Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Bulletin. (Bend, OR) 1963-current | View Entire Issue (June 8, 2021)
A6 The BulleTin • Tuesday, June 8, 2021 EDITORIALS & OPINIONS AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER Heidi Wright Gerry O’Brien Richard Coe Publisher Editor Editorial Page Editor Moving Hawthorne station could pay off B end’s central Hawthorne bus station is getting a makeover. The interior is being spruced up, shifting from a “Blade Runner” palette to something inviting and warm. Perhaps more important is that the buses are going to get pulled in on the property, instead of idling on nearby streets. Those are welcome changes. But the problem for many with the Haw- thorne location is the location. It’s awkward, sandwiched among busi- nesses and a shopping area. Some of that is inevitable. A bus hub had better be buzzing with activity, or it means buses aren’t important to the community. The officials at Cascades East Transit — and the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council, which supervises it — are working, though, on a possible future without the Hawthorne location. Bend might have more of a decentralized system. Maybe more smaller hubs. More on-demand services rather than just fixed routes. Maybe just not a loca- tion at Hawthorne. Hawthorne could be a valuable piece of property because of its loca- tion. You could take that land, sell it and redevelop it into a mix of hous- ing and perhaps more. It’s in a sweet spot, positioned already near shop- ping and near the area of downtown the city is aiming to redevelop. You could live there and walk to many places you have to go. We have to imagine the neighboring businesses would much rather have that devel- opment rather than the bus station. Tammy Baney, the executive di- rector of COIC, told us the idea is being explored. Development ideas are being discussed. A new location is being hunted. One catch is the 20-year state grant signed on July 29, 2011, to help build the Hawthorne station. COIC couldn’t just sell the property, take the money and move. It would have to convince the Oregon Transpor- tation Commission the move was a great deal. Baney was previously the chair of that commission. She knows COIC would have to have a plan that would improve transit service and be better for the community. Then the OTC might OK it. Moving a transit hub from Haw- thorne isn’t a cure-all. Along with offering more on-demand services, it may win more approval for the bus system and turn more people on to using transit for getting around. Oregon’s vaccine lottery is definitely worth a shot G ov. Kate Brown’s plan for us- ing a lottery giveaway to en- courage more people to get the COVID-19 vaccine got praise and criticism. It may encourage some people to get vaccinated for a shot at the $1,000,000 grand prize or one of the $10,000 prizes awarded in each county. There’s even a special draw- ing for Oregon residents aged 12 to 17 who had a shot. There will be five $100,000 contributions to Oregon College Savings Plan accounts in their names. The Take Your Shot, Oregon cam- paign also was criticized for being wasteful and “the worst lottery odds in human history.” Actually the odds of winning the grand prize in Ore- gon’s vaccination lottery, while very small, are an order of magnitude better than winning any of the na- tional grand prize lotteries. The vaccine lottery is a prized- based social policy. It tries to feed off the lure of a lottery prize to give peo- ple a nudge to do something. Many people are eager to spend a few bucks or more every week to buy lot- tery tickets. There’s usually only an incremental chance of winning big. What the ticket buys is the opportu- nity to dream big. The lottery prize idea has been used as a way to encourage people to save money. Some people don’t have enough money set aside for emer- gency expenses. So what if you gave people a prize if they did ? Credit unions in Michigan joined forces to offer prizes to people who saved money and kept it there for a year. There were smaller prizes and a $100,000 grand prize. People wouldn’t necessarily lose anything and could win an outsize prize. Savings made exciting. Get- ting vaccinated made more excit- ing. What’s so wrong with that? Of course it would be better if such incentives weren’t necessary. And maybe they aren’t necessary. They don’t seem wasteful if they encour- age more people to save or help bring the pandemic to an end. My Nickel’s Worth Up in dust It was alarming to see on the front page of the June 5 Bulletin the dire sit- uation of Central Oregon farmers. Drought conditions prevail and will likely worsen. Wasteful water use and uneven distribution of water to our regional farmers continues and the needed water rights remedies may be years before enactment. The featured farmer in the story — Cate Havstad-Casad — offers an appealing alternative of regenerative farming. As explained in the doc- umentary, “Kiss The Ground,” this technique requires no plowing. Soil is held in place and regenerated by grasses and other cover crops, which hold water, add nutrients to the soil and increase the capacity for carbon dioxide absorption from the atmo- sphere. Why not reward and give assistance to farmers for implementing better water and soil conservation? All ben- efit when the farmers can succeed and make the changes needed for the current and future climate circum- stances. — Gail Sabbadini, Bend Dignity, equity and independence After reading about the diversity equity inclusion program which is be- coming popular in schools, I became a bit disturbed by the indoctrination attitude of it. To truly be successful it needs to be more educationally ori- ented. So I would substitute another DEI program that would reach the same goals with more lasting results: Letters policy 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. Letters should be limited to one issue, contain no more than 250 words and in- clude the writer’s signature, phone num- dignity equity independence. Diversity without dignity of the in- dividual or group is worthless. Diver- sity can be forced — dignity of our- selves and others must be taught from a very young age. Equity — what does that mean? It, too, seems to be something artifi- cially forced to bring about the goal of equality. Would it not be better to teach each child that no matter what, they are valuable individuals and equal to all others? Independence is very important to each of us. No one of any age wants to accept that they are victims of groupthink. Let the education of our children emphasize the importance of their original thoughts without forcing a way of thinking on them by shame. My thought of teaching dignity, equality and independence may be a slower way of reaching the goal of a healthy and happy citizenship, but it seems preferable to a forced, indoctri- nated, unhappy way of reaching that goal. — Carol Oxley, Redmond Failing the city Please do not stop the news and ed- itorial focus on how this City Council is failing not only the homeless citi- zens of Bend, but all of the residents of Bend who care about our collective welfare and livability of this city. They have time to discuss and pass an unenforceable resolution to pre- vent the railroads from transporting fuel through our city but are contin- ually failing to develop concrete op- tions that can save the lives of their fellow citizens! ber and address for verification. We edit letters for brevity, grammar, taste and legal reasons. We reject poetry, personal attacks, form letters, letters submitted Shame on all the members of the council and shame on the city staff for not doing their job of providing solid options for our homeless. They should consider reaching out to the Chinese government, which somehow builds using prefabricated modules to build completed hospitals in days. — Bill Gregoricus, Bend Gyms for housing Here’s a possible solution to the homeless problem you addressed in your Saturday editorial: With the school year winding down, there are multiple school gym- nasiums that could be turned into the kind of dorms that organizations like the Red Cross use to house people during housing emergencies. People housed there would have access to the restrooms and showers, and nu- tritious meals could be provided in the cafeterias. Otherwise-idle school buses could be used to transport the residents back and forth to the jobs that are currently going unfilled. Of course, in order to make this work there would have to be bans on drug, alcohol and tobacco use in the facilities, and the residents would ei- ther have to have a job or be actively looking for one. Some part of their wages would pay for their meals and housing. If the real cause of people living on the streets is the lack of af- fordable housing, this would solve it. But if the real causes are rampant drug and alcohol abuse and untreated mental heath problems, it would just be another “feel good” waste of time and money, and people would just move to new campsites. —Jeff Keller, Bend elsewhere and those appropriate for other sections of The Bulletin. Writers are limited to one letter or guest column every 30 days. Email: letters@bendbulletin.com Something is ‘simply, simply wrong’ at Biden Justice Department BY FRED RYAN The Washington Post D uring the final days of the Trump administration, the at- torney general used extraordi- nary measures to obtain subpoenas to secretly seize records of reporters at three leading U.S. news organizations. After this was reported last month, President Joe Biden rightly decried this attack on the First Amendment, calling it “simply, simply wrong” and assuring Americans that it would not happen in his administration. Unfortunately, new revelations suggest that the Biden Justice Depart- ment not only allowed these disturb- ing intrusions to continue — it inten- sified the government’s attack on First Amendment rights before finally backing down in the face of reporting about its conduct. After Biden took office, the depart- ment continued to pursue subpoe- nas for reporters’ email logs issued to Google, which operates the New York Times’ email systems, and it obtained a gag order compelling a Times at- torney to keep silent about the fact that federal authorities were seeking to seize his colleagues’ records. Later, when the Justice Department broad- ened the number of those permitted to know about the effort, it barred Times executives from discussing the legal battle with the Times news- room, including the paper’s top ed- itor. This escalation, on Biden’s watch, represents an unprecedented assault on American news organizations and their efforts to inform the public about government wrongdoing. Last month, The Post learned of secret subpoenas authorized by President Donald Trump’s outgo- ing attorney general to obtain email information and home, cell and of- fice telephone records of three Post reporters over a 3 1/2-month span in 2017. We immediately requested an explanation and answers to several questions from the Justice Depart- ment as well as a meeting with the at- torney general. To date, no answers have been pro- vided and the meeting has yet to take place. This delay is troubling. When asked about how the president’s as- surances can be squared with his Jus- tice Department’s behavior, White House press secretary Jen Psaki could offer no explanation. She subse- quently released a statement disavow- ing White House knowledge of the actions that appear to have continued for several months during Biden’s presidency. Throughout U.S. history, there have been inevitable differences be- tween news organizations seeking to shed light on government activity and government officials seeking to preserve confidentiality. As a society, we have become accustomed to these tensions. For the most part, they have been constructive and good for the health of our democracy. However, the egregious acts by the outgoing Trump Justice Department, and the apparent doubling down on them during the Biden administration, should alarm all Americans, regard- less of political persuasion. The First Amendment is not a spe- cial privilege of the press but, rather, a fundamental right protecting all Americans. It empowers citizens to hold their elected officials to account by ensuring that wrongdoing, even at the highest levels, will be brought to light. Much of this reporting would be impossible without courageous government employees who, after learning about serious misdeeds, im- proper programs conducted under the cloak of secrecy, or other actions contrary to America’s fundamental principles and national interests, take the risk of speaking to reporters in confidence to bring such conduct to the attention of their fellow citizens. Over the years, revelations by con- fidential government sources have informed Americans of serious mis- steps by our leaders and institutions that possess great power but little ac- countability. The sinister experiments at the Tuskegee Institute, the contro- versial interrogations at secret CIA prisons and dangerous lapses in the Secret Service’s protection of the pres- ident are just a few of the countless stories that emerged because govern- ment sources, trusting reporters to keep their identities secret, served the public’s right to know. Trump’s actions, and the expansion upon them during the Biden admin- istration, pose a grave threat to our ability as a nation to keep powerful officials in check. With the revelation that the Justice Department has se- cretly obtained phone and email re- cords at multiple news organizations to sniff out the identities of journal- ists’ sources, government employees who would otherwise come forward to reveal malfeasance are more likely to fear exposure and retaliation, and therefore to stay silent. Perhaps beginning to realize the seriousness of its errors, the Biden Justice Department released a state- ment Saturday asserting that it “will not seek compulsory legal process in leak investigations to obtain source information from the media doing their jobs.” While this is an encour- aging step, it does not guarantee that the Biden administration — or future administrations — will not resume these intrusive tactics. There must be clear and enduring safeguards to ensure that this brazen infringement of the First Amendment rights of all Americans is never repeated. The inconsistency between pres- idential words and Justice Depart- ment deeds dictates the need for full accountability and transparency re- garding the actions taken by the ex- iting Trump Justice Department and those of the incoming Biden admin- istration. A full accounting should be produced and released for the Ameri- can public to see. Anything less would be simply, simply wrong. e Fred Ryan is publisher of The Washington Post
