Page 2
The INDEPENDENT, June 14,1995
».INDEPENDENT
Serving the upper Nehalem River valley. Published
twice monthly on the second and fourth Wednesdays of
each month, by Public Opinion Laboratory Ltd., 1206
S ta te A venue, V ernonia, OR 97064, as a free
new spaper. E ditors and P ublishers, Dirk & Noni
Andersen, (503) 429-9410.
AMERICAN WORKING
O F
* CAtAHfi/G A LIVING -
Recall unfortunate,
Hugo should resign
Columbia County Commissioner Bruce Hugo has
forced the taxpayers to spend about $13,000 on a re
call election because he sees no reason why he
should resign after admitting that he used a county
credit card for cash advances for gambling. The
$13,000 is a lot more money than he admitted misus
ing, but both situations contain the element of choice.
Part of Hugo’s defense is that he made a mistake
and should be forgiven, but he ignores something
very important. He had a choice and his choice was
to take money illegally. Then he compounded that be
havior by choosing to instruct the county accountant
that his charges should be paid-without proper docu
mentation.
Now he has chosen to use more tax money in an
attempt to retain his $43,000 position.
Every choice has shown how little regard he has
for either the people who elected him, or for the office
he holds.
Another of Hugo’s defenses is that he has an ad
diction to gambling, but is now getting treatment for
his addiction. Is addiction a justification for breaking
the law? Is addiction a justification for behaving irre
sponsibly?
The claim of addiction seems to be very popular, as
long, that is, as people ignore the obvious: It’s only
another self-serving excuse for lack of personal re
sponsibility.
The third part of Hugo’s defense is that the people
of Columbia County need him because he’s such a
great commissioner and has done so many wonderful
things for the county.
There is no doubt that Hugo is an intelligent per
son; that isn’t the question, even though he hasn’t
done as much as he claims credit for. The question
is: Can the people of this county afford a smart com
missioner who admits to theft and misuse of his office
for personal gain?
Holding public office isn’t easy, but no one forced
Hugo to seek the position and no one forced him to
gamble and no one forced him to instruct the accoun
tant to pay his personal debts.
Also facing Hugo, no matter what happens in the
election, is the investigation underway in the Oregon
Government Ethics Commission.
Bruce Hugo has lost his ability to be a leader in this
county because he lost sight of his responsibility to
the people of this county. Yet, in his arrogance, he
claims the people need him at the helm.
No one is indispensible and the voters should recall
Hugo.
Fire season is soon here
A brief reminder may be in order because the
weather has been wet enough to let us forget that fire
season starts Friday. Starting Friday, June 16, back
yard burning will be illegal and permits will be needed
for any outdoor burning.
If you have any questions, please contact your fire
district office. Let’s keep Oregon green.
7M T
/S
TAÌKs I/
| | t e f i » à | . Report
By Hep. TimJosi
Oregon Representative, District 2
Education has been a hotly debated topic
this legislative session. Regardless of where
one is on the political spectrum there seems
to be a pervasive belief that our public educa
tional system is failing to produce citizens who
are prepared for the demands of the future.
Some believe that we should concentrate on
teaching the “basics”, while others believe a
broader approach to learning is necessary.
There are even those who believe that our
public system of education has deteriorated
so far that it is not salvagable. These groups
have introduced legislation that would permit
public tax dollars to be spent on voucher pro
grams at public or private schools and on the
formation of charter schools.
Before we, as citizens and taxpayers, make
a decision to allow public money to fund these
types of programs, we need to examine sever
al fundamental issues. Our country has pros
pered over our short history for a number of
reasons, one is our public education system,
from which any person with the aptitude and
desire could graduate with a high school de
gree. It has been a major part of the “melting
pot” process for our society, as each succes
sive immigrant population learned our com
mon heritage and language there. It has also
been the place where we have rubbed el
bows, rich and poor, abled and disabled, bril
liant and not so brilliant. It is the place where,
hopefully, we continue to learn tolerance for
differences, while building pride in our national
identity.
I am not proposing that being taught in a
private school is un-American. However, is it
in the public interest to provide tax money for
programs over which we have little or no con
trol? If we give money in the form of vouchers
to private religious school pupils we are, in ef
fect, promoting certain religious views. The
public also has no input on who may or may
not attend private schools or what is taught in
their curriculum. Everyone has the right to at
tend our public schools and society asks that
they take advantage of that right. The decision
to send a child to private school is a choice, a
p rivile g e . Should taxp aye rs support that
choice monetarily?
Charter schools are being prom oted as
non-religious based “public schools” that will
create competition for the traditional public
school system. The idea is that if enough peo
ple establish their own schools this will spur
public schools to provide a better education to
their pupils. If we have a major flight from pub
lic schools to private and charter schools
— who have control over their pupil selec
tio n — w hat we w ill end up w ith in pu blic
schools will be students who were not “cho
sen” for these special schools. This population
will be comprised of high maintenance chil
dren: the poor, the learning disabled, the be
havior problems, and the unmotivated.
It is not right, just, or in our collective good
to do this. We must put our energy and tax
money into improving our public schools so all
may benefit to the greatest degree.
The Oregon House of Representatives vot
ed this month to recriminalize the possession
of less than an ounce of marijuana, so people
arrested for this offense would be charged
with a Class A misdemeanor. The fine would
be at least $100 per gram, but not more than
$5,000 total.
As with so much legislation that has come
before us this session, this bill represents the
will of just a few people in the state. However,
because of political game playing, this bill not
only reached the House floor, it was passed.
To begin with, the bill was run through the
House and Senate Rules Committee after the
regular committees that would normally dis
cuss the bill had been shut down for the ses
sion. It was sent through Rules with little no
tice or a full public hearing. This was done be
cause two bills of similar nature had failed to
be passed out of the Crimes and Corrections
subcommittee, after close scrutiny by commit
tee members and public hearings determined
them to be neither necessary nor desirable.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Jerry Grisham, R-
Beavercreek, wants to send a message to
O regonians regarding m arijuana use. He
claims that marijuana is not the same drug it
was in 1973 when possession was decrim
inalized. He believes that marijuana has be
come much stronger, and that people are risk
ing future involvement with more dangerous
drugs if they are not kept, by law, from using
Please see page 5