Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in October 2023

Can he do it?

Can he do it?

October 31, 2023

O.K.

So we have a Speaker of the House. I'll give you that.

Question is, for how long? Six months? Three months? Two? One?

No one knows at this juncture. But, given the history of the far right in all things political, the honeymoon may be short-lived. Words like "constancy" and "lengthy service" are not often attached to their doings.

Mike Johnson is the poster boy for all things extremist. He's had a fair to middling career on the bank benches. Not often raising his voice, sort of going with the flow. Especially if that flow has been to the right.

But, here's the thing. If he's to be Speaker, he has to be Speaker for the whole House. Not just the 40 or so cretins of the right. He may tilt that way in speech or thought. But, in the end, those of the opposite political persuasion have to be included in the workings of the House, too. That means, he'll have to moderate a bit.

Now, if there's one thing the right flank can't stand it's moderation.
Even the smallest movement to the middle. "Our way or the highway." "You're with us or you're 'agin us."

Even Newt Gingrich, with his "take no prisoners" politics, found he had to compromise here and there. While his career was nothing to write home about, he at least survived his turn "in the barrel" with his scalp intact.

If Johnson "moderates," will he be accused of "selling out?" Will a move toward the middle be viewed as "traitorous?" Will he find himself on the outside of the cabal looking in?

Then, there's new relationships with the President and the Senate to contend with. While Mr. Johnson might hold far right positions on such issues as abortion, he's got to work with the other two branches of government who are not as hidebound as himself. Can he do that?

If he doesn't move leftward, he won't have much cooperation from the folks at the other end of political life. Like Democrats. Remember, the GOP margin in the house is about four votes.

Mr. Johnson is going to have to do some soul searching. Does he really want the job and all the accouterments there-with? Or, would he rather enjoy the peace and quiet that've been the hallmark of his career thus far?

A former Idaho Governor used to say: "It's easier standing outside the circle, throwing the spears in, than it is to be on the inside catching 'em."

Johnson might enjoy a bit of a honeymoon with Democrats lying low for a short period. And, with the right-wing of his own Party holding it's fire for awhile.

But, sooner or later, he's going to be put to the test. Remember, it was Republicans who introduced this idea of Speaker recall by just a handful of voices in the House. So, when that test comes - and it will - will Johnson survive?

Words like "stable," and "permanent," and "moderate" are highly to be desired in the new Speaker. Those adjectives certainly don't describe the political roots from whence Johnson came. Far from it.

So, Mike Johnson could have some tough times ahead as he tries to be Speaker for all 434 House members. A job he can't successfully do if he tries to simply hang onto his previous political leanings.

I don't know who would want the job. But, I wish him well.

 

Stepping up

Stepping up

October 30, 2023

Dorothy Moon, the chair of the Idaho Republican Party, has been attacking Congressman Mike Simpson for his refusal to support Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) for Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Simpson responded in typical fashion, saying, “I will not take Chairwoman Moon’s ill-advised input when I have been fighting for Idaho longer than she has lived in the state.” As usual, he speaks the truth.

In his response, Simpson pointed out that Jordan has “repeatedly taken positions against Idaho’s best interests” in Congress. He criticized Jordan’s continuous opposition to funding for the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in Eastern Idaho, his repeated votes against the Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) program that is so vital to many of Idaho’s rural counties, his opposition to full funding of wildfire suppression, his opposition to every Farm Bill and his repeated votes against funding of Gowen Field, Mountain Home Air Force Base and “overall pay raises for our troops.”

As leader of the House Freedom Caucus, which he founded with Raul Labrador and several other far-right Congressmen in 2015, Jordan has also rallied support for these positions that are contrary to Idaho’s interests. They joined together to oppose the Affordable Care Act, INL funding and the PILT program. Simpson challenged their opposition to the PILT program in 2015, saying: “This kind of bill represents exactly what the American people want to see out of their elected representatives. They want us to fix problems, not to shout across the aisle and point fingers.”

There were many other valid reasons to keep Jordan as far away from the Speaker’s chair as possible. The claim that Jordan “turned a blind eye” to sexual abuse of athletes at Ohio State when he served there as a wrestling coach from 1986 to 1994 speaks volumes. A report commissioned by the university disclosed that 177 athletes had been abused over a number of years, but Jordan did not see fit to report it.

In addition to his apparent moral failings, Jordan has refused to abide by important principles of our constitutional government. He has steadfastly refused to acknowledge that Joe Biden was elected as President of the United States in 2020. There is absolutely no credible evidence to support Jordan’s fanatical position. Every court that has considered the issue has turned away challenges to the election. Even the three Trump-appointed Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court joined with the others in turning away appeals by Trump, Jordan and their allies. It is hard to imagine a Speaker who would put his own distorted beliefs over the considered findings of America’s judiciary.

On the other hand, Simpson has shown himself to be courageous when it comes to putting the interests of the nation over the self-serving interests of far-right extremists like Jordan. In 2010, I watched Mike forcefully defend his 2008 vote to fund the government bailout of the economy at a GOP meeting in Soda Springs where the audience was clearly against the bailout. He’s not a wishy-washy kind of guy.

Although I have often been confounded by votes or stands taken by Mike on a variety of issues, he then comes through with another vote or stand that reinforces the fact that he is the most effective, level-headed member of Idaho’s Congressional delegation. He protected the magnificent White Clouds. He is the only member of the delegation who has advanced a plan that has the potential to save our remarkable runs of salmon and steelheads from extinction–removal of the four federal dams on the lower Snake River. He knew he would take massive heat for his proposal, but went forward anyway, believing it to be the right thing to do.

The criticism by Moon and her cohorts is uninformed and wrongheaded. It could be that Moon is unfamiliar with Simpson’s record on issues of importance to Idaho because she is too busy churning out nonsense on fake culture war issues. Whatever the problem, she and her followers should settle down, study the real issues confronting the state, and join those of us who appreciate Mike.

 

The numbers and party attitudes

The numbers and party attitudes

October 29, 2023

The midway point between the midterm election of 2022 and the presidential election of 2024 makes for a useful benchmark for examining the hardest political numbers, outside of actual elections, Oregon has to offer: Its voter registration statistics.

They tell a story of rise and fall, but not between Democrats and Republicans: Rather, between those willing to identify with a party and those who are not.

Overall, Oregon voter registration over the last five years has been growing steadily, in line with the population and maybe beyond that – from October 2018 to now it grew 8.4% – to just under three million people statewide  or 2,999,871 to be exact. Picking numbers from monthly reports in October or September of each year avoids upticks in the parties from people who only temporarily switch to vote in a contested primary, and comes before the point when general election ballots are sent out.

Even then, the growth has not been even, and some categories of voters showed sharp declines.

Part of the political story of 2024 will be told in how that roller coaster is shaped next.

All of Oregon’s counties except the smallest, Wheeler, grew their voter registrations over the last five years, but some much more than others. The three fastest were Crook, Jefferson and Morrow, not among the top suspects for developing big electorates. Because of their small sizes, they don’t change the picture drastically. Oregon’s largest county, Multnomah, was one of the slowest growers. Registration declined some years, but is now up 5.1%.

Much more striking has been the roller coaster of party registration in the last few years.

Democratic Party registration this month stands at 998,380, which is almost 15,000 lower than in 2022, which was 13,000 lower than in 2021, which was a stunning 30,000 lower than in 2020. That’s not a happy trend line for the party. But there are some mitigating factors.

One of those happened just before those years: During the year leading up to the 2020  election, Democratic registration grew by a whopping 82,277. Considering that increase and the more gradual erosion in the years since, the party’s registration level today is about where it was in 2019 if you account for population increase.

The second mitigator is Republican registration, where the picture, though also mixed, looks rougher. This month, 721,530 Republicans are registered in the state – fewer than three-fourths the number of Democrats. That, too, is a decline from the 2020 numbers, when 764,216 Republicans were registered. (Both parties seem to have gone all out to register party members in that presidential year, then lost many afterward.) Since 2020, Republicans lost registrants two of the last three years, with the largest share of losses coming in 2021.

So if lots of people have left the two big parties since 2020, but overall voter registration has remained generally stable, where did they go?

Some went to the Independent Party of Oregon, which has gained about 6,000 members since 2020. But by far the largest number went to the nonaffiliated voter category: It picked up about 14,000 registrants in that time. While the parties gained members in the year prior to 2020, those in the unaffiliated category diminished by 9,184 voters.

There’s some recent history backing the idea that Oregon voter registration is like an accordion, with the parties puffing up when presidential election year comes around, then losing a significant chunk of their members in between.

What’s happening?

The numbers reflect the trend of people becoming  disenchanted with major parties in a non-presidential election year while turning towards them when the office of president is on the ballot.

It also shows that as steadily Democratic as Oregon can seem on a surface level – and generally has been when voters weigh in with their ballots – that the blue majority rides rising and falling tides.

Watch the registration numbers month by month and see whether Democrats start picking up in the year ahead, leading up to the 2024 presidential election. If they do, traditional results are likely to appear. But the parties will have to work for support. It’s soft enough that it could falter if it’s not well tended.

This article originally appeared in the Oregon Capital Chronicle.

 

Check these people out

Check these people out

October 27, 2023

You can find plenty of news stories about the ongoing and upcoming elections for local government - mainly city and school district elections. Call it a good thing that information still is out there, but voters need more.

In most places, the interest level, and discussion of serious candidate differences, seems low, and that may relate to too little detailed information.

We need more, because the consequences can be serious.

Consider the Wednesday editorial in the Coeur d’Alene Press, describing its contest for the Most Inept Board - elected public governing board, that is - in the region.

“Heading into the homestretch,” it said, “the trustee majorities at North Idaho College and the Community Library Network, both featuring Kootenai County Republican Central Committee-anointed ‘leaders’, are neck and neck for the Most Inept Board Award.” Whoever wins the MID, the editorial concluded, “The public will be declared the clear loser.”

They might have added for consideration the West Bonner School District board, which has two incumbent members trying to do their jobs but being blocked by a third member who has been skipping meetings and thereby denying the board a quorum. (This is the same board where two members, who were allied with the no-show guy, recently were recalled for their actions on the board.)

It can happen anywhere, and has happened in many places, and often does when many citizens get tired or discouraged tracking what’s happening, and figuring out which candidates will carry out their jobs responsibly and which won’t.

It requires some work.

One assist, which not nearly enough voters tend to use on their own, is checking campaign finance reports. Yes, you can easily find out who’s underwriting campaigns, and that can tell you a lot about what priorities really are at stake.

The Idaho Ed News reported this week, “Even in some of the state’s biggest school districts, Nov. 7’s trustee elections remain a mixed bag — a mishmash of spendy races and sleepy races, often within the same district. Three of Idaho’s largest and fastest growing school districts — West Ada, Kuna and Caldwell — illustrate the effect money is having, and isn’t having, on races for volunteer trustee seats.”

A good example is the pair of races in the West Ada School District - Idaho’s largest - in districts 4 and 5. The incumbents in those districts, David Binetti and Rene Ozuna, are both running, but they’re being significantly outspent by two allied challengers, Miguel De Luna and Tom Moore (respectively). Moore can afford to self-fund his campaign to a reported $50,000, and is helping fund De Luna's campaign as well.

Ozuna remarked the spending is “super concerning to me. I’m not sure why anybody would put that kind of money into that.”

As to the why, look to the joint Moore-De Luna web page under the label “conservatives for West Ada,” which lists goals mostly anodyne but with a few callouts to the base: “Supporting Idaho's Conservative Family Values, Advocating for Parental Rights to Participate in the Education Process.”

On the Ada County Republican Party web site (yes, they’re involved in this election too) Moore also included the intriguing comment, “The district must look at school security measures from physical attacks but also from the re-education and with help from you we can do this to protect all kids.” He didn’t explain what “the re-education” is.

In all, the tone sounds like an echo of the boards from the Idaho Panhandle, and if the money invested is as large as it is here, you tend to expect the results are intended to be outsized too.

A few admittedly vague comments and some larger-than-usual spending aren’t, of course, dispositive in the cases of Moore or De Luna or for that matter other candidates. But they are ample cause for a closer look.

Of course, cities are critical in this season’s elections as well, and Boise, Meridian and Nampa are among the cities with lively campaigns underway.

Take a little time to do your homework before marking those ballots. It could save some serious grief later.

 

Experiment

Experiment

October 26, 2023

Our new County Clerk has announced she is going to conduct an experiment in the next election. Our county uses machines to tabulate (count) the paper ballots. She has put out a call for volunteers to perform a hand count on all the ballots. She has calculated she needs 88 volunteers. That’s in addition to all the poll workers.

So, after the election is over, we will have two results: one done by the tabulation machines and the one done by hand.

She states the reason for such an experiment is to restore trust in elections. It will, she hopes, demonstrate that machine counted votes can be trusted.

I hope she is right. We need to trust our governance processes, and election trust is pretty basic.

So, let’s hypothesize.

Let’s say both results end up identical. What conclusion would you draw? Will your faith in elections be restored? Will you suddenly believe Joe Biden got more votes than Donald Trump?

What happens if the vote counts are different? Will your skepticism over fraudulent machines make you have more faith in the hand count? This would be contrary to all other evidence. Time and again machines have been shown to more accurately tabulate ballots than humans.

Maybe our new county clerk is trying to show elections can be trusted within her jurisdiction. She has never claimed our elections were corrupt. Election fraud must only happen elsewhere.

She did cite two examples of election fraud when prompted by the Idaho Republican Party in her campaign literature last year. Both examples were dismissed by judges when the Big Lie campaign disputed them.

So maybe we can’t trust the judiciary either. If our guy doesn’t win, then we should scream fraud.

As someone who has lost an election, I still believe in the voters. Lots of them didn’t vote for me. Lots did. In the only election I lost, I got more votes for me than I ever had in any previous election. But the other guy got more than I did. And he is now representing me. That’s the way our representative democracy works.

It's not that my faith is blind. We had observers at the polls, and we had observers in the counting room. So did the other guy. It’s the law.

The fraud that I believe occurs is not at the courthouse when the votes are being counted. It happens at the polling booth when my neighbors don’t show up to vote. That negligence makes this process of representation weak.

Our founders sure didn’t think everybody should vote. Heck, the 1889 Idaho Constitution blocked Native Americans and Mormons from the polls.

Who gets to vote has long been used as a tool by the ruling class, or party, or race, or religion, or sex to maintain power. Long before voting machines were invented, those who understood power knew how to manipulate it.

Now days, those with the power to vote may not exercise it. City council elections, school board elections affect our local governance. If you want to fret about voter fraud, maybe you should have some faith in the hard-working folks who count those ballots or run them through the machines. And maybe you should enfranchise yourself with some information and go to the polls on election day. Or vote early. It might restore some of your faith. But don’t just believe the outcome if your guy wins.

I hope our county clerk has her faith in government restored. But her experiment will have little influence on me. My faith in governance would be bolstered by a record turnout November 7th. You, the voters are our insurance against fraud and corruption. This 234-year-old experiment of representative democracy is being tested.

Vote.

 

Simpson and Jordan

Simpson and Jordan

October 25, 2023

Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson is accustomed to attacks from the right – for his work on the Appropriations Committee, his votes for big-budget bills and his support for dam breaching. Now, there’s something else for those on the far right to complain about: 

His votes against installing Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio as speaker of the House, which drew a strong rebuke from former state Rep. Dorothy Moon, the chair of the Idaho Republican Party. That’s akin to the Idaho State football team being booed by the cheering squad.  

Traditionally, the state GOP stays away from policy debates, focusing instead on keeping Republicans such as Simpson in office. But Moon, a vocal conservative during her days in the Legislature, has established a different standard. 

She wasted no time expressing “our disappointment” in voting against Jordan, the pride of Freedom Caucus fans everywhere. “Our party has always championed fair and open deliberation, and it is disheartening to see one of our own Idaho congressmen deviate from a fair process to emphasize the same message as the radical Democrat members of the House.” Idaho’s other congressman, Russ Fulcher, backed Jordan. 

Part of her comments had the flavor of a campaign press release. Moon said in her statement that the party’s office “has been inundated with emails and phone calls” from registered voters who were upset by Simpson’s actions. 

“Congressman Simpson’s inclination to engage in inside-the-Beltway political games rather than focusing on the pressing business that truly matters to our constituents is disappointing,” she wrote. “Representative Simpson has served in Congress for decades. Perhaps all this time away from Idaho has caused him to lose sight of the real work that Americans need on the important issues that impact them and their families. … The people of Idaho expect Mike Simpson to represent their concerns and prioritize their needs above political games and partisan divisions.” 

Simpson’s votes also crossed the line with the Idaho Freedom Foundation, which normally avoids involvement with congressional business. “Simpson, who is siding with other leftist members of Congress to keep the chamber in complete disarray, preventing it from carrying out the people’s business, and most importantly, blocking conservative leadership from being seated,” says the IFF, nothing that Jordan is “a respected member of the U.S. House Freedom Caucus.” 

Of course, with Simpson, “respected” and “House Freedom Caucus” don’t belong in the same sentence. Simpson has been at odds with that group for almost a decade. That caucus, which included Jordan and former Idaho Congressman Raul Labrador, was instrumental in forcing the resignation of Rep. John Boehner of Ohio (a friend of Simpson’s) as speaker in 2015. So, Jordan was about the last person in the world that Simpson would want as speaker. 

Simpson wasn’t the only Republican opposing Jordan. The House conducted three votes for Jordan’s speakership, and he lost support each time before giving up his bid. Simpson, in his response to Moon, blamed the whole mess on the “so-called Republicans” who initiated the ouster of Rep. Kevin McCarthy from the speaker’s chair. 

“Their actions paralyzed the House’s legislative business and left Republicans looking like we are incapable of governing,” Simpson wrote. 

Well … Republicans can’t govern, plain and simple. The divide, generally, is between those who want to kiss up to Donald Trump and re-live the 2020 election, and those (such as Simpson) who want to move on. There will be peace in the Middle East before that political situation gets resolved. 

Simpson said his objection to Jordan was based on Jordan’s consistent opposition to continued research at the Idaho National Laboratory, and other priorities that are near and dear to his constituents in the Second District – such as support for Gowen Field and Mountain Home Air Force Base. Simpson also noted that Jordan has never voted for a Farm Bill, which is crucial to the agriculture industry. 

“I cannot vote for a speaker who does not support our state. And I will not take Chairwoman Moon’s ill-advised imput when I have been fighting for Idaho longer than she has lived in the state,” Simpson wrote. 

We’ll see where Moon goes from here. If she thinks constituents in the Second District are so outraged over Simpson, and so overwhelmingly on her side, then maybe she ought to run against him next year. It would be a heck of a race, for sure. 

Chuck Malloy is a long-time Idaho journalist and columnist. He may be reached at ctmalloy@outlook.com 

(image/Gage Skimore)

 

Query

Query

October 24, 2023

There's a question that needs to be asked about our country's future.

"Is America governable?"

At the moment, and for the last couple of years, the answer to that question might require a qualified "yes."

Not exactly the ringing endorsement one would expect. Certainly not the answer you might desire. Just a qualified "yes."

Some 50 years ago or so, there was a collection of malcontents that founded the John Birch Society. From the start, the various "cells" of the Society found fault with the then-direction of the country, its politics and society (small "s") in general. The search for suspected Communists kept members busy looking behind every tree and bush. No one in any position of government was to be trusted. Especially Democrats.

Over the years, the Society and others of such ilk morphed into all sorts of "aginers." Trusting nothing. Trusting no one. Offering not a speck of anything to right the "wrongs" they opposed.

Along came "talk radio." Suddenly, the malingerers had a "voice." Their activities could be brought out into "the light." They had a focal point for all to see.

The sad truth is this "voice" of the right morphed again. It found a home in the national Republican Party and, through that, down to the local committees. The "Grand Old Party" would never be the same.

Over many national and state elections, representatives of rightward thought were elected to thousands of public offices. The face of government changed at all levels. The "my-way-or-the-highway" crowd was in charge.

Think about it. Our current struggle to simply elect a Speaker in the U.S. House of Representatives has become such a volatile mess because of what? The far-right. About 20 or so members got their backs up and told Jim Jordan his search for power would end in failure. And, that's been true.

While advocating nothing and opposing everything, these "cells" of rightward "thought" have infected Congress. The legal demand of a general national budget looms just a couple of weeks off. But, thanks to these miscreants, no one is doing much about getting down to the number crunching.

For the last few years, we've not had a national budget. We've been existing on what's called a "continuing resolution." That means, no one has constructed a budget from scratch for a decade or so. Instead, Congress has simply adopted a budget from a few years back and added an annual percentage "guestimate" to keep things running.

There's a wonderful contradiction in all this. The right-wingers have loudly - and repeatedly - advocated for "cutting the fat" out of our government spending. But, it's the same bunch that's continually - and successfully - kept budget hawks from creating a leaner operating document.

The embarrassing fight keeping Jordan out of the Speaker's chair is the doing of the far-right contingent within the national GOP. Whatever blood there be is on their hands. The personal threats against families of members of Congress, the anonymous callers in the middle of the night, the threatening texts and emails - those are theirs, too. All of it. The whole nasty, dangerous, mindlessness mess is theirs.

Recent governance, as we know it, has been simply responding to one crisis or another, drifting along without direction, without goals, without truly responding to national concerns. Gun violence. Solid evidence of the effects of climate change. Action on our national drug crisis and it's many manifestations on society. Reining in our bloated defense spending. All are serious national problems. But, Congress is doing nothing!

So, we are left with the question. "Is America governable?" And, the answer continues to be a qualified "yes." And such governance as there be is facing threats of violence and insurrection we've not seen for 250 years.

The answer - the action to get us back on the correct path - will not come from the top down. Solutions - corrections - must come from the bottom up.

We have a national election in some 13 months. A third of the seats in the U.S. Senate will be contested. And, every seat in the U.S. House of Representatives will be "up for grabs." Every one.

That election is so damned important. More than ever, we need an informed electorate. A very well-informed electorate. Vacancies in public offices must be filled. Candidates - whether now in office or new faces - must be re-examined for fitness. For judgment. For integrity. Nothing less is acceptable.

"Is America governable?" Can we make that answer an unqualified "YES?" The answer is up to us.

 

‘West Bonner’ em

‘West Bonner’ em

October 23, 2023

The voters of West Bonner County School District (WBCSD) are still working to clean up the wreckage caused to their school system by a board of trustees inspired by the Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF). A low turnout election in 2021 resulted in a three-person school board majority that seemed to be intent on turning the WBCSD schools into right-wing indoctrination mills. Among other things, the board tanked the district’s finances, caused havoc with the schools and turned a deaf ear to parents’ concerns.

The majority’s worst decision came in June when it voted to appoint Branden Durst as superintendent of schools. Durst was not only unqualified for the position but his main claim to fame was working for the IFF, which is dead set against public education. That fueled a recall election which resulted in the repudiation of the majority. What made this so remarkable is that WBCSD is in a very conservative area. Although he lost statewide in the 2022 GOP primary election for Idaho Superintendent of Public Instruction, Durst came out way ahead in Bonner County–6,648 votes, which was 50% more than the combined total of his two opponents. Just one year later, after WBCSD voters had gotten an up-close view of Durst, they wanted absolutely nothing to do with him.

Voters across the state should take heed as we approach election day on November 7. There will be school board and city elections in many localities. Candidates with an ideological ax to grind will be running in many of those elections and may win if voters do not inform themselves and turn out to support reasonable, pragmatic candidates.

Voters should find out the elections that will be held in their area and become informed about the candidates in the running. If candidates are endorsed by a political party, be wary of those candidates. School and city elections are nonpartisan. Political parties should butt out. The two recalled WBCSD school board members were endorsed by the local GOP. Since most county GOP committees have been taken over by extremists, the candidates they endorse will be ideologically driven. I find the Ada County GOP voter guide to be helpful in identifying those who should not get elected.

Some letter writers in the October 15 issue of the Idaho Press made noteworthy observations. Invoking the WBCSD debacle, Jim Runsvold urged the re-election of Manuel Godina, Travis Manning and Andrew Butler to the Caldwell School Board. He pointed out that one of the challengers, Nichole Trakel, is endorsed by Moms for America, a Florida dark money outfit that is dedicated to fanning the culture wars.

We probably don’t need help from Florida extremists to educate our kids.

Another writer, Tom Newton, observed that the incumbent “non-partisan” Caldwell School Board members “bring a wealth of knowledge, experience, and a positive attitude to the present board.” He questions the wisdom of voting for three partisan challengers who “collectively” push to bring a political agenda to the board. Sounds like the situation confronting WBCSD voters just prior to their low-turnout election in 2022.

Voters should be wary of school district candidates who want to bring religion into the schools, who wish to divert public money to private and parochial schools and who push culture war issues. Keeping them off of the boards in the first place is one heck of a lot cheaper and much less disruptive of school operations than trying to recall them later.

Equally important are the city elections that will soon be upon us. Again, it is critical that voters look into who is running in their locality and check out where they stand on the issues. Letter writer Sandra Haltom says that Meridian mayoral candidate Mike Hon is “not a viable choice,” pointing out that he led the failed charge to “dissolve our library district” and ended up pitting “neighbor against neighbor.” She urges the re-election of Mayor Robert Simison, who has done a fine job of governing that city.

Summing up, people need to get out to vote in these low-turnout, off-year elections. It really matters for these important governmental units that are closest to the people. Even though voters may not think they can make a difference, just look at what happened in WBCSD. The folks in that very conservative part of the state demonstrated that you can be conservative without being into crazy culture war issues. If they can throw the extremists out of WBCSD, it can be done anywhere in the Gem State. Idahoans should “West Bonner” extremist candidates across the state on November 7.

 

Easing up on the gas

Easing up on the gas

October 22, 2023

Eugene was all set to host, just about now, one of Oregon’s top culture war battles of the year … and then it evaporated.

Is this an indicator that culture warriors on the left are a little less eager now than they once were, even in places like Eugene, to push at the edges of contentious policy?

The story of natural gas in Eugene may be something of a harbinger.

The political matter started on Feb. 6, when the Eugene City Council passed, on a 5-3 vote, an ordinance banning the use of fossil fuels, which mainly meant natural gas, in newly built low-rise residential buildings. The ordinance was intentionally limited in scope, allowing only electric power and appliances in newly built residential structures with three or fewer floors. Existing residential buildings were exempt as well as commercial and industrial structures. The ordinance was needed, advocates said, as part of an effort to diminish carbon emissions.

It would have been be the first ordinance of its kind in the state, and a number of city officials were happy to push it forward. Eugene Mayor Lucy Vinis was quoted, “We have a governor who has pledged to build 36,000 new houses a year. We do not want those houses with natural gas hookups. And we can lead the way in the city of Eugene to say this is how it’s done.”

It was intended to be step one in moving away from natural gas; at least one council member alluded to the idea of eventually retrofitting existing buildings to be powered with electricity since by far the majority of gas emissions come from them rather than new structures.

Natural gas consists mainly of methane, and when it burns – usually to create heat – carbon dioxide is produced. The fuel can also cause methane leaks, though no one knows how large that problem is.

Desirée Plata, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering and director of the MIT Methane Network, said: “Leaks are so poorly quantified. Nobody knows that number for sure. It’s hard to sense methane comprehensively and finding those pipe-based leaks can be trickier than it sounds.”

The ordinance should not come as a great surprise in one of the green-minded centers of Oregon. If Eugene succeeded with the effort, similar approaches would be easy to imagine in Portland, Beaverton, Corvallis and other places.

But even as they passed the ordinance, the council in Eugene appears to have had a sense of unease. The Feb. 6 meeting originally was set up only to consider placing a natural gas question on the November election ballot, to allow the public to weigh in. Only during the meeting did the course change, and the council decided to adopt the ordinance outright.

The public proceeded to weigh in anyway.

Business interests involved with natural gas spoke in opposition, of course, but so did a number of labor union locals, and a broader group called Eugene for Energy Choice quickly organized.

It declared an effort to place a petition on the November ballot to kill the new ordinance. That effort was not easy, needing 6,460 valid signatures (almost 4% of the city’s total population) to take the case to ballot.

By early March, the anti-ordinance group had collected about 12,000 signatures. The group’s argument: “We believe having the option of using natural gas, along with other energy sources, keeps us all on a better path to a renewable future. Voting in favor of any gas ban will deprive Eugene residents of their ability to choose the system that works best for their family or business – and pave the way for a complete natural gas ban across all of Eugene.” The petition’s response suggested the group had a good shot at repeal.

The issue was set for the November ballot and a big political showdown. Both sides started to pitch their case, and in an odd-numbered year’s November season when elections are usually quiet, the prospect of a big culture war squabble was strong. Environmental groups weighed in, too, in support of a measure seen as helping with climate change.

And then, as abruptly as the conflict had started, it went away.

On July 10, the Eugene council revisited the issue and – this time unanimously – repealed the ordinance, which had the effect of removing the ballot question in November.

Councilor Emily Semple said, “I think it was a pragmatic decision. We need to wait for the right time.”

That suggests the city’s efforts on energy regulation aren’t necessarily over, and at least one council member said she would like to revisit the subject next year.

But if they do, their experience of 2023 might persuade them to move more cautiously. By averting a pitched battle in the culture wars, Eugene may be able to show a sounder path forward by developing energy policy through working with the full range of public interests in the city. Other cities, and even states, could draw a lesson from that.

This article (and image) originally appeared in the Oregon Capital Chronicle.