Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Bulletin. (Bend, OR) 1963-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 9, 2021)
A8 Th e Bu l l eTin " Tu es day, FeBr ua r y 9, 2021 EDITORIALS & OPINIONS AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER Heidi Wright Gerry O’Brien Richard Coe Publisher Editor Editorial Page Editor Should we change the way people become lawyers? T he Oregon Supreme Court granted what’s called “diploma privilege” in June 2020. People who had graduated from law school could become lawyers without taking the bar exam for a limited time. Should Oregon keep that in place? Legislators recently discussed the issue with representatives from the Oregon Bar Association. Deans of Oregon’s three law schools requested the temporary change because of the pandemic. Mass in-person testing could be challenging during a pandemic. Re- mote testing can have glitches. And there was concern that COVID-19 disrupted the ability of students to study. Utah and Washington state took action similar to Oregon’s. Wisconsin has had diploma privi- lege for years. The bar exam is the traditional guard put in place to ensure only people who are competent are al- lowed to operate in a state. That doesn’t mean the bar exam is perfect or could not be improved. Many question if a closed-book test that rewards memorization is a good measure of future perfor- mance as a lawyer. A good lawyer would never rely on memory alone. Being a good lawyer is about care- ful research and building good ar- guments, along with other things of course. Can a test even measure that? There also is simply not a lot of strong evidence that passing an exam translates into being a com- petent lawyer. Doesn’t it make sense that the ability to successfully grad- uate from law school is a better test? There have been equity concerns, as well. Even if a student’s parents are wealthy, law school is expen- sive. Many students then pay more for tutoring for the bar exam after law school. Piling up debt is not good for anyone. Look back in his- tory and the bar exam and other measures were also used as a tool to keep minorities from becoming lawyers. Switching to diploma privilege has its own complications. Law schools would be the new gatekeep- ers. Will the standards they devise be suitable? Would it be better to move away from the current model and have two years of schooling and a third year of apprenticeship, legal internship or work study? Profes- sional responsibility and fitness of character have also long been re- quired for lawyers. Who should de- cide those standards? The pandemic forced Oregon to think differently about how to certify new lawyers. Do you think Oregon should make a permanent change, go back to the pre-pan- demic pattern or try something else? Tell your legislator or send us a letter to the editor at letters@bend- bulletin.com. Run for school board and make a difference F our seats will be up for elec- tion in May on the Bend-La Pine School Board. If you want to make a difference in Bend schools, there can be no more pow- erful way than serving as a school board member. First thing to know: It can be a rewarding way to give back to your community and help kids. Second thing: It’s demanding work. It’s like a second job. Third thing: It’s not paid. Fourth thing: Check to ensure you qualify. The board makes critical deci- sions about budgets, priorities and policies. Parents, students and em- ployees want questions answered. Equity must be addressed. Excel- lence must be ensured. There are negotiations with unions and over lawsuits. Maintenance and repair must be kept up. In Bend there is growth and no way to pay for new buildings without asking the public to vote to approve bonds. And don’t underestimate the passion and con- flict in naming a new school. By the time you read this, in- terim Superintendent Lora Nord- quist, Board Chair Carrie Doug- lass and Vice Chair Melissa Barnes Dholakia likely will have already held some interactive sessions for people who have questions or want more information. There will be another one on Feb. 12 from noon to 1 p.m. Recordings of the sessions will be made public, so you can watch later. There is a bit more information on the district website: tinyurl.com/ runforboard. School board seats are zoned. Links there can help you check to ensure you qualify for a particular seat. Editorials reflect the views of The Bulletin’s editorial board, Publisher Heidi Wright, Editor Gerry O’Brien and Editorial Page Editor Richard Coe. They are written by Richard Coe. My Nickel’s Worth Negotiating with St. Charles I am a registered, diagnostic ultra- sound technologist and a 40-year em- ployee at St. Charles Health Systems in Bend. I am one of approximately 150 technologists at the hospital who are front-line caregivers, including respiratory therapists, surgical tech- nologists, radiation oncology technol- ogists, technologists in all of radiology and in the heart center, and others. We work alongside doctors and reg- istered nurses, treating traumatic in- juries, critically ill patients, and, of course, those who have contracted COVID-19. In 2019, my colleagues and I voted to build a union to improve our work- place, gain fair wages and benefits, and to ensure that St. Charles contin- ues to deliver the absolute best patient care. We are seeking a contract that will keep local health care provided through St. Charles system function- ing at a high level to serve patients throughout the region. The experi- ence that we have accumulated over the years could be lost to Bend area families if some of us must turn else- where to receive fair compensation. I am on our bargaining team and over the past year while we have been in negotiations, hospital administra- tion has dragged its feet. Like so many of my colleagues, I am disappointed in my employer’s behavior. That is why we recently held an informa- tional picket — to make sure the com- munity knows what is happening in their hospital. We are committed to continuing to provide the best care possible. Our hope is that you will support us to en- sure the hospital does the right thing for its employees. — Dee Dee Schumacher, Bend Legislature should not decide company boards Directors are theoretically put on boards for their ability to aid the com- pany in creating profits for it’s stock holders. Unless the company is some- how supported by the government (as a major customer) the government should have no right to interfere in its business. Any company with self respect should tell the government to “Take a Hike”. Where in the U.S. Con- stitution is it acceptable for the gov- ernment to dictate private business practices? — Jay Feinstein, Bend Letter to Cliff Bentz Your vote to protect Marjorie Tay- lor Greene was yet another clear in- dication of your support for hatred, violence and the overthrow of our democracy. You have condoned the idea of killing Congresswomen with whom you work. You have given cre- dence to outrageous and obviously fictional conspiracy theories. You have endorsed dangerous racist, mi- sogynistic and Semitic lies. You have encouraged citizens to distrust a free and fair election, fracturing our pre- cious democratic process. You have perpetuated the Big Lie and the vio- lent, seditious attack on our Capitol. Instead of honoring your oath to de- fend and protect our constitution, you have sworn allegiance to a man who would throw out the legitimate votes of the American people and appoint himself dictator. You are a disgrace, and you insult each and every Orego- nian in your district. We will not for- get, Cliff. — Janet Keen, Camp Sherman Distribute vaccine by age Why does Oregon State need a 27-person panel to determine who gets the COVID vaccine? Does this panel shield the Governor and the head of the Oregon Health Authority from be- ing held accountable for the misman- aged distribution plan? Today’s Wall Street Journal (Feb. 5th) had a great editorial about rationing the vaccine. It stated and I quote “Basing eligibility in stages from oldest to youngest from now on is simple, scientific and fair. As supply increases, this will be the fast- est way to inoculate the most people, reduce demands on the health-care system, and allow more businesses to reopen.” Unfortunately, our Governor and health authority chose to create another bureaucratic panel which has slowed the delivery of the vaccine to the oldest and most needy citizens of Central Oregon. — Steven Bahr, Bend Letters policy Guest columns How to submit We welcome your letters. Letters should be limited to one issue, contain no more than 250 words and include the writer’s signature, phone number and address for verification. We edit letters for brevity, grammar, taste and legal reasons. We re- ject poetry, personal attacks, form letters, letters submitted elsewhere and those appropriate for other sections of The Bul- letin. Writers are limited to one letter or guest column every 30 days. Your submissions should be between 550 and 650 words; they must be signed; and they must include the writer’s phone number and address for verification. We edit submissions for brevity, grammar, taste and legal reasons. We reject those submitted elsewhere. Locally submitted columns alternate with national colum- nists and commentaries. Writers are lim- ited to one letter or guest column every 30 days. Please address your submission to either My Nickel’s Worth or Guest Column and mail, fax or email it to The Bulletin. Email submissions are preferred. Email: letters@bendbulletin.com Write: My Nickel’s Worth/Guest Column P.O. Box 6020 Bend, OR 97708 Fax: 541-385-5804 Best vaccination strategy is simple: Focus on Americans 65 and older BY RUTH FADEN, MATTHEW CRANE AND SAAD OMER Special to The Washington Post N ow that COVID-19 vaccines are increasingly becoming available to people beyond health-care workers and those in long-term care, the question turns to who should be immunized next. For many people, the answer is essential workers. But while many workers face an elevated risk and should receive a vaccine soon, we believe the most eth- ically justified path forward is to focus on individuals 65 and older. The primary reason to prioritize people in this age group is simple: They account for more than 80% of covid-19 deaths, even though they are only about 16% of the population. This disproportionate toll is why the Biden administration’s vaccine plan encourages states to expand vaccine el- igibility to those who are 65 and older. But while many places — such as D.C., New York and Florida — are converging on a 65-and-older strat- egy, whether seniors qualify for vacci- nation largely depends on where they live. In New Mexico and Connecticut, you need to be at least 75 years old. In Colorado and Nevada, 70 is old enough. And in Hawaii and Virginia, older adults must compete with many other people for the same limited vac- cine supply, including essential work- ers. Prioritizing people 65 and older is the most efficient route to reduce the dying, but that is not the only reason it is the most ethically defensible way to proceed. The age cutoff also directly addresses disproportionate mortality in structurally disadvantaged groups. The differences in mortality rates by race are arguably the most morally egregious of the covid-19 disparities. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that Black and Lat- inx people have experienced death at 2.8 times the rate of White people. Indigenous Americans have only a slightly lower ratio, at 2.6 times. For many of the same structurally unjust reasons that people of color are dying of covid-19 at higher rates than White people, they are also dying at earlier ages. While nearly three-quar- ters of White people who die of covid-19 are 75 or older, that is true for only 45% of deaths among Black peo- ple and 33% of deaths among indige- nous Americans. By contrast, almost 70% of covid-19 deaths among Black and Latinx people and 60% of deaths among Native people were among people 65 and older. There is substantial variation among the states in terms of both percentage of the population over 65 and the per- centage who are members of disad- vantaged minority groups. But within each state, the relative distribution of mortality by age and the relative im- pact of disadvantage on mortality re- mains effectively the same. Thus, by simplifying vaccine prioritization to focus on people 65 and older across the nation, we can more effectively protect most Americans at the highest risk of dying in each ethnic and racial demographic in a way that focusing on essential workers would not. While a national age cutoff of 65 would go a long way to address eq- uity concerns, it would not, by itself, be sufficient. We must also make in- tensive efforts to overcome barriers in vaccinating older people in commu- nities of color. For many months now, there have been pleas to address the justified distrust many people of color have in government programs and public health, and to reduce barriers to registration for and access to vaccine administration. Any vaccine strategy, whether it prioritizes essential work- ers or older adults, will be inequitable without addressing these challenges. The considerable differential uptake of vaccines among health-care workers of color proves this point. Massive efforts must be initiated, now, to narrow this differential among older Americans. The National Acad- emies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recommended ensuring access in areas of social vulnerability. Different jurisdictions are applying metrics to do so. For example, D.C., which began offering vaccines to peo- ple over 65 on Jan. 11, is differentially reserving some vaccine appointments for residents of sections of the city that have been hit hardest by covid-19 hos- pitalizations and deaths. With thousands of Americans suc- cumbing to covid-19 daily, it is imper- ative we get our vaccine strategy right. The use of a nationally coordinated age cutoff of 65 may seem deceptively simple, but in conjunction with in- tensive equity efforts, it is also our best opportunity to save lives with the fierce urgency of now. e e Ruth Faden is the founder of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and a professor at Johns Hopkins University. Matthew Crane is a medical student at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and a visiting scholar at the USC Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics. Saad Omer is director of the Yale Institute for Global Health and a professor at the Yale University schools of medicine, nursing and public health.