State
Blue Mountain Eagle
Wednesday, December 20, 2017
A9
Oregon plans to
Carols at the Capitol: ‘It
restores my faith in the future’ challenge repeal
of net neutrality
By Paris Achen
Capital Bureau
First-graders from Salem’s Crosshill
Christian School curl their arms into
wing shapes, flap around the rotunda of
the Oregon Capitol and belt out: “Three
French hens, two turtle doves and a par-
tridge in a pear tree.”
The class of nearly 20 first-graders is
among more than 500 students who are
performing Christmas carols at the Capi-
tol this holiday season.
The decades-long tradition has gained
such popularity that the Capitol’s Visitors
Services employees no longer have to
reach out to schools to book the perfor-
mances. School choir directors call each
year to claim their spot on the schedule.
“I remember singing here when I was
a child so it was fun to see my daughter
sing here,” said Danielle Johnston, moth-
er of Crosshill first-grader Parker John-
ston.
Surrounded by a magical scene of
Christmas trees and holiday adornment
in the rotunda, the choirs sing from
about 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Monday through
Saturday until Dec. 22. Parents, pass-
ersby and state employees fill audience
seats. Some state employees bring their
lunches to the rotunda so that they can
watch the performances during their
break.
“Our world is a chaotic place right
now,” said Robin Maxey, communica-
tions director for Senate President Peter
Courtney, D-Salem. “We see and hear a
lot more about the bad than the good in
it. To be able to see the joy of the sea-
son on the faces of these children and
teenagers every day gives me a lift. It
restores my faith in the future.”
Maxey keeps closed-circuit footage
of the performances switched on in his
office upstairs for most of the day.
The performances also are streamed
live online.
“Having it in office doesn’t compare
to being in the rotunda and actually
hearing them, but it’s a busy time of year
for us prepping for session so we can’t
always get out there,” Maxey said.
(The Oregon Legislature convenes
its policymaking session shortly after
By Paris Achen
Capital Bureau
Capital Bureau/Paris Achen
First-graders with their teacher, Colleen Andersson, from Salem’s Crosshill
Christian School sing “The Twelve Days of Christmas” in the rotunda of the
Oregon Capitol in Salem Dec. 12.
Capital Bureau/Paris Achen
The school choir performance
schedule at the Oregon Capitol in
Salem Dec. 12.
the holidays Feb. 5-March 9.)
Sherry Chandler of Visitors Services,
who schedules the choirs, sits at an in-
formation desk near the rotunda for the
most of the day. She said she never tires
of hearing the carols.
“The little ones have sweet, little
voices, and in the middle school and
high school choirs, there is very good
talent. Sometimes, you hear the same
carols over and over. This year, they
were mixing it up a little.”
The carolers bring a starkly differ-
ent scene to the Capitol, where during
other times of the year lawmakers may
bicker over bills and lobbyists pace the
halls.
“The kids aren’t wearing thou-
sand-dollar suits and lobbying for bad
causes,” quipped Arthur Towers, a lob-
byist for Portland-based Oregon Trial
Lawyers Association. “It’s heartwarm-
ing as opposed to heartbreaking.”
Scott Jorgensen, chief of staff for Sen.
Alan DeBoer, R-Ashland, said he got
sick of hearing Christmas music in his
past life as an employee at Fred Meyer,
where the music cycled constantly from
Thanksgiving to New Year’s.
“It’s different when the school kids
sing,” Jorgensen said. “I absolutely love
it. I think it’s easy to lose sight of how
special it is when you’re there every
day.
“Through the eyes of schoolchildren,
especially schoolchildren from the rural
parts of the state, it’s a really big deal to
be able to come to the Capitol. You can
see it on their faces how thrilled they
are. It really warms your heart to see the
groups of kids singing.”
Oregon Attorney Gen-
eral Ellen Rosenblum
said she plans to join
a lawsuit to challenge
the Federal Communi-
cations Commission’s
decision to repeal a rule
barring internet provid-
ers from blocking or
charging more for access
to one website over an-
other.
The FCC voted 3-to-2
along party lines to scrap
the rule approved by the
FCC in 2015. The commis-
sion’s two Democrats voted
against it.
“The decision today by
the FCC to reverse course
on net neutrality will have
lasting negative impacts for
our economy and almost
every aspect of our lives,”
Rosenblum said. “We all
rely on a free and open in-
ternet, and we will no longer
have an even playing field if
we start to incentivize Big
Cable over other compa-
nies.”
The vote came despite
calls from state attorneys
general, consumer advo-
cates, tech executives and
even some Republican law-
makers to postpone or can-
cel the decision.
Rosenblum spearheaded
a letter from 18 state attor-
neys general Tuesday to the
FCC urging them to delay
a vote until investigators
could determine whether
fraud was committed in the
FCC comment process.
New York Attorney Gen-
eral Eric Schneiderman’s
Office
has
been investi-
gating whether
commenters
to the FCC on
the proposed
rule change
Ellen
illegally used
Rosenblum the identities
of Americans
from around the country to
give feedback on net neu-
trality.
Schneiderman released
new information Wednes-
day that his office had iden-
tified a total of 2 million
fake comments on net neu-
trality to the FCC using sto-
len identities.
His office has a search
engine where residents can
look to see if their identi-
ty was used fraudulently in
comments.
Oregon is one of more
than a dozen states expected
to join New York in launch-
ing a legal challenge of
Thursday’s FCC decision.
“I’m proud to stand up
with other attorneys general
and join New York to peti-
tion for review,” Rosenblum
said.
Supporters of the rule
change argue that it will
benefit consumers by spur-
ring more competition be-
tween broadband providers
and cutting internet provid-
ers’ expenses.
FCC Commissioner Jes-
sica Rosenworcel, one of
the two FCC commissioners
who voted against the rule
change, told NPR’s “The
Takeaway” that half of U.S.
households have only one
choice for a broadband pro-
vider.
Measure 101 supporters, opponents clash in debate
By Claire Withycombe
Capital Bureau
Supporters and opponents
of Ballot Measure 101, which
could repeal part of Oregon’s
Medicaid funding plan, faced
off Wednesday in a debate at
the Multnomah Athletic Club.
Medicaid is a health care
coverage program joint-
ly funded by the state and
federal government serving
about 1 million Oregonians
through the Oregon Health
Plan.
A special election Jan.
23 concerns parts of a 2017
funding law. Particularly at
issue are provisions in the law
to increase federal Medicaid
matching funding by col-
lecting assessments from the
state’s hospitals, insurers and
coordinated care organiza-
tions — the regional networks
of providers serving Medicaid
patients.
A trio of Republican state
representatives successfully
petitioned to refer portions of
the law, including those provi-
sions, to the ballot.
Measure 101 will ask vot-
ers to either vote “yes,” to
keep all the provisions of the
bill; or “no,” to cut some of
them out.
Republican State Reps. Ju-
lie Parrish, of Tualatin/West
Linn, and Cedric Hayden, of
Roseburg, who referred the
issue to the ballot, spoke in
favor of repealing parts of the
law Wednesday.
Speaking on the oppo-
site side was Felisa Hagins,
political director of the Ser-
vice Employees International
Union Local 49, and Jessica
Adamson, director of govern-
ment affairs for Providence
Health and Services, who are
advocating to keep all of the
assessments.
Some takeaways from
Wednesday’s forum:
• Neither side wants to
cut people from Medicaid:
Both sides of the issue said
they didn’t want people on
Medicaid to lose health care.
Parrish and Hagins say they
grew up covered by Medicaid,
and Hayden, a dentist, serves
patients on the Oregon Health
Plan.
Hayden and Parrish largely
disagree with the Measure 101
supporters, though, on how it
ought to be paid for — and ar-
gue the state could find other
sources of funding.
Supporters of the measure
say that it took the last legisla-
tive session to get insurers and
Medicaid providers to agree
on a funding plan. They argue
the legislation’s mechanisms
are approved ways to collect
federal matching funds, which
pay the vast majority of Med-
icaid costs.
• Where could the money
from the taxes go? The two
sides disagree on whether the
funds generated by portions of
the legislation at issue can be
reverted to the state’s general
fund to pay for other things.
Parrish claims a legislative
counsel opinion from June
indicates that a 0.7 percent
assessment on net hospital rev-
enues could get swept to the
state’s general fund and used
for purposes other than health
care.
The “yes” side disagrees,
saying that the money collect-
ed from the assessment would
only go to health care, and that
a “sweep” to the general fund
requires separate legislation —
which is not an unprecedented
move.
• The insurance market:
The cost of insurance for those
not on Medicaid, which could
also be affected by the bal-
lot measure, came up during
Wednesday’s debate as well.
The law’s 1.5 percent tax
on gross premiums, or pre-
mium equivalents for public
employee health care plans, on
insurers is intended to fund a
reinsurance program that in-
sulates insurers from high-risk
claims that can drive up premi-
ums.
Proponents say it’s already
working, reducing 2018 pre-
miums by an average of 6 per-
cent.
However, petitioners want
to stop the tax on insurers,
because the law allows premi-
ums to increase by up to 1.5
percent to absorb the cost of
the tax.
They also argue that the
state could have preempted
the need for a reinsurance
market by enrolling the
state’s public employees in
coordinated care organiza-
tions or having the state buy
employees’ insurance on the
exchange — either of those
moves, they argue, would
dramatically increase the
risk pool and bring down
premiums.
Hagins, the SEIU pan-
elist, said that the Public
Employee Benefits Board
— which oversees health
care benefits for public em-
ployees — did a pilot proj-
ect that enrolled employees
in a coordinated care orga-
nization.
But, Hagins said, the CCO
was unable to contain rates to
the agreed level.
Committees are formal public bodies required to comply with
Oregon Public Meetings Law ORS 192.610.
30337
Eleven members
serve three year terms and meet semi-annually to provide guidance and
assistance to local OSU Extension staff in planning, developing, and
evaluating balanced educational programs directed to high priority
needs of county residents. Membership is limited to one re-appointment.
Vincent Raschio • 3rd/4th Grade, Humbolt
Merry Christmas
From
ORS 215.020. Nine members serve four year
terms and two alternates serve two year terms, meeting as needed to
review land use and zoning applications and discuss city and county
growth issues and the siting of new facilities. Members must be residents
of various geographic areas within the county and no more than two
voting members shall be engaged in the same kind of business,
occupation, trade or profession with agriculture designations of livestock
/ forage crop production and horticulture / specialty crop production.
Commissioners serving in this capacity must file an Annual Verified
Statement of Economic Interest with the Oregon Government Ethics
Commission. Members must re-apply to the County Court before their
term ends if they wish to be re-appointed.
Created by Resolution 1993-29. Nine
members serve three year terms and meet as needed to discuss issues
regarding big game management and make recommendations to
Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife, including tag allocation and
hunting season structure as they relate to population and damage of
property.
29696