Editorial: Governor needs to focus on rural woes

In the speech that followed the oath, he struck an interesting note that might suggest one of his priorities for his final four years in office.

On some level, it was the speech of a man still restless to cement his legacy, and, if possible, to transform Oregon in some fundamental ways.

We’re midstream with some of the reforms the governor launched in his third term regarding education and health care.

We won’t truly know the results of those efforts until long after Kitzhaber, now 67, has left office.

In his speech, Kitzhaber talked about how he had been influenced by the life and times of Robert Kennedy: “I grew up in an era when people still believed in government as the vehicle with which they could do amazing things they couldn’t do on their own. I still believe that.”

Kitzhaber said Kennedy’s 1968 campaign for president focused on disparities and inequalities in America. “We’re still asking these same questions today,” the governor said.

Kitzhaber also talked about how growth in gross domestic product (better known as GDP) fails to capture economic disparities. The governor has made a pitch for a different measurement, the Genuine Progress Indicator, which takes into account additional social and environmental factors.

But you don’t really need either of those measurements to understand one of the critical disparities taking shape across Oregon: The gap between the state’s urban areas and its rural areas. Economic recovery has not lifted all boats equally in Oregon: While our cities and urban areas enjoy the recovery, our rural areas languish.

Both Kitzhaber and his Republican opponent, Dennis Richardson, frequently talked about the urban-rural gap during their campaigns, but it’s fair to say that neither man was overflowing with specific proposals to help close the gap.

And, to be fair, state government is not to blame for many of the problems that Oregon’s rural areas face: In a state where more than half of the land is owned by the federal government, national policies always will have an outsized effect on our economic health.

Look no further than the struggling counties of southeastern Oregon to see how that plays out in real life. (In Oregon, more than 53 percent of the land is owned by the federal government. Only Nevada, Alaska and Utah have a higher percentage.)

We’ve written before about how Kitzhaber should focus in his fourth term on consolidating the work he’s done on health care and education. But if he wants to add items to his “to-do” list — and is genuinely concerned about disparity and inequity — may we suggest that he craft specific plans designed to help rural Oregonians achieve their fair share of economic recovery.