|
Insider
Baseball : The Best We Can Do?: A pox on both
our houses.
Viewpoint
: Voice of Dissent: Barbara Lee' gutsy stand
honored.
Letters:
EW readers sound off.
The
Best We Can Do?
A
pox on both our houses.
My column this week is the ultimate "insider baseball":
my floor speech in the Senate Aug. 15 on the "school funding shift."
Mr. president and colleagues: I ask you today to
sustain the governor's vetoes. But, in actuality, I'm raising
the white flag. You Republicans have won, I doubt I can convince you
to put aside your hatred of Dr. No, your relentless attacks on the
governor. But my remarks and criticisms are for both parties.
With all due respect to my friend, the good senator
from Ashland, the governor has been consistent throughout: Pay as
you go, no one-time fixes.
As an aside, I would be surprised if we have enough
votes to actually override these vetoes. After all, most of you Republicans
actually voted against your own Republican leadership and against
the very bills whose vetoes you threaten to override today. But as
one of my learned Republican colleagues once said: Consistency is
the hobgoblin of the small mind.
I rise to tell you that the Senate Democratic leadership
has failed the citizens of Oregon. Democrats have lost their voice,
that of the loyal opposition, by conspiring with the Republicans.
Bleeding heart liberals out to save the world have made Oregon a worse
place.
One of our Republican Senate colleagues was bragging
recently to a House Democrat that the Republicans have a win-win situation
here: If we sustain the vetoes, the Republicans will blame the governor
for the cuts to schools. If we override the vetoes it will prove that
Democrats agree with the Republicans that this was the best we can
do. Give me a break! If we sustain the Governor's vetoes — even
the august members of the Oregonian and Register-Guard
editorial boards agree — apparently no one in the state disagrees:
that this is a bad budget. At least we could give Oregon voters a
chance to weigh in on this. If the public doesn't want to pay for
schools, for community colleges, for universities, for seniors, the
disabled, kids-at-risk — then let them say so. But why not give
them the chance? If anyone in this chamber thinks that it's politically
feasible for the Republican leadership to underfund schools to the
tune of $317 million — if the vetoes are sustained — they're
suffering from smoke inhalation, they're whistling through the graveyard,
and they'll suffer even worse in November.
Let me tell you, Oregonians
are really mad at all of us right now. Both parties. A recent
poll of motivated voters in the Portland area — without partisan
separation — unilaterally condemned our Legislature. Our approval
rating was right down there with Enron executives. Only 20 percent
approval. Not just Republicans, not just Democrats — it was
a pox on both our houses. Oregonians are right: We failed.
I've publicly criticized my own Democratic leadership
for cooperating with the Republicans to produce a bad result: $600
million in one-ime theft of every piggy bank in the state —
for one-time money to solve an $850 million shortfall is atrocious
public policy, parties aside. It leaves us with a huge hole in the
next biennium. Even the Irish with their bad math skills know this
is a bogus business practice.
If nothing else, I've been consistent in my criticism,
starting from the first special session. From the get-go I've said
that this is a Republican problem. You've had eight years of control
of both chambers and have not produced a long-term solution to adequate
education funding — from pre-kindergarten to community colleges
to our universities. From the first special session, I've insisted
that Democrats should not supply the votes for bad public policy —
untenable cuts to seniors, the disabled, children at-risk, working
families, small businesses, and our education system — while
granting corporate welfare tax breaks.
Our Democratic leaders did it anyway. But, as the
bumper sticker says: That was Zen, this is Tao. With the vetoes before
you, any hope of dealing realistically with the budget shortfall goes
up in smoke along with the Biscuit fire.
Soon, voters will face a clone of the recently
defeated Ballot Measure 13 in September: this is perhaps the most
instructive example. Oregonians will be asked to sacrifice 7,000 need
grants for income-eligible Oregon college kids who attend Oregon's
public colleges and universities for a one-time payment to K-12. The
Education Endowment Fund was originally placed in the Oregon Constitution
by former Senate President Gordon Smith so that greedy legislators
could not get their hands on the corpus of that fund the first time
they needed it. The current Republican leaders ignored their own guy.
What more can I say? Stealing from one group of Oregon citizens, our
needy college students, for a one-time fix another needy group —
our K-12 kids — is truly robbing Peter to pay Paul.
The Republican legislative leadership has proven itself
fundamentally incapable of dealing with this problem during the best
of times and now they say they can't solve it during the worst of
times. That doesn't leave many alternatives, does it colleagues? If
not you, who? If not now, when?
I ask you for once: do what's right. Do what another
Republican leader, Governor Vic Atiyeh did in an earlier economic
crisis: Face the facts. Vic did it, why can't you?
For one day, one vote, forget your partisan rancor,
and forget the weak Democrats who sold out for an easy election-year
result. Veto the shift, veto the bonding.
The Oregonian editorial board recently threw
in with the right-wing of the Oregon Republican Legislature, lamenting
the governor's final days as a Shakespearean tragedy ("… Portland
legislators should lead the way in voting to override the governor's
budget vetoes," Aug. 10). There is a Shakespearean tragedy here, but
it's not of the governor's making. Here's some more Shakespeare for
you, from King Lear:
"We have seen the best of our times. Machinations,
hollowness, treachery and all ruinous disorders follow us disquietly
to our graves."
Let us not be marked with this black spot on this
legislative body. Let us do what is right.
[Note: In the end, seven Democrats voted with me to
sustain the governor; six voted along with the Republicans to override:
22-7 was the final result.]
Sen. Tony Corcoran of Cottage Grove represents portions
of Lane and Douglas counties in the newly formed Senate District 4,
which now includes the UO area. He can be reached at corcoran.sen@state.or.us
Back to Top
Voice
of Dissent
Barbara
Lee' gutsy stand honored.
BY KITTY PIERCY
Congresswoman Barbara Lee (Oakland, Calif.) is coming
to Eugene this Sunday, Aug. 25 to accept the 2002 Wayne Morse Integrity
in Politics Award. This award honors an elected official who, like
the late Senator Morse, demonstrates integrity and independence in
politics, even at great political cost. Rep. Lee was chosen for this
award by three national scholars because of her gutsy vote against
the congressional resolution that approved the administration's "war
on terrorism."
In a time when most politicians feared challenging
a presidential request, Rep. Lee spoke out about her concern for the
future of this country and the larger world community. She said she
felt the resolution "was a blank check to the president to attack
anyone involved in the Sept. 11 events without regard to our nation's
long-term foreign policy, economic and national security interest
and without time limit."
Her vote met with harsh criticism even though it exemplified
a high level of honest patriotism and a strong sense of international
responsibility. It stands out because most political voices have been
carefully absent from public discourse about the "war on terrorism."
Since then, U.S. citizens have been incarcerated without
access to legal representation or the legal process. Civil liberties
have been eroded in the name of wartime need. Our country stands on
the brink of attacking Iraq. Now even Republican leaders are emboldened
to question the wisdom of such an invasion and at what cost. Bush
supporters back in Texas are reportedly asking if our government really
intends a non-ending series of attacks on all countries we disagree
with.
Lee's lone vote reminds many of us of a time when
no one spoke out against another war, the war in Vietnam. Americans
backed their presidents and asked few questions. Then two men in Congress
spoke out. They voted no. They were Ernest Greuning of Alaska and
Wayne Morse of Oregon. Morse paid a heavy price for his stand on Vietnam,
ending in political defeat. Morse said, " I will exercise an independence
of judgement based on the evidence of each issue. I will weigh the
views of my constituents and party, but cast my vote free of political
pressure and unmoved by threats of loss of political support."
His leadership remains bright in our memories. In
recent months, commentaries have linked Lee with Morse when they ask,
where is the voice of dissent? Many will celebrate Lee's award Sunday
but don't count on seeing many public officials brave enough to welcome
the gentle congresswoman from California.
Rep. Lee will give a public talk at 3 pm Sunday at
the UO Law School. Kitty Piercy is a former state representative and
currently public affairs director of Planned Parenthood Health Services
of Southwestern Oregon. She also serves on the Wayne Morse Historical
Park Board.
SHARING
BATHROOMS
There is something outrageous
being proposed in Eugene. Now, being from the Bay Area, and involving
myself in the modeling world of San Francisco means that I qualify
as a person with exposure to both colorful gender issues and tolerance
of such issues.
I, myself, am a very tolerant person. I've argued
for equality in health care for gay couples, and I've danced in front
of the S.F. City Hall during the Gay Rights Parade. I've seen cross-dressers,
I've seen men holding hands, and I've been exposed to a lot of literature
about sexual tolerance, both in schools and off campus. But how far
can I be wrestled into "tolerance" of something that is bizarre, potentially
dangerous, and disturbing?
Why can't men piss in their own bathrooms? Instead
of arguing for other's rights, gay, bi or straight, I am going to
argue for myself. Call me selfish, but I don't want to share the bathroom
with Joe Schmoe the transgender barber — I don't care if his
stilettos do match the Moschimo evening gown from this fall's collection.
I'm concerned about my safety, and the safety of all women and little
girls who use public restrooms.
Women are hunted in today's society. We have to be
careful walking down the street at dusk, we carry pepper spray on
hikes, we have to watch our drinks. Unless there's some sort of discriminatory
"bathroom pass," that says, "Yes, I am an actual transgender individual,"
who's to stop any transgender poser from waltzing in and attacking,
raping or kidnapping a little girl using the potty? Who's to stop
the abusive boyfriend from chasing his girlfriend into the ladies
stall — a place she used to go for escape?
Who's going to stop sick people from dressing up and
loitering for the ladies — must we also have police in the rest
rooms, dusting our coats and drying our hands? Must we have safety
buttons, to be pushed in case of an emergency?
I am ready to be tolerant. I read about women fighting
for their rights to kiss other women and be respected. I believe in
breastfeeding in public. I will protest and be arrested for gay rights,
the environment, and anything else that I feel strongly infringes
on the liberty and safety of others. Thus, I strongly take a stand
— for myself. I would like to be respected with the right to
have a ladies rest room stay that way. I would like the right to let
my little girl use the park bathroom without scoping it out for "strange
men." I would like the right to ask transgender individuals, straight,
gay or bi, to be tolerant of women's rights.
Paige Lehmann
LCC student
ERODING
EDUCATION
Gov. Kitzhaber was absolutely
right to veto the two education spending bills presented to him last
month by the state Legislature. House Republicans think that using
tricky accounting practices and borrowing from future education revenue
to solve current budget shortfalls are sound policy. And they proclaim
that the governor's vetoes are "stunningly irresponsible." Yet anyone
who is paying attention can see what is really happening: under the
current Republican leadership, our state school system is being systematically
eroded. Perhaps we should consider the possibility that this has been
their real goal all along.
Whether intended or not, this year's Enron-style accounting
methods and theft of future revenues amount to another step toward
the eventual destruction of our public schools. By vetoing the two
spending bills, our governor is trying to stop that from happening.
He should be applauded for his courage.
Just as the leadership at Enron and WorldCom have
done to their companies, the Republican leadership in Salem is driving
our school system into the ground. It is they who are stunningly irresponsible.
If you want leadership that understands the value of public education,
please work to elect Democrats to our state Legislature this November.
Vincent Mulier
Springfield
KITZ
A COWARD
It's too bad — I was just getting
to (almost) like Oregon. But the effect of Gov. Kitzhaber's recent
veto (SB 1022) is sending me packing — I'm off to find a teaching
job in pastures which, while perhaps not as green, are more honest.
Many would like us to believe that Gov. Kitzhaber's
veto is a courageous move — doing what no one else will do to
improve the picture of funding for education in Oregon. My question
is this: Since the problem has been brewing for years, and he's (supposedly)
so courageous, why did he wait until it could have no affect on his
personal political career?
It's because this is the move of a coward, not a courageous
man. One of the popular arguments in support of his veto is that it
will take a "train wreck" — complete devastation of the Oregon
education system — to get the voter's to pay attention. A courageous
man would have put his own job in that train wreck —
not hundreds of other people's, as well as the education of our children.
In (futile) search of an honest politician,
Judith McKenzie
Eugene
NO
STRINGS ATTACHED
For months, I and thousands of others
in the Northwest have been anxiously awaiting old-growth protection
legislation that Sen. Ron Wyden has been working on. Last week, I
was shocked to see what was finally revealed, and many working to
protect the last of our old-growth forests had their worst nightmare
come true: Eastside forests in Washington, Oregon and all of Idaho
would be the sacrificial lamb in the effort to protect forests 120
years and older on the west side. Worse yet, public participation
in the planning of these eastside sales would be curtailed. Old-growth
protection or old-growth sell out?
The public, regional scientists and economists have
called for an end to the logging of our remaining mature and old-growth
forests, for the health of the land and the recovery of species nearly
gone forever. There is a practical alternative out there: planning
timber sales in younger managed stands. According to the Conservation
Biology Institute in 2001, there were nearly 1.7 million acres of
tree plantations 30-80 years old on the west side of the Cascades.
If we want to talk about employment potential, this is a great place
to start. When the BLM and Forest Service continue to plan sales in
mature and old-growth forests, they will continue to create the gridlock
they are so opposed to.
Ron Wyden needs to step up and offer the legislation
that the majority of the public has been demanding: the end of mature
and old-growth logging, and more importantly, with no eastside strings
attached.
Josh Laughlin
Eugene
GOT
IT GOOD
Your greed reeks, Mr. Castle (8/8).
Are you under the assumption that you are the only person within this
area with bills to pay? You are aware that this is a college town,
many of these "young people" to whom you refer are also paying off
student loans as well as domestic and other bills.
I have had the pleasure of working within the service
industry three years ago in Colorado. Colorado does things a little
different; you only work for tips because the minimum wage for servers
was $2.35 an hour, just enough to pay Uncle Sam. I know here in Oregon
you are making $6.50 an hour.
I cannot stress the fact that you have it much better
than you think. An average night can yield you over $10 an hour, that's
counting your $6.50 an hour pay check. Many of these "young people"
only make $6.50 an hour — anything but substantial — and
you're saying what they have to give is not enough?
Nathan Pruitt
Eugene
OWING
FAVORS
OK, so the campaign finance reform
measure didn't make the ballot for various undemocratic reasons. For
one, you must be an ACTIVE registered voter, which means you must
re-register if you move, or your signature will be invalid if you
sign petitions. Then there is the subtraction of 400 signatures for
every duplicate found.
We are not going away. We're going to do it again.
But this time let's do it different. I'm tired of the Margaret Mead
quote of the small group doing all the work to change the world —
let's make it to a LARGE group of committed citizens. If all the people
and organizations that endorsed the initiative would fill out five
sheets, we could get this thing done in record time.
The corruption in government by big corporations is
more apparent now than ever before; it's time to stand up and do something
about it! Our precious citizens' initiative process is being undermined,
and frankly, I don't trust our legislators — and I bet they
wouldn't mind not owing "favors" to big money either. They might sleep
better at night.
Pam Driscoll
Eugene
RAISING
STATUES
Concerning Martin Henner's letter
("Joint Promotion," 8/8): how dare EW support the Em's, and
how dare the Em's charge admission and sell concessions? I
suppose that if I go to the Bijou and buy popcorn, another
local business suffers that much more. And don't mention what happens
when I get thirsty at the Hult Center.
I'm not a sports fan, and I'll probably never attend
a game. However, I realize that the Em's are a much-loved part of
the community that many people are happy to support. I think it would
behoove people like Henner to cut the self-centered whining and accept
it.
Eugene is filled with wonderful independently owned
businesses that I'm happy to support, but I'm tired of owners (not
to mention musicians, artists, etc.) who expect us to raise statues
in their honor. Yes, you all are a big part of what makes this place
so special, but sometimes we have other things happening in our lives.
Maybe we want to unwind with a quiet night in, or
maybe (gasp!) we want to take in a ball game.
Kris Bluth
Eugene
EXECS
ARE NO ANGELS
Am I the only one who found Jim Carlson's
response to the anonymous letter concerning Angel Jones a little bit
disturbing? Launching a witch hunt to locate the letter writer! Wouldn't
we all like to know what would prompt a city employee to write such
a letter? Why would such a letter be so offensive if the alleged offenses
were not true in whole or in part? Wouldn't we like to see him ask
his departments to promote teamwork and a healthy work environment?
No, he launches an investigation empowering city managers and employees
to become suspicious of friends and co-workers. This fulfills the
fears of the letter writer and proves the city executives are not
as innocent as they would like us to think they are.
Why would Carlson warn off councilors against conferring
with city employees? What gives Carlson the right to run a dictatorship
over access to city employees by the council? The councilors were
elected to run the city by the average citizen using taxpayer dollars.
Being the spouse of a city employee that works under
the Angel Jones regime, I am decidedly for making some serious changes.
There is an undercurrent of a Southern good ol' boy attitude among
management in the city. Please write your union. Call your mayor.
Let's get these issues out in the open so, as a city, we can flush
this inappropriate behavior and get on with providing the services
we are there to provide.
Cliff Farley
Springfield
CANINE
FRENZY
Regarding the "Feral Frenzy" article (8/15):
As a cat lover who can't keep a cat because of a previous commitment
to a large dog that has the wrong kind of fascination with felines,
I'd like to ask if there is any room for a follow-up story on the
effects that feral/free-roaming/stray animals can have on creatures
other than overly sensitive humans.
Dogs allowed to roam have had a negative effect on
the delicate sensibilities of human neighbors and their desire to
keep a nice lawn, but these dogs can also have an influence on the
lives of other animals by spreading disease, fighting, stalking and
sometimes killing wild birds or mammals, cats — and lest we
forget — livestock.
Feral cats have a "right" to life as a domestic animals,
but their freedom shouldn't require that wild birds and mammals adapt
to survive a species introduced by humans.
Just look at the effects that dogs, cats, goats, rats,
pigs and other assorted domesticated animals have had on island populations
of wild animals. Wild species of birds, mammals, reptiles, etc. are
on the brink of extinction because of their inability to evolve in
the face of the human introduction of new species. Is it the fault
of any of the "free" domestic animals? No, the fault lies with the
misguided and sometimes irresponsible liberty given to animals like
our very domesticated pets so that we can enjoy a little slice of
"wild" in our yards.
I appreciate the efforts of organizations like TNR
(Trap-Neuter-Release), but I wonder if its supporters would be as
interested in funding studies on the destruction strays can cause
because of our selfish interest in seeing these animals roam "free."
Todd Dunkirk
Seal Rock
MAKE
IT TREASON
I believe that it is time to introduce
legislation that would make certain white collar crimes fit a new
definition of treason. This would be a civil definition of treason
resulting in no jail time, and it would be in addition to any other
penalties, but would result in the loss of U.S. citizenship and being
expelled from the U.S.
This statute may never be used, but it could be a
tremendous deterrent to white collar crime. After all, everything
is a matter of degree. A little fraud can be dealt with by existing
statutes but massive fraud needs another penalty. At this time, with
all of the other white collar crime coming to the surface, who is
going to vote against this legislation?
If every country in the world adopted similar legislation,
the white collar criminals may finally get the message.
Frank Skipton
Veneta
FLAMING
FORESTRY
Yet another news article (R-G,
8/9, "Thinning of forests, use of fire supported") about the state
and federal forestry wish to use what will be called the Flame Thrower
Method of forest management.
The same old, tired and failed-in-practice statements
about how the Native Americans used fire on the old forests (not in
five-mile backfires, the Natives like to have some game still alive
to hunt), then there is the ever-popular concept of an "open" forest
with spaces between the trees. Anyone with any brains and having spent
even one vacation in any forest knows that it is sunlight on the forest
floor that causes undergrowth to flourish, and that is the stuff that
burns first.
So, the problem is: Just where did the federal and
state forestry get these alleged "new ideals?" They got them from
very small, war-torn countries in Europe. Yes, we are talking about
former Nazi Germany that destroyed its forests gifting the world not
only one but two world wars. It is the mechanical German method of
forestry care that is being used in a war against nature and every
living thing in the forests of the U.S. The "benefit" is to log every
four old-growth trees around any "save" tree, as well as to continue
to steal the former funds that used to be used to fight fire as well
as plant new trees in the logged areas.
How badly does the government want this? They will
burn your home and the innocent animals in the forest to get it.
You are nobody, nothing, compared to this misconstrued
hunger. Shut up, suffer; you're a terrorist if you don't comply. You
will comply.
Daniel J. Moore
Former Assistant Fire Chief,
California Division of Forestry
Springfield
LEARN
TO SCROUNGE
Prof. Greg McLauchlan (Viewpoint, 8/8) argues
that a living wage would "provide a 'no frills' budget for a working
parent with one child that comes to $23,500 a year, still well below
the national average of $32,000." Heck, my hillbilly mama raised six
of us on less than that (in present dollars). This is not an income
problem, it's a budgetary problem.
I will be glad to show a single mother with one kid
how to make it on $15,000 a year, frills included. Part of the bargain
will be a healthy diet and a physical activity regimen. All I ask
is that you turn off the TV and start going to the library. In return,
I'll teach you how to precycle, recycle and scrounge your way through
the system.
The professor might consider accepting a salary —
donated by the taxpayers — of $23,000 a year. That would help
to lower the national average if he's concerned with it. He might
also consider that on the morning the Berlin Wall came down, the people
prying apart the monstrosity had the sun to their backs.
Tom Tracey
Eugene
LETTERS POLICY: We welcome letters on all topics
and will print as many as space allows. Please limit length to 250 words,
keep submissions to once a month, and include your address and phone
number. E-mail to editor@eugeneweekly.com,
fax to 484-4044, or mail to 1251 Lincoln, Eugene 97401.
Back to Top
Table
of Contents
| News | Views | Arts & Entertainment
Classifieds | Personals
| EW
Archive
|