Rural "Anger"

Do we seek first to understand or to judge?

Conservative politicians often claim to be channeling the righteous anger of their rural constituents.  In my experience living in a rural area as a kid and later representing rural constituents who were generous in sharing their insights, I never felt them to be particularly angry.  Instead, like most voters, urban, suburban, or rural, they mostly want to be left alone to pursue the activities endemic to rural life, not to become the justification for regressive policies.  Rural voters may have perspectives different from urban voters, but, contrary to the representations from extremists from the left and the right, good governance can harmonize those interests.

Photo courtesy of Oregon Women for Agriculture

Farming.  Farmer’s needs aren’t contrary to the needs of public or environmental health.  I recall talking about herbicide policies with a friend who owned a grass seed farm in Linn County.  She pointed out that the elimination of field burning in the Willamette Valley left her family with little choice but to use herbicides to sterilize the fields after the harvest, to allow the production of unmixed seed the next season.  She had no desire to pollute the river, which passed through her property, or to expose her family or employees to harmful herbicides unnecessarily.  She wasn’t angry, just frustrated by a political process that boiled down to herbicide company-sponsored conservative politicians promoting unregulated use versus liberal advocates promoting policies that would put her out of business.  A thoughtful policy would have addressed her needs, possibly by identifying the safest herbicides to use, addressing the protections needed for workers during application, and ensuring buffers to prevent herbicides from reaching the river before they broke down. 

Untreated (left) and treated (right) fescue. Photo courtesy of Oregon State University.

Firearms.  Despite the perception that no issue is as divisive between urban and rural voters than the regulation of firearms, I saw commonalities there as well.  My rural constituents often viewed firearms as a necessary tool to protect themselves from animals, provide meat for their families, and deter crime in areas where police response time is measured in hours, not minutes.  They generally believed in responsible use, including training, safety, and supervision of minors.  The focus from the left on eliminating entire categories of firearms and setting restrictions that would limit their effectiveness as tools frustrated some rural constituents, but few owned assault rifles, needed high-capacity magazines, or opposed the safe storage of firearm when not in use. 

The inability to pass a property tax bond to support school construction has been a longstanding problem in Halsey.

Property Taxes.  Perhaps no issue divided my constituents more than property taxes.  Urban constituents often supported property taxes to fund services like public schools, but land rich and cash poor rural families felt the impact of property taxes more severely.  They wanted good schools as much as urbanites; they just preferred another way of funding them.  And, in fairness to them, of the three major types of taxation – income, sales, and property – property taxes often feel the least fair.  Counterintuitively, despite the famous opposition of Oregon voters to a general sales tax, voters across the spectrum most often supported specified sales taxes. Taxing things like liquor, tobacco, cellular service, and other optional purchases elicits less resistance when those taxes were directed toward specific services.  For instance, voters across the spectrum supported Measure 101, levying tobacco taxes to support health coverage, because the connection made sense.  On a similar note, the lack of a fair method of funding forest fire prevention and suppression frustrates them, as they’re the ones who feel the impact of those fires most directly.

What does anger rural voters is the failure to acknowledge their circumstances and legitimate interests.  It can be difficult to understand the reasoning of those who seem to disagree with us, but failing to do so empowers cynical politicians who strive to profit off those divisions by promoting them and using deceptive tactics (see below).  Conversely, some of the most satisfying experiences I had as a politician representing both urban and rural voters came when I was able to harmonize their interests, to find a solution that worked for everyone.  So, when I see someone claiming to explain “rural anger,” I wonder if they are really working to promote understanding, or merely seeking to profit from division.

Political Cowardice and Ukraine.  In his recent NY Times piece, Senator JD Vance makes 4 points about his opposition to aid to Ukraine: 1) the US can’t supply all the weapons Ukraine needs; 2) US weapons production should be dedicated to defending against potential Chinese aggression; 3) Ukraine lacks the military power to defend itself; and 4) Ukraine should negotiate an end to the war, rather than pursue full recapture of its territory.  Every single point he makes is deceptive.  First, US industry was never intended to fulfill all of Ukraine’s needs; other donors and internal production were always contemplated and continue to contribute.  Second, the strongest deterrent to China is a robust defense of Ukraine.  If the Chinese Communist Party sees us waiver in our support of our ally Ukraine, they’ll know that we won’t defend Taiwan.  Third, Ukraine may have a lower population than Russian, but they’re willing to mobilize a much higher percentage of their population for the defense of their country than Russia can mobilize for its imperial ambitions.  Finally, Russia has repeatedly violated its international agreements, particularly in its declaration that its 2014 gains against Ukraine were all it wanted.  You can’t negotiate with a liar.  Having already show his political cowardice in switching from a “Never Trump” position to a wholehearted endorsement of Trump to promote his own ambitions, Vance is now showing his willingness to try to deceive the country with his new arguments.  He’s not representing the needs of rural Americans; he’s just another politician that believes you’re too dumb not to see through his deceptions.  Do we really need another politician who believes that the voters are suckers to be manipulated?  I look forward to the passage of the Ukraine aid bill this week.

New Leadership.  I’m encouraged by the election of Senator Daniel Bonham as Minority Leader of the Oregon State Senate.  While Dan and I didn’t always agree on matters of policy, he and I both support non-partisan redistricting to eliminate gerrymandering.  We also agree that the Governor’s breaking of her own agreement on redistricting and her lack of contrition about doing so make it difficult for the Legislature to trust her word on other matters.  To move beyond partisanship, we have to be able to trust each other to keep our promises.

Boo! Hiss!  Shame on UO for failing to report promptly and warn students about a string of “roofie” incidents and trying to deflect the blame for that failure.  The answer to “Which matters more, the reputation of the institution and the safety of the campus?” should always be answered in favor of safety.  President Scholz should follow the example of his predecessor, who, when confronted with allegations of negligence in the victimization of a student by student-athletes, promptly settled the case in favor of the survivor when he took office.  Here, responsible leadership means a prompt apology and a public plan for preventing future incidents and notifying the campus about future dangers. Many thanks to the Eugene Weekly for bringing the problem to light.

Keep Letters from a Recovering Politician Free

As always, the best thing you can do to support this column is to share it with people who might be interested. I do not have a paid plan because I want folks to be able to access it without worrying about money. If you’d like to leave me a tip to show your appreciation, you can click on the “buy me a coffee” button below.