of the most glaring myths:
1. Candidate quality counts most with
voters.
In this age of celebrity, name recognition
rather than substantive accomplishment
matters. There is no other explanation for
the electoral success of Donald Trump, the
candidacies of Kari Lake, J.D. Vance and
Mehmet Oz, and the contemplation of fu-
ture candidacies by Kanye West and Dwayne
Johnson. Many voters embrace celebrity to
acquire vicarious status or because a celebrity
voices their long-held beliefs.
2. Voters prefer candidates who display
bipartisanship.
Prospective voters often express chagrin
about politicians’ failure to “just get along.”
Yet, they largely vote for candidates in pri-
mary elections who reflect the most polar-
ized positions. Candidates respond accord-
ingly, even after they win.
3. Voters prefer positive messages from
candidates.
Voters also frequently bemoan attack ads
that combine half-truths about opponents
with scary images and ominous music. Stud-
ies reveal, however, that most voters respond
more to negative ads than positive ones.
4. Voters pay attention to candidates’ re-
cords on the issues.
Candidates’ websites post detailed posi-
tions on a wide range of issues, but scant ev-
idence exists that voters examine these web-
sites carefully. In fact, voters hardly notice
shifts in candidates’ positions except on the
few issues they already cared about.
5. Voters care about the future.
Some candidates address long-term prob-
lems, such as the national debt, the fate of
Social Security and Medicare, and the fu-
ture of the Earth. Voters focus on short-term
concerns, however, like gasoline prices or
entrenched issues like abortion. To some ex-
tent, this reflects how the media cover the
issues.
6. Voters assess candidates using similar
criteria.
Although they claim to prefer candidates
whose moral rectitude reflects a commit-
ment to “family values,” voters all over the
political spectrum are remarkably forgiving
of their preferred candidates even when they
violate these norms. For example, feminists
supported Bill Clinton; evangelicals still back
Donald Trump. Less popular politicians,
however, often suffer the voters’ wrath for
less egregious transgressions.
7. Voters who identify as independent
are better informed and less partisan.
Given the increasing importance of pri-
maries in determining who ultimately wins
political office, declaring oneself an “in-
dependent” is increasingly no more than
a form of virtue signaling. States without
“open primaries” render independents po-
litically irrelevant, yet both parties moderate
previous positions to attract their votes. In-
dependents are just as partisan as other vot-
ers. They only differ in the combination of
issues about which they are partisan.
8. There is such a thing as the women’s
vote, the Black vote, the Jewish vote, etc.
The media frequently report how a par-
ticular group’s votes will split among candi-
dates, and pay inordinate attention to per-
ceived shifts in these blocs’ voting patterns.
Following an election, they twist them-
selves into analytic pretzels explaining why
so many women voted for Donald Trump;
non-college educated white men voted for
Barack Obama, but not Hillary Clinton; and
why Latinos embrace conservative positions
on abortion and immigration. The myth that
identity equates with ideology has been dis-
proved so often it is no longer a surprise.
9. Debates influence election outcomes.
Since the Kennedy-Nixon debates, the as-
sumption that these events influence the out-
come of close elections remains a sacred truth
of American politics. Campaigns spend con-
siderable time rehearsing rhetorical zingers
for their candidate to inject at an opportune
moment. In some cases, they deliberately set
the bar so low for their candidate that any-
thing short of incoherence is a “victory” (see
Herschel Walker). Debates, however, now
have less impact on elections than viewers do
on “Dancing with the Stars,” especially when
they occur after early voting begins.
10. Not voting sends a powerful political
message.
Deliberately choosing not to vote out of
apathy, cynicism or the belief that voting
makes no difference is just another version
of virtue signaling. It is particularly tragic
that groups most likely not to vote — people
who are young, lower income, and less edu-
cated — are those most affected by election
outcomes. Although some campaigns engage
in registration and “get out the vote” efforts,
they largely target likely voters and tailor
their messages accordingly.
█
Michael Reisch has conducted and consulted on
political campaigns at the local, state, and national
level and written and taught about politics and social
action at six major universities.
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. 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, Kenyon Damschen,
Johnny Waggoner Sr. and Dean Guyer.
Baker City administration: 541-523-6541.
Jonathan Cannon, city manager; Ty Duby, police
chief; David Blair, 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.