Extra cridet PS 202
Issue #2/Issue #2 - 8-29-2013 - Federalism - marijuana states right_.pdf
Oregon Sign in | Join
Search
87 comments
Print (http://blog.oregonlive.com/politics_impact/print.html?
entry=/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html)
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/politics/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/42744329/StoryAd/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
Members of a crowd numbering tens of thousands smoke marijuana and listen to live music, at the Denver 420 pro-marijuana
rally at Civic Center Park in Denver in April. The U.S. government said Thursday that it will not make it a priority to block
marijuana legalization in Colorado or Washington or close down recreational marijuana stores, so long as the stores abide by
state regulations. (The Associated Press/File)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/staff/ncrombie/index.html) By Noelle Crombie, The Oregonian
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/staff/ncrombie/posts.html)
Email the author | Follow on Twitter (http://twitter.com/ncoregonian)
on August 29, 2013 at 5:21 PM, updated August 29, 2013 at 11:28 PM
In a decision that buoyed advocates pushing for a marijuana legalization
(http://topics.oregonlive.com/tag/marijuana%20laws/index.html) initiative
in Oregon, the federal government said Thursday it isn't likely to interfere with
Colorado and Washington as they move to offer the drug for recreational use next year.
The U.S. Department of Justice, however, said its longstanding marijuana prosecution
priorities remain unchanged. Those include keeping marijuana from minors,
preventing revenue from marijuana sales from going to gangs and cartels, and cracking
down on the trafficking of cannabis from states where it's legal to those where it's not.
At the same time, states with strong marijuana regulatory and enforcement systems are
"less likely to threaten" federal priorities, said U.S. Deputy Attorney General James
Cole, who drafted the memo
(http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/3052013829132756857467.pdf).
"Indeed, a robust system may affirmatively address those priorities by, for example,
implementing effective measures to prevent diversion of marijuana outside of the
regulated system and to other states," he wrote.
Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhere, backers say
Sponsored By:
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/politics/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/L27/1762616988/SecSponsor/OREGONLIVE/UofOregon16_OR_News_SecSpon/thMA00596.html/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
Laws and lawmakers
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/)
Your Government resource (http://gov.oregonlive.com/#incart_special- report) Keep tabs on the people who represent your
interests in Salem and Washington, D.C.
() () () () ()
PERS
The challenge of Oregon's public retirement system (http://gov.oregonlive.com/pers/)
Prospects for reforming Oregon’s troubled
Public Employees Retirement System rest in the
hands of lawmakers. ... More PERS
coverage» (http://gov.oregonlive.com/pers/)
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/pers/)
Politics 2012 Election Results Education Environment Jeff Mapes Opinion PolitiFact Oregon Portland City Hall Watch US & World Newsletters more
Set Weather
NEWS BUSINESS SPORTS H.S. SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT LOCAL
IN YOUR COMMUNITY: JOBS AUTOS REAL ESTATE RENTALS CLASSIFIEDS OBITUARIES FIND&SAVE LOCAL BUSINESSES PLACE AN AD
Page 1 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhere, ...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
To Amanda Marshall,
(http://media.oregonlive.com/politics_impact/other/USA%20Statement%
20re%20Marijuana.pdf) Oregon's top federal law enforcement official, the memo
changes little for marijuana prosecutions in the state. Pending federal marijuana
prosecutions in Oregon involve guns or drug trafficking and will continue, she said.
"We haven't been going after low-level offenders or people who are operating in
compliance with the Oregon medical marijuana law," she said. "It just kind of takes that
and expands it in terms of applying that same principle to those two states who now
have legalized marijuana for recreational use."
The announcement gives momentum to legalization efforts across the country.
"This will only help Oregon and other states move forward with ending cannabis
prohibition," said Anthony Johnson, director of New Approach Oregon, a group
working to put an initiative on the ballot here in 2014.
"It shows that ending prohibition has become inevitable," he said.
Advocates in Oregon rejected a plea last year by the influential Marijuana Policy Project
to defer an initiative until 2016. That decision meant the Washington, D.C.-based
group, which helped make marijuana legal in Colorado, won't be underwriting Oregon's
effort. The group had pledged an infusion of $700,000.
Roy Kaufmann, a Portland marijuana policy reform advocate and consultant, said the
Marijuana Policy Project's advice was based on stronger voter turnout during
presidential election years.
But Kaufmann said plans to get a marriage equality initiative on the 2014 ballot
changed that equation for Oregon's marijuana activists. The marriage equality measure,
he said, is expected to draw a large voter turnout, which works to marijuana advocates'
advantage.
"I think that was a real turning point in recognizing that a lot of the voters who might
normally sit at home in a non-presidential election year would be willing to engage."
Paul Stanford, who owns a chain of medical marijuana clinics and was the chief backer
of Measure 80, the legalization measure rejected by Oregon voters last year, said he's
encouraged by the feds' stance on Colorado and Washington. He, too, is moving ahead
with two marijuana legalization initiatives.
"The fact that the federal government has said that as long as you have a well-regulated
cannabis industry, they won't interfere, that supports us and encourages people to enact
such a system," he said.
But Clatsop County District Attorney Josh Marquis said cautioned against reading too
much into the feds' decision. He said the conflict between federal and state law over
marijuana's legal status remains fundamentally unchanged and future presidential
administrations may view cannabis differently.
"Individuals who want to smoke their doobies in Washington and Colorado probably
have nothing to worry about," said Marquis. "But businesses constructing business
models for long-terms marijuana consumption and distribution would be well advised
to be a little cautious."
-- Noelle Crombie
Tweet 24 8 Email
Real Estate
Salem, OR Aurora, OR
Your Government » (http://gov.oregonlive.com)
More politics
Jeff Mapes on Politics
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/)
PolitiFact Oregon: Is it True, False or a Pants-on-Fire lie?
(http://www.politifact.com/oregon/)
Guide to lobbyists in Salem
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/lobbying/lobbyists/2012/)
Most Comments Most Read
See more comments
» (http://www.oregonlive.com/interact/)
Oregon State Beavers-San Diego State live
chat: In-game updates, photos,
commentary and questions
(http://oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2013/09/oregon_ducks-
san_diego_state_l.html#incart_most-
comments)
581 (http://oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2013/09/oregon_ducks- san_diego_state_l.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Game thread: Portland Winterhawks at
Seattle Thunderbirds
(http://oregonlive.com/hawks/index.ssf/2013/09/seattle_2013_09_21.html#incart_most-
comments)
397 (http://oregonlive.com/hawks/index.ssf/2013/09/seattle_2013_09_21.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
There's no stopping the Affordable Care
Act: Guest opinion
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/theres_no_stopping_the_afforda.html#incart_most-
comments)
353 (http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/theres_no_stopping_the_afforda.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Starbucks' rule that guns and lattes don't
mix will satisfy few: Editorial
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/starbucks_rule_that_guns_and_l.html#incart_most-
comments)
330 (http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/starbucks_rule_that_guns_and_l.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Phil and Penny Knight to OHSU: $500
million is yours for cancer research if you
can match it
(http://oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2013/09/phil_and_penny_knight_to_ohsu_1.html#incart_most-
comments)
301 (http://oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2013/09/phil_and_penny_knight_to_ohsu_1.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Page 2 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhere, ...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
(http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/federal_marijuana_decision_cle.html) Federal marijuana decision clears way for Oregon hemp production, advocates say (http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/federal_marijuana_decision_cle.html)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/marijuana_headlines_washington.html) Marijuana news: Oregon lays groundwork for dispensaries; Washington plans for 334 shops (http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/marijuana_headlines_washington.html)
pause live updates
Related Stories
Sign in with your OregonLive.com, Facebook or Google account or sign up
(https://signup.oregonlive.com/register/?return_to=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.oregonlive.com%2Fpolitics%2Findex.ssf%2F2013%2F08%
2Foregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html%23comments)
Please review the Community Rules (http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/index.ssf?rules.html) before posting
Comments (87) Social (17) Community
HighDesert (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/HighDesert13/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/HighDesert13/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-09-01/1378097551-285-837.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-09-01/1378097551-285-837.html)
Why does it not matter to all these boomers who run triathlons, bench press 350, and
are better for smoking 2 ounces of Oregon-potent weed each month" to smoke
(medical card holders in Oregon get 24 ounces a month) that in the last three years
Oregon voters have said NO to both dispensaries and legalization.
Unlike the pro-dope crows who make boatloads selling 25% THC Ganga and are
funded by pro-drug billionaires like George Soros, Peter Lewis, and John Sperling
( who want ALL drugs legalized, not just marijuana) the few people and groups willing
to take the less popular position against the pro-dope measures, those few gutsy folks
have NOBODY funding them.
So why do they keep winning at the ballot? Why should those voters be ignored?
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Edward Thomas (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/edward_thomas/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/edward_thomas/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377908120-171-988.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377908120-171-988.html)
The Oregon legislature has no b-a-l-l-s . Else this would be done. Already.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Duncan20903 (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Duncan20903/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Duncan20903/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377905892-693-352.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377905892-693-352.html)
I’ve heard that there are people who abuse their own naughty parts! What kind of
society would we have if that were legal?!? There would be people doing that when
they’re driving! Their cars would be bouncing up and down like those hydraulic hot rods
that are driven by our Country's unregistered guests! I don’t want to see people playing
with their privates in public places either! It makes people go blind! I've known lots of
blind people and every one of them abused their own naughty parts before they went
blind! If we legalize that then we would have to let people marry their hands for crying
out loud! Ooooh, I’m so excited! I asked for my hand in marriage today and it said yes!
’nuff said!
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/politics/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/985162431/Marketing1/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
Page 3 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhere, ...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
Jimmy Tee (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/jimmy_tee/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/jimmy_tee/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377902336-613-861.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377902336-613-861.html)
quite simply put
The Federal Government has no case,
And will not temp the Supreme Court to bring constitutional judgement to a 10th
amendment issue.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Edward Thomas (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/edward_thomas/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/edward_thomas/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-30/1377908220-433-696.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-30/1377908220-433-696.html)
You need a new picture. The C.R.C. with the toy trains is dead.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
amused (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/grover125/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/grover125/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377890814-264-819.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377890814-264-819.html)
Addendum: Please cut us a little slack here. After all, the abortion issue and even gay
rights issues are about played out. About all we are going to have left to debate is "end
of life on the planet" type stuff like climate change and radioactive leakage. Nobody
wants to hear about (or read about) depressing stuff like that. If anyone has some other
non-issue that we can use, please e-mail us.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
amused (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/grover125/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/grover125/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377889286-747-456.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377889286-747-456.html)
On behalf of all of the weak-willed, hypocritical politicians and alcoholic law
enforcement officials, I would like to apologize to the citizens of this country for
decades of needless destruction of innocent lives and for the damage to the respect for
the rule of law. We will try to find other ways to fill our prisons and provide jobs to
corrections workers. As politicians, we promise to find some other divisive and
emotional issue that will help make elections interesting and predictable so that
incumbents do not have to worry about having to discuss any real issues.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
katuba (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/katuba/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/katuba/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)
2
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377870202-89-679.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377870202-89-679.html)
Josh Marquis...chill dude...you still have tons of shoplifting to handle...you can
concentrate on 2nd and third time drunk drivers , garage heists, prescription drug theft
and sales....The 60's are over dude...let them be.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
katuba (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/katuba/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/katuba/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377869542-774-153.html)
Page 4 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhere, ...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377869542-774-153.html)
In the 60's pot tested at 4-5% THC...and it took an entire joint, passed among friends,
to get a buzz. Medical marijuana, produced under extremely controlled circumstances,
with emphasis on light and proper plant nutrition, harvesting the buds, tests in ranges
varying from 10-25% THC. This is good stuff no question and one hit will get you nicely
loaded. So, the stuff needs to be tested and warnings need to go on the packaging:
OHW: one hit wonder LDWDY: little dab will do you or PWCN: proceed with caution
numbnuts, WNIKA: we're not in kansas anymore...etc.,
The prices will fall now, small operators will be forced out and corporate farms will
produce good and better product...
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Edward Thomas (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/edward_thomas/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/edward_thomas/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-30/1377908324-803-996.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-30/1377908324-803-996.html)
The prices have already fallen to the point you can hardly pay the electric bill.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Sandy Jackson (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Sandy_Jackson682/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Sandy_Jackson682/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377869285-648-349.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377869285-648-349.html)
Look at all the stoners willingly doing whatever the government wants them to do as
long as they get their pot.
Part of the collapse of what was once the greatest society the world has ever known.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Brodie (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-30/1377873384-998-804.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-30/1377873384-998-804.html)
What??!!
(htt
p://oregonlive.com/)
Brodie (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377868816-364-100.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377868816-364-100.html)
Hillary will legalize it
"He said the conflict between federal and state law over marijuana's legal status
remains fundamentally unchanged and future presidential administrations may view
cannabis differently."
(http://oregonlive.com/)
HighDesert (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/HighDesert13/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/HighDesert13/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-30/1377900508-264-269.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-30/1377900508-264-269.html)
Dude, we don't live in a monarchy. CONGRESS needs to change the Controlled
Substance Act, something the evil DA Marquis proposed in an op-Ed 9 YEARS
ago...
Page 5 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhere, ...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
http://coastda.blogspot.com/2004/10/heresy-in-war-...
(http://coastda.blogspot.com/2004/10/heresy-in-war-on-drugs.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/)
formerlyret (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/formerlyret/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/formerlyret/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377866766-417-460.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377866766-417-460.html)
Can anyone provide a link/resource for the science/research criteria used to
declare/define cannabis as a Drug?
(http://oregonlive.com/)
BeaverLover69 (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/BeaverLover69/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/BeaverLover69/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html)
2
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377848194-352-703.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-30/1377848194-352-703.html)
Federal drug policy finally tries a more sane and sober approach, at least when it
comes to the most inappropriately demonized recreational drug.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
shonzberries (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html)
2
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377840153-726-668.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377840153-726-668.html)
God Bless America! Go democracy!
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Ken (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/kenneth_anderson_1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/kenneth_anderson_1/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377837716-354-202.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377837716-354-202.html)
PLEASE LEGALIZE. OREGON IS NEXT. THEN CALIFORNIA, THEN THE WHOLE
COUNTRY. STOP THE CARTELS! ALL THE PEOPLE WHO SMOKE WEED IN THIS
COUNTRY WOULD JUMP AT A CHANCE TO THROW $100 AT THE GOVERNMENT
FOR A CARD THAT ENABLES THEM TO LEGALLY HAVE LESS THAN A OUNCE
ON THEM.
AND THERE COULD BE COMMUNITY GARDENS WHERE PEOPLE CAN GROW
THEIR OWN BUDS UNDER CONTROLLED, REGULATED, AND MUCH MORE
SAFER CIRCUMSTANCES. OR THEY CAN GROW A PLANT OR TWO IN THEIR
OWN HOME. NOBODY WOULD EVER PUT ANOTHER DOLLAR INTO THE BLACK
MARKET. AND WE CAN MAKE THE WORLD A SAFER PLACE.
I'M SURE $100's OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS EACH YEAR WILL FLOW INTO THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND IT WILL BE MUCH MORE PROFITABLE FOR THEM
THAN COSTLY PROSECUTIONS AND COURT BATTLES.
LET'S STOP WRECKING PEOPLES LIVES OVER A PLANT, A WEED FOR GOD
SAKES!!
LET'S REPAIR OUR EARTH BY PLANTING HUGE CROPS OF EARTH FRIENDLY
HEMP. WE CAN GROW OUR OWN FUEL, CLOTHING, AND SO MUCH MORE IN A
SUSTAINABLE WAY THAT ISN'T TOUGH ON THE ECOSYSTEM!
AND MAKE THE AGE LIMIT 18. NO SMOKING AND DRIVING. BE DISCREET AND
KEEP IT ON THE DOWN LOW. NO SMOKING WEED AT WORK. IF YOU COME
Page 6 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhere, ...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
BACK FROM LUNCH SMELLING LIKE GANJA YOU WILL PROBABLY STILL GET
FIRED. JUST BE SMART. BE SAFE. AND HAVE FUN!
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Orleanna Price (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/jimmy_tee/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html)
4
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377835752-126-585.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377835752-126-585.html)
Mr. Marquis, I spent today just like I'll spend every day for the next two weeks. I'll be
trimming legal medical MJ with a bunch of other senior citizens. While we trim we all
marvel that we have at least legal medical MJ, and look forward to a time when weed is
totally decriminalized. And it is gonna happen in our lifetimes.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Superfido (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377836376-232-811.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377836376-232-811.html)
I bet you all have a good laugh about it in between Dorito break, second
breakfast, snacks, coffee and doughnut break, third breakfast, the uhh,
ummm...uhhh..I forget...but some other break...then forth breakfast finished off by
a bag of Doritios on your way to lunch.
;)
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Orleanna Price (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/grover125/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/dorydog/index.html)
2
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377836611-198-499.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377836611-198-499.html)
Actually we are all well into our sixties and quite fit. I'll race you to the top of
the climbing wall at OSU any day of the week doggyman. Or you can meet
us at Manzanita when we take an afternoon off this sat. and catch some
waves. We did snack, I won't deny it, I brought a bin of kale chips fresh from
my garden and we all enjoyed some lovely cherry tomatoes. Grow up young
pup, you won't ever get to the porch with that kind of attitude.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Superfido (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377837637-302-169.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377837637-302-169.html)
I was joking, and I would take your challenge on the wall. Don't surf though man.
Beat you at a 50k cross country ski any time you desire though, or a hike up any
of the beautiful mountains in the Gorge.
And I'm already on the porch.
I would have thought you would have learned sarcasm at your mature old age.
Guess the kale chips made you too serious.
;)
I
Page 7 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhere, ...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
(http://oregonlive.com/)
pilotrockpat (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/pilotrockpat/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/pilotrockpat/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Sandy_Jackson682/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377832825-502-274.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377832825-502-274.html)
Does anyone here remember the book "Brave New World"?
In that startlingly accurate look into the future, the drug 'Soma' is widely used to calm
the masses and reduce apprehension about what the government is doing.
Liberals love the idea.
Good book. You "Soma" users ought to read it.
(htt
p://oregonlive.com/)
View more items
Brodie (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-30/1377867916-920-224.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-30/1377867916-920-224.html)
Good book, analogy fail.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
amused (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/grover125/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/grover125/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-30/1377884601-78-277.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-30/1377884601-78-277.html)
Prozac is Soma
(http://oregonlive.com/)
doswheels (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/doswheels/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/doswheels/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377830690-868-621.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377830690-868-621.html)
One must ask themselves, why does the federal goverment have any input into this
State only decision ??
(http://
oregonlive.
com/)
Superfido (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377831884-648-988.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377831884-648-988.html)
Well...because all states are part of the federal government known as the United
States of America, and there are federal laws which apply in all states. The ban
on marijuana being one of them.
That is why they have an input.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
samoht1 (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377832389-259-814.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377832389-259-814.html)
The laws are ridicules..Its a Schedule 1 drug..That needs changed right
away..Marijuana is nothing like heroin or other schedule 1 drugs..
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Page 8 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhere, ...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
Huehuecoyotl (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_
marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/2013-08-
29/1377832726-199-339.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377832726-199-339.html)
But doswheels raises a good point.
If you look at the criminal laws against simple possession of marijuana,
there's currently both a state one and a federal one. There's no reason on
earth why Oregon can't repeal its law --there wouldn't be a conflict with
federal law. Possession would still be a crime under federal law but wouldn't
be one under Oregon law.
The state potentially gets in trouble under federal law only when they take
the next step, which is explicitly allowing it --such as granting medicinal-use
licenses when possession is prohibited under federal law. Or taxing it.
At that point, you're in conflict.
So really dos is right --on the question of whether marijuana should no
longer be a crime in Oregon, the feds should mind their own business.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Superfido (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377834035-271-326.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377834035-271-326.html)
in principal I agree with what he says, but as is, the government does have a say.
It is a federal law regarding a federally banned substance.
Whether that law is logically or morally justifiable is another thing altogether.
But a say they have as long as the laws of the nation are as they are.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Momos (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Momos/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Momos/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
3
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377830530-629-963.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377830530-629-963.html)
The only people defending prohibition somehow derive a paycheck from it. People like
Marquis.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
HighDesert (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/HighDesert13/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/HighDesert13/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-30/1377904094-822-952.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-30/1377904094-822-952.html)
Exactly how do Marquis and other Oregon prosecutors financially benefit from
prosecuting drug cases, marijuana cases in particular?
There is no "bounty" or bonus for filing more cases.
An easy and facile charge to make but unless you can back it up it's just
false and reckless.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Huehuecoyotl (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377830073-905-491.html)
Page 9 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhere, ...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377830073-905-491.html)
The legislature needs to roll up its sleeves and get to work on a real process for
legalization in Oregon.
It needs to address the taxation issue, what the regulations on businesses engaged in
marijuana cultivation and sales are going to look like, and what exceptions there will be
(e.g., smoking in public, access for minors).
The various squabbling factions of legalization activists are idiots. Their competing
ballot measures are going to create such a cluster%#@$ that they'll sink the whole
thing.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
shonzberries (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377830655-165-83.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377830655-165-83.html)
Doesn't legalization have to come first? I mean, you can't really legislate
production and distribution of an illegal substance.
Amsterdam has a good system. Confine usage to designated areas. In Oregon,
since there is a drinking age, also restrict usage to adults 21 and older.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
View more items
Huehuecoyotl (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377836564-540-901.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377836564-540-901.html)
The Measure specified the amount of the tax and what it will go toward. The
petitioners wrote that, not the Legislature. Where you're getting a critique of
the Legislature I can't imagine.
Then to obtusely assert that your "assumption about the tone" of my post is
"correct," when you didn't even read it... Geez.
I normally don't bother much anymore with this site because every single
stupid thing becomes a pedantic bickering match about nothing with people
who can't or won't read. So thanks for that.
I'm out of here.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Superfido (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377837843-112-15.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377837843-112-15.html)
I did read it. What are you on about. Read it 5 times at least to be sure. How
do you think I found the quote? by chance? Don't be a whiner. I interpreted it
a specific way. If that is not what you meant then sorry. But write less
ambiguously then.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
shonzberries (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377830020-458-388.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377830020-458-388.html)
Page 10 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhe...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/grover125/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)
2
"smoke their doobies"
Hey, Mr. Marquis, 1972 called and said it wants its lingo back.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
samoht1 (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377829012-320-822.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377829012-320-822.html)
The last initiative was 757,023 voting yes and 877,553 voting no..That is 54% voting no
and 46% voting yes..That was a big lose for pot..They will need better funding for
education..Putting it on the ballot with same sex marriage makes sense..I also would
include the tax in the ballot..At least $50 a ounce tax..People will see it is a money
maker..I have heard they want to write it up with a $35 dollar per ounce tax..To me that
is to low..I think it will pass but it will need to be written better than last time and better
outreach which takes cash..
(http://oregonlive.com/)
View more items
samoht1 (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377831798-69-613.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377831798-69-613.html)
The key is convincing the R's...Spending ad money targeting them is
necessary..The R voter wants to hear how much money will be raised..The
number of R's voting for legalization last time were not good..That goes for same
sex marriage..Those were bad numbers also coming from the R's..Like if I
remember right only about 15% of R's voted yes..The thing about voting during
presidential because of higher turnout does have some advantage but remember
last time over 200,000 Oregonians voted only for President and Nothing else on
the ballot.. Its a strange stat..Shows lots of people don't care what is happening in
Oregon.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Brodie (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-30/1377868174-299-688.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377868174-299-688.html)
The key is a well written ballot not the crap we had to vote on last time. I
almost voted no and I am for legalization.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Superfido (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tony_stewart_1/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/brodiemaxwell/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377832455-884-30.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377832455-884-30.html)
The last initiative did not pass because it was poorly formed and put the control of
a multi multi million dollars a year business in the hands of a few that would have
been given too much power and would have been, in that sense, able to make
rules and regulations that benefited them.
Also, the stoned driving aspect of the Oregon bill was deficient. If the next bill
takes these things into account and is modeled more after Wa and Co it will
surely pass.
Especially since fence sitters will see the fabric of the universe has not come
undone for the northern neighbors.
(htt
p://oregonlive.com/)
Page 11 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhe...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
evileyebrows (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/evileyebrows/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/evileyebrows/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377827680-465-951.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377827680-465-951.html)
Josh Marquis, always the wet blanket....
(http:/
/oregonli
ve.com/)
porsadgai (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/porsadgai/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/porsadgai/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377832212-547-593.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377832212-547-593.html)
He's got his "Fighting Prosecutor" superhero costume ready to go at all times.
(htt
p://oregonlive.com/)
righteous leftie (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/gorgedelight/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/gorgedelight/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377826446-776-472.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377826446-776-472.html)
"...implementing effective measures to prevent diversion of marijuana outside of the
regulated system and to other states..."
Think of the drug runners in their cigar boats racing across the Columbia.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
shonzberries (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377826765-363-480.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377826765-363-480.html)
The blue states will legalize it; the red states will stick to Jack and meth.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
evileyebrows (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/evileyebrows/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/evileyebrows/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377827695-524-164.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377827695-524-164.html)
Article IV, Section 1:
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records,
and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by
general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and
proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Huehuecoyotl (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377829369-282-602.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377829369-282-602.html)
@evileyebrows: So you're saying all states have to honor marriage licenses
from states that permit same-sex marriage?
(http://oregonlive.com/)
porsadgai (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/porsadgai/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/porsadgai/index.html)
Page 12 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhe...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Duncan20903/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html)
3
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377832141-634-602.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377832141-634-602.html)
Yeah... I can imagine their worry... I mean... sheesh... there's NO marijuana in
Oregon right now, is there? Gad! I sure hope none of that there legalized
marrywuanna stuff gets diverted to our innocent state! Whatever would we do!??
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Smokey D Bud (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/smokeydbud/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/smokeydbud/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377826161-813-871.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377826161-813-871.html)
Eventually, marijuana is going to be totally legal. Those who fight this are stupid.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
View more items
shonzberries (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377826627-155-926.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377826627-155-926.html)
But what sucks is, if you have a job that does random UAs, even after it's legal
you'll still get fired if you smoked once in the previous six weeks or so. It's gonna
take a lot longer for that particular hypocrisy to end.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
View more items
shonzberries (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377839054-251-664.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377839054-251-664.html)
It's the principle that bothers me. A person should be fired for being high at
work - not for getting high a month previously on a day off.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
F-Minus (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/F-Minus/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/F-Minus/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-30/1377861802-229-100.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-30/1377861802-229-100.html)
Perhaps a better test should be developed?
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Edward Thomas (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/edward_thomas/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/edward_thomas/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-30/1377908484-315-646.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-30/1377908484-315-646.html)
ALREADY legal in my house.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Alcoholiday (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Alcoholiday/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Alcoholiday/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377825311-415-413.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/post/20
13-08-29/1377825311-415-413.html)
Page 13 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhe...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html)
2
"Individuals who want to smoke their doobies in Washington and Colorado probably
have nothing to worry about".
I wish folks in law enforcement didn't make fun of marijuana users as harmless losers
and dangerous criminals in the same sentence. If marijuana is just a drug lazy losers
use, why prosecute them as criminals? The mocking of marijuana users by prosecutors
is in direct contradiction to how seriously they treat marijuana possession. No one
mocks crack, heroine, Meth, etc this way. There are no cheeto jokes when those drugs
are discussed. Because those are serious drugs.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
View more items
shonzberries (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377826351-270-883.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377826351-270-883.html)
Well, I'm gonna generalize here, but cops are generally hard-core conformists
who just accept whatever comes down to them from those in positions of
authority. When I was in college I talked to a criminal justice major who was
opposed to pot "because it's a drug". When I pointed out that she drank and
smoked, she said, "But those aren't drugs! They're LEGAL!"
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Kevin Smith (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/kevin_smith_13/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/kevin_smith_13/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/UniversalTruth/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/damian_omenIII/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Huehuecoyotl/index.html)
4
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalizat
ion_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377827375-485-41.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html/p
ost/2013-08-29/1377827375-485-41.html)
Law enforcement does not want to lose the low hanging fruit, that makes their
livelihood easy...
(http://oregonlive.com/)
View more items
tierhog (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tierhog/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/tierhog/index.html)
3 weeks ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/orleanna_price/index.html)
1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377831561-316-583.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377831561-316-583.html)
Actually that's not true. less than an ounce is a citation. Going after casual
users is a waste of time and resources. Now if you're driving Cheech and
Chong's van made out of weed...seriously, if less than an ounce becomes
100% legal it makes their job easier. A Kilo will still be a problem unless
you're a licensed distributor. When legalization happens the police will be
handing out Doritos at the first 420 festival. They will just be reminding folks
not to drive while high as that will still be illegal. Legalization is going to
happen. So keep calm and carry...a bong...
(http://oregonlive.com/)
porsadgai (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/porsadgai/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/porsadgai/index.html)
3 weeks ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_le
galization_1.html/post/2013-08-29/1377831922-199-481.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.
html/post/2013-08-29/1377831922-199-481.html)
Casual users get nicked all the time. They get their fines out of you; up to
$500 if they feel like it. OR, they give you the option of "diversion"... oh
Page 14 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhe...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
(http://www.advancedigital.com/)
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement (http://www.oregonlive.com/useragreement/) and Privacy
Policy (http://www.oregonlive.com/privacypolicy/)
© 2013 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us (http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/)).
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of
Oregon Live LLC.
About OregonLive.com
(http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/)
Advertise with us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/advertise/)
Contact Us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/contactus/)
Jobs at OregonLive.com
(http://jobs.oregonlive.com/careers/company/detail/id/116368/page/jobs)
FAQ
(http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/index.ssf?/aboutus/content/faq.html)
Newsletters (http://www.oregonlive.com/newsletters/)
Text Alerts (http://www.oregonlive.com/text-alerts/)
RSS (http://www.oregonlive.com/siteindex/)
Mix Magazine (http://www.oregonlive.com/mixsubscribe/index.ssf?/cgi-bin/gfv.cgi/mixsubscribe/affiliate_media/subscribe.ata)
The Oregonian (http://biz.oregonian.com/readerservices/)
The Hillsboro Argus (http://www.oregonlive.com/argus/subscribe/)
About Us
Subscriptions
News
(http://www.oregonlive.com/news/)
Business
(http://www.oregonlive.com/business/)
Sports
(http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/)
High School Sports
(http://highschoolsports.oregonlive.com/)
Entertainment
(http://www.oregonlive.com/entertainment/)
Living
(http://www.oregonlive.com/living/)
Travel
(http://www.oregonlive.com/travel/)
Opinion
(http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/)
Obituaries
(http://www.oregonlive.com/obituaries/)
Jobs
(http://www.oregonlive.com/jobs/)
Autos
(http://autos.oregonlive.com/)
Real Estate
(http://realestate.oregonlive.com/)
Rentals
(http://realestate.oregonlive.com/for-
rent)
Classifieds
(http://classifieds.oregonlive.com/)
Local Deals
(http://www.oregonlive.com/shopping/)
Local Businesses
(http://www.oregonlive.com/business/)
Clackamas County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/)
Clark County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/clark-
county/)
Gresham
(http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/)
Portland
(http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/)
Washington County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/)
More Local News
(http://www.oregonlive.com/local/)
OregonLive.com Sections
Your Regional News Pages
Mobile Mobile site (http://mobile.oregonlive.com/) | iPhone,
Android apps (http://www.oregonlive.com/mobile-
device/) | Tablet Apps
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mobile-device/)
Forums
(http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/)
Videos
(http://videos.oregonlive.com/)
Photos
(http://photos.oregonlive.com/photogallery/)
Interact with us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/interact/)
Weather
(http://www.oregonlive.com/weather/)
Post a job
(http://www.oregonlive.com/jobs/products/index.ssf)
Post a classified ad
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sell your car
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sell/rent your home
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sitemap & search
(http://www.oregonlive.com/sitemap/)
More on OregonLive.com
Follow Us Twitter
(http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/twitter/)
|
(http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/facebook/)
Google+ (http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/)|
(http://www.oregonlive.com/dining/index.ssf/2013/09/portlands_best_bagels_readers.html#incart_river_default#incart_hbx#incart_best- of) Portland's best bagels: Readers respond with suggestions... (http://www.oregonlive.com/dining/index.ssf/2013/09/portlands_best_bagels_readers.html#incart_river_default#incart_hbx#incart_best- of)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2013/09/contaminated_fish_alert_high_m.html#incart_m- rpt-2#incart_hbx#incart_best-of) High mercury, PCBs in certain Columbia River species... (http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2013/09/contaminated_fish_alert_high_m.html#incart_m- rpt-2#incart_hbx#incart_best-of)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/money/index.ssf/2013/09/portland_unemployment_falls_again_in_august_matches_us_trend.html#incart_m- rpt-2#incart_hbx#incart_best-of) Portland unemployment falls again in August (http://www.oregonlive.com/money/index.ssf/2013/09/portland_unemployment_falls_again_in_august_matches_us_trend.html#incart_m- rpt-2#incart_hbx#incart_best-of)
Best of OregonLive.com
yeah... you still pay the fine... AND you get to pay hundreds more for UAs,
"evaluation", and "treatment" by some shark in the fraud laden "rehab"
industry. Oh.. and then you pay to get your record "expunged"; which, of
course, it NEVER actually is.
Yup... it's a lucrative business for town clowns, county mounties and
prosecutors with a name to make.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Page 15 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhe...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
Community Rules (http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/index.ssf?rules.html) apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
Contact interactivity management. (http://www.oregonlive.com/interactivity/)
Ad Choices (http://www.advance.net/advancedigitalUserAgreement#opt_out)
Page 16 of 16Marijuana legalization decision foreshadows end to pot prohibition in Oregon, elsewhe...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.ht...
Issue #2/Issue #2 - Federal memo on Marijuana.pdf
Issue #2/Issue #2 - Federalism and same-sex marriage.pdf
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/1331182993/Tower/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/L26/1407461749/Leaderboard/OREGONLIVE/ProvidenceHealth03_OR_News_Lead/PHP_Family_728x90.gif/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
Oregon Sign in | Join
Search
15 comments
Print (http://blog.oregonlive.com/opinion_impact/print.html?
entry=/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html)
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/1753813337/StoryAd/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/staff/oliveguestop/index.html) By Guest Columnist
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/staff/oliveguestop/posts.html)
Follow on Twitter (http://twitter.com/oregonian)
on April 08, 2013 at 4:00 AM, updated April 08, 2013 at 4:06 AM
By Erin Ryan
Federalism is once again at the forefront of the Supreme Court's most contentious cases
this term. The cases attracting most attention are the two same-sex marriage cases that
were argued last week. Facing intense public sentiment on both sides of the issue and
the difficult questions they raise about the boundary between state and federal
authority, some justices openly questioned whether they should just defer to the
political process. And while this is often a wise, prudential approach in review of
contested federalism-sensitive policymaking, it's exactly the wrong course of action
when the matter at hand is an individual right.
While both cases raise curious issues of standing, the substantive issue at the heart of
each case is whether same-sex couples should be able to marry. Hollingsworth v. Perry
asks the court to review the constitutionality of a California's Proposition 8, a ballot
initiative banning same-sex marriages within the state. United States v. Windsor tests
the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a federal law that
prevents the U.S. government from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in states
that allow it (and affecting the administration of some 1,100 federal benefits connected
with marriage).
Yet the looming question for the Supreme Court is not just whether gays and lesbians
have the right to marry -- the justices must also confront the question of who should
decide whether same-sex couples can marry. Is this something that states should be
able to decide for themselves, by making and interpreting state law? (After all, matters
of family law have traditionally been left to state regulation.) Or, is the decision to
marry so fundamentally important that it triggers the federal Constitution's promise
that all citizens will be treated equally under the law? (After all, even though family law
is traditionally left to the states, the Constitution won't allow them to deny interracial
marriages.)
So these cases are not only about the rights of same-sex couples to marry, but also
about the relationship between the state and federal governments in regulating
marriage. And what's especially strange about the cases is that they pose the same-sex
marriage question from opposite sides of the federalism issue.
In the Prop 8 case, same-sex marriage advocates want federal law to override the state
approach, arguing that the U.S. Constitution prevents California from discriminating
against gay and lesbian citizens who wish to marry -- and opponents want the feds to
butt out of an area of traditional state prerogative. In the DOMA case, same-sex
marriage advocates want the feds to butt out, arguing (in part) that Congress shouldn't
interfere with state authority by limiting the legal effect of marriages performed
Why equal protection trumps federalism in the same-sex marriage cases: Guest opinion
Sponsored By:
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/L26/1730671941/SecSponsor/OREGONLIVE/UofOregon16_OR_News_SecSpon/thMA00596.html/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/L26/1227167085/Rectangle/OREGONLIVE/ProvidenceHealth03_OR_News_HalfPage/PHP_Family_300x600.jpg/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
() () () () ()
Your Opinion
My Oregon (http://blog.oregonlive.com/myoregon/index.html)
(http://blog.oregonlive.com/myoregon/index.html)
Opinion Hovde Monaghan Nesbitt Nielsen Roberts Sarasohn Editorials Letters to the Editor My Oregon OpEd more
Set Weather
NEWS BUSINESS SPORTS H.S. SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT LOCAL
IN YOUR COMMUNITY: JOBS AUTOS REAL ESTATE RENTALS CLASSIFIEDS OBITUARIES FIND&SAVE LOCAL BUSINESSES PLACE AN AD
Page 1 of 8Why equal protection trumps federalism in the same-sex marriage cases: Guest opinion | ...
9/30/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.h...
according to state law -- while opponents are maintaining the propriety of federal
intrusion. (Some analysts have even surmised that members the court may have
strategically partnered the two cases together, using each as a foil against the other.)
Indeed, should the court invalidate DOMA on federalism grounds alone -- holding that
the federal law unconstitutionally intrudes on a protected zone of state sovereignty --
then same-sex marriage advocates would be celebrating a mixed victory. DOMA would
no longer bar legally married gays and lesbians from federal benefits in the few states
that have legalized same-sex marriage. But it would seemingly affirm the ability of
states like California to deny them the legal right to marry in the first place, without the
threat of federal interference.
Joining with same-sex marriage advocates, the Justice Department has advanced the
other constitutional argument that would resolve both cases on the same grounds: that
both DOMA and Prop 8 violate the Constitution's essential promise to treat all citizens
equally before the law.
By this claim, both laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth and 14th
Amendments, because there is no legitimate basis for the federal or state governments
to discriminate between heterosexual and homosexual couples who wish to marry. If
the court agrees that there is an equal protection problem with DOMA, then that federal
interest would properly override the traditional allocation of family law to the states,
because the Bill of Rights clearly limits all state and federal lawmaking. (Again, recall
the constitutional invalidation of anti-miscegenation laws for the same reason.) If this
happens, the court will also have to set, for the first time, the specific level of equal
protection "scrutiny" that courts should apply when reviewing laws that discriminate on
the basis of sexual orientation.
At least on the (sketchy) basis of reading the tea leaves at oral argument, no clear
majority is ready to take either approach to invalidating the challenged laws -- nor is a
majority prepared to uphold them. Most analysts are presuming that the four most
liberal members of the court would accept the equal protection rationale for
invalidating DOMA and that the four most conservative members are sympathetic to
preserving it. Justice Anthony Kennedy, the likely swing vote, is the author of past
opinions that have championed both states' rights and gay rights. In the DOMA oral
arguments, he seemed drawn to the federalism rationale for invalidating DOMA,
though it was not clear this view could command a majority. In the Prop 8 arguments,
he appeared deeply reluctant to insert the court in the dispute at all, fueling uncertainty
and anxiety among stakeholders on both sides.
Indeed, Kennedy seemed deeply moved by the argument frequently made by the
supporters of Prop 8 and DOMA against judicial interference in both cases. The
argument is that American culture is in transition on the issue of gay marriage, and that
the court should allow the democratic process to proceed legislatively. Following
suggestive public comments by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg recently, some are
pointing to the abortion-related culture wars that followed the court's decision in Roe v.
Wade as a cautionary tale about what can happen when the court gets out too far in
front of public opinion. Leave gay marriage to the ballot box, they argue, and the people
will work this out for themselves -- as they have in the handful of states that have
independently legalized gay marriage (and of course, the vast majority that have not).
But from the jurisprudential perspective, deference to the political process misses the
very point of judicial review and the constitutional rights that these nine justices have
sworn to protect. Constitutional individual rights are -- by their very nature -- counter-
majoritarian. You hold them regardless of what the majority thinks, and they are most
dear when the majority is against you. Freedom of religion means that your neighbors
can't force you into their church if they don't particularly like yours. Your right to jury
trial is especially valuable when the public at large believes you should be locked up and
the key thrown away. Your right to free speech is important precisely because others
may prefer that you just shut up. Equal protection is the Constitution's promise that
you won't be treated unfairly by the government, even when most Americans really
want you to be.
Oregonian Media Group
(http://topics.oregonlive.com/tag/2013-readers-
guide/posts.html)
Readers Guide (http://topics.oregonlive.com/tag/2013- readers- guide/posts.html#incart_special- report) A guide to the new company and its products
What's changing on Oct. 1 (http://www.oregonlive.com/oregonian- media- group/index.ssf/2013/09/a_quick_list_of_what_is_changi.html#incart_special- report)
Digital edition of The Oregonian (http://www.oregonlive.com/oregonian- media- group/index.ssf/2013/09/the_digital_edition_of_the_ore.html#incart_special- report)
Update from the publisher (http://www.oregonlive.com/oregonian- media- group/index.ssf/2013/09/sept_29_update_from_the_publis.html#incart_special- report)
More Oregonian Media Group
» (http://www.oregonlive.com/oregonian-media-group/)
Opinion Resources
How do I write a Letter to the Editor, or submit commentary?
(http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/how_do_i_write_a_letter_to_the.html)
About The Oregonian's opinion editors
(http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2008/08/about_the_editors.html)
Oregonian opinion columnists
(http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/oregonian_opinion_columnists.html)
A public blog to share your ideas, opinions,
knowledge and experience. ... Write your
letter» (http://blog.oregonlive.com/myoregon/index.html)
Most Comments Most Read
Federal government shutdown: House bill
delays 'Obamacare' 1 year, pays troops
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/federal_government_shutdown_ho.html#incart_most-
comments)
476 (http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/federal_government_shutdown_ho.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
No. 2 Oregon Ducks- California Golden
Bears live chat: In-game updates, photos,
commentary and questions
(http://oregonlive.com/ducks/index.ssf/2013/09/no_2_oregon_ducks-
_california.html#incart_most-comments)
237 (http://oregonlive.com/ducks/index.ssf/2013/09/no_2_oregon_ducks- _california.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Sex offenders in Oregon: Oregonian
exclusive (http://oregonlive.com/pacific-
northwest-
230 (http://oregonlive.com/pacific- northwest- news/index.ssf/2013/09/sex_offenders_in_oregon_oregon.html#comments#incart_most-
Page 2 of 8Why equal protection trumps federalism in the same-sex marriage cases: Guest opinion | ...
9/30/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.h...
(http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/08/ruth_bader_ginsburg_goes_on_th.html) Ruth Bader Ginsburg goes on the offensive: Ruth Marcus (http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/08/ruth_bader_ginsburg_goes_on_th.html)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2013/07/portland_jaywalking_case_raise.html) Portland jaywalking case raises question: When is an arrest not an arrest? (http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2013/07/portland_jaywalking_case_raise.html)
So when, as here, the issue on the line is about protecting individual rights against
unfair discrimination by the majority -- then the Supreme Court has a constitutional
obligation not to just leave the matter to the majoritarian political process. Questions
about the existence and scope of individual rights are exactly the kind of issue that
requires the judiciary to weigh in, delivering on the Constitution's sacred promise of fair
and equal treatment. Can you imagine if the Supreme Court had concluded that Brown
v. Board of Education was "improvidently granted" in order to allow the political
process more time to work things out?
Properly understanding the same-sex marriage cases as matters of equal protection also
squarely resolves the federalism issue. Under the Supremacy Clause, there is no
question but that state law falls when it conflicts with constitutionally protected
individual rights -- which is precisely as it should be. After all, one of the most
frequently acknowledged purposes of our federal structure is its maintenance of checks
and balances between local and national authority in order to protect individual rights
against incursion by either side. To put abstract federalism concerns before equal
protection is to put the constitutional cart before the horse, and to misunderstand the
underlying purposes of American federalism to begin with. "States' rights" serve only
one true purpose: the fuller protection of individuals.
The court should recognize the critical relationship between the federalism and equal
protection arguments in these cases. Questions about the boundary between state and
federal authority may hold more sway in murkier interjurisdictional realms like health
care and education, but if the Constitution protects gay and lesbian people from
discrimination, then the issue is elevated beyond the reach of federalism for its own
sake. Federalism is important, but there is no federalism "for its own sake" -- it is a
structural means to a substantive end. In the United States, that end should be fairness
and justice for all.
Erin Ryan, a professor at the Northwestern School of Law, Lewis & Clark College, is
the author of "Federalism and the Tug of War Within." A version of this essay first
appeared on the American Constitution Society blog
(http://www.acslaw.org/).
Tweet 0 0 Email
Related Stories
Sign in with your OregonLive.com, Facebook or Google account or sign up
(https://signup.oregonlive.com/register/?return_to=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.oregonlive.com%2Fopinion%2Findex.ssf%2F2013%2F04% 2Fwhy_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html%23comments)
Please review the Community Rules (http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/index.ssf?rules.html) before posting
Real Estate
Aurora, OR Woodburn, OR
Like 0
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/1886517548/Marketing1/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
See more comments
» (http://www.oregonlive.com/interact/)
news/index.ssf/2013/09/sex_offenders_in_oregon_oregon.html#incart_most-
comments)
From Cave Junction ranch and lab, Art
Robinson provides provocative voice for
Oregon GOP
(http://oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2013/09/from_cave_junction_ranch_and_l.html#incart_most-
comments)
193 (http://oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2013/09/from_cave_junction_ranch_and_l.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Oregon State Beavers-Colorado live chat:
In-game updates, photos, commentary and
questions
(http://oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2013/09/oregon-
state-beavers-colorado-football-live-
updates.html#incart_most-comments)
188 (http://oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2013/09/oregon- state- beavers- colorado- football- live- updates.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Page 3 of 8Why equal protection trumps federalism in the same-sex marriage cases: Guest opinion | ...
9/30/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.h...
pause live updates
Comments (15) Popular Topics
samoht1 (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html)
5 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_f
e.html/post/2013-04-08/1365459514-585-384.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365459514-585-384.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365459514-585-384.html)
I hitting a bunch of like buttons to reward everyone because you all deserve it..Lots of
legal eagle interpretations is nice and worth rewarding and reading....
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Mortie (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/guysgumbo/index.html) 5 months ago(
h
ttp://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/201
3-04-08/1365459287-350-355.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365459287-350-355.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365459287-350-355.html)
I originally didn't care one way or another on this issue. After being bullied by the "pros"
into "caring, one way or another", gay marriage has become something for me to
oppose.
Anything I can do?
You just let me know.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Equality (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/oretega19/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/oretega19/index.html)
5 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_tru
mps_fe.html/post/2013-04-08/1365474693-58-815.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/
post/2013-04-08/1365474693-58-815.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/
post/2013-04-08/1365474693-58-815.html)
How does a marriage equality supporter who says "I disagree" in any way,
"bullying" you? Sorry but its amazingly hypocritical for the anti-gay crowd to scoff
at equal protection arguments while playing the victim themselves.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Mortie (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/guysgumbo/index.html)
5 months ago
(htt
p://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_
trumps_fe.html/post/2013-04-09/1365485939-44-487.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.
html/post/2013-04-09/1365485939-44-487.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.
html/post/2013-04-09/1365485939-44-487.html)
I wasn't a hater til I was informed that I was. You telling me I'm "ANTI GAY"
when I just don't care is counter to your cause and because of your unfair
accusation, I will work against you.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Equality (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/oretega19/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/oretega19/index.html)
5 months ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/dream1958/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protecti
on_trumps_fe.html/post/2013-04-09/1365535325-942-672.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.
html/post/2013-04-09/1365535325-942-672.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.
html/post/2013-04-09/1365535325-942-672.html)
Well obviously you *do* care.. and you never really answered the question.
(h
ttp://oregonlive.com/)
mnacrelli (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/mnacrelli/index.html) 5 months ago(
h
ttp://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/201
Page 4 of 8Why equal protection trumps federalism in the same-sex marriage cases: Guest opinion | ...
9/30/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.h...
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html)1
3-04-08/1365447660-515-187.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365447660-515-187.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365447660-515-187.html)
The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment was never intended to obliterate
any legal recognition of male-female distinctiveness or conjugal complementarity. This
is clearly evidenced by the reference to "male inhabitants" of each state in Section 2 of
the 14th Amendment itself. It's futher evidenced by the subsequent passage of the 19th
Amendment granting women the right to vote. If the revisionist reading of the 14th
Amendment had any merit, the 19th Amendment would have been completely
unnecessary.
It's pathetic that a distinguished law professor would so readily disregard the actual text
and historical context of the 14th Amendment and instead advocate flagrant judicial
activism to achieve her preferred policy agenda.
(http://oregon
live.com/)
fratermal (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/fratermal/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/fratermal/index.html)
5 months ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_f
e.html/post/2013-04-08/1365442960-37-470.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365442960-37-470.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365442960-37-470.html)
Of course the whole underlying thrust of this essay is based on the yet unproven
assumption that there is so "protected right" of same-sex couples to "marry" as
marriage has always and everywhere been understood. It's possible the USSC will rule
that way and decide, ludicrously, that defining marriage the way it always has been
defined is somehow a "ban", i.e. a denial of a "right." The Professor of course drags up
the Loving v Virginia ruling even though he knows (and admits) that those were anti-
miscegenation laws based on racial prejudice and in no way defined marriage itself
differently.
(http://oregon
live.com/)
nwokie (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/nwokie/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/nwokie/index.html)
5 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_f
e.html/post/2013-04-08/1365439494-404-169.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365439494-404-169.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365439494-404-169.html)
Interesting argument, if you accept it as true, shouldn't you then agree that state gun
laws trump federal gun laws?
(http://oregonlive.com/)
nwokie (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/nwokie/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/nwokie/index.html)
5 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_tru
mps_fe.html/post/2013-04-08/1365439516-159-74.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/
post/2013-04-08/1365439516-159-74.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/
post/2013-04-08/1365439516-159-74.html)
Or state immigration laws trump federal immigration laws?
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Inkberrow (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Inkberrow/index.html)
5 months ago
(http://orego
nlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/
2013-04-08/1365435832-2-924.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365435832-2-924.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365435832-2-924.html)
"Constitutional individual rights are---by their very nature---counter-majoritarian. You
hold them regardless of what the majority thinks, and they are most dear when the
majority is against you."
Well said, but I can't help but wonder whether Professor Ryan also applies this full-
Page 5 of 8Why equal protection trumps federalism in the same-sex marriage cases: Guest opinion | ...
9/30/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.h...
throated defense of individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution to ongoing populist-
driven state and federal efforts to infringe on the Second Amendment's right of
individuals to keep and bear arms.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
stumpspeech (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/stumpspeech/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/stumpspeech/index.html)
5 months ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Aussie64/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_tru
mps_fe.html/post/2013-04-08/1365455859-314-906.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/
post/2013-04-08/1365455859-314-906.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/
post/2013-04-08/1365455859-314-906.html)
Recording the particulars of a sales transaction is not an infringment of the right to
participate in that sale.
(http://
oregonlive
.com/)
Inkberrow (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Inkberrow/index.html)
5 months ago
(
http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protectio
n_trumps_fe.html/post/2013-04-08/1365460111-244-327.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.
html/post/2013-04-08/1365460111-244-327.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.
html/post/2013-04-08/1365460111-244-327.html)
Stump---
I agree in that particular connection, but my question related to Professor
Ryan's general approach to the subject matter.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Aldo (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Aldo2004/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Aldo2004/index.html)
5 months ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Aussie64/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html)
2
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_f
e.html/post/2013-04-08/1365430833-585-289.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365430833-585-289.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-08/1365430833-585-289.html)
There is a simple way to solve this issue.
Let's separate church and state. Churches were the foundation of marriage, not the
state.
Let the state provide "civil unions" to all who the state decides to give them to or require
to have them. Base all taxation and regulation on civil unions.
Let churches decide who they wish to marry in their church. Catholics can do what they
want, Jews can do what they want. Individual church regulations can define who gets
married in their church. Marriage becomes a religious matter.
Problem solved!
(http://oregonlive.com/)
stumpspeech (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/stumpspeech/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/stumpspeech/index.html)
5 months ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Aussie64/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html)
2
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_tru
mps_fe.html/post/2013-04-08/1365455731-484-277.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/
post/2013-04-08/1365455731-484-277.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/
post/2013-04-08/1365455731-484-277.html)
There is a simple way to solve this. Let marriage as defined in law supercede any
church designation. They can perform religious unions to their hearts content and
nobdy else is affected. Marriage is a matter enshrined in law, let churches
oversee their own religious unions and stay seperate from the government.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Page 6 of 8Why equal protection trumps federalism in the same-sex marriage cases: Guest opinion | ...
9/30/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.h...
About OregonLive.com
(http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/)
Advertise with us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/advertise/)
Contact Us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/contactus/)
Jobs at OregonLive.com
(http://jobs.oregonlive.com/careers/company/detail/id/116368/page/jobs)
FAQ
(http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/index.ssf?/aboutus/content/faq.html)
Newsletters (http://www.oregonlive.com/newsletters/)
Text Alerts (http://www.oregonlive.com/text-alerts/)
RSS (http://www.oregonlive.com/siteindex/)
Mix Magazine (http://www.oregonlive.com/mixsubscribe/index.ssf?/cgi-bin/gfv.cgi/mixsubscribe/affiliate_media/subscribe.ata)
The Oregonian (http://biz.oregonian.com/readerservices/)
The Hillsboro Argus (http://www.oregonlive.com/argus/subscribe/)
About Us
Subscriptions
News
(http://www.oregonlive.com/news/)
Business
(http://www.oregonlive.com/business/)
Sports
(http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/)
High School Sports
(http://highschoolsports.oregonlive.com/)
Entertainment
(http://www.oregonlive.com/entertainment/)
Living
(http://www.oregonlive.com/living/)
Travel
(http://www.oregonlive.com/travel/)
Opinion
(http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/)
Obituaries
(http://www.oregonlive.com/obituaries/)
Jobs
(http://www.oregonlive.com/jobs/)
Autos
(http://autos.oregonlive.com/)
Real Estate
(http://realestate.oregonlive.com/)
Rentals
(http://realestate.oregonlive.com/for-
rent)
Classifieds
(http://classifieds.oregonlive.com/)
Local Deals
(http://www.oregonlive.com/shopping/)
Local Businesses
(http://www.oregonlive.com/business/)
Clackamas County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/)
Clark County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/clark-
county/)
Gresham
(http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/)
Portland
(http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/)
Washington County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/)
More Local News
(http://www.oregonlive.com/local/)
OregonLive.com Sections
Your Regional News Pages
Mobile Mobile site (http://mobile.oregonlive.com/) | iPhone,
Android apps (http://www.oregonlive.com/mobile-
device/) | Tablet Apps
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mobile-device/)
Forums
(http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/)
Videos
(http://videos.oregonlive.com/)
Photos
(http://photos.oregonlive.com/photogallery/)
Interact with us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/interact/)
Weather
(http://www.oregonlive.com/weather/)
Post a job
(http://www.oregonlive.com/jobs/products/index.ssf)
Post a classified ad
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sell your car
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sell/rent your home
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sitemap & search
(http://www.oregonlive.com/sitemap/)
More on OregonLive.com
Follow Us Twitter
(http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/twitter/)
|
(http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/facebook/)
Google+ (http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/)|
(http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/stakes_rise_for_gov_john_kitzh.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of) 2013 special session: Stakes rise for Gov. John Kitzhaber... (http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/stakes_rise_for_gov_john_kitzh.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/travel/index.ssf/2013/09/mount_st_helens_listed_on_nati.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of)Mount St. Helens listed on National Register of Historic... (http://www.oregonlive.com/travel/index.ssf/2013/09/mount_st_helens_listed_on_nati.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2013/09/health_reform_wrinkles_emerge.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of) Oregonians see health reform wrinkles emerge as enrollment... (http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2013/09/health_reform_wrinkles_emerge.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of)
Best of OregonLive.com
luddness (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/luddness/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/luddness/index.html)
5 months ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Aussie64/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/samoht1/index.html)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Way_Of_The_Whigs/index.html)
3
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_f
e.html/post/2013-04-07/1365424673-526-279.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-07/1365424673-526-279.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.html/post/2
013-04-07/1365424673-526-279.html)
Nice discussion, but the equation is far more simple in both cases. Whether it is the
states or the federal government, any government entity that denies governmental
rights to any person or persons based on their gender, or sexual orientation, violates
the constitution.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Page 7 of 8Why equal protection trumps federalism in the same-sex marriage cases: Guest opinion | ...
9/30/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.h...
(http://www.advancedigital.com/)
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement (http://www.oregonlive.com/useragreement/) and Privacy
Policy (http://www.oregonlive.com/privacypolicy/)
© 2013 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us (http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/)).
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of
Oregon Live LLC.
Community Rules (http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/index.ssf?rules.html) apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
Contact interactivity management. (http://www.oregonlive.com/interactivity/)
Ad Choices (http://www.advance.net/advancedigitalUserAgreement#opt_out)
Page 8 of 8Why equal protection trumps federalism in the same-sex marriage cases: Guest opinion | ...
9/30/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/04/why_equal_protection_trumps_fe.h...
Issue #2/Issue #2 - Federalism.png
Issue #2/Issue #2 - Healthcare and federalism.pdf
Alex Brandon/AP PhotoView full size
It's the biggest secret in a city known for not keeping them: The nine Supreme Court justices and more than three dozen other people have
kept quiet for more than two months about how the high court is going to rule on the constitutionality of President Barack Obama's health care
overhaul.
Obamacare, federalism in a Supreme Court tug of war
Published: Wednesday, June 27, 2012, 4:00 AM Updated: Friday, June 29, 2012, 9:38 AM
By Guest Columnist
By Erin Ryan
Soon, the Supreme Court will decide what
some believe will be among the most
important cases in the history of the
institution.
In the Obamacare cases, the court
considers whether the Affordable Care Act
(ACA) exceeds the boundaries of federal
authority under the various provisions of
the Constitution that establish the
relationship between local and national
governance. Its response will determine
the fate of Congress' efforts to grapple
with the nation's health care crisis, and
perhaps other legislative responses to
wicked regulatory problems such as
climate governance or education policy. Whichever way the gavel falls, the decisions will likely affect the
upcoming presidential and congressional elections, and some argue that they may significantly alter public
faith in the court itself. But from the constitutional perspective, they are important because they will speak
directly to the interpretive problems of federalism that have ensnared the architects, practitioners and
scholars of American governance since the nation's first days.
Federalism is the Constitution's mechanism for dividing authority between the national and local levels. In a
nutshell, it assesses which kinds of policy questions should be decided nationally -- yielding the same answer
throughout the country -- and which should be decided locally -- enabling different answers in different
states. Accordingly, the basic inquiry in all federalism controversies is always the same: Who should get to
decide? Is it the state or federal government that should make these kinds of health policy choices? And just
as important, especially in this case, is who gets to answer that question -- the political branches or the
judiciary? Should the court defer to Congress' choices in enacting the ACA, or is it the responsibility of the
Page 1 of 4Obamacare, federalism in a Supreme Court tug of war
9/30/2013http://blog.oregonlive.com/opinion_impact/print.html?entry=/2012/06/obamacare_federali...
court to substitute its own judgment for the legislature's on such matters?
Here's the thing: The reason federalism issues become so complicated -- and so controversial -- is that the
Constitution itself, beautiful as we may think it, usually doesn't resolve them. Indeed, the problem that
pervades all federalism controversies is that the Constitution mandates but incompletely describes our
federal system, in a way that forces those implementing it to rely on some external theory about what
federalism is for and how it should operate when applying its vague directives to actual controversies. And
unsurprisingly, there are multiple competing theories, all consistent with those directives but pushing us in
different directions.
Two have especially influenced the court's notoriously vacillating federalism jurisprudence. The "dual
federalism" approach prefers stricter separation between proper spheres of state and federal power, policed
by judicially enforced constraints that trump legislative determinations. Dual federalism thinkers see
federalism as a zero-sum game, in which any expansion of federal reach comes at the direct expense of
state reach, and vice versa. "Cooperative federalism" rejects the zero-sum model and tolerates greater
jurisdictional overlap. It urges judicial deference to federalism-sensitive policymaking because the elected
branches know best, and because "political safeguards" for federalism are already embedded in
constitutional design, given that national representatives are elected at the state level.
The battle between these classic contenders of federalism theory was on full display during the ACA oral
arguments. For example, the question most vexing Justice Anthony Kennedy about the individual mandate
was that of federal limits. If the federal government can do this, he asked, then what can't it do? Does
affirming a mandate like this one effectively eviscerate all determinable limits of federal power under the
Commerce Clause, or any other? Could Congress next order us to eat broccoli, for all the same reasons it
can require us to buy health insurance? In this respect, he voiced the dual federalism perspective,
suggesting that judicial safeguards might be necessary to police the perilous boundaries of federal authority.
(Begging the question: Were it the state government ordering us to eat broccoli, would that be OK?)
Donald Verrilli, the solicitor general defending the ACA, replied from the cooperative federalism perspective
that the effective limits on federal power were located in the democratic process itself. He argued that
nobody can seriously imagine a congressional mandate to eat broccoli, because to the extent Americans
believe it unreasonable, they won't elect representatives who would enact it (and they will replace any who
do). He answered with the political-safeguards refrain that Congress reliably makes these difficult choices,
which are more amenable to legislative deliberation than judicial review. (So as long as the Congress that
orders us to eat broccoli is duly elected, federalism is satisfied?)
This moment of Supreme Court dialogue, reiterating a conversation hallowed by centuries of repetition,
reveals the rabbit hole in which federalism debates have languished for too long -- stuck between
alternatives of jurisdictional separation or overlap, and judicial or legislative hegemony. But neither
approach satisfactorily balances the roles of the different branches, and neither gives us the tools we really
need to evaluate the broccoli law (or any other). A better approach to resolving federalism controversies like
Page 2 of 4Obamacare, federalism in a Supreme Court tug of war
9/30/2013http://blog.oregonlive.com/opinion_impact/print.html?entry=/2012/06/obamacare_federali...
Obamacare frames the "who decides" question as an examination of how the challenged governance relates
to the values that underlie American federalism in the first place, and who can best evaluate that in which
circumstances.
We Americans invented federalism to help us actualize a set of good-governance goals in operation of the
new union. We created checks and balances between local and national power to protect individuals against
governmental overreaching or abdication on either side. Federalism fosters local autonomy and
interjurisdictional competition, and we hope it will promote governmental accountability to enhance
democratic participation throughout the jurisdictional spectrum. Federalism also facilitates the problem-
solving synergies that arise between the separate strengths of local and national governance for dealing with
different parts of interjurisdictional problems. On balance, if governance advances these values, then it is
consistent with the Constitution's federalism directives. If it detracts from them, then we have a problem.
The trick, of course, is that while all of these values are independently good things, they are nevertheless
suspended in tension with one another, such that you can't always satisfy all of them at the same time.
Sometimes local autonomy pulls in the opposite direction from checks and balances, which can alternatively
frustrate problem-solving synergy. These tensions expose the values "tug of war" within federalism,
highlighting the inevitable tradeoffs in interjurisdictional governance that makes it so difficult. Moreover,
they suggest that the most robust approach for resolving federalism controversies should be tethered to
consideration of how challenged governance fails or succeeds in advancing these fundamental values.
And that's just what the court should be doing in analyzing the ACA. Rather than asking whether the law
violates some abstract limit on federal power, the court should ask whether the trade-offs against some
federalism values are justified in service to others.
The states submit that the law compromises local autonomy too much, and the federal government
maintains that the need for collective-action problem solving justifies any intrusion, which is limited by the
flexibility the law confers on states to create alternative programs and to opt out entirely by declining federal
funds. The plaintiffs argue that the individual mandate compromises the very individual rights that checks
and balances are designed to protect, while the defendants protest that there is no recognized right to not
buy health insurance, especially when the failure to do so externalizes harms to other individuals. They
might further argue that both checks and synergy values are served by the use of a regulatory partnership
approach to health reform rather than full federal pre-emption. And so on.
Federalism analysis tethered to underlying constitutional values would help ensure governance that best
advances them, and it would defuse the frequent constitutional grandstanding in which federalism is
strategically deployed to mask substantive policy disagreements. In the end, the question should not be
whether only the state or also the federal government can make us eat broccoli; it is whether there are
constitutionally compelling reasons for either to do so. Either way, one thing remains clear: No matter what
the court decides, we are sure to be talking about it for a very long time.
Page 3 of 4Obamacare, federalism in a Supreme Court tug of war
9/30/2013http://blog.oregonlive.com/opinion_impact/print.html?entry=/2012/06/obamacare_federali...
Erin Ryan, a professor at Lewis & Clark Law School, is currently a Fulbright scholar in China. She is the
author of "Federalism and the Tug of War Within." This piece first appeared on RegBlog.
© 2013 OregonLive.com. All rights reserved.
Page 4 of 4Obamacare, federalism in a Supreme Court tug of war
9/30/2013http://blog.oregonlive.com/opinion_impact/print.html?entry=/2012/06/obamacare_federali...
Issue #2/Issue #2 - Sanctuary cities, federalism and separation of powers.pdf
The Volokh Conspiracy Opinion
Jeff Sessions’ attack on sanctuary cities is also an assault on federalism and separation of powers [updated with a response to Leah Litman]
By Ilya Somin July 27
Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently announced a new Justice Department policy seeking to pull federal grants from
“sanctuary cities” – jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate with some federal efforts to deport undocumented immigrants.
Much like President Trump’s earlier executive order targeting sanctuary cities, which was blocked by a federal court decision,
the Justice Department’s new policy is unconstitutional. If allowed to proceed, it would create a dangerous precedent for both
federalism and separation of powers.
The new DOJ policy would deny federal Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants (approximately $275 million in
2016) to state and local governments unless they meet three conditions:
1. Prove compliance with federal law that bars cities or states from restricting communications between the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) about the
immigration or citizenship status of a person in custody.
2. Allow DHS officials access into any detention facility to determine the immigration status of any aliens
being held.
3. Give DHS 48 hours’ notice before a jail or prison releases a person when DHS has sent over a detention
request, so the feds can arrange to take custody of the alien after he or she is released.
The first requirement is similar to the demand in Trump’s executive order requiring compliance with 8 U.S.C. Section 1373,
the federal law that it references. The two other requirements potentially go beyond that order, though the order was broader
in the sense that it applied to a much wider range of federal funds.
The major constitutional problem with all three requirements is exactly the same as the main flaw in the earlier order:
Longstanding Supreme Court precedent indicates that only Congress can impose conditions on grants given to states and
localities, and that those conditions must be “unambiguously” stated in the text of the law “so that the States can knowingly
decide whether or not to accept those funds.” Neither compliance with Section 1373 nor the other two conditions the DOJ
seeks to impose are included in the authorizing legislation for the Byrne grants. Sessions and Trump may be at odds on other
issues right now. But they are united in their desire to make up new grant conditions and impose them on states and localities
after the fact.
Should the administration manage to get away with this, it will set a dangerous precedent that goes far beyond the relatively
small Byrne program and the specific issue of sanctuary cities. If the president can unilaterally add new conditions to one
federal grant program, he can do the same thing with others. This would give presidents a massive club to coerce state and
local governments on a wide range of issues. That power might still be limited by the requirement that conditions be related to
the purpose of the grant. But, given the existence of a vast array of federal grants for many different purposes, this would be
only a modest constraint.
Some conservatives may cheer when the current administration uses this tool against sanctuary cities. But they are likely to
regret their enthusiasm if a liberal Democratic president uses the same tactic to force states to increase gun control, adopt a
“common core” curriculum, or pursue liberal policies on transgender bathroom accommodations.
Allowing the executive to impose its own after-the-fact grant conditions also threatens the separation of powers. It goes a long
way towards taking control over spending away from Congress and transferring it to the president. This, of course, violates the
text of Article I of the Constitution, which clearly gives the power of the purse to the legislature, not the executive.
As conservatives often pointed out during the Obama Administration, the modern executive has already appropriated far too
much power that more properly belongs to Congress or the states. It is dangerous to let it seize even more. If the Justice
Department proceeds with this policy, hopefully it will be challenged in court, and meet the same fate as the earlier executive
order.
The need to prevent the executive from usurping Congress’ spending authority and using it as a tool to coerce states and
localities is yet another example of how both left and right can benefit from strong, consistent enforcement of constitutional
limits on federal power. If more people learn that lesson, it may be one of the few positive legacies of this otherwise dismal
period in American political history.
UPDATE: Leah Litman criticizes part of this post at the Take Care Blog. She argues that federal grant conditions need not
always be unambiguously imposed in the text of the law because federal agencies tasked with enforcing grant condition
statutes can issue regulations that recipients must comply with, even though the regulations are not in the text of the law. It is
absolutely true that the federal agencies can issue enforcement regulations that are not themselves in the text of the law.
Enforcement measures sometimes have to go beyond the laws they are meant to effectuate. The examples Litman cites clearly
fall within this category. For example, she notes a regulation that forbids recipients of funds subject to Title VI’s ban on racial
and ethnic discrimination to “utilize criteria or methods of administration which have the effect of subjecting individuals to
discrimination because of their race, color, or national origin, or have the effect of defeating or substantially impairing
accomplishment of the objectives of the program as respects individuals of a particular race, color, or national origin.” It is
pretty obvious that this regulation is closely tailored to the law it is supposed to enforce. Indeed, the enforcement regulation
closely mirrors Title VI’s text banning “discrimination under federally assisted programs on ground of race, color, or national
origin.” It is hard to see how that language can be enforced without banning practices that “have the effect of defeating or
substantially impairing” its objectives and practices that “have the effect” of subjecting individuals to discrimination on
precisely those grounds that the law prohibits.
But, of course, agencies have the power to issue enforcement regulations only in so far as the regulations actually are
necessary to enforce conditions spelled out by Congress. And those conditions, in turn, must be “unambiguous” and in the text
of the statute, as the Supreme Court emphasized in the 1981 Pennhurst case, and reaffirmed in more recent decisions, such as
Arlington Central School District v. Murphy (2006).
Litman also claims that “[a]gencies can impose conditions that reasonably interpret ambiguous statutes they’ve been
empowered to administer.” If the conditions in question are spending conditions, it is not the case that an ambiguity in the
statute authorized by Congress can be fixed by a condition imposed by an agency. If the initial condition is itself ambiguous,
then it cannot be imposed on a state or local government on pain of withholding federal funds.
Obviously, when Congress does impose a clear condition, there is sometimes room for disagreement over whether a particular
enforcement regulation adopted by an agency goes beyond enforcing the congressional requirement and becomes a new
condition of its own. But the fact that such borderline cases exist (as is true with almost any legal doctrine) does not mean that
agencies are free to exploit ambiguities in statutes to impose conditions so long as those conditions are themselves
“reasonable.” And, as Litman recognizes, it also does not mean that they are free to add new conditions that are not authorized
by any federal statute at all, which is the case with Sessions’ new rules.
Ilya Somin is Professor of Law at George Mason University. His research focuses on constitutional law, property law, and popular political participation. He is the author of "The Grasping Hand: Kelo v. City of New London and the Limits of Eminent Domain" and "Democracy and Political Ignorance: Why Smaller Government is Smarter."
Issue #2/Issue #2- Federalism, the Constitution, and sanctuary cities.pdf
The Volokh Conspiracy Opinion
Federalism, the Constitution, and sanctuary cities
By Ilya Somin November 26, 2016
President-elect Donald Trump has repeatedly promised to engage in large-scale deportation of undocumented immigrants. In
order to accomplish that goal, he is likely to need the cooperation of state and local governments, as federal law enforcement
personnel are extremely limited. But numerous cities have “sanctuary” policies under which they are committed to refusing
cooperation with most federal deportation efforts. They include New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, and other cities with
large immigrant populations. Sanctuary cities refuse to facilitate deportation both because city leaders believe it to be harmful
and unjust, and because local law enforcement officials have concluded that it poisons community relations and undermines
efforts to combat violent crime. They also recognize that mass deportation would have severe economic costs.
Under the Constitution, state and local governments have every right to refuse to help enforce federal law. In cases like Printz
v. United States (1997) and New York v. United States (1992), the Supreme Court has ruled that the Tenth Amendment
forbids federal “commandeering” of state governments to help enforce federal law. Most of the support for this anti-
commandeering principle came from conservative justices such as the late Antonin Scalia, who wrote the majority opinion in
Printz.
Trump has said that he intends to break the resistance of sanctuary cities by cutting off all of their federal funding. The cities
might continue resisting even if they do lose some federal funds. But Trump’s threat is not as formidable as it might seem.
Few if any federal grants to state and local governments are conditioned on cooperation with federal deportation efforts. The
Supreme Court has long ruled that conditions on federal grants to state and local governments are not enforceable unless they
are “unambiguously” stated in the text of the law “so that the States can knowingly decide whether or not to accept those
funds.” In ambiguous cases, courts must assume that state and local governments are not required to meet the condition in
question. In sum, the Trump administration can’t cut off any federal grants to sanctuary cities unless it can show that those
grants were clearly conditioned on cooperation with federal deportation policies.
The looming fight over sanctuary cities is an example of how federalism and constitutional limitations on federal power can
sometimes protect vulnerable minorities – in this case undocumented immigrants. States and localities have a reputation for
being enemies of minority rights, while the federal government is seen as their protector. That has often been true historically.
But sometimes the situation is reversed – a pattern that has become more common in recent years.
Many deportation advocates claim it is essential to enforce the law against all violators. But the vast majority of Americans
have violated the law at some point in their lives, and few truly believe that all lawbreaking should be punished, regardless of
the nature of the law in question or the reason for the violation. And few have more defensible reasons for violating law than
undocumented migrants whose only other option is a lifetime of Third World poverty and oppression. In any event, even if
there is an obligation to enforce a particular law, it does not follow that the duty falls on state and local governments.
At this point, it is not yet clear how far Trump intends to push his deportation agenda. Election exit polls suggest that mass
deportation is not a popular policy, with 70% of the public believing that undocumented migrants working in the US should be
offered permanent residency, and only 25% indicating they should be deported. The spectacle of the federal government trying
to deport large numbers of people in the face of local resistance is unlikely to make good PR for the Trump administration.
Perhaps that will lead them to scale back their ambitions.
Should Trump choose to pursue a policy of mass deportation regardless of the potential downsides, sanctuary cities can refuse
to cooperate with it. And they will have the Constitution on their side.
UPDATE: It is worth noting that if Congress were to pass a law stripping sanctuary cities of all their federal funding unless
they help facilitate federal deportation efforts, it would be unconstitutional under the Supreme Court’s decision striking down
the Obamacare Medicaid expansion in NFIB v. Sebelius (2012), which forbids funding conditions so coercive that they amount
to a “gun to the head” of a state or local government. While the exact limits of this principle are debatable, denying a state all
federal grants for the purpose of compelling cooperation with federal deportation policy surely qualifies, if anything does. At
the very least, that would be true for local governments that depend on federal funds for a substantial proportion of their
budget.
Ilya Somin is Professor of Law at George Mason University. His research focuses on constitutional law, property law, and popular political participation. He is the author of "The Grasping Hand: Kelo v. City of New London and the Limits of Eminent Domain" and "Democracy and Political Ignorance: Why Smaller Government is Smarter."
Issue #2/Issue 2 - Oregon lawmakers to the federal government, de-schedule marijuana.pdf
10/4/2017 Oregon lawmakers to the federal government: de-schedule marijuana | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/08/state_lawmakers_to_the_federal.html 1/5
Oregon lawmakers to the federal government: de-schedule marijuana Updated on August 8, 2017 at 10:10 AM Posted on August 7, 2017 at 6:43 PM
By Hillary Borrud [email protected] The Oregonian/OregonLive
A bipartisan group of Oregon lawmakers joined legislators from across the country on Monday in calling for the federal government to remove marijuana from the list of
POLITICS & ELECTIONS
100
,
1.1k shares
10/4/2017 Oregon lawmakers to the federal government: de-schedule marijuana | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/08/state_lawmakers_to_the_federal.html 2/5
controlled drugs.
If the federal government were to heed the request, it could ease restrictions on cannabis research and banking in states that have legalized the drug. Yet it comes at a time when the U.S. Department of Justice is increasing its scrutiny of states with legal marijuana markets.
Oregon lawmakers have been pushing for a similar resolution since last year.
"As more states continue to legalize either medical or adult use cannabis, it is imperative that we allow legal cannabis businesses to access the banking system," Oregon Senate Majority Leader Ginny Burdick, D-Portland, said in a statement.
The lawmakers' vote to pass the resolution took place in Boston, at the National Conference of State Legislatures' annual summit.
Senate Minority Leader Ted Ferrioli, R-John Day, was not at the summit but has worked with Burdick to implement Oregon's legal marijuana system in recent years. "We are asking the federal government to remove cannabis from scheduling so that we can forge ahead with life-changing cannabis medical research," Ferrioli said in a statement.
10/4/2017 Oregon lawmakers to the federal government: de-schedule marijuana | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/08/state_lawmakers_to_the_federal.html 3/5
It comes at a time when Oregon and other states that have legalized marijuana face additional scrutiny from the U.S. Department of Justice under Attorney General Jeff Sessions. On July 24, Sessions asked Gov. Kate Brown how she plans to address problems outlined in a report by the Oregon State Police earlier this year, including Oregon's ongoing role exporting marijuana to the black market in other states such as Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Idaho.
Sessions has said a U.S. Department of Justice memorandum issued under President Barack Obama remains valid. That document, known as the Cole memo, reassured states with legal marijuana that federal prosecutors would focus on drug trafficking and other priorities, as long as the states thoroughly regulated cannabis to prevent it from leaking into the black market.
The attorney general pointed to revelations in the state police report that there is "pervasive illicit cannabis cultivation in the state ... [and] a strong indication that
10/4/2017 Oregon lawmakers to the federal government: de-schedule marijuana | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/08/state_lawmakers_to_the_federal.html 4/5
surplus cannabis is not discarded, but is in fact trafficked out-of-state and sold for a huge profit margin."
Sessions also cited other concerns, including a 55 percent increase in marijuana-related emergency room visits from March 2015 through September 2016.
He asked Brown to "please advise as to how Oregon plans to address the serious findings in the Oregon State Police report, including efforts to ensure that all marijuana activity is compliant with state marijuana laws, to combat diversion of marijuana, to protect public health and safety, and to prevent marijuana sue by minors."
-- Hillary Borrud
ADVERTISING
10/4/2017 Oregon lawmakers to the federal government: de-schedule marijuana | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/08/state_lawmakers_to_the_federal.html 5/5
503-294-4034; @hborrud
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and
Privacy Policy
© 2017 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us). The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Oregon Live LLC.
Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
Ad Choices
Issue #2/Issue 2 - States Keep Saying Yes to Marijuana Usepdf
10/4/2017 States Keep Saying Yes to Marijuana Use. Now Comes the Federal No. - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/15/us/politics/marijuana-laws-state-federal.html 1/4
https://nyti.ms/2umdSM8
POLITICS
States Keep Saying Yes to Marijuana Use. Now Comes the Federal No. By AVANTIKA CHILKOTI JULY 15, 2017
In a national vote widely viewed as a victory for conservatives, last year’s elections also yielded a win for liberals in eight states that legalized marijuana for medical or recreational use. But the growing industry is facing a federal crackdown under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who has compared cannabis to heroin.
A task force Mr. Sessions appointed to, in part, review links between violent crimes and marijuana is scheduled to release its findings by the end of the month. But he has already asked Senate leaders to roll back rules that block the Justice Department from bypassing state laws to enforce a federal ban on medical marijuana.
That has pitted the attorney general against members of Congress across the political spectrum — from Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, to Senator Cory Booker, Democrat of New Jersey — who are determined to defend states’ rights and provide some certainty for the multibillion-dollar pot industry.
“Our attorney general is giving everyone whiplash by trying to take us back to the 1960s,” said Representative Jared Huffman, Democrat of California, whose district includes the so-called Emerald Triangle that produces much of America’s marijuana.
“Prosecutorial discretion is everything given the current conflict between the federal law and the law of many states,” he said in an interview last month.9
ARTICLES REMAINING
SEE MY OPTIONS Subscriber login
10/4/2017 States Keep Saying Yes to Marijuana Use. Now Comes the Federal No. - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/15/us/politics/marijuana-laws-state-federal.html 2/4
In February, Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, said the Trump administration would look into enforcing federal law against recreational marijuana businesses. Some states are considering tougher stands: In Massachusetts, for example, the Legislature is trying to rewrite a law to legalize recreational marijuana that voters passed in November.
Around one-fifth of Americans now live in states where marijuana is legal for adult use, according to the Brookings Institution, and an estimated 200 million live in places where medicinal marijuana is legal. Cannabis retailing has moved from street corners to state-of-the-art dispensaries and stores, with California entrepreneurs producing rose gold vaporizers and businesses in Colorado selling infused drinks.
Mr. Sessions is backed by a minority of Americans who view cannabis as a “gateway” drug that drives social problems, like the recent rise in opioid addiction.
“We love Jeff Sessions’s position on marijuana because he is thinking about it clearly,” said Scott Chipman, Southern California chairman for Citizens Against Legalizing Marijuana.
He dismissed the idea of recreational drug use. “‘Recreational’ is a bike ride, a swim, going to the beach,” he said. “Using a drug to put your brain in an altered state is not recreation. That is self-destructive behavior and escapism.”
Marijuana merchants are protected by a provision in the federal budget that prohibits the Justice Department from spending money to block state laws that allow medicinal cannabis. Under the Obama administration, the Justice Department did not interfere with state laws that legalize marijuana and instead focused on prosecuting drug cartels and the transport of pot across state lines.
In March, a group of senators that included Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, asked Mr. Sessions to stick with existing policies. Some lawmakers also want to allow banks to work with the marijuana industry and to allow tax deductions for business expenses.
10/4/2017 States Keep Saying Yes to Marijuana Use. Now Comes the Federal No. - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/15/us/politics/marijuana-laws-state-federal.html 3/4
Lawmakers who support legalizing marijuana contend that it leads to greater regulation, curbs the black market and stops money laundering. They point to studies showing that the war on drugs, which began under President Richard M. Nixon, had disastrous impacts on national incarceration rates and racial divides.
In a statement, Mr. Booker said the Trump administration’s crackdown against marijuana “will not make our communities safer or reduce the use of illegal drugs.”
“Instead, they will worsen an already broken system,” he said, noting that marijuana-related arrests are disproportionately high for black Americans.
Consumers spent $5.9 billion on legal cannabis in the United States last year, according to the Arcview Group, which studies and invests in the industry. That figure is expected to reach $19 billion by 2021.
A Quinnipiac University poll in February concluded that 59 percent of American voters believe cannabis should be legal. Additionally, the poll found, 71 percent say the federal government should not prosecute marijuana use in states that have legalized it.
“This is part of a larger set of issues that the country is wrestling with right now, where a very strong-willed minority is trying to impose its value system on the country as a whole,” said Roger McNamee, an industry investor.
But marijuana businesses are bracing for a possible clampdown.
“People that were sort of on the fence — a family office, a high-net-worth individual thinking of privately financing a licensed opportunity — it has swayed them to go the other way and think: not just yet,” said Randy Maslow, a founder of iAnthus Capital Holdings. The public company raises money in Canada, where Prime Minister Justin Trudeau campaigned on a promise to legalize recreational use of marijuana.
Representative Earl Blumenauer, Democrat of Oregon and a co-chairman of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, is urging marijuana businesses not to be “unduly concerned.”
10/4/2017 States Keep Saying Yes to Marijuana Use. Now Comes the Federal No. - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/15/us/politics/marijuana-laws-state-federal.html 4/4
“We have watched where the politicians have consistently failed to be able to fashion rational policy and show a little backbone,” he said. “This issue has been driven by the people.”
A version of this article appears in print on July 16, 2017, on Page A18 of the New York edition with the headline: States Keep Saying Yes to Marijuana. Now There’s an Attorney General Saying No.
© 2017 The New York Times Company
Issue #3/Week 3 reading 10-12-2017/Clucas_et_al_Chap_5_Direct_Democracy.pdf
This reading is from: Clucas, Steel, Henkels, Oregon Politics and
Government: University of Nebraska Press, 2005
The tables and figures are at the end of the reading.
Chapter Five
Direct Democracy
Richard J. Ellis
Distrust of state legislatures runs deep in the United States,
but citizens must generally act through their legislature, no
matter how much they may distrust it. They can keep a watchful
eye, join interest groups, attend hearings, write letters or e-
mails to their representatives, even vote them out of office or
protest on the streets, but the job of writing and passing
public policy lies with the elected officials not the citizens.
In 24 states, however, citizens have the power to bypass the
legislature and enact legislation directly. In all but a few of
these 24 states, citizens also have the power to force a popular
110
vote on laws passed by the legislature. These twin instruments
of direct democracy are known respectively as the initiative and
referendum. 1
Although the initiative and referendum are often lumped
together, their implications for the political system are
significantly different. By enabling citizens to force a public
vote on recently enacted legislation, the referendum adds an
additional check to the normal legislative process. Legislators
are still writing the laws and governors are still signing the
laws. The referendum only adds one more veto point to the
process. The initiative, in contrast, is not an additional check
but an alternative law-making process. Through the initiative
process, citizens can enact laws with little or no involvement
of elected officials. The initiative thus poses a qualitatively
different challenge to representative democracy than does the
referendum.
How the Process Works
The state manual explaining the operation of the initiative and
referendum processes is more than 50 pages long, but its
essential features can be readily summarized. To qualify an
initiative for the ballot, an initiative’s sponsors must first
file the full text of their proposed law with the elections
division in the secretary of state’s office. The elections
111
division then forwards the initiative proposal to the attorney
general, who prepares a title for the ballot, which explains the
initiative’s content and potential effect. The secretary of
state also reviews the proposed initiative petition at this time
to make sure it complies with the procedural requirements of the
state constitution.
Once the proposal has received a ballot title and passed
this review, the sponsors can then collect signatures from
registered voters. The total number of signatures that is
required to reach the ballot depends on the type of initiative.
There are two types of initiatives in Oregon: the statutory
initiative and the constitutional initiative. A statutory
initiative seeks to create a new state law (statute) or revise
an existing one. A constitutional initiative seeks to amend the
state constitution. To qualify a statutory initiative, the
sponsors must obtain signatures equal to 6 percent of the
turnout in the previous gubernatorial election; for
constitutional initiatives, supporters must gather 8 percent.
Oregonians have up to two years to gather the signatures for an
initiative petition and, unlike in many states, there are no
restrictions on where the signatures may be gathered within the
state.
When the sponsors have collected enough signatures, they
submit their petitions to the elections division, which then
112
verifies the validity of the signatures. Initiative sponsors
routinely try to submit more signatures than is required in
order to ensure they have enough valid ones. If there are enough
valid signatures, the elections division will then place the
proposal on the next statewide general election ballot. To
become law, initiatives must receive more than 50 percent of the
votes cast.
To qualify a referendum, the referendum sponsors must file
a copy of their proposed referendum petition with the elections
division within 90 days of the end of the legislative session in
which the law was enacted. If the proposed petition complies
with state regulations, the elections division then will notify
the sponsors that they can begin collecting signatures. The
signature threshold is lower for a referendum, but the time
allowed to gather signatures is much shorter. To qualify for the
ballot, the referendum sponsors must obtain signatures equal to
4 percent of the turnout in the previous gubernatorial election,
but they are allowed only 90 days to gather these signatures.
For a referendum to pass, and thus overturn the legislature’s
action, it must receive more than 50 percent of the vote.
The Oregon System
No state has used the initiative and referendum more often than
Oregon. Since the first initiative election in 1904, Oregonians
113
have voted on more than 300 initiatives and 60 popular
referenda. Only California comes close to matching Oregon’s
record of activity. Although not the first state to adopt the
statewide initiative and referendum (that distinction goes to
South Dakota), Oregon was the first to use these new mechanisms
of democracy. Oregon’s pioneering role in the use of the
initiative and referendum was widely recognized in the early
twentieth century; indeed, the initiative and referendum were
often referred to as “the Oregon system.” Political reformers
hailed the state as the nation’s “political experiment station.”
Between 1904 and 1908, Oregonians voted on 23 initiatives, and
passed 17. In contrast, only two statutory initiatives qualified
for the ballot in the rest of country during this period, and
both were defeated.
What made the nation take notice of Oregon was not only the
quantity of initiatives but also the innovative uses of direct
legislation. Among the earliest initiatives passed by Oregon
voters were some of the most important reforms of the
Progressive Movement. Laws and amendments were enacted that
opened up the primary process, instructed state legislators to
select the people’s choice for U.S. senator, enabled voters to
recall public officials, expanded the initiative process to
cities, and established a Corrupt Practices Act. Observers came
away from Oregon persuaded that they had glimpsed the future and
114
it worked. Here at last, many thought, was a mechanism to defeat
the power of the political bosses and organized wealth. It was
from out of these landmark laws that Oregon’s reputation as a
progressive state first emerged.
States that did not yet have the initiative and referendum
rushed to get it. By 1918, 19 states had adopted the initiative
and referendum. Although Oregon’s early experience helped spark
national enthusiasm for direct democracy, within the state the
euphoria was short-lived. When 25 initiatives qualified for the
ballot in 1910 and 28 in 1912, many Oregonians began to question
the wisdom of direct legislation. Even erstwhile supporters
criticized the initiative’s overuse and abuse. The state’s
special interest groups quickly learned to use the initiative
and referendum to advance their own interests. Because there was
no requirement that an initiative campaign reveal to the public
how much money they had received and from what sources, groups
were often able to conceal their involvement. Until 1913 the
secretary of state was not even required to record who had filed
the petition for an initiative, and so the public often did not
know which interests were sponsoring let alone bankrolling an
initiative.
The less-regulated political environment of the early
twentieth century meant that fraud and corruption were
widespread in the circulation of petitions. The most infamous
115
case was a popular referendum in 1912 that aimed to overturn the
legislature’s appropriation for the University of Oregon. The
circuit court that heard the case concluded that over 60 percent
of the 13,000 signatures gathered for the referendum were
fraudulent. Even the defendants themselves conceded that about
30 percent of the signatures had either been forged or
fabricated. It is difficult to determine how typical or
pervasive such corruption was because under a 1907 law,
petitions were verified by the signed affidavit of the
circulators. The large number of initiatives combined with
stories of fraud and abuse soon cooled voters’ enthusiasm for
direct legislation. Of the 53 statewide initiatives on the
Oregon ballot in 1910 and 1912, only 16 passed. In the following
election, in 1914, voters rejected all but two of the 19
initiatives on the ballot. After 1914, initiative use in Oregon
declined precipitously. Between 1920 and 1969, Oregonians voted
on fewer initiatives than in the five general elections between
1906 and 1914. Even more striking, the 23 initiatives passed
during the five decades and 25 general elections stretching from
the 1920s through the 1960s is less than the number of
initiatives that were passed in the three general elections
between 1906 and 1910. In the 1920s and 1930s, less than one in
five initiatives succeeded, and during the 1960s not a single
initiative passed, and only seven qualified for the ballot.
116
Since reaching its nadir in the 1960s, initiative use in
Oregon has climbed steeply in each of the subsequent decades
(see figure 5.1). Each decade since the 1960s has nearly doubled
the initiative use of the previous decade. In the 1980s and
1990s, Oregonians approved more initiatives than in the previous
six decades combined. The recent revolution in initiative use
reached its apex in 2000 when a modern record of 18 initiatives
qualified for the ballot. In that one election, Oregonians voted
on more initiatives than they did in the twenty-year period
between 1956 and 1975.
(figure 5.1 about here)
While initiative use has increased dramatically in Oregon
over the last several decades, use of the popular referendum has
generally declined (see figure 5.2). Referenda have never been
as common as initiatives, but in the first half of the twentieth
century, they were a regular and important feature of the
political landscape. Between 1904 and 1952, 47 referenda were
voted on; in contrast, during the next half century (1953-2002)
only 13 referenda reached the ballot. There has been some
tentative evidence recently that the referendum may be staging a
mini-comeback. Two referenda qualified in 2000, which is only
the second time since 1952 that there has been more than one
referendum in a single year. For the most part, however, the
story of direct democracy in modern Oregon is the tale of the
117
initiative process.
(figure 5.2 about here)
Supply-Side Politics
Why does Oregon have so many initiatives compared with other
initiative states? In 2000, almost one-quarter of the nation’s
statewide initiatives were in Oregon. In 2002, the absolute
number of initiatives in Oregon declined precipitously (to
seven), but Oregon still qualified more initiatives than any
other state. Why, moreover, has initiative use increased so
dramatically in Oregon (as well as in the nation) over the past
several decades?
Initiative activists often explain the increase in
initiative use by pointing to voters’ distrust of politicians or
to the ineffective performance of government. However, citizens
in Oregon are not more alienated from government or distrustful
of politicians than voters in low-use initiative states like
Idaho or Ohio. The record number of initiatives in 2000,
moreover, came at a time when voters’ distrust of government was
not notably high by modern standards. Nor can the explanation be
attributed to poor legislative performance. The Oregon
legislature is not any more ineffective or unresponsive than the
legislatures in Wyoming or Oklahoma, where the initiative
118
continues to be used infrequently.
Part of the explanation for why Oregon has more initiatives
than other states is that it is relatively easy to qualify an
initiative in Oregon. If Oregon required, as Wyoming does, that
petitioners gather signatures equal to at least 15 percent of
the total number of votes cast in the preceding general
election, initiative use would decline substantially. Also
important is the absence of a geographic distribution
requirement that requires signatures to be gathered in a certain
number of counties or legislative districts across the state.
None of the top six initiative states in the 1980s and 1990s had
a geographic requirement. In contrast, all but a handful of the
states in the bottom half of initiative use have some form of
geographic requirement.
Legal rules and procedural hurdles account for much of the
difference among states in initiative use, but they also leave
much unexplained. On paper it is easier to qualify an initiative
in South Dakota than in Oregon; yet Oregonians have used the
initiative process more than six times as often as voters in
South Dakota. In California, petitioners have only 150 days to
gather signatures for initiative petitions, which is among the
most restrictive circulation periods in the nation. However,
California typically has far more initiatives on the ballot than
other states, including states that allow petitioners several
119
years to gather signatures. Nor can signature requirements
explain why Arizona, which has a relatively high requirement (10
percent for statutory initiatives and 15 percent for
constitutional initiatives), has seen far more initiatives than
many states with much lower signature thresholds.
What separates Oregon from most other initiative states is
less its signature requirements than its bevy of experienced
initiative activists who are skilled at using direct legislation
to serve their political ends. Initiative use in Oregon has
become institutionalized, driven not by the demands of the
public, but by the activists and professionals who supply the
initiatives.
In recent years, the most accomplished initiative user in
the state, and perhaps in the nation, has been Bill Sizemore.
Since becoming head of Oregon Taxpayers United in 1993, Sizemore
has been responsible for well over a dozen initiatives,
including some of the most important conservative ballot
measures. He has championed initiatives that have sought to cut
property and income taxes, reduce public employees’ pensions,
curtail the power of labor unions, abolish Portland’s regional
government, block the expansion of Portland’s commuter railway,
and link teacher pay to performance. In 2000, Sizemore sponsored
six of the eighteen initiatives on the ballot. Contributing to
Sizemore’s success is that he has turned the initiative process
120
into a lucrative business. In 1997, Sizemore established his own
signature-gathering firm, I&R Petition Services Inc. Through
this business, Sizemore is able not only to introduce his own
initiatives, but also to qualify them. In addition, he can sell
his services to other chief petitioners.
Sizemore is only the most prominent of a network of
energetic conservative initiative activists in the state. Lon
Mabon and the Oregon Citizens Alliance qualified three anti-gay
initiatives in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and came close to
qualifying several more in the mid and late 1990s. In 2000,
Mabon and the alliance were able to place Measure 9 on the
ballot, which unsuccessfully tried to ban the teaching of
homosexuality in schools. Don McIntyre, one of the fathers of
Oregon’s landmark 1990 tax limitation initiative (Measure 5), is
another conservative activist who has qualified initiatives in
many elections, including a measure (Measure 8) that would have
placed a lid on state spending in 2000 (it was defeated), and
another in 2002 that would have changed the way that Supreme
Court and appeals court justices are elected (also defeated).
Ruth Bendl has been instrumental in qualifying conservative
proposals as well. In 2000, Bendl coordinated the signature-
gathering drive for Measure 8, and in the mid-1990s she worked
in a similar capacity for Loren Parks, one of the leading
financial supporters of conservative initiatives in Oregon,
121
including many of Sizemore’s. Together with Parks, Bendl played
a pivotal role in qualifying nearly half of the 16 initiatives
on the 1996 ballot, as well as several on the 1994 ballot.
Activists and groups on the left have also frequently used
the initiative to pursue their agenda. Perhaps the most
persistent has been Lloyd Marbet, a fixture of Oregon initiative
politics since the mid-1980s when he led three separate
initiative campaigns to close the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant
along the Columbia River. Marbet has also sponsored initiatives
to force the clean up of radioactive wastes and to stop Portland
General Electric from earning profits from the mothballed Trojan
Nuclear Plant. In 2002, his effort to qualify a campaign finance
reform initiative fell about 10,000 signatures short of making
the ballot. Throughout this book, the other authors have
emphasized the importance of progressivism in Oregon politics.
But Marbet, like many users of the initiative on the left, is
more of a liberal populist than a progressive. Many of his
initiatives have challenged corporate interests in the state.
Environmental groups in the state have also periodically
supplied initiatives. In 1998, for instance, the Nature
Conservancy spearheaded Measure 66, which allotted 15 percent of
state lottery money to salmon and parks. In 1996, the Oregon
Natural Desert Association sponsored the Clean Streams
Initiative. This measure (Measure 38) was widely seen as too
122
extreme and was handily defeated at the polls, a fate that
befell a number of other environmental initiatives in the 1990s,
including efforts to limit the use of polystyrene in packaging
(Measure 6 in 1990), restrict fish harvests (Measure 8 in 1992),
restrict strip mining (Measure 14 in 1994), expand the bottle
bill (Measure 37 in 1996), and limit timber harvests (Measure 64
in 1998). During the 1970s and 1980s, environmentalists were
often among the most vocal proponents of the initiative process,
believing that environmental issues--where benefits are widely
distributed and costs are narrowly concentrated--are ideally
suited to the majoritarian bias of direct legislation. These
recent setbacks (and similar defeats in other states, most
notably like California) have arguably chastened some
environmentalists’ enthusiasm for the initiative, but
environmental groups remain formidable players in initiative
politics and will undoubtedly continue to supply initiatives in
the future.
In recent years, labor unions have been the most important
(and successful) supplier of progressive initiative campaigns in
Oregon. Tim Nesbitt, president of the Oregon AFL-CIO, has
emerged in recent years as a leader in organized labor’s
increased use of initiatives. Nesbitt helped direct the
successful campaigns for two pro-labor initiatives on the 1998
ballot: Measure 62, which included a clause granting
123
constitutional protection to union payroll deductions, and
Measure 63, which established new rules making it more difficult
for anti-tax advocates to create “supermajority” requirements
for tax increases. The latter measure required that all future
initiatives that establish supermajority voting requirements be
passed with the same supermajority of votes. In 2002, Nesbitt
and the unions qualified two more measures, one prohibiting
payment by the signature on initiative petitions, and the other
increasing the minimum wage and indexing it to inflation.
“Good government” groups have also championed several
initiatives in the past decade. One of the most active of these
is the Oregon State Public Interest Research Group (OSPIRG), a
statewide organization that is led by college and university
students. OSPIRG played a leading role in the 1994 passage of
Measure 9, placing restrictions on campaign finance (the measure
was subsequently invalidated by the courts). OSPIRG has also
pushed initiatives focusing on the environment and consumer
protection. For example, OSPIRG helped champion an unsuccessful
initiative (Measure 37) in 1996 to expand the state’s bottle
bill law. In addition to OSPIRG, Common Cause and the League of
Women Voters have played leadership roles in promoting “good
government” initiatives.
Paid Signature Gatherers. Some of these initiative petitioners
124
(most notably, Lon Mabon) have relied entirely on volunteers,
but the overwhelming majority of the successful initiative
activists in Oregon rely on paid signature gatherers. Between
1990 and 2002, all but eight of the 82 initiatives on the ballot
used paid signature gatherers. As recently as the early 1980s,
paying people to gather signatures was illegal in Oregon, as it
also was in Washington and Colorado. Oregon’s longstanding ban
on paid signature gatherers (the ban had been in effect since
1935) was repealed by the legislature after a 1982 court
decision that held that barring individuals from paying people
to gather signatures unconstitutionally restricts freedom of
speech. 2 That decision, and a 1988 U.S. Supreme Court ruling
invalidating Colorado’s ban on paid signature gatherers, 3 helped
to pave the way for the explosion of initiative activity in the
1990s. From World War II through 1982, while Oregon’s ban on
paid signature gatherers was in place, there were only two
elections in which more than four initiatives appeared on the
Oregon ballot (1948 and 1978), and never was there more than
seven; after the ban's elimination, however, there has been only
one election (1988) in which fewer than seven initiatives have
appeared on the ballot.
Volunteer signature campaigns are difficult. They require
organization, experience, and intense commitment. Little
surprise that about 90 percent of volunteer-only signature
125
drives over the past decade have failed to gather the necessary
signatures. Initiative campaigns that pay for signatures have a
much higher rate of success. Moreover, the amount of money it
takes to secure a place on the Oregon ballot--between $100,000
to $150,000--is small enough that wealthy individuals have
little difficulty purchasing a place on the ballot for their
ideas. A particularly good example of a wealthy private citizen
purchasing a spot on the ballot came in 1996, when Gordon
Miller, a Salem eye doctor, underwrote virtually the entire cost
of qualifying three initiatives he had written (Measures 35, 41,
and 42). In 2002, to take a more recent example, Loren Parks
single-handedly secured a place on the ballot for two
initiatives (Measures 21 and 22) that would have changed the way
judges are elected. Qualifying the two constitutional
amendments, both of which were defeated, cost Parks $256,453,
which was 99.7 percent of the total amount raised by the two
qualifying campaigns. 4 In initiative politics, money may not
always be a necessary condition for ballot access but in large
enough quantities it is a sufficient condition.
Why Initiative Sponsors Matter
According to some, it does not much matter who places a measure
on the ballot, or where the money comes from, because it is the
citizens who decide whether to vote yes or no. Voters have the
126
final say, so no initiative can become law unless it represents
the will of the people. Dr. Miller’s three 1996 initiatives, for
instance, were all soundly defeated and left no lasting
impression on Oregon politics or policy.
Even allowing for the limitations of money in electoral
campaigns and the good sense of Oregon voters, there are still
strong reasons to be concerned about how initiatives get on the
ballot and who places them there. To begin with, initiative
sponsors frame how an issue is presented. As anyone familiar
with polling knows, public opinion on many issues is
extraordinarily sensitive to how questions are worded. For
example, if you ask people whether they support spending for the
“poor,” their responses will be far more favorable than if they
are asked about spending on “welfare.” Just as the answer one
gets in a poll depends on the way the question is asked, so the
support an initiative receives depends in large part on the
wording of the ballot title.
Supporters and critics of the initiative process agree that
the wording of the ballot title is important in an initiative’s
success. Speaking before a legislative committee in 1999,
Sizemore was asked by a state senator about his strategy of
submitting multiple versions of the same initiative to the
secretary of state’s office. The ballot title and accompanying
statements describing the effects of the measure, Sizemore
127
explained, are “very important”; indeed they are perhaps "the
sole determinant" of the vote. If the sponsors do not like the
ballot title and summary drafted by the attorney general, it is
simple “prudence” for them to shop for one more appealing to
voters. 5
Those who write initiatives, moreover, structure and
thereby shape voter choice. Voters may prefer a particular
initiative to keeping the status quo, but if given a wider range
of options, voters might rank that initiative near the bottom of
their preferences. For instance, given a choice between A and
Not-A, voters may choose A, but given a choice between A, B, and
C, A might be voters’ least favorite option. The power to
structure the choices on the ballot thus carries with it the
power to shape the vote.
A recent tax-cutting initiative illustrates this
phenomenon. In 1996, Oregonians were offered Measure 47, which
promised to roll back property taxes dramatically. The choice
given voters was between a large rollback or no change in their
taxes. There were no other options, such as for a more moderate
rollback or providing rebates for low-income and fixed income
property owners. So while the vote on Measure 47 (52 percent
supported it) did reflect a majority’s preference for lower
property taxes, the precise policies that were enacted did not
necessarily reflect the voters’ most preferred policy.
128
A further reason that voters’ approval of an initiative
cannot erase concerns about who sponsored it is that passage of
an initiative does not necessarily reflect the issue’s salience
to voters. For example, anti-tax initiatives dominated state
ballots in 2000, appearing in Oregon, Alaska, California,
Colorado, Massachusetts, South Dakota, and Washington, even
though polls consistently showed that a large majority of voters
were less concerned with reducing taxes than they were with
adequately funding government services. 6 Once on the ballot,
however, less salient issues can quickly become the central
focus of political debate.
Finally, the presence of an initiative on the ballot can
force elected officials and interest groups to play defense on
issues promoted by initiative sponsors. Thus, even when
initiative sponsors lose the electoral battle, they may still
win the political war by controlling the agenda. In 1998, for
example, Democrat incumbent governor John Kitzhaber soundly
defeated Sizemore, the Republican nominee, by a two-to-one
margin. Yet soon after the election, Sizemore was able to seize
control over much of the agenda by qualifying a measure that
would have dramatically scaled back state income taxes. In
response, Kitzhaber felt compelled to challenge his defeated
opponent to a series of debates over Sizemore's proposed tax
cuts. Moreover, Kitzhaber dropped one of his own planned
129
initiatives, which would have established a rainy day fund for
schools, so that he could concentrate his campaigning and fund-
raising efforts on defeating Sizemore’s tax proposals.
Voting on Initiatives
If there is more reason to worry about how initiatives reach the
ballot than is commonly assumed, there is arguably less cause
for concern about the election itself than some initiative
critics believe. Many citizens worry a great deal about the role
of money in deciding election outcomes, but most research has
shown the role of money in initiative campaigns to be limited in
important respects. Studies have consistently shown that the
power of money is greatest when spent in opposition to an
initiative, and that money spent on behalf of an initiative has
substantially smaller effects. Moreover, a recent study by
Elizabeth Garrett and Elizabeth Gerber finds that the effects of
spending on behalf of an initiative are most pronounced among
initiatives that receive less of their money from a few large
contributors. Interestingly, Garrett and Gerber found that this
effect was not present in spending in opposition to initiatives.
In fact, campaigns with more large contributors did better
opposing initiatives than those campaigns that had more broad-
based contributions. 7 The clear implication of this and other
130
studies like it is that our real concern in initiative election
is less that powerful well-endowed interests will be able to
push through a favored policy than that powerful well-endowed
interests will be able to halt policy change via the initiative.
Those who are most concerned about the effects of the
initiative process should be the ones most resistant to the idea
of limiting money in initiative elections. Far from corrupting
the initiative process, special interest groups across the
political spectrum play a vital role in helping voters to become
aware of an initiative’s deleterious effects, which are often
obscured by attractive ballot titles or arcane technical
language. It is when powerful special interest groups mobilize
against an initiative and spend large sums of money on
television and radio advertisements that voters have the best
chance of hearing opposing arguments and making a reasonably
informed decision.
Few voters are policy wonks or political junkies. But they
do not necessarily need to be in order to make informed
decisions on ballot measures. As in candidate elections, voters
use information shortcuts to make decisions. Although voters
will only rarely understand the many ramifications of complex
proposals, they can ask themselves the much simpler question:
Who is for it and who is against it? The more money spent in a
campaign, the more likely voters will find out which groups are
131
behind a measure and which groups oppose the measure. So long as
voters have an attitude toward those groups–-whether they be
labor unions or anti-tax groups, Democrats or Republicans,
environmental organizations or pro-life groups–-they can
generally arrive at a reasonably informed decision. 8 Oregonians’
strongly negative attitude toward Sizemore after his failed 1998
gubernatorial bid may explain why all six of his measures were
defeated in 2000.
Ballots crowded with issues undoubtedly present more of a
challenge to voters than a ballot with only a handful of
measures. In particular, the problem with a crowded ballot is
that a few issues hog the media limelight, leaving others
struggling to gain public attention. In Oregon in 2000, one of
the chief ballot hogs was Measure 9, which would have prohibited
public schools, including community colleges, from promoting or
sanctioning homosexual or bisexual behavior. Between Labor Day
and election day, nearly 30 percent of the measure-related
letters to the editor in the state’s leading newspaper, the
Oregonian, were devoted to Measure 9. Add Measure 94, the effort
to repeal mandatory minimum sentences for violent offenders, and
one has accounted for almost half of the letters to the editor.
Throw in Sizemore’s prohibition on double taxation (Measure 91)
and the number exceeds 60 percent. In contrast, 16 of the 26
measures (including the seven legislative referrals and one
132
popular referendum) accounted for only about 13 percent of the
letters to the editor. This makes it possible for a measure to
slip through without the same level of scrutiny it would receive
on a less crowded ballot.
Although crowded ballots raise legitimate concerns for the
quality of voter decision-making, there is also evidence that
the process is self-correcting because voters seem to react to
confusion by voting no. In 2000, only five of the 18 initiatives
passed, whereas in 1998, when there were only nine initiatives
on the ballot, six passed. In 2002, four of seven were approved.
Since the initiative’s inception in 1904, there have been six
elections with 16 or more initiatives on the ballot, and the
passage rate has been only 28 percent. In contrast, in the
remainder of the initiative elections, the passage rate has been
about 40 percent.
The Initiative Goes to Court
Elections are the most visible arena in which initiatives are
contested, but experienced initiative activists know that the
most important battleground is often the courts. During the
1980s and 1990s, half of Oregon’s statewide initiatives approved
by voters were challenged in court, and of these, half were
struck down either in whole or in part. 9 Why do such a high
percentage of initiatives get entangled in the courts?
133
Part of the answer lies in the technical and legal
deficiencies of some initiatives. Although initiative proponents
generally seek out legal counsel in drafting a measure,
initiatives do not have to run through the institutional
gauntlet of staff analyses, committee hearings, and mark-up
sessions that helps to ferret out drafting flaws in the state
legislature. More important than the legal deficiencies,
however, may be the political deficiencies of the initiative
process. In the legislature, some bills skate through with
virtually no serious opposition, but on contentious issues, the
sort that routinely appear on initiative ballots, legislation
does not normally get passed without significant concessions
being made to opponents. By moderating a bill to take into
account opponents’ objections, the legislative process makes it
less likely that these groups will seek to challenge the law in
court. The winner-take-all politics of the initiative process,
in contrast, encourages sore losers to take their political
grievance to the courts.
The courts’ importance in initiative politics has increased
still further in the wake of its decision in the 1998 case,
Armatta v. Kitzhaber. In Armatta, the court heard a challenge to
Measure 40, a 1996 “victim’s rights” initiative. Prior to the
Armatta decision, the primary legal constraint on both statutory
and constitutional initiatives was that they could only address
134
one subject, or what is referred to as the single-subject rule.
In the Armatta case, the court expanded restrictions on
constitutional initiatives, ruling that an individual initiative
cannot offer more than one amendment to the constitution. If two
or more amendments are sought, then each one must be submitted
“separately” to the voters. Since Measure 40 changed five
different sections of the Oregon constitution and implicated a
number of distinct constitutional rights, the court ruled that
it violated the people’s right to vote on different amendments
separately. 10
The court’s decision opened up a new legal challenge to
constitutional amendments and had an immediate impact on the
secretary of state’s pre-election review of initiative
petitions. Using the “separate-vote” test of the 1998 Armatta
decision, the secretary of state’s office rejected seven
initiatives in under a year, which was roughly equal to the
number of initiatives that had been turned down in the previous
eight years combined. Lower courts have also begun to use the
Armatta decision to strike down initiatives. In November 2000,
the Oregon Court of Appeals relied on Armatta to invalidate
Measure 62, a complex campaign finance measure sponsored by
labor unions in 1998. A few months later, a circuit judge used
Armatta to invalidate Measure 7, a controversial initiative on
the 2000 ballot that required government to compensate land
135
owners for any government regulation that lowers property
values. The state Supreme Court also relied on Armatta in
overturning Oregon’s 1992 term limits law and in upholding the
lower court’s ruling on Measure 62.
Courts are often seen as the protector of minority rights,
a role that seems particularly important given the majoritarian
bias of direct legislation. In the Armatta decision, however,
the court arguably advanced majority rule. The chief petitioner
of Measure 40, state legislator Kevin Mannix, responded to the
Armatta ruling by breaking up the measure into seven different
amendments, pushing each through the legislature, and referring
them to the voters in November 1999. The results of that
election are a cautionary tale for those who assume that a
successful initiative represents the will of the people. Three
of the seven proposals that were part of the successful Measure
40--the 11-to-1 jury verdict in murder trials, the weakening of
immunity law, and the prosecutor’s right to insist on a jury
trial–-were comfortably defeated in 1999. In the case of the
prosecutor’s power to demand a jury trial, close to 60 percent
voted in opposition. The remaining four measures passed, in all
but one case by roughly the same margin as the original Measure
40. Far from depriving people of their voice, the high court had
enabled people to speak more clearly and to express their
preferences more accurately.
136
The Armatta decision may also create an incentive for
initiative sponsors to craft initiatives as statutory changes,
where the hurdle will be a lenient single-subject rule, rather
than as constitutional amendments, where they will face a more
exacting “separate-vote” requirement. Hitherto the only
difference between statutory and constitutional initiatives has
been the slightly higher number of signatures required for the
latter. The additional signatures required for a constitutional
amendment are generally a small burden for a well-endowed
initiative sponsor, especially when weighed against the benefit
to initiative sponsors of being able to insulate their
initiatives from legislative meddling. The result has been a
host of law-like initiatives, including Mannix’s 1994 measure
requiring prisoners to work, that have been enshrined in the
Oregon Constitution. Nearly 60 percent of the initiatives that
made it to the ballot between 1990 and 2000 were constitutional
amendments, though many could as easily have been written as
statutory changes. Some may see the Armatta decision as a
positive step in helping to arrest the erosion of a meaningful
distinction between constitutional and statutory law, but others
less trusting of the legislature will likely see this
as making it harder to prevent the legislature from undoing the
will of the people.
The primary risk of the Armatta decision, and more generally
137
of relying on the courts as a check on initiative politics, is
that it has the potential to threaten courts’ legitimacy because
it puts them squarely in the middle of highly volatile political
disputes. When initiative advocates meet a setback in the courts,
they frequently lambast the judges for judicial arrogance, for
legislating from the bench, and for thwarting the public will.
Initiative sponsor Bob Tiernan was so outraged by the Supreme
Court’s invalidation of Measure 8, a 1994 initiative requiring
public employees to contribute to their pension benefits, that he
promptly filed an initiative to alter the rules of judicial
elections. The initiative sought to overturn the state regulations
restricting judges from raising money directly and from discussing
decisions during campaigns. Although unsuccessful in his
initiative bid, Tiernan’s aim was to lift the profile of judicial
races, making them more competitive and more politicized, and
thereby making it easier for challengers to unseat incumbents. In
2002, two initiatives were aimed at changing judicial elections,
and both were sponsored by conservatives upset at recent court
rulings on initiatives. Both initiatives were defeated, though the
measure promoting the election of appellate and Supreme Court
judges by district received 49 percent of the vote.
Of particular concern to some observers is the state Supreme
Court’s growing involvement in the writing of ballot titles. A
ballot title consists of a 15-word caption, a summary of the
138
measure, and a description of the potential results if the measure
is approved or rejected. If the proponents or opponents of the
measure are dissatisfied with the attorney general’s ballot title,
they can ask the state Supreme Court to review the ballot title.
The court must take the case and conduct the review of the ballot
title “expeditiously” so as to “ensure the orderly and timely
circulation of the petition.” In practice, this has meant that the
court immediately moves ballot-title cases to the top of its
docket. The court can either certify the ballot title as written
by the attorney general or, if the title fails to “substantially
comply” with statutory requirements, it can rewrite the ballot
title. Over half of the ballot titles certified by the court in
the late 1990s were rewritten by the court. 11
In recent years, moreover, the number of such cases has
mushroomed. Of the 146 ballot titles certified by the attorney
general’s office in the 1999-2000 election cycle, 92 were appealed
to the court. In March and April 2000, according to the Supreme
Court’s staff attorney, the justices and staff dedicated virtually
all their time to ballot-title cases. 12 More than one-fifth of the
court’s opinions between 1998 and 2000 related to initiative
titles. Crowding the judicial docket with ballot-title cases means
less time to hear other cases.
The mushrooming of the court’s ballot title caseload is due
in part to the increase in the number of different measures
139
submitted. Far more important, however, has been the rise of
ballot-title shopping and ballot-title challenges. In an effort to
secure the most favorable ballot title, initiative advocates
submit multiple versions of the same measure. Meanwhile, opponents
of ballot measures have become increasingly savvy as well, and now
routinely challenge ballot titles. Even if the challenge is
unsuccessful, opponents know that it can delay the commencement of
signature gathering and thus leave proponents less time to gather
the required signatures. The political battle between rival
ideologies and interests is thus fought out not only in the
electoral arena but also in the courtroom.
The Future of Direct Democracy
Oregonians generally remain strongly supportive of the initiative
process. A survey taken shortly after the 2000 election found that
four out of every five Oregonians believed that initiatives
“enhance the democratic process in Oregon.” To be sure, most
acknowledge that there are problems with the process. Many
complain that there are too many initiatives on the ballot, that
ballot measures are often badly written, and that voters are ill-
informed on ballot questions. Many also criticize the role of
money in initiative politics. 13 Yet despite these concerns, voters
have usually resisted efforts to make qualifying or passing
initiatives more difficult. In the May 2000 primary, for example,
140
Oregon voters soundly rejected a legislative referral that would
have increased the number of signatures required to qualify a
constitutional initiative, and in 1996 they rejected a proposal to
add a geographic distribution requirement.
Those who wish to reform the initiative process in Oregon
face two imposing obstacles: the courts and the state’s political
culture. The reforms that most voters readily endorse--banning
paid signature gatherers and restricting funding--have been
prohibited by the U.S. Supreme Court as violations of free speech
rights. 14 The reforms that the courts apparently will allow--
increasing signature thresholds, adding geographic requirements,
and requiring supermajority votes for passage--run headlong into
two powerful strains in American political culture: libertarianism
and populism. Suspicion of government and faith in the people
converge in a profound distrust of legislators. Given that state
legislators are generally responsible for placing reform proposals
on the ballot, opponents of initiative reform have little
difficulty framing initiative reform as a struggle between the
people and the politicians. This is a fight that legislators will
almost always lose. In Oregon, these strains are defining
features of what others in this book have described as
conservative populism, though the appeal of populism in Oregon as
well as in the nation transcends political ideology.
That is not to say that the initiative process will remain
141
unchanged. But the most consequential changes to the initiative
process will most likely continue to come not from the legislature
but from the courts. Eliminating the ban on paid signature
gatherers was arguably the most significant change in the rules of
engagement in modern initiative politics, and that change was made
by the judiciary. Allowing paid signature gatherers made life
easier for initiative sponsors, but courts have also changed the
rules in ways that have made the lives of initiative proponents
more difficult. In September 2000, for example, the Oregon Supreme
Court, reversing its own decision in 1993, ruled that owners of
private property, including owners of supermarkets and shopping
malls, do not have to allow initiative petitioners to gather
signatures on their property. 15 Most observers agree that the
court’s ruling, by significantly reducing the places where
petitioners can gather signatures, was an important factor in the
precipitous drop in the number of initiatives in 2002 as compared
to 2000. Even though the court may be the most likely source of
consequential change, initiative sponsors were handed a setback in
2002 when state voters passed an initiative banning sponsors from
paying signature gatherers for each signature they obtain. If the
new restriction survives an expected court challenge, it will make
it more costly, and thus more difficult, for initiatives to get on
the ballot.
Despite this decline in initiative use and this new
142
challenge, reports of the imminent demise of the initiative are
greatly exaggerated. Predicting the future is always risky, but
there are good reasons to think that heavy use of the initiative
process will remain a fixture of Oregon politics for the
foreseeable future. To begin with, a record high number of
initiatives were submitted and certified for circulation in Oregon
in 2002, which suggests that the activists’ and interest groups’
enthusiasm for direct legislation is undimmed. Second, initiative
use was down among all the traditionally heavy use states
(California, Colorado, Washington, and Arizona) in 2002, which
suggests that election-specific factors (like, for instance, the
depressed state of the economy and stock market, which made
raising money more difficult) may have contributed to the
initiative downturn. Third, it should be recalled that despite the
downturn in 2002, Oregon was still the nation’s initiative leader
in that election. Fourth, the 2000 election is not a useful
baseline year, but better understood as an aberration due to the
extraordinary number of initiatives that Sizemore qualified for
the ballot. If Sizemore is taken out of the equation, there would
have only been 11 initiatives on the 2000 ballot, which, as it
happens, is exactly the same as the average number of initiatives
in the 1990s. Finally, the number of initiatives in 2002 is
roughly the same as the state had in 1998 (9), 1992 (7), and 1990
(8), none of which were considered at the time to be years of
143
light initiative usage. That seven now seems to many people to be
a small number of initiatives tells us more about the centrality
of the initiative in contemporary Oregon politics than it does
about its imminent demise. Love them or hate them, ballots laden
with initiatives, supplied by activists and groups from across the
ideological spectrum, are likely here to stay in Oregon.
Figure 5.1. Initiative Use in Oregon, 1904-2002
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1904-12 1914-22 1924-32 1934-42 1944-52 1954-62 1964-72 1974-82 1984-92 1994-02
A v e ra
g e P
e r
E le
c ti
o n
144
Figure 5.2. Referendum Use in Oregon, 1904-2002
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
1904-12 1914-22 1924-32 1934-42 1944-52 1954-62 1964-72 1974-82 1984-92 1994-02
A v g
. P
e r
2 Y
e a r
E le
c ti
o n
C y c le
Issue #3/Week 3 reading 10-12-2017/Issue #3 - NCSL States direct democracy powers.pdf
Google Custom Search GO
Legislatures & Elections » Elections & Campaigns » Chart of the Initiative States Go 16589
Initiative and Referendum States
Last updated September 2012
Statutes Constitution
State Initiative Popular Referendum Initiative
Alaska I * Yes None
Arizona D Yes D
Arkansas D Yes D
California D Yes D
Colorado D Yes D
Florida None No D
Idaho D Yes None
Illinois None No D
Maine I Yes None
Maryland None Yes None
Massachusetts I Yes I
Michigan I Yes D
Mississippi None No I
Missouri D Yes D
Montana D Yes D
Nebraska D Yes D
Nevada I Yes D
New Mexico None Yes None
North Dakota D Yes D
Ohio I Yes D
Oklahoma D Yes D
Oregon D Yes D
South Dakota D Yes D
Utah D & I Yes None
Washington D & I Yes None
Wyoming I * Yes None
U.S. Virgin Islands I Yes I
Initiative – a law or constitutional amendment introduced by citizens through a petition process either to the legislature or directly to the voters.
D – Direct Initiative; proposals that qualify go directly on the ballot
I – Indirect Initiative; proposals are submitted to the legislature, which has an opportunity to act on the proposed legislation. The initiative question will
subsequently go on the ballot if the legislature rejects it, submits a different proposal or takes no action.
I *
-- Alaska and Wyoming’s initiative processes are usually considered indirect. However, instead of requiring that an initiative be submitted to the legislature for
action, they only require that an initiative cannot be placed on the ballot until after a legislative session has convened and adjourned.
Popular Referendum – a process by which voters may petition to demand a popular vote on a new law passed by the legislature.
For more information on Initiative and Referendum, contact Jennie Drage Bowser
Denver Office
Tel: 303-364-7700 | Fax: 303-364-7800 | 7700 East First Place |
Denver, CO 80230
Washington Office
Tel: 202-624-5400 | Fax: 202-737-1069 | 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515 |
Washington, D.C. 20001
©2012 National Conference of State Legislatures. All Rights Reserved.
Page 1 of 1Chart of the Initiative States
10/1/2012http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/chart-of-the-initiative-states.aspx
Issue #3/Week 3 reading 10-12-2017/Issue #3 - NCSL States ranked in order of initiative use.pdf
Google Custom Search GO
Legislatures & Elections » Elections & Campaigns » Initiative States Ranked in Order of Use Go 21238
Initiative States Ranked in Order by Use
Last updated September 20, 2012
The following table shows the 24 states that have an initiative process and the total number of initiatives that have appeared on the ballot in state history. While
California is presently in second place behind Oregon for the heaviest use of the initiative process, it won't stay there for long. Californians have been using their
initiative process more heavily than Oregonians in recent years, thanks in part to the fact that until recently, initiatives could appear on primary election ballots in
California but not in Oregon. It is likely that California will surpass Oregon and move to the top of the list within the next decade.
The chart contains data on initiatives on ballots through September 2012. It does not include the initiatives scheduled for a November 2012 vote.
State Year Initiative
Adopted
Number on Ballot
Oregon 1902 353
California 1911 344
Colorado 1910 215
North Dakota 1914 181
Arizona 1912 170
Washington 1912 167
Arkansas 1909 124
Oklahoma 1907 88
Missouri 1908 79
Ohio 1912 78
Montana 1906 77
Michigan 1908 73
Massachusetts 1918 72
South Dakota 1898 63
Maine 1908 56
Alaska 1959 49
Nebraska 1912 48
Nevada 1912 39*
Florida 1972 32
Idaho 1912 28
Utah 1900** 20
Wyoming 1968 7
Mississippi 1992 5
Illinois 1970 1
TOTAL 2,369
* Since 1962, Nevada's process has required that a constitutional amendment be passed in two consecutive general elections. This document represents the number
of unique questions and excludes second votes of ratification. Therefore, the following 14 questions were excluded from the Nevada total because they were
appearing on the ballot for a second time: 1980 - Q6; 1982 - Q8 and Q9; 1990 - Q9; 1996: Q9A, Q9B, Q10, Q11; 1998 - Q17; 2000 - Q9; 2002 - Q2; 2006 - Q1,
Q6; 2008 - Q2
** The Utah Legislature did not pass implementing legislation until 1917.
For More Information
For more information about initiative and referendum, contact Jennie Drage Bowser in NCSL's Denver office.
Page 1 of 2Initiative States Ranked in Order of Use
10/1/2012http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/initiative-states-ranked-in-order-of-use...
Denver Office
Tel: 303-364-7700 | Fax: 303-364-7800 | 7700 East First Place |
Denver, CO 80230
Washington Office
Tel: 202-624-5400 | Fax: 202-737-1069 | 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515 |
Washington, D.C. 20001
©2012 National Conference of State Legislatures. All Rights Reserved.
Page 2 of 2Initiative States Ranked in Order of Use
10/1/2012http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/initiative-states-ranked-in-order-of-use...
Issue #3/Week 3 reading 10-12-2017/Issue 3 - Direct Democracy_ Legislative Tampering.pdf
Issue #3/Week 3 reading 10-12-2017/issue 3 - healthcare referendum legislative tampering.pdf
10/12/2017 Oregon Legislature passes plan for early elections if 2 tax plans are referred to voters | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/07/oregon_legislature_passes_plan.html 1/5
Oregon Legislature passes plan for early elections if 2 tax plans are referred to voters Updated on July 6, 2017 at 8:24 PM Posted on July 6, 2017 at 8:14 PM
POLITICS & ELECTIONS
Rep. Julie Parrish, R-West Linn, talks on the floor of the Oregon House during the 2015 legislative session. (Randy L. Rasmussen/Staff)
7
10/12/2017 Oregon Legislature passes plan for early elections if 2 tax plans are referred to voters | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/07/oregon_legislature_passes_plan.html 2/5
By Hillary Borrud [email protected] The Oregonian/OregonLive
SALEM – Democrats in the Oregon Legislature succeeded Thursday in approving a switch that requires the state to hold a special election in early 2018, not later that year, if opponents of two major tax plans refer either of those measures to voters.
Lawmakers easily approved new taxes to fund transportation projects and preserve Medicaid coverage for 350,000 Oregonians this session. But there are people who oppose both tax schemes who've said they'll try to get voters to undo them.
Senate Bill 229 would require the state to hold a special election Jan. 23 if a $550 million health care tax increase is referred to voters. A possible referral of the transportation funding bill would be placed on the May 2018 primary election ballot. If not for the bill, those referrals would end up on the November 2018 ballot.
Three House Republicans – Rep. Julie Parrish, R-West Linn, Rep. Sal Esquivel, R-Medford and Rep. Cedric Hayden, have already started gathering signatures to refer portions of House Bill 2391 to voters. The Republicans want to repeal a new 1.5 percent tax on insurance premiums, while leaving intact an increase in hospital taxes.
34
,
7 shares
10/12/2017 Oregon Legislature passes plan for early elections if 2 tax plans are referred to voters | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/07/oregon_legislature_passes_plan.html 3/5
Parrish said in a statement earlier this week that provision "is a sales tax on healthcare, and worse, it's a sales tax only for those who buy their insurance in the marketplace."
Democrats want an early election if the health care bill is referred to the ballot, because the measure would be put on hold until the vote. The delay would open a hole in the state budget that lawmakers would be forced to close another way, in order to avoid kicking people off Medicaid.
"Voters have a constitutional right to have their voices heard, if enough signatures are gathered to bring a referendum forward," Rep. Dan Rayfield, D-Corvallis, said in a statement. "(Senate Bill 229) allows voters to resolve this question as quickly as possible, so that we can move forward based on their answer. It's a prudent approach that ensures that Oregonians don't lose their health care in the meantime."
The bill passed on party line votes in both the Oregon House and Senate Thursday, and now heads to the governor's desk.
10/12/2017 Oregon Legislature passes plan for early elections if 2 tax plans are referred to voters | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/07/oregon_legislature_passes_plan.html 4/5
It's unclear whether any groups will refer the transportation plan to voters. The state's largest public employee union, Service Employees International Union Local 503, threatened to refer the $5.3 billion transportation funding bill -- aimed at easing congestion in the Portland metropolitan area and paying for other projects around the state -- to voters if lawmakers failed to overhaul and increase corporate taxes.
There's been talk that other groups such as truckers and the fuel industry could refer a gas tax increase to the ballot, but no specific threat yet.
-- Hillary Borrud
ADVERTISING
10/12/2017 Oregon Legislature passes plan for early elections if 2 tax plans are referred to voters | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/07/oregon_legislature_passes_plan.html 5/5
503-294-4034; @hborrud
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and
Privacy Policy
© 2017 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us). The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Oregon Live LLC.
Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
Ad Choices
Issue #3/Week 3 reading 10-12-2017/Issue 3 - recall of sherwood city council.pdf
10/12/2017 Facing recall, Sherwood Mayor Krisanna Clark-Endicott resigns | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/index.ssf/2017/10/facing_recall_sherwood_mayor_k.html 1/6
Facing recall, Sherwood Mayor Krisanna Clark-Endicott resigns Updated on October 10, 2017 at 7:16 PM Posted on October 2, 2017 at 5:30 PM
WASHINGTON COUNTY NEWS
Mayor Krisanna Clark-Endicott, shown at the Sept. 19 City Council meeting, was the subject of a recall
10/12/2017 Facing recall, Sherwood Mayor Krisanna Clark-Endicott resigns | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/index.ssf/2017/10/facing_recall_sherwood_mayor_k.html 2/6
By Samantha Swindler [email protected] The Oregonian/OregonLive
Facing a recall election, Sherwood Mayor Krisanna Clark- Endicott resigned her seat Monday, saying she was moving to Redmond to be with her husband.
"It has been my great pleasure to serve the citizens of the City of Sherwood," Clark-Endicott said in a statement, adding that she worked under the belief that "you can disagree without being disagreeable."
Read her resignation letter
Two other city councilors, Sally Robinson and Jennifer Harris, will face a recall election on Oct. 17, in part over their handling of a contract to manage the city-owned recreation center.
Robinson, Harris and Clark-Endicott all voted to begin negotiations with an out-of-state company, HealthFitness, over community objections to keep the center under the management of the YMCA.
petition that seeks to remove her from office. She resigned Oct. 2. (Samantha Swindler/Staff)
67
,
165 shares
10/12/2017 Facing recall, Sherwood Mayor Krisanna Clark-Endicott resigns | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/index.ssf/2017/10/facing_recall_sherwood_mayor_k.html 3/6
Last week, Clark-Endicott called a special meeting to vote on the final contract. A city staff report released the morning of the meeting advised the council against approving the HealthFitness contract because it would leave the city liable for nearly all losses at the rec center.
"I am especially concerned about the first year of operation with the potential large exodus of current members that utilize our facility," City Manager Joe Gall wrote. "This potential exodus poses significant financial risk and, based upon the proposed contract, this financial risk would fall squarely upon the City of Sherwood to absorb in the first year of operations."
The motion to approve the contract failed in a 4-2 council vote.
Later during the same meeting, Robinson said the recall effort was "completely irresponsible" and "really unfortunate, especially because the main focus of the
10/12/2017 Facing recall, Sherwood Mayor Krisanna Clark-Endicott resigns | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/index.ssf/2017/10/facing_recall_sherwood_mayor_k.html 4/6
recall is that we're not being fiscally responsible. Well, you saw tonight we are fiscally responsible. We have turned down a contract that would have resulted in losses."
But both Robinson and Harris had voted 22 minutes earlier to approve the contract.
(Update: During the Oct. 10th city council meeting, Harris asked that the record be amended, saying she had intended to vote against the contract. This amendment was accepted.)
The recalls against Robinson and Harris claim each has "failed in her fiduciary responsibilities, behaves in an unethical manner" and "continues to move the city of Sherwood in a direction that is not in the best interest of the community." The recalls cite the rec center vote and their "written abuse/attacks (on Facebook) of Sherwood citizens."
Harris rebutted those claims in her statement for the voter's pamphlet.
"I'm fighting this recall because I know that I have served Sherwood with honor and integrity," Harris wrote. "I work hard to always be respectful and level headed when engaging on social media, even when I don't agree with someone. I believe everyone has a right to their opinion, but I also believe people re entitled to respect regardless of that opinion -- something that has been missing from the recall campaign."
10/12/2017 Facing recall, Sherwood Mayor Krisanna Clark-Endicott resigns | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/index.ssf/2017/10/facing_recall_sherwood_mayor_k.html 5/6
In her statement, Robinson countered that "This recall is NOT about fiscal responsibility or ethical violations. It is based on a personal vendetta against 3 councilors who voted against the YMCA and its supporters... No specific charges of unethical behavior have been leveled against me, nor have I ever been cited by the Oregon Ethics Commission. As an attorney, I take pride in upholding my ethical obligations."
- Samantha Swindler
@editorswindler/ 503-294-4031
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and
Privacy Policy
© 2017 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us). The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Oregon Live LLC.
10/12/2017 Facing recall, Sherwood Mayor Krisanna Clark-Endicott resigns | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/index.ssf/2017/10/facing_recall_sherwood_mayor_k.html 6/6
Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
Ad Choices
Issue #3/Week 3 reading 10-12-2017/issue 3 - SB 719 referendum.pdf
10/12/2017 Effort to repeal new Oregon gun control law falls flat | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/10/effort_to_repeal_new_oregon_gu.html 1/7
Effort to repeal new Oregon gun control law falls flat Updated on October 5, 2017 at 8:45 PM Posted on October 5, 2017 at 2:14 PM
POLITICS & ELECTIONS
Warren Lacasse of Southeast Foster Road's Gun Room gives a tour of his shop and waits on customers. A new law will allow judges to issue orders authorizing law enforcement officials to
10/12/2017 Effort to repeal new Oregon gun control law falls flat | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/10/effort_to_repeal_new_oregon_gu.html 2/7
By Gordon R. Friedman [email protected] The Oregonian/OregonLive
Sponsors of a referendum to repeal a state gun control law enacted this year said Thursday that they have not gathered enough signatures to put their referendum on the ballot so it is dead.
The sponsors, two Republican lawmakers and a candidate for the Legislature, aimed to do away with a law authorizing "extreme risk protection orders." The law, which takes effect January 1, will allow judges to issue orders enabling law enforcement officials to temporarily confiscate deadly weapons from a people deemed an imminent threat to themselves or others.
temporarily take guns away from people deemed likely to harm themselves or others. An effort to repeal the law fell flat Thursday because it lacked enough voter signatures.(Thomas Boyd / The Oregonian / 2015)
395
,
972 shares
10/12/2017 Effort to repeal new Oregon gun control law falls flat | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/10/effort_to_repeal_new_oregon_gu.html 3/7
Republican House members Bill Post, left, and Mike Nearman wanted voters to repeal a new law that allows officials to take away guns from Oregon residents found to be a danger to themselves or other members of their household.
The bill passed by a hair in the Legislature. Supporters said establishing a system for taking guns away from dangerous or unstable people may help prevent suicides and mass shootings. Opponents said such a system will give the courts and law enforcement power to trample on gun ownership rights.
Thursday was the deadline for petitioners to turn in 58,142 valid signatures. In a statement, leaders of the group advocating the repeal said they collected fewer than 25,000 signatures.
"It wasn't for lack of support," said Rep. Mike Nearman, an Independence Republican who was one of the referendum's sponsors. "We just simply did not have
10/12/2017 Effort to repeal new Oregon gun control law falls flat | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/10/effort_to_repeal_new_oregon_gu.html 4/7
enough time."
Nearman said he and others hoping to undo the gun control law had their signature-gathering effort hamstrung by Gov. Kate Brown. Brown is an outspoken advocate of gun control and last year accepted a $250,000 donation from former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg tied to that support.
Sponsors of referendums have until 90 days after the legislative session to turn in enough valid signatures. But petitioners can't begin gathering signatures until the legislation they want to repeal has been signed by the governor. Though Senate Bill 719 passed July 6, Brown didn't sign it until August 15.
"The foot-dragging by Governor Brown cost us 39 of our 90 days," said Rep. Bill Post, R-Keizer, another sponsor of the referendum. Post said there was no reason for Brown to slow-walk the bill signing other than to hamper the repeal effort.
10/12/2017 Effort to repeal new Oregon gun control law falls flat | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/10/effort_to_repeal_new_oregon_gu.html 5/7
Chris Pair, communications director for Brown, declined to answer questions about why the governor took so long to sign Senate Bill 719.
Local advocacy groups on opposing sides of the gun debate either cheered or lamented the failed push to repeal the bill.
The Oregon chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America -- part of Bloomberg's pro-gun control effort called Everytown for Gun Safety -- said legislation like Senate Bill 719 will help identify "red flags" before mass shootings.
"The gun lobby's effort to repeal Oregon's Extreme Risk Protection Order law was yet another failed attempt to undermine public safety in our state," said Andrea Platt, a volunteer with the group. She called Senate Bill 719 "a commonsense policy" that may "potentially prevent tragedies."
The Oregon Firearms Federation, the state's preeminent pro-gun rights group, excoriated the National Rifle Association for failing to back the repeal effort. The national pro-gun group should have alerted its members to signature gathering campaign, the federation said.
ADVERTISING
10/12/2017 Effort to repeal new Oregon gun control law falls flat | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/10/effort_to_repeal_new_oregon_gu.html 6/7
"But, as always, the NRA would rather 'work with' gun grabbers than confront them," the group said, adding that "the battle is not over."
"We are in for a tough fight. We've seen how little we can expect from the NRA," they said.
Nearman said that although Oregonians won't have a chance to vote next year on whether to allow extreme risk protection orders, their campaign left a message with supporters of gun control. Nearman said "gun grabbers are on notice" that he and others are part of a movement that wants Oregon voters to have the final say on gun control.
-- Gordon R. Friedman
503-221-8209; @GordonRFriedman
10/12/2017 Effort to repeal new Oregon gun control law falls flat | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/10/effort_to_repeal_new_oregon_gu.html 7/7
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and
Privacy Policy
© 2017 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us). The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Oregon Live LLC.
Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
Ad Choices
Issue #3/Week 3 reading 10-12-2017/Recall of mayor.pdf
9/20/2017 After vitriolic campaign, voters oust mayor of Jefferson, Oregon | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/09/after_vitriolic_campaign_voter.html 1/4
After vitriolic campaign, voters oust mayor of Jefferson, Oregon
Updated on September 20, 2017 at 8:37 PM Posted on September 20, 2017 at 6:35 PM
55 shares
By Gordon R. Friedman [email protected] The Oregonian/OregonLive
Voters in tiny Jefferson, Oregon recalled their mayor in a landslide Tuesday, marking the culmination of a vicious, months-long land dispute and recall campaign.
Cyndie Hightower was mayor of the Marion County town of 3,000 for less than nine months. In a phone interview, she said she did her best as the volunteer mayor and broke no rules. But after her opponents ran a recall campaign alleging she misspent public funds and was inept, voters removed her with 64 percent of the vote.
Hightower said she's been the victim of personal and political attacks by her opponents, who are allies of local developer Nancy Hamby. Hightower said she faced death threats, a drone flying over her home and harassment that affected her work
POLITICS & ELECTIONS
5
Voters ousted Jefferson Mayor Cyndie Hightower on Tuesday, Sept. 20, 2017 after a hard-fought recall campaign.(Don Ryan)
,
9/20/2017 After vitriolic campaign, voters oust mayor of Jefferson, Oregon | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/09/after_vitriolic_campaign_voter.html 2/4
and personal life.
"It was brutal," Hightower said.
Hamby said Hightower wasn't a great mayor, and she supported her recall. Hamby said Hightower has exaggerated how opponents treated her.
But both agree that the recall is an example of how local politics can turn ruthless.
"It's been very ugly," Hamby said.
Controversy erupted last year when the city council voted to annex a 15-acre parcel Hamby owns and wants to develop. Then private citizens who had never run for office, Hightower and three associates -- Bob Burns, Brad Cheney and Stan Neal -- wanted city residents vote on the annexation, which was near their homes.
A state law passed in 2016 bars residents from voting on annexations. But Hightower, 59, said she and her allies were undeterred.
They filed an initiative to get the annexation put on a local ballot. The city recorder threw out the initiative, saying it was illegal. In turn, Hightower helped her associates sue the city and the recorder.
Then, the foursome ran for city council. They won, giving their contingent a majority.
"It became a mess after that," said Greg Ellis, the city administrator. "The legal bills started piling up and people were up in arms."
Hamby and other residents cried foul. She said it presented a conflict of interest for the mayor and three councilors to vote on city business while intertwined with a lawsuit against the city. Hightower was not a party to the suit and said she ended her involvement with it after she took office
A former councilor filed an ethics complaint against Hightower, which was thrown out by the state ethics commission, whose investigators said they "did not find cause to proceed."
9/20/2017 After vitriolic campaign, voters oust mayor of Jefferson, Oregon | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/09/after_vitriolic_campaign_voter.html 3/4
Then came calls for Hightower and her allies to resign -- and bullying, Hightower said.
"They came with barrels and guns loaded, coming to council meetings and firing at will. Bullying me and the council. It got pretty fierce," she said. "They started making death threats. I had to have three sheriff's deputies at one council meeting."
Hightower works with special needs children at Jefferson Elementary School. After the annexation brouhaha began, opponents sifted through Hightower's Facebook posts, she said, and tried to get her fired over a post she wrote that was critical of illegal immigration.
Hightower said she was disciplined at work and lost some of her job responsibilities.
"That was devastating. I've been there 17 years," she said. "That was hard. It's been an onslaught."
For her part, Hamby said Hightower has aimed vitriol her way as well.
"I had my name dragged through the dirt. I've done nothing," Hamby said. "I'm a sixth- generation Jeffersonian. I love this community."
As the going got rough, Burns, Cheney and Neal -- the candidates who ran with Hightower -- resigned from the city council. Despite calls for her to resign, Hightower stayed put.
"I wasn't going to resign. I stayed in it. It was brutal," she said. "I just was not going to have them push me out and make me resign."
Then, the recall effort launched.
A website called JeffersonFirst.com was published, listing each time opponents felt Hightower did something wrong. Hamby said she's affiliated with the website, which pushed for the recall vote.
Both sides say insults and fury never stopped flying.
9/20/2017 After vitriolic campaign, voters oust mayor of Jefferson, Oregon | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/09/after_vitriolic_campaign_voter.html 4/4
"It got to be so ugly I thought, 'Let Jefferson die,'" Hamby said. "There's six of us little old ladies -- we're building a library here on sweat and bake sales. We're giving. And then you get people who come and break down the community."
She added, "This is like reality T.V. It's nuts."
Now that the dust has settled, Hightower said she's glad to be out of the fray.
"It's kind of a relief," she said. "It was a lot to go through."
Hightower said she now has a better sense of politics -- and how brutal it can get when neighbors are involved.
"It's about power and control," she said.
-- Gordon R. Friedman
503-805-3347; @GordonRFriedman
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
© 2017 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us). The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Oregon Live LLC.
Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
Ad Choices
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Interest Groups/Issue #4 - 9-19-2013 - Protesters at Capitol.pdf
Oregon Sign in | Join
Search
9 comments
Print (http://blog.oregonlive.com/politics_impact/print.html?
entry=/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html)
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/politics/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/1909729344/StoryAd/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/staff/ncrombie/index.html) By Noelle Crombie |
[email protected] (http://connect.oregonlive.com/staff/ncrombie/posts.html)
Email the author | Follow on Twitter (http://twitter.com/noellecrombie)
on September 19, 2013 at 10:45 AM, updated September 19, 2013 at 11:09 AM
Oregon State Police are responding to a pair of protesters hanging from near the top of
the Capitol building in Salem.
Cascadia Forest Defenders took credit for the protest in a statement to news media:
“We are protesting because we think Oregonians deserve to know that their public land
is being sold to private industry. If it is privatized, we will never be able to have a say on
what happens to it again. This is our public comment,” says Erin Grady of Cascadia
Forest Defenders.
The organization claimed its protesters hope to sway the State Land Board, set to
consider on a proposal to sell more than 2,700 acres in Elliott State Forest at a meeting
on Dec. 10.
Traffic in the area is restricted until the situation is resolved.
Statesman Journal reporter Colton Totland has this image of the protesters:
Protestors arrived at 10:00 a.m. to unfurl a banner against privatization of
the Elliot State Forest #sjnow (https://twitter.com/search?q=%
23sjnow&src=hash) pic.twitter.com/8oJ86reiVn
(http://t.co/8oJ86reiVn)
— Colton Totland (@ColtonTotland) September 19, 2013
(https://twitter.com/ColtonTotland/statuses/380749532432056320)
-- The Oregonian
Tweet 11 0 Email
Protesters dangling from Capitol building
Real Estate
Salem, OR Salem, OR
Sponsored By:
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/politics/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/L27/877439183/SecSponsor/OREGONLIVE/UofOregon16_OR_News_SecSpon/thMA00596.html/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
Laws and lawmakers
Your Government resource (http://gov.oregonlive.com/#incart_special- report) Keep tabs on the people who represent your
interests in Salem and Washington, D.C.
() () () () ()
PERS
The challenge of Oregon's public retirement system (http://gov.oregonlive.com/pers/)
Prospects for reforming Oregon’s troubled
Public Employees Retirement System rest in the
hands of lawmakers. ... More PERS
coverage» (http://gov.oregonlive.com/pers/)
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/pers/)
Politics 2012 Election Results Education Environment Jeff Mapes Opinion PolitiFact Oregon Portland City Hall Watch US & World Newsletters more
Set Weather
NEWS BUSINESS SPORTS H.S. SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT LOCAL
IN YOUR COMMUNITY: JOBS AUTOS REAL ESTATE RENTALS CLASSIFIEDS OBITUARIES FIND&SAVE LOCAL BUSINESSES PLACE AN AD
Page 1 of 4Protesters dangling from Capitol building | OregonLive.com#incart_river#incart_river#in...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html
(http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific- northwest- news/index.ssf/2013/09/independence_woman_20_killed_i.html) Independence woman, 20, killed in one- car crash near Salem (http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific- northwest- news/index.ssf/2013/09/independence_woman_20_killed_i.html)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific- northwest- news/index.ssf/2013/09/salem_armed_robbery_suspect_ca.html) Salem armed robbery suspect captured after chase by store employees (http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific- northwest- news/index.ssf/2013/09/salem_armed_robbery_suspect_ca.html)
pause live updates
Related Stories
Sign in with your OregonLive.com, Facebook or Google account or sign up
(https://signup.oregonlive.com/register/?return_to=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.oregonlive.com%2Fpolitics%2Findex.ssf%2F2013%2F09% 2Fprotesters_dangling_from_capit.html%23comments)
Please review the Community Rules (http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/index.ssf?rules.html) before posting
Comments (9) Social (9) Community
redheddedhed (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/irenius/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/irenius/index.html) 3 days ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.ht
ml/post/2013-09-19/1379628529-517-528.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/post/201
3-09-19/1379628529-517-528.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/post/201
3-09-19/1379628529-517-528.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/post/201
3-09-19/1379628529-517-528.html)
They're supposed to be hugging trees, not buildings
(http://oregonlive.com/)
puddlemonkey (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/puddlemonkey/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/puddlemonkey/index.html) 3 days ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/taxedbykitz/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_ca
pit.html/post/2013-09-19/1379628728-568-764.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/po
st/2013-09-19/1379628728-568-764.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/po
st/2013-09-19/1379628728-568-764.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/po
st/2013-09-19/1379628728-568-764.html)
We ran out of trees.
(htt
p://oreg
onlive.com/)
evileyebrows (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/evileyebrows/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/evileyebrows/index.html) 4 days ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.ht
ml/post/2013-09-19/1379613383-32-536.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/post/201
3-09-19/1379613383-32-536.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/post/201
3-09-19/1379613383-32-536.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/post/201
3-09-19/1379613383-32-536.html)
"The nature of the protest is not known, police said."
"Protestors arrived at 10:00 a.m. to unfurl a banner against privatization of the Elliot
State Forest "
As usual, police have NO clue.
And, Ms Crombie, your own article contradicts your copy.
Your Government » (http://gov.oregonlive.com)
More politics
Jeff Mapes on Politics
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/)
PolitiFact Oregon: Is it True, False or a Pants-on-Fire lie?
(http://www.politifact.com/oregon/)
Guide to lobbyists in Salem
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/lobbying/lobbyists/2012/)
Most Comments Most Read
See more comments
» (http://www.oregonlive.com/interact/)
Oregon State Beavers-San Diego State live
chat: In-game updates, photos,
commentary and questions
(http://oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2013/09/oregon_ducks-
san_diego_state_l.html#incart_most-
comments)
581 (http://oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2013/09/oregon_ducks- san_diego_state_l.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Game thread: Portland Winterhawks at
Seattle Thunderbirds
(http://oregonlive.com/hawks/index.ssf/2013/09/seattle_2013_09_21.html#incart_most-
comments)
397 (http://oregonlive.com/hawks/index.ssf/2013/09/seattle_2013_09_21.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
There's no stopping the Affordable Care
Act: Guest opinion
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/theres_no_stopping_the_afforda.html#incart_most-
comments)
353 (http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/theres_no_stopping_the_afforda.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Starbucks' rule that guns and lattes don't
mix will satisfy few: Editorial
(http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/starbucks_rule_that_guns_and_l.html#incart_most-
comments)
330 (http://oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/starbucks_rule_that_guns_and_l.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Phil and Penny Knight to OHSU: $500
million is yours for cancer research if you
can match it
(http://oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2013/09/phil_and_penny_knight_to_ohsu_1.html#incart_most-
comments)
301 (http://oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2013/09/phil_and_penny_knight_to_ohsu_1.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Page 2 of 4Protesters dangling from Capitol building | OregonLive.com#incart_river#incart_river#in...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html
(http://www.oregonlive.com/dining/index.ssf/2013/09/portlands_best_bagels_readers.html#incart_river_default#incart_hbx#incart_best- of) Portland's best bagels: Readers respond with suggestions... (http://www.oregonlive.com/dining/index.ssf/2013/09/portlands_best_bagels_readers.html#incart_river_default#incart_hbx#incart_best- of)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2013/09/contaminated_fish_alert_high_m.html#incart_m- rpt-2#incart_hbx#incart_best-of) High mercury, PCBs in certain Columbia River species... (http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2013/09/contaminated_fish_alert_high_m.html#incart_m- rpt-2#incart_hbx#incart_best-of)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/money/index.ssf/2013/09/portland_unemployment_falls_again_in_august_matches_us_trend.html#incart_m- rpt-2#incart_hbx#incart_best-of) Portland unemployment falls again in August (http://www.oregonlive.com/money/index.ssf/2013/09/portland_unemployment_falls_again_in_august_matches_us_trend.html#incart_m- rpt-2#incart_hbx#incart_best-of)
Best of OregonLive.com
(http://oregonlive.com/)
puddlemonkey (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/puddlemonkey/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/puddlemonkey/index.html) 4 days ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.ht
ml/post/2013-09-19/1379613383-869-373.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/post/201
3-09-19/1379613383-869-373.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/post/201
3-09-19/1379613383-869-373.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/post/201
3-09-19/1379613383-869-373.html)
Perhaps they're protesting against the violation of their perceived right to dangle from
public buildings.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
View more items
Noelle Crombie | [email protected] (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/ncrombie/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/ncrombie/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/ncrombie/index.html) 4 days ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from
_capit.html/post/2013-09-19/1379614108-762-466.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html
/post/2013-09-19/1379614108-762-466.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html
/post/2013-09-19/1379614108-762-466.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html
/post/2013-09-19/1379614108-762-466.html)
Thanks for reading, everyone. The post has been updated to include the
nameof the group claiming credit for the protest.
Thanks, Noelle Crombie
(http://oregonlive.com/)
leo1234 (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/leo1234/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/leo1234/index.html) 3 days ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_ca
pit.html/post/2013-09-19/1379633798-451-583.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/po
st/2013-09-19/1379633798-451-583.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/po
st/2013-09-19/1379633798-451-583.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html/po
st/2013-09-19/1379633798-451-583.html)
* *
As we learned in school, it's not the "angle of the dangle, it's the heat of the
meat".
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Page 3 of 4Protesters dangling from Capitol building | OregonLive.com#incart_river#incart_river#in...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html
(http://www.advancedigital.com/)
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement (http://www.oregonlive.com/useragreement/) and Privacy
Policy (http://www.oregonlive.com/privacypolicy/)
© 2013 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us (http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/)).
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of
Oregon Live LLC.
Community Rules (http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/index.ssf?rules.html) apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
Contact interactivity management. (http://www.oregonlive.com/interactivity/)
Ad Choices (http://www.advance.net/advancedigitalUserAgreement#opt_out)
About OregonLive.com
(http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/)
Advertise with us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/advertise/)
Contact Us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/contactus/)
Jobs at OregonLive.com
(http://jobs.oregonlive.com/careers/company/detail/id/116368/page/jobs)
FAQ
(http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/index.ssf?/aboutus/content/faq.html)
Newsletters (http://www.oregonlive.com/newsletters/)
Text Alerts (http://www.oregonlive.com/text-alerts/)
RSS (http://www.oregonlive.com/siteindex/)
Mix Magazine (http://www.oregonlive.com/mixsubscribe/index.ssf?/cgi-bin/gfv.cgi/mixsubscribe/affiliate_media/subscribe.ata)
The Oregonian (http://biz.oregonian.com/readerservices/)
The Hillsboro Argus (http://www.oregonlive.com/argus/subscribe/)
About Us
Subscriptions
News
(http://www.oregonlive.com/news/)
Business
(http://www.oregonlive.com/business/)
Sports
(http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/)
High School Sports
(http://highschoolsports.oregonlive.com/)
Entertainment
(http://www.oregonlive.com/entertainment/)
Living
(http://www.oregonlive.com/living/)
Travel
(http://www.oregonlive.com/travel/)
Opinion
(http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/)
Obituaries
(http://www.oregonlive.com/obituaries/)
Jobs
(http://www.oregonlive.com/jobs/)
Autos
(http://autos.oregonlive.com/)
Real Estate
(http://realestate.oregonlive.com/)
Rentals
(http://realestate.oregonlive.com/for-
rent)
Classifieds
(http://classifieds.oregonlive.com/)
Local Deals
(http://www.oregonlive.com/shopping/)
Local Businesses
(http://www.oregonlive.com/business/)
Clackamas County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/)
Clark County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/clark-
county/)
Gresham
(http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/)
Portland
(http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/)
Washington County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/)
More Local News
(http://www.oregonlive.com/local/)
OregonLive.com Sections
Your Regional News Pages
Mobile Mobile site (http://mobile.oregonlive.com/) | iPhone,
Android apps (http://www.oregonlive.com/mobile-
device/) | Tablet Apps
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mobile-device/)
Forums
(http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/)
Videos
(http://videos.oregonlive.com/)
Photos
(http://photos.oregonlive.com/photogallery/)
Interact with us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/interact/)
Weather
(http://www.oregonlive.com/weather/)
Post a job
(http://www.oregonlive.com/jobs/products/index.ssf)
Post a classified ad
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sell your car
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sell/rent your home
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sitemap & search
(http://www.oregonlive.com/sitemap/)
More on OregonLive.com
Follow Us Twitter
(http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/twitter/)
|
(http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/facebook/)
Google+ (http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/)|
Page 4 of 4Protesters dangling from Capitol building | OregonLive.com#incart_river#incart_river#in...
9/23/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/protesters_dangling_from_capit.html
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Interest Groups/Issue #4 - Interest groups - education rally.pdf
LISTEN WATCH SUPPORT SHOP
Make it
happen! contribute now
HOME TV RADIO NEWS ARTS & LIFE EARTHFIX MUSIC KIDS & FAMILY Search OPB
Oregon Nation World Economy Environment Elections Health Education
OREGON
Salem Education Rally Draws Hundreds OPB | Feb. 21, 2012 12:12 a.m. | Updated: July 17, 2012 1:02 a.m. | Portland, OR
CONTRIBUTED BY:
ROB MANNING
Hundreds of school and labor supporters rallied at the Oregon Capitol
Monday to advocate for more state spending on education and social
services.
Rob Manning / OPB
An audience of a few dozen predominantly Democratic lawmakers, and
hundreds of union members and supporters listened to pleas for more
money for schools and human services. Several educators -- including
Beaverton's Mike Ali -- objected to what they consider a flawed line of
thinking around education reform.
Rob Manning / OPB
Ali explains, "That less people can do more work in less time, and
maintain -- and even improve -- the quality of education provided!"
"That may be an effective sound bite, but it is not the truth!"
Rally organizers say increased funding is mostly a long-term effort. In the
current session, advocates are targeting an increase in community college
spending, and the possible renewal of a tax increase on high-income
Oregonians.
Other union advocates pressed for passage of two bills to help
homeowners facing foreclosure.
THANKS TO OUR SPONSORS: become a sponsor
THANKS TO OUR SPONSORS become a sponsor
ALSO IN NEWS
Boat Inspections Begin In Effort To Stop
Invasive Species
Board Suspends License Of Bend Doctor
Convicted Of Rape
Oregon Judge Sanctioned After Excoriating
Pedophile
Like 0
0
Share 0
00:00 00:56
Page 1 of 2Salem Education Rally Draws Hundreds » News » OPB
2/11/2013http://www.opb.org/news/article/salem-education-rally-draws-hundreds/
On Tuesday, Feb. 28th at 6:30 p.m., OPB is hosting a listening session on
budget cuts to education for teachers, parents, administrators, and
more. If you have insights or story ideas for our newsroom, we’d love to
hear from you. E-mail [email protected] for details.
COMMENTS
0 comments
Leave a message...
Discussion #Share
0★
About OPB
FAQs
Employment
Volunteering
Internships
Tours
Producing for OPB
Accessibility Services
Hire OPB
Pressroom
OPB Public Files
Contact Us
Connect
Upcoming Events
Reception Issues
Mobile
Mobile Apps
Digital Magazine
Newsletters
RSS Feeds
Support
Contribute
Business Partners
Leadership Giving
Planned Giving
Vehicle Donations
Volunteering
Shop
Search OPB
Legal
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use
Editorial Policy
© 2012, Oregon Public Broadcasting
Page 2 of 2Salem Education Rally Draws Hundreds » News » OPB
2/11/2013http://www.opb.org/news/article/salem-education-rally-draws-hundreds/
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Interest Groups/Issue #4 - Interest Groups - Pro-gun rally.pdf
Pro-gun demonstrators bring their message and weapons inside
Oregon Capitol
By Harry Esteve, The Oregonian
on February 08, 2013 at 12:00 PM, updated February 08, 2013 at 3:04 PM
SALEM -- Some gun-toting demonstrators have taken their protest and their weapons inside the Capitol
building.
Oregon law allows people who have concealed handgun licenses to openly carry weapons inside public
buildings, including the Capitol.
Among those who ventured inside from a pro-gun rally across the street was a man who would only give a
first name, Warren.
"I'm supporting my fellow patriots," he said. He was carrying an AR-15 slung across his back. "It's
technically loaded," he said, meaning a full magazine was in place, but no round was chambered.
He was approached by a state police officer -- about a half dozen were posted directly inside the Capitol
rotunda -- who asked to see Warren's concealed handgun permit. The trooper looked at the permit and
walked away, while Warren took photos of the Rotunda art work.
Several hundred gun enthusiasts are rallying in the Capitol Mall to support the Second Amendment and to
protest efforts to restrict gun ownership.
"Everything's going exactly as planned," state police Lt. Terri Davie said. There are people walking through
the building with weapons, but "there's been no concerns." She wouldn't say how many state troopers are
on hand, but said they always beef up security whenever there's a large rally.
She estimated the crowd at 300 to 400 demonstrators.
– Harry Esteve
© OregonLive.com. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
2/11/2013http://blog.oregonlive.com/politics_impact/print.html?entry=/2013/02/pro-gun_demonstrat...
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Political Parties/Issue #4 - Independent Party of Oregon earns major-party status.pdf
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/mapes/2015/02/independent_party_of_oregon_ea.html/129114878/Popup/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314b7a6732634143424163)
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/mapes/2015/02/independent_party_of_oregon_ea.html/879613879/Tower/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314b7a6732634143424163) (http://www.oregonlive.com/)
Menu Set Weather SearchSign In
Subscribe
22 comments
Print (http://impact.oregonlive.com/mapes/print.html? entry=/2015/02/independent_party_of_oregon_ea.html)
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/mapes/2015/02/independent_party_of_oregon_ea.html/2020505463/StoryAd/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314b7a6732634143424163)
Secretary of State Kate Brown on Monday ruled that the Independent Party of Oregon had achieved major party status in Oregon.
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/staff/jmapes/index.html) By Jeff Mapes | The Oregonian/OregonLive (http://connect.oregonlive.com/staff/jmapes/posts.html) Email the author | Follow on Twitter (http://twitter.com/jeffmapes)
on February 09, 2015 at 5:11 PM, updated February 09, 2015 at 5:13 PM
Secretary of State Kate Brown on Monday ruled that the Independent Party of Oregon met the threshold (http://oregonsosblog.us/2015/02/independent partyachievesmajorpartystatus/? utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheOregonSecretaryOfStateBlog+%28The+Oregon+Secretary+of+State+Blog%29) to become a major party in Oregon by registering 5 percent of the electorate that voted in the last race for governor.
The chief impact of the ruling is that the Independent Party will now have its primary conducted by the state and paid for by taxpayers in 2016, just as the Democratic and Republican parties do. It also heightens the visibility of the party and offers the opportunity for an Independent candidate to gain public attention by running in a statewide primary.
There was one major caveat to Brown's ruling. The secretary of state said in a statement that the party has to "reverify" its majorparty status on Aug. 17 by showing that it still meets that 5 percent threshold. As of Feb. 2, the Independent Party had 108,742 members, just over the threshold of 108,739.
Given that the party has shown steady growth since its founding in 2007, the party is likely to continue to meet that threshold.
Sal Peralta, the Independent Party's secretary, said he was more concerned about whether the Legislature might try to remove the party's new status.
Peralta said the Independent Party now has a chance to ramp up its partyrecruitment efforts and is looking forward to its new prominence. "I think it's great," he said. "From our point of view, it's nice to be so recognized."
Independent Party of Oregon earns major-party status; looks forward to state-run primary
Tweet
22
118
Share
1
Share
0
Reddit About Jeff Mapes
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/jmapes/index.html)
Email Jeff Mapes
(mailto:[email protected])
Follow @jeffmapes
(http://twitter.com/jeffmapes)
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/mapes/2015/02/independent_party_of_oregon_ea.html/259239169/SecSponsor/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314b7a6732634143424163)
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/passback.oregonlive.com/undertonepassback/L41/1559033963/Rectangle/OREGONLIVE/Remnant01_OR_ROS_Passback/news 300x25031111481.jpg/6e336d6d59314b7a6732634143424163)
Mapes on Politics
Most Read
Does Jeb Bush's favor seeking put John Kitzhaber Cylvia Hayes scandal in perspective?
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2015/02/does_jeb_bushs_favor seeking_p.html#incart_most read_mapes_article)
Kate Brown, preparing to take governorship, has little to say at Oregon birthday celebration
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2015/02/kate_brown_preparing_to_take_g.html#incart_most read_mapes_article)
Kate Brown to name Brian Shipley, OHSU lobbyist, as her gubernatorial chief of staff
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2015/02/kate_brown_to_name_brian_shipl.html#incart_most read_mapes_article)
Active Discussions
Recommended Stories From Around the Web
'Motor voter' benefits don't justify potential hassles: Editorial
(http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/02/motor_voter_benefits_dont_just.html#incart_related_stories)
Independent Party of Oregon says it qualifies for major-party status
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2015/02/independent_party_of_oregon_sa.html#incart_related_stories)
One big sticking point is that Oregon law requires that candidates for a majorparty nomination be registered in that party. Peralta said his party believes that provision is unconstitutional and would like to continue nominating candidates who may be registered in another party.
Peralta said the Independent Party also planned to open its primaries to the state's non affiliated voters, who constitute more than 30 percent of Oregon voters.
Jeff Mapes
[email protected] (mailto:[email protected])
5032218209
@Jeffmapes
Recommended by
Tweet 22 Share 1 Reddit
(http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php? u=http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2015/02/independent_party_of_oregon_ea.html) (http://twitter.com/share? url=http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2015/02/independent_party_of_oregon_ea.html&text=Independent Party of Oregon earns majorparty status; looks forward to staterun primary) (mailto:?subject=Independent Party of Oregon earns majorparty status; looks forward to staterun primary&body=http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2015/02/independent_party_of_oregon_ea.html#incart_email_mobile)
Related Stories
Haggen begins rolling takeover of
Albertsons and Safeway stores;
Oregon rebranding slated for March
(http://www.oregonlive.com/window shop/index.ssf/2015/02/haggen_begins_takeover_of_albe.html)
Steve Duin: The forlorn twilight of
Dan and Joan Pyle
(http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/steve_duin/index.ssf/2015/01/steve_duin_the_forlorn_twiligh.html)
Live updates: Oregon Governor John
Kitzhaber resigns
(http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/02/oregon_governor_john_kitzhaber_3.html)
U.S Presidents Ranked From Worst
to Best (RantPolitical) (http://www.rantpolitical.com/2014/09/19/10 bestand10worstus presidents/? utm_source=Outbrain&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=Title6)
This ExMicrosoft Exec Will Not
Sleep Until He Reinvents Investing
(Business Insider)
(http://outbr.in/LGQ8)
This App is Quickly Replacing
Human Financial Advisors (Business Insider)
(http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/trackclk/N9515.186294OUTBRAININC0/B8198435.110097758;dc_trk_aid=283444611;dc_trk_cid=58834128)
118Share
Newest | Oldest
Sign in
22 comments
Post comment as...
See more comments » (http://www.oregonlive.com/interact/)
1 Will Kitzhaber empty death row? Oregonians anxiously wait as governor's resignation looms (http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/02/will_kitzhaber_empty_death_row.html#incart_most commented_mapes_article) (276 comments)
2 Wellknown soccer coach Joe Leonetti: Sex abuse allegation was like scarlet letter (video) (http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon city/index.ssf/2015/02/joe_leonetti_feeling_vindicate.html#incart_most commented_mapes_article) (30 comments)
3 Oregon's proposed sick leave law raises concerns among business groups, Republican lawmakers (http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2015/02/oregons_proposed_sick_leave_la.html#incart_most commented_mapes_article) (36 comments)
4 Washington lieutenant governor admonishes state senator for 'abusive behavior' (http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific northwest news/index.ssf/2015/02/washington_lieutenant_governor_1.html#incart_most commented_mapes_article) (14 comments)
5 In God We Trust: It's not coincidence Klamath and Clark counties both debated the motto this month (http://www.oregonlive.com/faith/2015/02/in_god_we_trust_why_clark_and.html#incart_most commented_mapes_article) (252 comments)
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Political Parties/Issue #4 - Oregon Voters Rejecting Political Parties.pdf
Oregon Voters Rejecting Political Parties
Tuesday, October 28, 2014 Shelby Sebens, GoLocalPDX Reporter
Photo credit: AardvArt on Flickr
A growing number of Oregon voters don’t want to affiliate with Republicans or Democrats, or
any other political party.
Unaffiliated voters make up the third highest registration in the state, but they are not far behind
Democrats and Republicans.
And in several large counties this election cycle, the numbers of registered unaffiliated voters
went up while those choosing to register as Democrat or Republican went down, according to an
analysis of state voter registration numbers by Political Director, DHM Research and Director of
the Early Voting Information Center Paul Gronke.
“It is alarming to the Republican Party, and probably the two major parties, that there is a feeling
in people registering to vote that they’re moving to non affiliated as opposed to supporting the
party structures,” Oregon Republican Party Executive Director Margie Hughes said.
While Democrats still lead in overall voter registration, with 831,432 and Republicans in second
with 656,794, unaffiliated voters are creeping up at 532,420.
"In the long term what it means is people are interested in politics but the political parties are not
what they’re interested in," Political Science Professor at Pacific University Jim Moore said.
Voter registration numbers overall are the highest they have been for a midterm election since at
least 1998 and are nearly as high as the 2012 presidential election. Voter registration was
2,193,295 this election compared to 2,068,798 in 2010, according to the Oregon Secretary of
State's Elections Division.
In the state’s largest county, Multnomah County, unaffiliated registration went up 10 percent
from 2012 to 2014, according to numbers compiled by Gronke. But registration decreased by just
over 7 percent for Republicans and just over 4 percent for Democrats.
The state’s second largest county, Washington, saw an increase in unaffiliated voter registration
of over 9 percent while Republicans went down 5.5 percent and Democrats went down just over
4 percent. Deschutes County saw the largest uptick in unaffiliated voters from 2012 to 2014 at 12
percent. Democrats and Republicans saw a slight increase, both less than 1 percent.
Jackson, Yamhill, Marion, Polk, Linn and Benton Counties also saw signficant increases in
registered unaffiliated voters, of at least 9 percent.
Hughes said it’s been trending this way for a while. She said in the 1990s, she remembers when
unaffiliated voters accounted for about 80,000 Oregonians.
“Now they’re pushing the registration levels of the Democrats and the Republicans,” she said.
Moore said political experts have been tracking it for years..
"It’s a national trend," he said. "It’s a little more pronounced in the west because we have had
weaker political parties."
But, Moore added, the increased voter registrations likely won't translate to votes. He said as of
Monday, unaffiliated voters had the lowest percentage of ballots returned. Moore also said of the
new registrations in Oregon, 70 percent are unaffiliated voters.
But Hughes said it’s definitely on the minds of Republicans.
“For the growth of the party we of course need to convince those citizens, those voters who are
registering non affiliate to consider joining the Republican Party, however, it is just as important
for our republican candidates to get the message out,” Hughes said. “When it comes time for the
election, it’s more important that we convince the non affiliates to vote with us than to have them
in the party.”
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Political Parties/Issue #4 - Political Parties in Oregon.pdf
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Political Parties/Issue #4_ Poltiical Parties_ Millennials_ They avoid parties.pdf
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Voting/Issue #4 - state primary systems.pdf
Google Custom Search GO
Legislatures & Elections » Elections & Campaigns » State Primary Election Systems Go 20112
State Primary Election Types
Last updated September 28, 2011
The manner in which party primary elections are conducted varies widely from state to state. Most primaries can be categorized as either open, closed or top-two. In
other states, the primary type does not fall neatly into a category, but may represent a hybrid of these types.
Open Primaries
Eleven states operate open primaries, which permit any registered voter to cast a vote in a primary, regardless of his or her political affiliation. This means that a
Democrat could "cross over” and cast a vote in the Republican primary, or vice versa, and an unaffiliated voter can choose either major party's primary.
Proponents say that this system gives voters maximum flexibility because they can cross party lines. Opponents counter that this system dilutes a political party’s
ability to nominate its own candidate without interference from non-members.
Alabama Michigan North Dakota
Arkansas Minnesota Vermont
Georgia Missouri Wisconsin
Hawaii Montana
Closed Primaries
Eleven states operate closed primary elections or caucuses. In either case, only voters who are registered as members of a political party prior to the primary
date may participate in the nomination process for its candidates.
Proponents say that closed systems contribute to a strong party organization. Opponents note that independent or unaffiliated voters are excluded from the process.
Delaware Maine New York
Florida Nevada Pennsylvania
Kansas New Jersey Wyoming
Kentucky New Mexico
Top-Two Primaries
In top-two primaries all candidates, regardless of party affiliation, are listed on one ballot. Voters choose their favorite candidate, and the top two vote-getters
become the candidates in the general election. The top-two model is not used for presidential primaries in any state. In Nebraska, it is used only for the state's
nonpartisan legislature and for some statewide races. In California, Louisiana and Washington, the top-two primary is used for state and Congressional races.
Proponents say that top-two primaries give independent voters an equal voice and may help elect more moderate candidates from the major parties. Opponents
argue that it can reduce ballot access for third party candidates and lessen voter choice in that two Democrats or two Republicans could be the only candidates in
the general election.
California Nebraska
Louisiana Washington
Hybrid
Many states use primary election systems that fall somewhere in between "open" and "closed." Procedures are unique from state to state, and how to categorize
these primaries is a judgment call. Some states allow voters to cross party lines to vote. Depending on the state, choosing a ballot may actually be a form of
registration in the party. States in this category also vary according to how they treat unaffiliated voters. They may or may not be permitted to vote in party
primaries. In some states, such as Alaska, political parties may decide for themselves whether to permit voters who are unaffiliated or are members of another
party to participate in their primary. The parties may not necessarily all choose the same approach in a given state. For instance, in 2008 and 2010, the Alaska
Democratic party allowed any registered voter, regardless of party affiliation, to participate in its primary, while the Republican party limited participation in its
primary to its own members.
Alaska Maryland Rhode Island
Arizona Massachusetts South Carolina
Colorado Mississippi South Dakota
Connecticut New Hampshire Tennessee
Page 1 of 2State Primary Election Systems
10/25/2012http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/primary-types.aspx
Idaho North Carolina Texas
Illinois Ohio Utah
Indiana Oklahoma Virginia
Iowa Oregon West Virginia
Recent Changes
In 2011, Idaho did away with its open primary. Before 2011, Idaho did not have party registration, and each voter could choose which party's primary to vote in. In
2012, voters will be required to declare a party affiliation in order to receive that party's ballot in the primary election. Voters who choose to remain unaffiliated will
be offered a primary ballot with only non-partisan races. Parties may choose whether to allow unaffiliated voters and members of other parties to participate
in future primary elections, and a voter's choice to do so will affiliate the voter with that party.
For More Information
Contact NCSL's elections team at 303-364-7700.
Denver Office
Tel: 303-364-7700 | Fax: 303-364-7800 | 7700 East First Place |
Denver, CO 80230
Washington Office
Tel: 202-624-5400 | Fax: 202-737-1069 | 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515 |
Washington, D.C. 20001
©2012 National Conference of State Legislatures. All Rights Reserved.
Page 2 of 2State Primary Election Systems
10/25/2012http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/primary-types.aspx
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Voting/Issue #4 - Arizona primary experience 2016.pdf
Phoenix elections chief takes blame for long primary lines, won't resign Caitlin McGlade and Yvonne Wingett Sanchez, The Arizona Republic 7:53 p.m. EDT March 23, 2016
PHOENIX — Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell took responsibility for the hourslong lines (http://azc.cc/1MmfzgG) at the polls Tuesday that enraged voters and had some calling for her to step down over her handling of the presidential preference election.
“We certainly made bad decisions, and having only 60 polling places, didn’t anticipate there would be that many people going to the polling places,” she said. “We were obviously wrong — that’s my fault. So we’ll certainly look at that for future elections.”
But Purcell said she would not step down in the wake of Tuesday's debacle.
USA TODAY
Lack of polls caused Ariz. election chaos
(http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/2016/03/23/lack pollscausedarizelectionchaos/82187088/)
"I’m not going to resign," she said, as protesters gathered outside her downtown Phoenix office to call for her resignation or recall. "And the electorate is free to do whatever they want to do."
Voters waited in long lines to participate in Arizona's presidential preference election on Tuesday because of fewer polling sites this year in Maricopa County. County officials earlier this year said fewer sites would be more costeffective while still accommodating projected voter turnout.
USA TODAY
Donald Trump wins Arizona Republican primary
(http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/03/22/donaldtrump tedcruzjohnkasicharizonautah/82123356/)
The Board of Supervisors approved reducing the number of polling sites in February on the advice of Purcell, even as the Republican and Democratic presidential primary races across the country were seeing large voter turnout. Despite that, Purcell said she still believed there would be more people voting by mail early than showing up at the polls.
“There were still people who wanted to go to the polls. And I miscalculated on that, and you know, that’s my error."
(Photo: Mark Henle/The Republic)
People wait in line to vote in the Arizona Presidential Primary Election at Mountain View Lutheran Church Tuesday, March 22, 2016 in Phoenix, Ariz. (Photo: David Kadlubowski/The Republic)
Purcell said the department was “just trying to do something different for this election, hoping that it would work.” The decision was made after examining the number of people on the permanent early voting list and “just not anticipating the energy, if you will, of this election.”
County officials estimated 95% of voters would vote by mail. By Tuesday only 85% had voted by mail.
“I was just looking at the statistical history we had when we looked at early ballots," Purcell said. "What it is for these type of elections."
Purcell had a similar reducedpollinglocation plan in place for May 17's special election. Voters will decide Proposition 123, the ballot measure that calls for increasing funding to schools by $3.5 billion over 10 years.
USA TODAY
Hillary Clinton wins Arizona Democratic primary
(http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/03/22/hillaryclinton berniesandersarizonautahidaho/82128248/)
In light of Tuesday's long lines, Purcell said she has scrapped that plan and will increase the number of polling sites. She will huddle with her team to draw up a new pollingsite plan, which must be approved by the Board of Supervisors.
County Supervisor Steve Gallardo said during the board's regular meeting Wednesday morning that money should not be used as a reason to "cut corners."
Purcell has blamed the long lines on confused independents demanding to vote provisionally. Gallardo said that should have been expected.
"I just don't buy that," he said.
See a breakdown of the data so far. (https://infogr.am/arizonas_presidential_primary_election)
Hundreds of voters were still in line at Maricopa County polling places Tuesday night even as the Associated Press projected Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton as the winners. Some voters reported that they waited more than five hours before casting a ballot.
At least one polling site ran out of ballots, and elections officials hustled them to the site. Independents showed up to vote, leading to a surge in provisional ballots, which don't even count unless the voter was registered as a member of the Democratic, Republican or Green parties.
That was even with 86% of voters casting ballots by mail, according to County Elections Director Karen Osborne.
"This was a national news story and the public is owed an answer," said County Supervisor Steve Chucri. "The Maricopa County brand failed."
Ducey on Wednesday morning laid blame with election officials. (/story/news/politics/elections/2016/03/23/duceyripslongvoterlinescallsthem unacceptable/82160766/)
"Our election officials must evaluate what went wrong and how they make sure it doesn't happen again," Ducey said.
USA TODAY
Long lines, too few polls anger Phoenix voters
(http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/03/22/arizona primaryturnouttrumpcruzkasichclintonsanders/82134252/)
Protesters formed outside the Board of Supervisors meeting in downtown Phoenix, and some community leaders spoke for a news conference.
"This is nothing more than voter suppression," said Devon Del Palacio, a Tolleson Union High School District board member.
About two dozen angry voters, community leaders and elected officials gathered outside the county Board of Supervisors building and the county elections offices to voice their anger. Some called on Purcell to resign while others called for a “revote.” They held signs that read, "Hey, hey, ho, ho, Helen Purcell has to go!" and "Revote or revolt."
State Rep. Reginald Bolding, a Democrat, said he’s concerned voters were disenfranchised and wondered if it was deliberate.
“No matter if you were Democrat, no matter if you’re Republican or independent, this was not a good process at all,” Bolding said.
Asked if he thinks it was deliberate, he said, “I use the saying 'If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck.' ... We also have bills at the state Legislature that makes it a felony to help individuals vote. You would hope that it’s not deliberate, but when you look at everything that’s been introduced, it’s hard to believe it’s not a deliberate effort."
Megan Hitt, 32, of central Phoenix, held a sign saying, "70% less locations for 300% more voters = SUPPRESSION."
She didn’t work Tuesday and showed up to vote at a church near 40th Street and Thomas, where she waited 2½ hours to vote for Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders. She said there were too few people staffing the site and thinks elections officials had ulterior motives for understaffing and reducing the number of sites. Elections officials have said that is untrue.
“The numbers don’t make sense,” Hitt said. “For two weeks, Super Tuesdays have documented unprecedented voter turnout, and for them to have a 70% reduction in polling sites with a 300% increase in voter turnout is absolutely unacceptable.”
Alessandra Soler, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, said the organization has received about 50 complaints from voters. The group is reviewing complaints and will submit a request for public information to determine what data county officials used to decide to reduce polling places.
“That’s going to be the best way to gather information about how they made these decisions and where the biggest impact was,” she said. “There were some reports that in some Latino districts, there were no polling places.”
Follow Yvonne Wingett Sanchez and Caitlin McGlade on Twitter: @yvonnewingett and @CaitMcGlade
Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1MmNt4X
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Voting/Issue #4 - Costs to voting for minority voters.pdf
Charts: How minority
voters were blocked at
the ballot box in 2012.
[5]
Even Without Voter ID Laws, Minority Voters Face More Hurdles to Casting Ballots Heavily black and Latino precincts often have long lines and fewer voting machines on Election Day. Why?
By Stephanie Mencimer | Mon Nov. 3, 2014 6:00 AM EST
Social Title:
Even without voter ID laws, minority voters face more hurdles to casting ballots
Over the past decade, Republican legislators have pushed a number of measures critics say are blatant
attempts to suppress minority voting [1], including voter ID requirements [2], shortened early voting [3]
periods, and limits on same-day voter registration [4]. But minority voters are often disenfranchised in
another, more subtle way: polling places without enough voting machines or poll workers.
These polling places tend to have long lines to vote. Long lines force people to
eventually give up and go home, depressing voter turnout. And that happens
regularly all across the country in precincts with lots of minority voters, even
without voter ID or other voting restrictions in place.
Nationally, African Americans waited about twice as long to vote in the 2012
election [6]as white people (23 minutes on average versus 12 minutes); Hispanics waited 19 minutes. White
people who live in neighborhoods whose residents are less than 5 percent minority had the shortest of all wait
times, just 7 minutes. These averages obscure some of the unusually long lines in some areas. In South
Carolina's Richland County, which is 48 percent black and is home to 14 percent of the state's African
American registered voters, some people waited more than five hours to cast their ballots.
Even Without Voter ID Laws, Minority Voters Face More Hurdles to Cas... http://www.motherjones.com/print/263761
1 of 8 11/3/2014 11:35 PM
Average Wait Time by Race Nationwide, Election Day, 2012 (in minutes)
11.611.611.611.611.611.611.611.6
23.323.323.323.323.323.323.323.3
18.718.718.718.718.718.718.718.7
Source: Cooperative Congressional Election Study Get the data Fullscreen
A recent study [7] from the Brennan Center for Justice suggests that a big factor behind these delays was
inadequately prepared polling places in heavily minority precincts. Looking at Florida, Maryland, and South
Carolina, three states that had some of the longest voting lines in 2012 , the center found a strong correlation
between areas with large minority populations and a lack of voting machines and poll workers. In South
Carolina, the 10 precincts with the longest waits had more than twice the percentage of black voters (64
percent) as the state as a whole (27 percent).
In the parts of South Carolina with the longest lines (all in Richland County), precincts had an average of only
1 poll worker for every 321 voters, almost twice the state's mandated ratio of 1 to 167. These precincts also
had the fewest voting machines relative to registered voters, with some precincts hitting 432 voters per
machine. In contrast, precincts with no wait times had an average of 279 voters per machine. State law
requires no more than 250 voters per machine, a limit implemented under the Voting Rights Act [8]. Research
show [9]s that voter participation starts to drop off sharply when the number of registered voters per machine
exceeds that.
Even Without Voter ID Laws, Minority Voters Face More Hurdles to Cas... http://www.motherjones.com/print/263761
2 of 8 11/3/2014 11:35 PM
African Americans waited about twice
South Carolina: Voters Per Machine Average number of registered voters per voting machine on Election Day, 2012
582582582582582582582582
297297297297297297297297
Source: Brennan Center for Justice Get the data Fullscreen
Voting difficulties are not only a problem in poor areas; even well-off African Americans have had a hard
time voting. Consider, for instance, Prince George's County, Maryland, the wealthiest African American
suburb in the country, which has the highest proportion of minority residents of any county in the state. In
2012, P.G. County saw three-hour waits to vote [10]. It had the state's highest number of precincts without the
legally required number of voting machines. In most of its precincts, the county had only one voting machine
for every 230 registered voters; state law requires no more than 200 voters per machine.
The racially imbalanced distribution of voting resources has spurred allegations that state and local officials
are violating the Voting Rights Act, which bars implementing election policies that deny people the right to
vote based on race. In 2004, the House Judiciary Committee held field hearings [11] to examine irregularities
in voting in Ohio, including long lines in minority areas of the hotly contested swing state in that year's
presidential election. Franklin County, which includes Columbus and had twice the proportion of black voters
as the rest of the state, was ground zero for long voting lines. Anecdotal evidence suggested that 5,000 to
10,000 people in Columbus walked away from the polls because of long lines. One woman reported [12] that
during the four hours she had to wait to vote in Franklin County, her husband died at home alone.
After the 2004 election, University of Michigan political scientist Walter
Mebane studied [9] Franklin County for the Democratic National
Committee, which wanted to figure out why so many likely Democratic
Even Without Voter ID Laws, Minority Voters Face More Hurdles to Cas... http://www.motherjones.com/print/263761
3 of 8 11/3/2014 11:35 PM
as long to cast ballots in the 2012 election as white voters.
voters had been unable to vote. He found that precincts with large minority
populations had nearly 24 percent more registered voters per voting
machine than in precincts whose population was less than one-quarter
minority. Mebane estimated [9] that the voting machine shortage had
reduced potential voter turnout in those areas of Franklin by about 4
percent. Another estimate [13]suggested that roughly 130,000 would-be
voters were turned away thanks to long lines. (Those missing votes would not have been enough to swing the
state [14] for John Kerry, but they were enough to fuel conspiracy theories for years afterward.)
The Advancement Project, a civil rights organization, sued Virginia shortly before the 2008 presidential
election, alleging that African American voters were getting short-changed on voting machines. Mebane's
analysis of election officials' plans [15]revealed that in Richmond and Virginia Beach, the larger the
percentage of African American voters in a precinct, the fewer voting machines would be provided. In
Richmond, for instance, in areas where fewer than 12 percent of the residents were black, officials planned to
provide a voting machine for every 232 registered voters. In areas where residents were virtually all black,
there would only be one machine for every 308 registered voters. Nonetheless, a state court threw the case
out.
The reasons for the lack of voting machines and long wait times in minority communities isn't always clear.
At the county level, it is hard to find evidence of Republican schemes to keep heavily Democratic areas from
voting. Local officials are responsible for buying voting machines and staffing polling places. Many of the
places with the fewest resources and longest lines are governed by African Americans and Latinos and tend to
skew Democratic. Take Maryland's P.G. County. Alisha Alexander, the county's election administrator, told
me that voter registrations for the 2012 election far surpassed projections made in the early 2000s, yet the
county still had the same number of voting machines. Those machines, purchased in 2001, were nearing the
end of their useful lives and could not be easily fixed or replaced since they were no longer being
manufactured. "You can't mix and match voting equipment," Alexander explains. State law required the
county to use the same type of machine everywhere. "We literally had all of our voting units out in the field
between early voting and Election Day, but there was no mechanism to get additional units."
The 2012 election in Richland County, South Carolina, was a disaster that officials are still trying to untangle.
Nearly 100 voting machines [16] sat in a warehouse, unused on election night while voters queued up for as
long as seven hours [17] to vote at overburdened polling places. (Local conspiracy theorists [18]have
suggested—incorrectly—that the election office stiffed precincts on voting machines in areas that opposed a
Even Without Voter ID Laws, Minority Voters Face More Hurdles to Cas... http://www.motherjones.com/print/263761
4 of 8 11/3/2014 11:35 PM
The chairman of the Franklin County GOP explained, "We shouldn't contort the voting process to accommodate the urban—read African American —voter turnout machine."
controversial tax proposal that voters rejected in 2010.)
Charles Stewart III, a political science professor at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology who has studied voting wait times, has posited [19]
that the problem is likely related to the poor provision of public service in
minority areas in general. In other words, if you don't have good trash pick
up, your polling station isn't likely to function very well, either.
Regardless of the cause, it is indisputable that African Americans and
Latinos often have a much harder time voting than white people. This
history inspired many of the election reforms that Republicans are now
actively trying to roll back in places like Ohio and North Carolina, which
the Supreme Court has essentially approved [2].
After the disastrous election in Ohio in 2004, state lawmakers and election
officials created opportunities for early and absentee voting, and allowed
people to register to vote and cast a ballot on the same day. The state required that every polling station have
at least one voting machine for every 175 people. By 2012, roughly a third of all voters cast ballots early [13]
and the lines didn't make the evening news.
But since Barack Obama was elected, the GOP-dominated Ohio state Legislature has been working feverishly
to roll back those measures, which many Republicans view as too favorable to Democrats. In 2012, Doug
Preisse, the chairman of the Franklin County Republican Party explained to the Columbus Dispatch [20], "I
guess I really actually feel we shouldn't contort the voting process to accommodate the urban—read African
American—voter turnout machine."
In 2011, the Legislature passed a bill killing off what's known as "Golden Week [21]," where people could
register and vote on the same day during the first of four weeks of early voting. Following a ballot initiative to
overturn the measure, the legislature repealed the law. Earlier this year, Republican lawmakers once again
eliminated Golden Week, and the Republican secretary of state, Jon Husted, issued a rule eliminating early
voting on Sundays, the Monday before the election, and all evenings after five o'clock. The American Civil
Liberties Union sued the state, [13] at first blocking the measure in federal court. But in late September, the
Supreme Court allowed the state to proceed.
Early voting and other reforms to make voting easier for everyone were not designed to boost Democrats but
simply to even the playing field. That's why the new measures in places such as Ohio and North Carolina that
Even Without Voter ID Laws, Minority Voters Face More Hurdles to Cas... http://www.motherjones.com/print/263761
5 of 8 11/3/2014 11:35 PM
pare back early voting and pile on new ID and registration requirements are likely to create a double whammy
for minority voters by compounding existing problems at the polls. Strict new ID requirements [1] in
particular are likely to lead to longer lines as voters try to figure out the new system at precincts that may
already be suffering from a shortage of poll workers.
Carrie Davis, the executive director of the Ohio League of Women Voters, says it's not yet clear how this
year's Election Day will turn out. The state has consolidated polling places due to the success of early and
absentee voting in reducing the high demand on Election Day. In 2010, for instance, Franklin County [22]
went from 123 precincts to 61. Such moves raise concerns about a return of long lines, particularly in minority
precincts. "With the law change and court action, this will be the first time we don't have evening early and
in-person voting, so that will impact people. All of these different restrictions, whether they're subtle or
obvious, they add up. And that's the concern. Does that put voters off?" Davis wonders.
Probably so. Consider what happened in 2012 in Lee County, a Florida county named after the Confederate
general that was subject to a federal school desegregation order until 1999. The number of registered voters in
the county jumped 70,000 [23], from about 320,000 in 2008 to 390,000 in 2012. During the same time, the
state provided 14 days of early voting before elections; more than 30,000 of Lee County voters voted early
during that period in 2010. Those early voters allowed the county to pare back the resources it needed to
deploy on Election Day without causing much disruption to the election. According to the Orlando Sentinel,
[24] during that same time the county consolidated its polling stations, shrinking their numbers from 136 to
88.
Even Without Voter ID Laws, Minority Voters Face More Hurdles to Cas... http://www.motherjones.com/print/263761
6 of 8 11/3/2014 11:35 PM
Lee County, FL: Average Number of Registered Voters Per Machine Precincts by percentage of Latino voters
1,5321,5321,5321,5321,5321,5321,5321,532
1,7701,7701,7701,7701,7701,7701,7701,770
Source: Brennan Center for Justice Get the data Fullscreen
But in 2011, the state Legislature passed a law reducing the early voting period from 14 to 8 days. The next
year, Lee County had some of the state's longest voting lines on Election Day, with some voters waiting as
long as five hours. Many others likely gave up without voting. (One study [24]estimated that long lines
deterred more than 200,000 people from voting in Florida in 2012.)
Not all Lee County voters were equally inconvenienced. Lee County is about 87 percent white, 19 percent
Hispanic, and 9 percent black. Precincts with more than 20 percent Latino voters had on average about 2,000
voters per machine, compared with about 1,500 in areas that were 10 percent or less Latino. In areas of the
county where African Americans and Latinos made up 40 to 50 percent of the population, precincts on
average had a machine for every 2,150 voters, compared with 1,485 in areas with less than 10 percent
minority populations.
Myrna Perez, deputy director of the democracy program at the Brennan Center and a coauthor of its voting
study, says that the center hasn't found find any evidence that these sorts of problems were created
intentionally. But because their effect is so dramatic, she says something will have to change: "We think that
now election officials have been put on notice they have an obligation to address it." Given the trends in most
of these contested states, that's not likely to happen any time soon, and especially not before tomorrow's
election, when it could make a difference.
Even Without Voter ID Laws, Minority Voters Face More Hurdles to Cas... http://www.motherjones.com/print/263761
7 of 8 11/3/2014 11:35 PM
Source URL: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/10/minority-voters-election-long-lines-id
Links: [1] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/10/voting-rights-november-voter-suppression-states [2] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/10/supreme-court-texas-voter-id-law-history [3] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/missouri-gop-voter-fraud-early-voting [4] http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2014/10/north-carolina-voting-law-supreme-court [5] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/10/charts-black-latino-voters-machines-poll-workers [6] https://www.supportthevoter.gov/files/2013/08/Waiting-to-Vote-in-2012-Stewart.pdf [7] http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/publications/ElectionDayLongLines- ResourceAllocation.pdf [8] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/republican-voting-rights-supreme-court-id [9] http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/franklin2.pdf [10] http://www.866ourvote.org/newsroom/publications/body/EP2012-StateReports-MD.pdf [11] http://www.openvotingconsortium.org/files/Conyersreport.pdf [12] http://www.lawyerscommittee.org/admin/voting_rights/documents/files/0004.pdf [13] https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/ohio_complaint.pdf [14] http://ps.ucdavis.edu/people/bhighton/home/copenhagen2012/readings/Highton_lines_ps_2006.pdf [15] http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/Kaine-MotionExDec-10-28-08.pdf [16] http://www.wistv.com/story/20223227/richland-county-election-investigation-not-enough-voting- machines-used [17] http://www.thestate.com/2012/11/11/2515647_vote-counting-expert-former-voting.html?rh=1 [18] https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/evtwote13/jets-0101-buell.pdf [19] https://www.supportthevoter.gov/files/2013/08/Waiting-in-Line-to-Vote-White-Paper-Stewart- Ansolabehere.pdf [20] http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2012/08/19/fight-over-poll-hours-isnt-just-political.html [21] http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2014/02/kasich_signs_voting_bills_that.html [22] http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/09/19/counties-cutting-back-on-polling- locations.html [23] http://election.dos.state.fl.us/voter-registration/archives/2012/November/Monthly.pdf [24] http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-01-29/business/os-voter-lines-statewide-20130118_1_long-lines- sentinel-analysis-state-ken-detzner
Even Without Voter ID Laws, Minority Voters Face More Hurdles to Cas... http://www.motherjones.com/print/263761
8 of 8 11/3/2014 11:35 PM
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Voting/Issue #4 - Laws effecting voter access.pdf
Nearly half the nation has tighter voting restrictions
today than four years ago.
Since the 2010 election, 22 states have passed new
voting requirements, according to the nonprofit law and
policy institute the Brennan Center for Justice at New
York University, which advocates against many of the
restrictions. In 15 of those states, this year marks the
first major federal election with those new policies in
place. Seven states are facing court challenges over their
tighter voting laws.
Follow @NirajC
Map: 22 states have passed new voting restrictions over the past four year... http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/06/17/map-22-s...
1 of 4 10/27/2014 2:03 PM
The restrictions have a disproportionate impact on the
black population, according to a review of census data.
While the 22 states are home to 46 percent of the overall
population, they represent 57 percent of the nation’s
black population. The Hispanic population, however, is
underrepresented: just 42 percent live in the states with
new voting requirements. The restrictions range from
photo ID requirements to narrower windows for early
voting.
Most were passed by GOP-led legislatures in states with
growing minority turnout, the report finds. In 18 of the
22 states, the restrictions were ushered through GOP-led
bodies. The requirements will also have an outsized
effect on states with high minority turnout. Seven of the
states with new requirements are among the 11 with the
highest African American turnout in 2008. Nine of the
states with new restrictions are among the 12 with the
highest Hispanic turnout.
Proponents of such policies say they boost election
integrity and reduce voter fraud. Opponents argue that
they discourage turnout. Academic studies have found
that voter fraud is incredibly rare and are mixed on the
impact such policies have on turnout.
The Brennan Center report characterizes the recent
passage of voter requirements as a marked shift.
Between early 2011 and the 2012 election, state
lawmakers introduced at least 180 restrictive voting bills
in 41 states, with such policies passing in 19 states by the
2012 election. Laws requiring that voters present some
Map: 22 states have passed new voting restrictions over the past four year... http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/06/17/map-22-s...
2 of 4 10/27/2014 2:03 PM
form of ID at the polls are in effect in 31 states, according
to a count last month by the bipartisan National
Conference on State Legislatures.
The report breaks the new requirements into four broad
categories: tighter identification laws introduced in 13
states; greater registration requirements introduced in
10 states; narrower early voting windows in 8 states; and
restricting the voting rights of those with past
convictions in 3 states. (Some states passed multiple new
requirements.)
The seven states facing challenges over their new voting
requirements are Arizona, Arkansas, Kansas, North
Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Wisconsin, as shown in the
map above. (Iowa is shaded a different color because,
while there is a lawsuit there, it targets an administrative
action and not a law.)
Of the 16 states that have passed expansions to voting
Map: 22 states have passed new voting restrictions over the past four year... http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/06/17/map-22-s...
3 of 4 10/27/2014 2:03 PM
access in the past two years, 11 modernized their
registration systems, making it easier for eligible citizens
to sign up. Early voting was expanded in three states,
while youths in their late teens were granted the ability
to pre-register to vote in another three. Oklahoma
weakened its photo ID law. Colorado expanded ballot
access to non-English speakers, while Mississippi and
Oklahoma expanded absentee ballot access.
Map: 22 states have passed new voting restrictions over the past four year... http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/06/17/map-22-s...
4 of 4 10/27/2014 2:03 PM
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Voting/Issue #4 - New laws for voting - CNN.pdf
McDaniel: Cochran campaign 'race-baited' Jones: North Carolina is rigging the system
Democrats likely swung GOP contest
Rules of the game: New laws could make it tougher for some to vote By Halimah Abdullah, CNN updated 12:05 PM EDT, Fri July 4, 2014 CNN.com
Washington (CNN) -- Edna Griggs keenly remembers the anger and outrage she felt during the 2012 general election when she watched as African-American senior citizens were forced to wait in long lines in the Houston heat as they cued up to vote at the Acres Homes Multi- Service Center.
A member of her local NAACP chapter, Griggs says she was told that she couldn't bring them water
to drink or chairs to rest in.
"A poll watcher approached me and said, 'What are you doing?' He told me I couldn't do that. They thought we
were trying to sway their votes by giving them water," she said. "It was really sad to me because it was like a reflection of the stories I heard from my grandmother and mother when they had to pay to vote. It was a reflection of everything our people have gone through."
Griggs is one of the plaintiffs in a NAACP lawsuit about new Texas voting identification laws, regulations that are considered by some civil rights and liberties groups
as among the nation's most restrictive.
Civil rights groups in that state, and others, fear that election officials and poll watchers, empowered by those new laws will ratchet up the level of discrimination against minority voters.
"We've had a serious problem with elected officials discriminating against Latino and African- American voters. It's obvious that many officials cannot be expected to treat these voters fairly," said Gary Bledsoe, an attorney and president of the Texas NAACP. "When you give them more power to reject black and Latino voters at the polls, that power will be exercised and the discrimination escalated."
Rules of the game: New laws tough for some voters - CNN.com http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/04/politics/voter-laws/
1 of 4 10/27/2014 2:05 PM
Obama cracks 'birth certificate' joke Voter ID's, Cliven, and the Donald
Voting rights vs. voter fraud
Key races to watch in 2014
Texas voting officials have said the state's new photo voter identification law will help tamp down fraud.
"The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that voter ID laws do not suppress legal votes, but do help prevent illegal votes," Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said last year, according to media reports.
The hunt for fraud
When they head to the polls in this fall's midterm elections, some voters in nearly half of the country will find it a lot tougher to cast ballots due to new voting laws, according to a new report by the Brennan Center for Justice. It is a legal think tank at New York University School of Law that has criticized the increase in what it sees as prohibitive voting measures.
Most of the laws were approved by Republican-dominated legislatures and in states that saw greater minority voter turnout in the 2008 and 2012 general elections, the report found.
Civil rights groups and voting rights advocates see the spate of new laws as a way to disenfranchise and intimidate minority voters and suppress turnout during high-stakes elections. Others support the changes and see the laws as the best way to preserve integrity in the voting process.
Such groups as the grassroots Voter Integrity Project in North Carolina and True the Vote, a
conservative group in Texas, supports citizen enforcement of the new voter laws, acts that often mean sifting through voter rolls and pounding on doors in search of fraud.
True the Vote announced this week that it is suing the Mississippi secretary of state and that state's Republican Party over the right to look at the poll books and ballots in order to ensure that Democratic primary
voters didn't also illegally vote in last month's Republican primary runoff. In Mississippi, voters who don't cast ballots in a primary election can vote in either party's runoff.
Mississippi state Sen. Chris McDaniel, who lost a bitter runoff against incumbent Republican Sen. Thad Cochran last month, is citing what he sees as "illegal" and "unethical" behavior among African-American Democrats who cast ballots for the veteran lawmaker.
Rules of the game: New laws tough for some voters - CNN.com http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/04/politics/voter-laws/
2 of 4 10/27/2014 2:05 PM
Analysis: The politics of voter ID laws Lawsuits filed over N.C. Voter ID Law
McDaniel said many of those voters participated in the Democratic primary and shouldn't have been allowed to vote in the Republican runoff.
"True the Vote has been inundated with reports from voters across Mississippi who are outraged to see the integrity of this election being undermined so that politicos can get back to business as usual. Enough is enough," True the Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht said in statement.
Vigilante or vindicator? One man's bid to root out voter fraud
Tough new laws
The nation's new crop of voting laws run the gamut from dialing back early voting hours to new requirements for photo identification to stricter rules for voter registration.
A few examples:
In Georgia, Republican lawmakers voted in 2001 to cut the early voting period down from 45 to 21 days, and nixed early voting the weekend before Election Day.
In North Carolina: The GOP-controlled legislature did away with same-day registration, reduced the early voting period and put in place a photo ID requirement, among other changes. Those provisions are the subject of a court challenge and could go to trial next year.
In Ohio, the Republican-dominated legislature this year approved measures nixing the so-called "Golden Week," a period in which voters could both register and cast early ballots during the same trip to the polls. Those cuts are the subject of a lawsuit.
In Texas, which also has a GOP-controlled legislature, a new photo identification requirement went into effect for the first time this year. In 2011, a law which bans voter registration drives — a method that is often used to target potential voters in poor neighborhoods and on college campuses — went into effect.
And, in at least seven states, including Arizona, Arkansas and North Carolina, suits challenging
new voting restrictions are wending their way through state and federal courts and could potentially impact the outcome of the 2014 elections.
"The rules of the game"
This all follows a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year striking down provisions of the Voting Rights Act, which required a number of states — many of them in the South — to get clearance from the Justice Department before changing their voting laws.
Rules of the game: New laws tough for some voters - CNN.com http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/04/politics/voter-laws/
3 of 4 10/27/2014 2:05 PM
Without that protection, voting rights advocates say, in states with a history of discriminatory voting practices against racial minorities those who seek to unduly influence elections will find it easier to suppress votes.
2012 increase in voting ID laws
"We have seen a dramatic increase in politicians trying to manipulate the rules of the game in terms of making it harder for citizens to vote," said Myrna Perez, a senior counsel at NYU's Brennan Center for Justice.
The flurry of new and more restrictive voter laws coincided with the 2010 elections and new Republican majorities that came into power, Perez said.
In 2012, the increase in laws reached a fever pitch when 19 states put forth measures civil rights groups view as restrictive.
Now, as the 2014 midterm elections loom, voting rights advocates point to scenarios in the 2000 and 2012 general elections in Florida, where there was confusion about voting methods, laws and long lines, as a model for what could happen elsewhere in the country.
"I guess you could say we're ahead of the curve on voter suppression," said Deirdre Macnab, president of the nonpartisan League of Women Voters of Florida adding that the state has since passed a series of election reform measures which have improved voting. "When it comes to Florida, we first saw the impact of taking away days and times to vote. And the legislators were properly shamed and embarrassed. It's unfortunate that other states have to experience that."
2014 Midterm Elections
© 2014 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Rules of the game: New laws tough for some voters - CNN.com http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/04/politics/voter-laws/
4 of 4 10/27/2014 2:05 PM
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Voting/Issue #4 - Voter fraud Oregon.pdf
9/15/2017 54 suspected vote fraud cases emerge in Oregon
https://apnews.com/e128b46c4eb64539b6b463ecb2154987 1/7
By ANDREW SELSKY Today
RELATED TOPICS Elections Oregon Donald Trump
More from Elections
SALEM, Ore. (AP) — A study of the November 2016 election in
Oregon has revealed 54 cases of suspected voter fraud,
representing only .002 percent of votes cast, Oregon’s secretary
of state announced Friday.
Of the total, 46 people apparently voted in Oregon and in some
other state, six ballots were turned in under the names of people
listed as dead, and two people appeared to have voted more
than once, Dennis Richardson said in a videotaped
announcement . Richardson said the evidence has been turned
over to the Oregon attorney general’s office for criminal
investigation and prosecution.
President Donald Trump has claimed that “millions of people”
voted illegally in the election that he lost in the popular vote but
won in the Electoral College. Presidential adviser Stephen Miller
https://apnews.com/e128b46c4eb64539b6b463ecb2154987
54 suspected vote fraud cases emerge in Oregon
AP Top News Sports Entertainment Explore
9/15/2017 54 suspected vote fraud cases emerge in Oregon
https://apnews.com/e128b46c4eb64539b6b463ecb2154987 2/7
has said an “astonishing” number of non-citizens were
registered to vote.
But Richardson, the state’s highest-ranking Republican, did not
mention any non-citizens voting, and he made a point of saying
the number of suspicious cases amounted to only one out of
38,000 ballots.
“These are very low numbers compared to the amount of ballots
that have been turned in,” he said. He also said in a statement
that “there is no evidence that these fraudulent ballots impacted
the outcome of any contest.”
His office recently handed over a statewide list of voters to
Trump’s commission investigating allegations of voter fraud,
after it paid the $500 fee required of anyone seeking the
information for non-commercial purposes. Made available were
names, addresses, registration dates and status, birth year,
precinct name and political party affiliation. But information
that was not disclosed included Social Security and driver’s
license numbers or how a person voted.
Kristina Edmunson, spokeswoman for Attorney General Ellen
Rosenblum’s office, said in an email to The Associated Press the
office is reviewing the new materials provided by Richardson.
Oregon’s Elections Division consulted with other states and
used Oregon county data; the Electronic Registration
Information Center, or ERIC, which is governed by a board of
directors made up of member states, including Oregon; U.S.
Postal Service change of address information; and Social
Security death records, Debra Royal, Richardson’s chief of staff,
told AP in an email.
9/15/2017 54 suspected vote fraud cases emerge in Oregon
https://apnews.com/e128b46c4eb64539b6b463ecb2154987 3/7
“This is the most comprehensive check we have ever done with
more data and a better data matching engine,” she quoted
Elections Director Steve Trout as saying.
Intentionally voting twice is a felony punishable by up to five
years in prison and up to a $125,000 fine, Richardson said.
While there have been isolated cases of voter fraud in the U.S.,
there is no evidence of it being a widespread problem. Experts
also say this would be an inefficient way to rig an election, given
the fraud would have to be conducted one voter at a time, and
would only be effective in places where the race is close enough
that the outcome could be swayed.
Studies have shown voter impersonation to be quite rare. In one
analysis, a Loyola Law School professor found 31 instances
involving allegations of voter impersonation out of 1 billion
votes cast in U.S. elections between 2000 and 2014.
Another study by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York
University Law School found that many reports of people voting
twice or ballots being cast on behalf of dead people were largely
the result of clerical errors that suggested wrongdoing when
none had occurred.
“In these kinds of circumstances, I suspect the numbers tend to
be a bit inflated,” Myrna Perez, deputy director of the Brennan
Center’s democracy program, said in a telephone interview. “At
the outset, comparing large lists of names produces false
positives of matches. The person they think is Myrna Perez in
9/15/2017 54 suspected vote fraud cases emerge in Oregon
https://apnews.com/e128b46c4eb64539b6b463ecb2154987 4/7
Jersey City is not the same Myrna Perez in Texas voting. That’s
one thing that happens when you look at double voting.”
“It’ll be very interesting to see how many convictions they
actually end up getting,” she said.
___
Follow Andrew Selsky on Twitter at
https://twitter.com/andrewselsky
.
More From AP by Taboola
Authorities: Stun gun used before fatal shooting by shelter
7 live sharks, 3 dead ones found in home's basement pool
Mystery continues after removal of object off beach
Police: 9 dead, including suspect, at suburban Dallas home
Ad Content by Taboola Sponsored Links
Sports Jamm
Posthard
He's the most feared player in NFL history
Actual Wild West Photos You Can't Unsee
The Kitchen Cabinet Company Big Box Retailers Don't Want You To Know About
9/15/2017 54 suspected vote fraud cases emerge in Oregon
https://apnews.com/e128b46c4eb64539b6b463ecb2154987 5/7
CliqStudios Cabinets
IFLMyLife
Shape | Brandless
Privacy Pop
Dollar Shave Club
Throne: Free Online Game
Iconic ‘Forrest Gump’ Scene Has One Ridiculous Flaw No One Noticed
How To Eat Healthy On A Budget With Brandless
Sleep in Bed-Tent Seclusion Even in a Packed Dorm
The Razor Deal That Everyone's Talking About
Play this game for 10 minutes and see why everyone is addicted
9/15/2017 54 suspected vote fraud cases emerge in Oregon
https://apnews.com/e128b46c4eb64539b6b463ecb2154987 6/7
VIEW MORE
Voter turnout still headache for Democrats
Judiciary considers subpoenas for Manafort, FBI officials
Guatemala Congress repeals bill that cut campaign penalties
27 mins ago
Today
Today
9/15/2017 54 suspected vote fraud cases emerge in Oregon
https://apnews.com/e128b46c4eb64539b6b463ecb2154987 7/7
AP NEWS
About Terms and Conditions Privacy
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
About Us Products and Services Media Center Company Contact Us Careers
MORE FROM AP
AP Images AP Archives AP Video Hub
FOLLOW AP
All contents © copyright 2017 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Food: Home Cooks Should
Lead the Fight Against Food
Waste
Alternative Therapies: What
Every Parent Should Know
General Health: The
Happiest Age Group,
Revealed
Care2
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Voting/Issue #4 - voter ID.pdf
9/25/2017 Wisconsin Strict ID Law Discouraged Voters, Study Finds - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/us/wisconsin-voters.html?partner=rss&emc=rss 1/3
https://nyti.ms/2jZEVc7
U.S.
Wisconsin Strict ID Law Discouraged Voters, Study Finds By MICHAEL WINES SEPT. 25, 2017
WASHINGTON — More than 10,000 registered Wisconsin voters — potentially many more — were deterred from casting ballots in November by the state’s strict voter ID law, according to a new survey of nonvoters by two University of Wisconsin political scientists.
The survey, summarized on Monday on the university’s website, is certain to further roil an ongoing debate over whether Donald J. Trump’s narrow victory in Wisconsin over Hillary Clinton was a result of efforts to depress Democratic turnout. Mr. Trump defeated Ms. Clinton by 22,748 votes out of more than 2.9 million ballots cast. The November turnout in Wisconsin, 69.4 percent of eligible voters, was the lowest in a presidential election year since 2000.
The study summarized on Monday specifically does not make that claim, its principal author, Prof. Kenneth R. Mayer of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said in an interview. But neither did he rule it out.
“The survey did not ask any questions about how people would have voted or about their party identification,” he said. “But it’s certainly possible that there were enough voters deterred that it flipped the election.”
Wisconsin’s voter ID law, enacted in 2011 after Republicans took control of the legislature and the statehouse, requires citizens to show a driver’s license, a passport,
9/25/2017 Wisconsin Strict ID Law Discouraged Voters, Study Finds - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/us/wisconsin-voters.html?partner=rss&emc=rss 2/3
a naturalization certificate or one of several other fairly uncommon documents before casting a ballot. A federal court blunted the impact of the law in 2016, ordering the state to give a free ID to any voter who asked for one, but the state’s implementation of that order was criticized as ineffective.
In Wisconsin and elsewhere, Republicans have argued that an ID requirement is necessary to combat an epidemic of fraudulent voting, although studies have repeatedly shown that illegal voting is exceedingly rare. Privately, some Republicans have allowed that the laws’ main intent is to keep people who often vote Democratic — the poor, the young and minorities — from going to the polls.
The study reported Monday, by Professor Mayer and a doctoral student in political science, Michael G. DeCrescenzo, concludes that that is largely what occurred in November. Their survey involved 288 registered voters in the state’s two most populous counties who did not cast ballots in the 2016 election. Based on their answers, the study estimated that 11.2 percent of the counties’ 160,000 registered nonvoters were deterred from casting ballots by the voter ID law, generally because they mistakenly believed they lacked an acceptable identification card. Another 6 percent, they estimated, were prevented from voting because they actually did not have an acceptable ID.
Of the survey respondents who said that the voter ID law deterred or prevented them from voting, about eight in 10 had voted in the previous presidential election, the survey showed.
The study also found that the law disproportionately affected low-income and African-American voters: 21.1 percent of registrants earning less than $25,000 a year were estimated to have been deterred from voting, compared with 2.7 percent of registrants making $100,000 a year or more. More than 27 percent of blacks reported being deterred, compared with about 8 percent of whites.
All told, the study concluded, about 25,800 registrants in the two counties could not or did not cast ballots because of the law. Still more residents elsewhere in the state undoubtedly were kept from voting by the law, Professor Mayer said, but the survey results from the two counties, which include Madison and Milwaukee, cannot be applied to other parts of the state.
8 ARTICLES REMAINING
SIGN UP Subscriber login
9/25/2017 Wisconsin Strict ID Law Discouraged Voters, Study Finds - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/us/wisconsin-voters.html?partner=rss&emc=rss 3/3
It has been difficult to gauge the effect of voter ID laws, Professor Mayer said, because each election is different and people have many reasons for not voting. Political scientists have usually relied on statistical analyses of voter data to draw conclusions on the laws’ impact. But surveys of actual nonvoters can provide more reliable estimates, he said, because they directly measure people’s motivations for voting or staying home.
The Wisconsin study broadly confirms the results of another survey of nonvoters conducted by Rice University scholars after the 2014 congressional election. That study concluded that 9 percent of nonvoters in the state’s 23rd Congressional District were discouraged from voting by Texas’s voter ID law — often, as in Wisconsin, because they mistakenly believed they lacked a valid ID.
© 2017 The New York Times Company
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Voting/Issue #4 - Voting and Voter registration.pdf
9/25/2017 We must keep working to expand voter registration (Guest opinion) | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2017/09/work_to_expand_voter_registrat.html#incart_2box_opinion 1/4
We must keep working to expand voter registration (Guest opinion)
Posted on September 25, 2017 at 2:00 PM
2 shares
By Guest Columnist
BY DAN RAYFIELD
Tomorrow is National Voter Registration Day. Given the renewed focus by some national and state politicians to roll back voter access, the day takes on an even more important meaning this year--and the need to stop these undemocratic efforts becomes even more urgent.
OPINION
23
Voters drop ballots off at the Multnomah County Elections headquarters on Southeast Morrison Street in Portland. (Beth Nakamura/2016)
9/25/2017 We must keep working to expand voter registration (Guest opinion) | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2017/09/work_to_expand_voter_registrat.html#incart_2box_opinion 2/4
To be clear, we have a lot to celebrate in Oregon. Between voting by mail and the groundbreaking Motor Voter program that we put into place in 2015, Oregon is held up as a national model for voter registration, ballot access and civic engagement. Studies are showing that automatic voter registration is diversifying the electorate and improving turnout. Vote by mail makes it easy for all voters to participate and includes important anti-fraud safeguards.
But while we pat ourselves on the back for our accomplishments, we shouldn't lose sight of the many Oregonians who remain unregistered. Today there are still large groups of Oregonians, like students and seniors, who don't have driver licenses or who have voter information that needs to be updated. In other words, there are eligible voters who won't receive a ballot during the next election. There is room for improvement from a legislative perspective.
Because portions of our population are still not registered, it's been necessary for organizations, such as the League of Women Voters and the locally-based Bus Project, to engage voters and conduct registration drives. These organizations and their volunteers have played a vital role registering historically underrepresented communities. It's also why the Bus Project worked to help create the upcoming National Voter Registration Day. Organizations and volunteers that have focused their efforts on voter registration shouldn't become complacent just because we've made progress on these issues.
We must also remain vigilant against political efforts to reduce voter access under the guise of "voter fraud." The Trump Administration has tapped one of the leading architects of the voter restriction movement -- Kris Kobach -- to lead a national effort to strip away voting rights using this ploy. In places where politicians like Kobach have been successful, traditionally underrepresented communities are being blocked from voting. That's why federal courts have repeatedly struck down these laws as unconstitutional instruments of intentional disenfranchisement.
Oregon provides a model that other states should follow: Pass laws designed to get a ballot in the hands of every eligible voter, and make it as easy as possible for them to cast their ballot. It's that simple.
9/25/2017 We must keep working to expand voter registration (Guest opinion) | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2017/09/work_to_expand_voter_registrat.html#incart_2box_opinion 3/4
This week, when people across the United States join forces on one single day to register as many voters as possible, ask yourself this question: What can I do this important day? You can volunteer. You can take your co-workers or family out to celebrate. Or, you can tell everyone about the easiest way to register to vote: www.beregistered.org.
Until all eligible Oregonians are registered, National Voter Registration Day should remain an important date on our calendars. The one factor we know that directly impacts the odds that someone will vote is whether they can vote.
Rep. Dan Rayfield is a Democrat who represents Corvallis.
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
© 2017 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us). The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Oregon Live LLC.
Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
Ad Choices
ADVERTISING
Learn more
9/25/2017 We must keep working to expand voter registration (Guest opinion) | OregonLive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2017/09/work_to_expand_voter_registrat.html#incart_2box_opinion 4/4
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Voting/Issue #4 - Voting experience.pdf
ELECTION DAY 2016 PRIMARY – A FRESH NEW HELL
Home / Politics / ELECTION DAY 2016 PRIMARY – A FRESH NEW HELL
randi rhodes voter id
shutterstock_2816956192
I always vote on Election Day. I like to witness firsthand the fresh new hell our democratically elected leaders have thought of to thwart the will of We the People. I haven’t been adversely affected since the 2000 debacle in Palm Beach County with the butterfly ballot, a ballot so confusing Democrats, smart ones, like me, voted for Pat Buchannan. Nope, for the past sixteen years, I’ve just observed, made notes and reported about other people’s problems casting their vote. But this year it was my turn, again. I was purged from the voter rolls.
On Primary Day, March 15, 2016 in notorious Palm Beach County, Florida, I arrived at my polling place at noon, full of hope only to find I could not vote. After fortyfive minutes, trying to find my name on the rolls, my poll workers asked if I’d like a Provisional Ballot. “Of course not. I might as well write on a cocktail napkin. Can you please call the Supervisor and ask what’s happened?” After they laughed it off, one of the poll workers called the Supervisor of Elections office. The line, shockingly, was busy. The ladies tried and tried again. Finally, I said, “I’ll just go over there. I’ll be back.”
They wished me luck, and said “This happened to others. We had to give them Provisionals, but we know you’ll be back.” Why? Because they know me.
I headed 20 miles north to the Election Supervisors Office, where I was told “You’ve been purged. You were taken off the roles in 2011. We were told you moved.” I hadn’t moved and I’d voted in 2012.
NOW THIS IS KEY: I knew to ask, “Can you please retrieve my voting record and print it for me?” Of course, my records showed I had been registered since 2000 and last voted in 2012. Once they saw that I had voted in 2012, that I hadn’t moved, my voting rights were reinstated on the spot, but ONLY because I knew what to ask for.
Previous Find us on Facebook
Be the first of your friends to like this
Randi Rhodes Sh… 5,202 likes
Like Page Share
Randi’s Recent Tweets
Of course, I then had to go back to my precinct, 20 miles away, to cast my ballot, because you cannot vote at the ELECTION Supervisors office on ELECTION DAY. No, that would be too easy. But I love to vote, so much so that no matter what they place in front of me, I will cast a ballot!
There was no lawful reason why I should vote Provisional, and, that ballot, had I cast it, would not have counted. Remember: If you have been erroneously, feloniously purged it is up to you to correct the, ummm error. I wasn’t on the roster, until I was, so if I hadn’t gone and corrected their mistake, my vote would have been tossed.
Tweets by @randiradio
15h
17h
17h
Election Day Hell The latest blog from The Randi Rhodes Show. fb.me/3GDkaT7UZ
Election called at 8:30 thousands and thousands waiting until midnight to vote? How is this possible? Randirhodes.com
Consider: 2012 primary had 300,000 voters and 200 polling places. 2016 primary has estimated 800,000 voters at 60 polling places
Randi Rhodes @randiradio
ELECTION DA… I always vote o… randirhodes.com
Randi Rhodes @randiradio
Home Randi … Learn more Le… randirhodes.com
Randi Rhodes @randiradio
Recent Posts
ELECTION DAY 2016 PRIMARY – A FRESH NEW HELL
What A Riot!!!
Archives
March 2016
My fiasco could have been simple error, but yesterday in Arizona, we saw multiple voter suppression efforts in play. Very little about it was broadcast on The TV. There was a terrorist attack in Belgium, that completely upended election coverage. Apparently, Corporate Media with all their assets, can’t cover two events on the same day.
Finally, last night, after they’d exhausted themselves on covering Brussels, they switched to a minimal amount of Election Day coverage. By minimal I mean the bare minimum. At 8:30 Mountain Time, the Arizona primary was called. The media, “gave” the state to Clinton, by a margin of 61.5% to 36.1% but, what they didn’t tell you was that all of these votes were early voting and that the last vote would not be cast until midnight in Arizona or 3 a.m. Eastern.
CONTACT INFORMATION
DARK HORSE BROADCASTING LLC. PO BOX 540755 Lake Worth, FL 33454 Email: [email protected]
Home | About Randi Rhodes | Mailing lIst | Gallery | Listen Live | Privacy Policy | Terms of use
Copyright © 2016 Dark Horse Broadcasting. All Rights Reserved.
CNN even wrongly reported that these early votes constituted the live Election Day vote in 41% of all Arizona precincts — rather than merely mailin votes constituting a tiny percentage (12%) of the total projected vote in the state — which allowed most Americans in the East to go to bed believing both that Clinton had won Arizona by 25 points and that these numbers represented close to half of all voters. Neither was true.
At the time CNN and others reported these numbers, not a single precinct in Arizona had reported live Election Day voting results.
More than two and a half hours after Arizona’s’ polls closed, election officials had counted only 54,000 of the more than 431,000 votes cast in the primary. 54,000 votes are roughly 12% of the total ballots cast, yet we had a winner at 8:30 Mountain Time.
Now consider this: The 2012 primary had 300,000 voters and 200 polling places. The 2016 primary has estimated 800,000 voters at 60 polling places. Look at these lines! Oh sure, today they are sorry that you had a five hour wait to cast a short and simple ballot. How many times have we been told the long lines were due to a lengthy ballot? Yeah, NO. Just another WTF moment in “Ameeercan democracy” which translates to “Banana Republic,” in English.
Legal challenges were filed even before the voting ended. Democrats were listed, in error, as Independents or Republicans or No affiliation. These were people, like me and you who voted in nearly every election and knew better. Still, they didn’t know where to go or what to ask for.
And just a “style point” if I may. IF voluminous numbers of those people in line were not eligible because their voter’s registration cards said “No affiliation” or “Independent” or “Republican,” why wasn’t a simple announcement made to shorten the lines, and help direct voters to the Supervisor for aid? See that’s a good question right? Something like, “Ladies and gentlemen, this is a closed primary. Only Democrats and Republicans can cast a ballot today. Please look at your voter registration card to determine if you are eligible. Anyone needing help, please speak to a poll worker, or head over to the Election Supervisors Office if you believe there is an error.” Help your fellow voter by requesting this be done!
You must learn that you have a right to your voting record. You are entitled to a print out. You must learn to help your fellow voter by asking that official announcements be made. You must know to ask your poll workers for the turnout numbers (how many people voted at your polling place?) and to report those numbers to the campaign you are supporting.
Rules change almost every election cycle because parties want to include or exclude voters. In my voting lifetime the changes favor suppressing the vote. Remember the VOTING RIGHTS ACT of 2012, placed onerous voter ID requirements on voters in several states, among them Arizona, and the presumption of guilt is with the voter. We all must learn what to do when challenged, try to fix it, record the challenge, and report it.
A word to the campaigns. If what happened yesterday in Arizona doesn’t
Home Randi Rhodes Show Blog About Randi Rhodes Contact Mailing List
Gallery
318
1
Copyright © 2016 Dark Horse Broadcasting. All Rights Reserved. disturb you, enough to say something or even better do something, I am going to have to question your integrity and I doubt I’ll be alone. You are asking to be President of the United States.
By Randi Rhodes | March 23rd, 2016
Share This Story, Choose Your
Platform!
About the Author: Randi Rhodes
Related Posts
6 Comments
bob riehle March 23, 2016 at 11:28 pm Reply
Thanks Randi, we must stay vigilant.
318 1
Issue #4/Issue #4 - Voting/Issue #4 - Youth voters.pdf
Issue 67 | March 2016
can•vass (n.)
Compilation of election
returns and validation of
the outcome that forms
the basis of the official
results by a political
subdivision.
—U.S. Election Assistance Commission: Glossary of Key Election Terminology
TO SUBSCRIBE to The Canvass, please
email a request to [email protected]
Inside this Issue
1
Then and Now 3
Chairman Hicks Interview
4
From the Chair 5
The Election Admin- istrator’s Perspective
5
Worth Noting 6
From NCSL’s Elections Team
6
Dude—I’m Way Too Depressed About The Future to Vote It’s a refrain commonly heard in modern elections—
“young people don’t vote.” And the truth of the matter
is that youths are not voting at the same rates as their
elders. In 2014, turnout for 18 to 29-year-olds reached
record lows of 16 percent, according to the U.S. Elec-
tions Project. That’s compared to turnout for older age
brackets consistently above 30 percent (youth hit rec-
ord high turnout in 2008 of 48 percent). This begs the
question: What can states do to engage young people
in the electoral process? No silver bullet exists, but
states have taken a variety of bipartisan steps to
reach out to their younger residents. We’ll consider
whether these legislative options really make a differ-
ence:
Preregistration for youth;
Allowing 17-year-olds to vote in primaries;
Lowering the voting age.
Preregistration for youth Preregistration for 16-and-17-year olds has gained traction recently. Preregistration involves permitting
those under the age of 18 to register to vote. Typically, those youth are placed into a pending status in the
voter registration database and then changed to active status when they turn 18. This definition, however,
isn’t consistent across every state and the way states treat these voters varies greatly.
Currently California, Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maryland,
Rhode Island and Utah allow someone as young as 16-years old to preregister to vote. Utah passed its
preregistration law last year and it was well received. Weber County Clerk/Auditor Ricky Hatch said it was a
“simple tweak” to begin preregistering 16-year-olds and that “schools enjoyed being able to engage more
students at an earlier age.” Beginning in August 2016, Massachusetts will also allow someone as young as
16 to preregister to vote.
Some states limit the age for preregistration specifically to 17-year-olds: Maine, Nebraska, New Jersey (the
newest member of the group), Oregon, and West Virginia. Other states specify different ages at which reg-
istration can begin: Alaska (90 days preceding 18th birthday), Georgia (17.5-years-old), Iowa (17.5-years-
old), Missouri (17.5-years-old) and Texas (17 years and 10 months old).
Even more states allow actual registration without a specific age if an individual will turn 18 by either the
next general election (Indiana, Kansas, New Mexico and Wyoming) or just the next election of any kind
(Minnesota and Nevada).
(cont. on page 2)
Page 2
NCSL: The Canvass March 2016
(Youth Engagement, cont. from page 1)
According to Fair Vote, Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, the Dis-
trict of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky,
Maine, Maryland, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Caroli-
na, Ohio, South Carolina, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, West
Virginia and Wyoming all allow 17-year-olds to vote in primaries.
New Mexico became the 22nd member of the group earlier this
month with the passage of House Bill 183 to allow 17-year-olds
to vote in primary elections if they will be 18 by the general.
“I am excited for the opportunity that this
law will give some of our young adults to
participate in choosing their elected offi-
cials,”
Jeff Steinborn. “No right is more important
than our right to vote and I am hopeful
that this legislation will empower the next
generation to get involved.” Steinborn
indicated the state hopes to have the law
in effect for its presidential primary
on June 7.
Not all the states listed above have
a defined preregistration policy so
it’s hard to categorize them as preregistration states. Further-
more, in these states, as in several others, 17-year-olds are
considered registered voters and never moved into that
“pending” category in the statewide database.
Six states have legislation pending so far in 2016 to allow 17-
year-olds to vote in primaries: California, Iowa, Massachusetts,
New York, Utah and Wisconsin.
Lowering the Voting Age The U.S. Constitution protects the right of 18-year-olds to vote,
but it may not prevent a state from lowering the voting age.
While it’s not quite as simple as that for states, at least two local
jurisdictions have taken that step.
Only Takoma Park and Hyattsville, Md. have taken the step of
allowing someone as young as 16 to vote in their municipal
elections only. Takoma Park had its first elections with 16-year-
olds voting in 2013 and Hyattsville had its first in 2015.
Jessie Carpenter, the city clerk in Takoma Park, told The Can-
vass that the city itself had to do very little promotion about the
changes as it was mostly done by other groups. But, she said,
the process has been smooth.
For the November 2013 municipal elections, the first year teens
were eligible to vote, Takoma Park had 44 percent turnout
among 16-and-17-year-olds—not too bad considering off-year
municipal elections are normally low turnout affairs.
But are we really on the cusp of states allowing 16-and-17-year-
olds to vote in all elections? The answer is probably no. But
legislation in at least three states seeks to extend voting rights
to those under 18—Arizona, California and Massachusetts as
well as legislation in the District of Columbia that looks to lower
the voting age in the nation’s capital to 16-years-old.
So far in 2016, 25 bills in 12 states have been introduced that
look to establish some kind of preregistration for youth. Con-
gressman Don Beyer (D-Va.) has introduced the Preregistration
for Voters Everywhere (PROVE) Act to require preregistration
nationwide.
Legislative considerations for preregistration
Logistics and costs—can your statewide voter registration
database accommodate preregistration?
What forms of identification are required for registering to
vote or for actually voting? Younger voters may not have a
driver’s license. Are they able to use any other documents?
What about having a parent sign an affidavit? Many states
are preregistering through the DMV and motor voter. This
can make it easier.
Will your state provide notifications to preregistered people
when they turn 18? Online voter registration is key here—
these voters tend to move around often especially as they
leave high school, so being able to update their information
online is a good way to keep records up-to-date.
Is there certain information that is statutorily protected for
preregistered people, so that this data is not included on
publicly available voter lists? Many states that allow prereg-
istration do not include any voter designated as “pending”
on the publicly available voter list. But some states, like
Florida, don’t make that distinction and that information is
publicly available. See the February issue of The Canvass
for more information.
How to get the word out? In Florida, for instance, election
supervisors typically spend one day in high schools and
conduct registration drives.
Allowing 17-Year-Olds to Vote in Primaries It’s evident that preregistration is not clearly defined amongst the
states. But another way that states engage youth makes defin-
ing preregistration even trickier. At least 21 states allow 17-year-
olds to vote in primaries if they will be 18 by the general election.
In many ways this makes sense—if a state is going to allow
those who will turn 18 by the general election to register to vote
beforehand then it’s natural to extend voting to the primary elec-
tion that will decide the nominations for the general election. And
if a 17-year-old could vote in a primary then they would have to
register to vote to do so.
This issue created controversy in Ohio earlier this month when
the secretary of state issued a ruling determining that 17-year-
olds would not be eligible to vote in the presidential primary on
March 15 because the primary involved electing delegates to the
A judge reversed that ruling a few short days later.
Rep. Jeff Steinborn (NM)
NCSL: The Canvass March 2016
workers.
Then and Now: 2012 to 2016 Comparisons From now until the November general election, we will be taking a look at one major election administration
topic showing how it has changed at the legislative level from one presidential year to another.
This month: Early and No-Excuse Absentee Voting.
Amount of change: Moderate
In 2012: 35 states offered one or more of those same options (no-excuse absentee voting, early in-person
voting or vote-by-mail) for everyone.
In 2016: 37 states offer either no-excuse absentee voting, early in-person voting or vote-by-mail for everyone.
Major changes:
In 2013, Colorado shifted to all-mail balloting (although it continues to offer Election Day voting for those who need or want it at
vote centers).
Also in 2013, Minnesota approved no-excuse absentee voting.
In 2014, Massachusetts approved early in-person voting, which will be in effect for the general election this year.
Minor changes:
Early voting increases: Florida (in 2012, early voting began on the 10th day before the election and ended the third day before;
now, requirements are the same, but election supervisors can choose to offer early voting beginning the 15th day before, and can
choose to end it two days before Election Day); Illinois (in 2012, early voting began 15 days before the election; now, early voting
begins 40 days before the election and hours in the last 8 days before the election are extended and include Sunday voting); and
Maryland (in 2012, early voting began the second Saturday before Election Day and was available 10 a.m.-8 p.m.; now
early voting begins the second Thursday before Election Day and hours are 8 a.m.-8 p.m.).
Early voting decreases: South Dakota (in 2012, early voting ended at 3 p.m. on Election Day; now it ends at 5 p.m. the day be-
fore); Tennessee (in 2012, early voting ended five days before Election Day; now it ends 7 days before); Nebraska (in 2012 early
voting began 35 days before Election Day; now it begins 30 days before); Ohio (in 2012 early voting began 35 days before Elec-
tion Day; now it begins to 29 days before); and North Carolina (in 2012 early voting began the third Thursday before Election Day;
now it begins the second Thursday before).
Early voting standardization: Wisconsin (in 2012, clerks decided when to offer early voting; now, early voting is available Monday-
Friday, 7:30 a.m.-6 p.m., or by special appointment).
Page 3
Don’t forget about using youth as poll workers Another great way to get youth involved in the electoral process is to let them see it up close and
personal by serving as poll workers, something recommended by the Presidential Commission on
Election Administration.
At least 42 states allow an individual under 18 to serve as a poll worker:
29 of those states allow an individual as young as 16-years-old.
13 allow someone as young as 17-years-old.
Many give academic credit or other recognition for serving as well as excused absences for Election Day, according to the
Presidential Commission on Election Administration.
Only Alabama, Montana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia and Washington do not allow those under 18
to serve as poll workers.
In 2016, three bills have been introduced that address youth poll workers. Kentucky has legislation to allow 16-year-olds to be poll
workers. New Jersey has a bill to allow excused absences for students who serve as poll workers. New York legislation seeks to
allow college students to serve as poll workers in the community where their school is located.
Page 4
NCSL: The Canvass March 2016
Tom Hicks takes over as chair of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission
Tom Hicks was named chairman of the U.S. Election Assis-
tance Commission (EAC) on Feb. 24. He was confirmed as a
commissioner in 2014, and has served alongside fellow com-
missioners Matt Masterson and Christy McCormick, whom he
succeeded as chairman. Commissioner Hicks formerly served
as a Senior Elections Counsel and Minority Elections Counsel
to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on House
Administration from 2003 to 2014. He spoke to The Canvass
on March 7.
Q: What brought you into the elections world? Is there a per-
sonal story you’d like to share?
A: Just watching my parents growing up. My
mom voted in the 1980 election for the first time
and brought me to the polling booth. She said to
my brother and me that she didn’t get this oppor-
tunity when she was younger and to always
cherish it. I saw that you can have the same
power as the richest man in America or the Pres-
ident of the United States. One person, one
vote—every vote counts the same.
Q: What is the EAC and why should legislators
care about it?
A: The EAC was formed after election officials,
advocates and members of Congress came to-
gether to address the problems in Florida during
the 2000 election. Specifically, the Help America Vote Act
(HAVA) of 2002 formed the EAC to ensure that there is provi-
sional voting, that states have statewide voter registration data-
bases, and that antiquated voting machines would be replaced
with newer voting equipment. One of the things I’m most proud
of is that the EAC also serves as a clearinghouse for election
information—polling place, rights of individual voters, how to
become a poll worker, poll worker training, and quick tip guides
for election officials on a host of issues ranging from polling
place allocation and contingency planning. Election officials
can find information on everything from voter registration to
counting ballots at www.eac.gov.
Q: What are the priorities of the EAC for the coming year?
A: The EAC wants to ensure that the 2016 primaries and gen-
eral elections go smoothly. We are going across the country
talking to disabled voters and military voters about receiving
ballots, how voters can keep their registration up-to-date, how
individuals can volunteer as poll workers, and how clerks and
registrars can utilize the information on our website at our
agency to help with running elections.
Q: What are your suggested priorities for legislators, as they
either make small tweaks this year before the big election, or
look ahead to changes for next year and beyond?
A: I would suggest they look at their voting equipment and
where it might need to be upgraded and at their statewide vot-
er registration database. Over half the states use some form of
online voter registration. The EAC looks at the process from A
to Z—how’s the voter registration process working out? How’s
the vote counting and recording process working? Look at eve-
rything from beginning to end and everything in between.
Make sure their constituents can find out where their polling
places are or how to check their voter registration status. That’s
one of the most common problems we find—voters aren’t sure
where to check if their status is up-to-date. I encourage legisla-
tors and election officials to connect those resources to voters
through social media platforms.
Q: There seems to be a strong focus on poll
worker training. What are things that local elec-
tion officials can do to recruit good poll workers?
A: Number one is looking at poll workers who
haven’t served before like younger or newer vot-
ers who may be interested in seeing the process
first hand. These could be high school or college
students. I’d also suggest ways to reduce the
time commitment for poll workers. It can be tough
for some to commit 12 or 14 hours in one day,
but if you can reduce that to four to six hours you
might be able to recruit college age people, dis-
abled people, or folks with expertise in other lan-
guages. Offering online training could also help
out as well. My parents instilled in me an ethic of
not just sitting around when something needs can be done—
volunteer!
Q: You’ve mentioned disabled voters several times and acces-
sibility is becoming a big issue. What are some things states
can do to ensure accessibility, both at the polling place and in
the voting booth?
A: Well, three of the six mandates in HAVA refer to disabled
voters and two of those are about ensuring a disabled voter can
vote independently and privately. Election officials should be
sensitive to the needs of disabled voters. HAVA mandates that
each polling place has one accessible machine. Unfortunately
sometimes it is tucked into the corner. We’ve come a long way
in the 15 years since 2000. The focus has to continue to be on
accessibility for all voters on all machines. As the baby boomer
generation gets older, there could be more disabled voters.
Disabled voters are the same as every other voter—their vote
counts the same—and they should be able to cast that vote in
the same manner as other voters.
Q: What are your hopes and fears for this election?
A: My hope is that it goes smoothly in that everyone who is
eligible to vote and wants to cast their ballot can do so inde-
pendently and privately and have that ballot counted. My fear is
that no one will come out to vote. The buzz is here now during
the primaries and I personally hope that we have this same
momentum for the general election no matter which party or
candidate voters support.
Page 4
EAC Chairman Tom Hicks
Page 5
NCSL: The Canvass March 2016
From The Chair Senator Larry Martin has served as chair of the Judiciary Committee in the South Carolina
Senate since 2012. He represents District 2 which includes the majority of Pickens County
in northwest South Carolina. Senator Martin spoke to The Canvass on March 24.
“[My perspective is] that election policy be easily understood so that the average person can
follow it. We can forget sometimes that first time voters and office seekers may not under-
stand all the nuances of our election system.”
“In 2012, we had a ballot access controversy where many candidates challenging incum-
bents were removed from the primary ballot due to a decision by the state supreme court
about when the candidates had to file their statements and disclosures. There were two dif-
ferent provisions—one for incumbents and one for challengers. It was not a pleasant experi-
ence and many of those rejected candidates had to run as petition candidates in the general
election. Recently, we were able to pass legislation to fix this problem and make all candi-
dates subject to the same rules.”
“We are still subject to suit under the Voting Rights Act but have maintained a commitment to
be in compliance with it. We don’t want someone to point at us and say we don’t follow the rules. There is a tremendous respon-
sibility to be as diligent as we can be.”
“I’m most proud of our volunteers that are at polling places all day long doing their civic duty. There are such dedicated people
working to make sure our citizens can cast their votes.”
Read the full interview with Senator Martin.
The Election Administrator’s Perspective Laurence Pizer is the town clerk for Plymouth, Mass. which is home to Plymouth Rock, the tradi-
tional landing site of the Pilgrims. Pizer is also a former president of the Massachusetts Town
Clerks Association. He spoke to The Canvass on March 9.
“Election law is complex—my job is to understand the laws and communicate that to my staff,
the 90 to 125 poll workers we will have, and the public. It can be a challenge. No matter what
you do or how much outreach you do to the public there will always be those with questions
and those who only show up every four years.”
“I think online voter registration has been a net positive. Far more people have utilized it than
initially expected. It’s saved us confusion in terms of deciphering hand writing on paper regis-
trations. There are some questions that remain but overall it’s a benefit. I have some trepida-
tion about preregistration which goes into effect in August, but I’m hopeful it will be smooth.”
“There are no regulations for early voting yet and the secretary of state is working hard on them.
We are seven months away from early voting starting and we don’t know how to do it or how
much it will cost or how to make it a smooth process.” (Editor’s note: Massachusetts in 2014
passed a law permitting two weeks of early voting beginning in the general election this year).
“I get a bang out of elections. It’s choreography. You have to put all the right pieces in the right places—poll workers, clerk staff,
registrars, police. One person slips and it can be a serious situation.”
Read the full interview with Pizer.
Plymouth Town Clerk Laurence Pizer
Senator Larry Martin
Page 6
The Canvass, an Elections Newsletter for Legislatures © 2015
Published by the National Conference of State Legislatures
William T. Pound, Executive Director
In conjunction with NCSL, funding support for The Canvass is provided
by The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Election Initiatives project.
Any opinions, findings or conclusions in this publication are those of
NCSL and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Pew Charitable
Trusts. Links provided do not indicate NCSL or The Pew Charitable
Trusts endorsement of these sites.
TO SUBSCRIBE, contact [email protected]
NCSL: The Canvass March 2016
Worth Noting The Utah Republican Party allowed members to cast their
votes online for the presidential candidate of their choice
and it had the election security world aflutter with concern.
Professor Edward Foley of the Moritz College of Law at
Ohio State University wrote a great piece in Politico about
an obscure federal law that could potentially determine who
wins a disputed 2016 presidential election.
Speaking of Ohio, its status as a swing state seems to put it
perpetually in the crosshairs when it comes to election
changes—here’s a rundown of several pending court cases
in the Buckeye State.
The OSET Foundation, together with the Wharton School
of the University of Pennsylvania, announced a new part-
nership to look at the state of the global election technology
industry. Gregory Miller of OSET offered a strikingly true
statement when he referred to election technology as a
“backwater of government I.T.” when it should be consid-
ered essential infrastructure.
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal from the Mon-
tana state Republican Party for voters to have to register
with the party before voting in the June primary keeping the
Treasure State’s primaries open with any voter able to se-
lect the ballot they want to vote.
If you haven’t done so, be sure to sign up for The Pew
Charitable Trusts’ election newsletter.
Elections are usually in the fall which is harvest time, but
there will be no more ballot harvesting this November in
Arizona, which just signed into a law a bill outlawing the
practice of permitting people to pick up and deliver other
people’s voted ballots.
Is your polling place a school, police station or church?
Scientific American has how different polling places can
subconsciously influence voters.
Minnesota has joined the growing list of states including
Maine, Colorado and Arizona that are looking at switching
up their presidential nominating contest.
The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) will be
putting together a series of webisodes to help election offi-
cials prepare for the general election. The first webisode on
New York is the only state that holds a primary for federal
offices separate from its state and presidential primaries,
but that could change soon if legislation to consolidate the
federal and state primaries makes its way through the legis-
lature.
If there is one thing we’ve learned over the past month it’s
that presidential primaries are confusing. A picture is worth
a thousand words so luckily this helpful video should clear
things right up.
There is a plethora of new and interesting pages up on our website:
Elections Technology Toolkit;
Early Voting Dates;
Post-Election Audits;
Legislative Enactments for Initiative and Referendum in 2014 and 2015.
It’s never too early to think about registration for the 2016 NCSL Legislative Summit, Aug. 8-11 in Chicago, Ill. Join us in the Windy
City for in-depth discussions on key elections and redistricting topics like military voting, elections technology, disputed elections and
much more.
Be sure to look for #NCSLElections on Twitter for all NCSL election resources and news.
Thanks for reading, let us know your news and please stay in touch.
—Wendy Underhill and Dan Diorio
Issue 1/Clucas_et_al_Chapter_1.pdf
This reading is from: Clucas, Steel, Henkels, Oregon Politics and
Government: University of Nebraska Press, 2005
The tables and figures are at the end of the reading.
Chapter One
Introduction
Richard A. Clucas and Mark Henkels
Every state has its own political character, but at times,
Oregon seems especially unusual. The word that might best
describe politics in the Beaver State is schizophrenic. The
state is driven by two different visions of government and
politics. Many state residents desire an active government that
rationally seeks to solve societal problems; other residents
want a smaller government, one that keeps taxes low, produces
few regulations, and protects traditional social values.
Sometimes Oregonians are proud of their state’s innovative and
pragmatic government policies; at other times, voters want to
tear down those policies. The divide between these two visions
permeates the state’s political landscape, from small local
2
debates over development issues to high-profile battles over
statewide ballot initiatives.
To understand Oregon, it is essential to appreciate these
two visions because they play such a central role in the state's
politics. We start this introduction to Oregon politics by
exploring the historical roots, philosophies, and importance of
both perspectives. One view is rooted in the state's
"progressive" heritage; the other is rooted in "conservative
populism." We then discuss the character of the state’s
political geography and its constitution. These two factors also
significantly structure the state's government and politics.
Progressives and Conservative Populists
Contemporary Oregon government and politics remains strongly
influenced by the Progressive and Populist movements that arose
more than 100 years ago. Although many of the original concerns
of these movements have lost significance, their underlying
values remain potent and help explain the ideological division
between the modern progressives and conservative populists in
Oregon politics.
The Progressive Movement of the 1890s-1920s embraced a
variety of different, and often conflicting, goals. Underneath
the varying goals, two concerns motivated most Progressive
reformers. The first was a desire to reduce the economic and
3
political power of corporate interests. Certainly, this desire
helped spur Progressive leaders to champion the initiative and
referendum, or what became known as the “Oregon System.” 1 These
procedures were seen as ways to wrest power from the dominant
influence of business and corrupt politicians and return it to
the people.
Second, the Progressives believed that government should be
a positive force in society, one that helps further the common
good. Among other things, Progressives advocated that expert
officials control government policies. It was this desire for
government by experts that led Progressives to advocate civil-
service reform and changes in municipal governments, including
the introduction of the commission system of government in
Portland. Although the “Progressives” were to disappear as a
distinct force in Oregon politics by 1920, their belief that an
open, activist, and pragmatic government could lead the way to a
better, more “modern”, society remains influential. 2 Throughout
this book, we use the term “progressive” to identify the ideas,
policies, individuals, and groups that follow this latter strain
of Progressive thought. Progressives, as we use the term,
promote the active use of government power to solve societal
ills. They support the promotion of experts in government, the
use of rational problem solving, and the adoption of innovative
policy solutions.
4
Progressives of the early 1900s sometimes overlapped and
sometimes were in conflict with another reform movement --
Populism. The early Populist Movement was based in agricultural
areas where farmers and others believed that their well-being
was controlled by powerful outside forces, particularly the
railroads and banks. 3 Seeing the underlying political problem to
be the power of the corporate elite, the early Populists sought
government policies that supported the interests of farmers and
the working class. There was a natural alliance between Populist
and Progressives in their early days because both sought to give
political power more directly to citizens. The Populist Movement
in Oregon peaked in the 1880s and 1890s, when supporters helped
elect a populist governor (Sylvester Pennoyer) and several state
legislators. Like Progressivism, Populism as a formal movement
faded early in the twentieth century; yet its core belief
remains a potent political force.
Today, “populism” is a term commonly used to describe
political movements that believe that powerful elites prevent
the common people from achieving what is rightfully theirs. The
appeal of this idea goes beyond the rural communities and small
businessmen of the original Populist Party, or what was called
the People's Party in Oregon. Contemporary populists hold a
variety of different, and often conflicting, goals. Populists
can be roughly divided into two groups: liberal populists and
5
conservative populists.
Liberal populism and conservative populism are both
“populist” because they identify an elite that must be fought to
promote what advocates see as the true will of the people. Yet
they focus on different elites, public values, and issues.
Liberal populists (sometimes referred to as “progressive
populists”) see the will of the people as being denied by the
influence of large corporations and a wealthy elite.
Accordingly, they advocate government programs that advance the
political power and material interests of the less wealthy. 4
Although occasionally recognizing problems connected to
corporate power, conservative populists believe that the core
problem of modern politics is how government agencies,
politicians, and an elitist media interfere with the popular
will. They fear that these groups hinder private economic
choice, the effectiveness of the market, and the public’s
ability to promote broadly shared conservative social values.
Thus, conservative populists seek to restrict the size of
government and to rely more on the free market. There is one
area where conservative populists do promote an active
government: social regulation. While criticizing the liberal
social values presented in the media and academia, conservative
populists often support government regulations that promote
their view of appropriate personal behavior. Thus conservative
6
populists often advocate government intervention that promotes
"traditional family values" and inhibits such activities as
abortion and homosexuality.
In this book, we use the term "conservative populist" to
refer to the ideas, policies, individuals, and groups that want
to reduce taxes and limit the role of government in most social
and economic contexts, except where the government may serve to
promote traditional values.
In many works examining America politics today, authors
tend to focus on the split between "liberals" and
"conservatives." We could have used those terms in describing
Oregon's politics, for in truth, the conflict in Oregon does
reflect a split between those two groups. However, both of those
terms incorporate a wide variety of groups as well as diverse
and sometimes contradictory political ideas. We chose the terms
"progressives" and "conservative populists" to give a more
precise and historically appropriate description of Oregon
politics. We use the term progressive, in large part, because of
its long historical roots in the state. The state's image has
long been associated with progressivism, and the term is still
used by many to describe Oregon. We wanted to capture that
history. We have also used the term in order to emphasize the
tie to the Progressive Movement's support for government by
experts, rational problem-solving, and innovation. The term
7
“liberalism” does not convey that particular tie.
We chose the term "conservative populism" because we want
to emphasize the strong concern that many Oregonians have for
protecting the rights, interests, and values of the people from
an overly intrusive government and a morally divergent
intellectual and media elite. The plain term "conservative"
misses the significance of the anti-elitist nature of this
movement.
The Modern Context
The terms “progressive” and “conservative populist” are crude
categories for complex movements and sets of values. The two
terms certainly do not capture the full character of Oregon
politics. Not all liberals in the state are progressives. Not
all conservatives are populists. Not all the conflict is between
progressives and conservative populists. As several of the
chapters point out, Oregon has initiative activists and
opponents to free trade who demonstrate liberal populist values.
There are also traditional conservatives, who value a healthy
economic environment more than a conservative social climate.
Yet much of Oregon’s political conflict reflects the collision
of the progressives' strong support for an active government and
the conservative populists' general desire to limit government.
This conflict is found in most states and in national politics,
8
but in Oregon, it is so prominent that we argue that it is the
defining characteristic of the state’s politics today.
Certainly, progressivism has long played a significant role
in Oregon politics. Historically, the state built a reputation
for progressivism through its adoption of a variety of
innovative policies. At the beginning of the twentieth century,
Oregon was a leader in the Progressive Movement, championing
such reforms as the initiative and referendum, the recall of
public officials, the direct primary, the direct election of
U.S. senators, and women’s suffrage. Since then, the state has
asserted public control over ocean beaches, imposed strict land-
use laws, created one of the nation’s only regional governments
(the Portland region’s Metropolitan Service District, or
“Metro”), experimented with universal health-care coverage
(Oregon Health Plan), passed the first bill requiring a deposit
on beverage containers (the “Bottle Bill”), and introduced Vote
by Mail.
Recently, one of the state’s newer progressive policies
received national attention for its achievements. In 1989, the
state created the Oregon Progress Board. The board’s mission was
to create a benchmark system to measure Oregon’s social
conditions and clarify goals in many areas of policy. Through
the benchmarks system, Oregonians and their officials can
determine whether their government is fulfilling its goals. In
9
2002, the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard
University recognized this effort as one of the top 15
outstanding examples of innovation in state or local government
in the past 15 years. 5 Another more recent progressive policy has
captured even more attention, however. Since adopted by voters
in 1994, the state’s physician-assisted suicide law has been the
continuous target of opponents in Congress and the White House,
who would like to see it blocked.
Despite this lengthy list of accomplishments, the Oregon’s
progressive image is not entirely accurate. There are two
problems with this perception. First, the actual impact of many
of the state's progressive programs often fall short of their
advocates’ hopes. For example, the adoption of the “bottle bill”
greatly increased the recycling of cans and bottles, but more
than 20 other states still have a higher overall recycling rate
than Oregon. 6
Second, and more important, the state has another important
side to it, namely, strong support for conservative populist
ideals. In recent years, conservative populists, like
progressives, have enjoyed some success in pursuing their own
innovative legislation and shaping the state's political agenda.
The most visible way that conservative populists have been able
to articulate their vision is through the initiative process.
During the past 15 years or more, several conservative populist
10
leaders have turned to the initiative to pursue their goals. If
one counts the total number of victories by these conservative
leaders, one finds that their success rate is not much different
from progressive activists. Yet many of their proposals have
been at the forefront of political debate in Oregon, and some
very important ones have become law. These include ballot
initiatives reducing taxes (Measure 5 and 47), controlling
government takings (Measure 7), stiffening penalties on
criminals (Measure 11), and imposing legislative term limits
(Measure 3). Conservative populist proposals have also enjoyed
greater support in the state legislature in recent years, ever
since the Republican Party took control of both houses in 1995
for the first time in four decades. But even beyond the
initiative process and state legislative politics, the ideals of
conservative populists are often heard in a variety of political
debates in Oregon, including on such diverse topics as the
building of a home in the Columbia River Gorge (chapter 3), the
selection of state court judges (chapter 11), and the character
of public education (chapter 17). Thus, conservative populism
cannot be ignored if one is to capture Oregon politics
accurately.
Of course, what makes these two groups is not just that
they exist, but that they are frequently in conflict with each
other, setting the stage for some of the most important
11
political fights in Oregon today. In the chapters that follow,
we describe a variety of ways in which progressives and
conservative populists, and the conflicts between them, shape
Oregon politics. The next section, however, presents two case
studies that illustrate the importance of both sides in defining
Oregon politics. These specific issues are illuminating because
they are often held up as examples of Oregon’s progressive
policies. In reality, the politics surrounding them is more
complex and their current status has been strongly shaped by
conservative populist activism. The two examples are land use
planning and the Oregon Health Plan.
Land-Use and Health Care Cases
The Ecotopia Legacy and Measure 7. Oregon’s reputation as a
pioneer in environmental protection developed in the early and
mid-1970s when Republican Governor Tom McCall promoted novel
concepts such as the bottle bill, universal land-use planning,
and open public beaches. McCall’s strong advocacy inspired many
who felt Oregon was at the forefront of a new social model.
State leaders dubbed the state’s emerging environmental ethic as
the “Oregon Story.” In 1975, the spirit of Oregon’s
environmental movement was so influential that it provided the
setting for an influential utopian novel, Ecotopia. Authored by
Ernest Callenbach, the novel describes a world in which the
12
Pacific Northwest has become a separate nation built around the
principle of ecological balance. 7
Oregon’s public was never as completely committed to
McCall’s environmental activism as later media generalizations
depict. Both the adoption and the implementation of the
environmental policies of the early 1970s were hard fought,
reflecting Oregon’s deep splits regarding economic and social
priorities. In truth, Oregon’s economic dependence on the timber
industry has often meant that its environmental reputation has
exceeded its environmental practices (see chapter 14). Still,
the Ecotopia image captured how many viewed Oregon’s progressive
environmental record in the 1970s. Even today, many progressive
environmentalists believe that the region’s commitment to
environmental values may allow the state to develop in closer
harmony with the natural environment than is true elsewhere. 8
The early and mid-1970s were heady times for progressive
environmentalists, but since that time state environmental
policy battles have been more in defense of the McCall legacy
than with pushing these goals farther. The ongoing skirmishes
over land-use planning and other environmental regulations
reached a critical point in the November 2000 general election
when Oregonians passed Measure 7 with a 53 percent majority.
Although the Oregon Supreme Court ruled Measure 7 to be
unconstitutional on the grounds that it amended more than one
13
section of the constitution in a single ballot measure, the
values and political movement that led to its passage
demonstrate the forcefulness of conservative populism in Oregon.
Measure 7 was a ballot initiative that would have required
state and local governments to compensate property owners when
public regulations restrict the use of private property and
lower its value. Existing provisions in the state and federal
constitutions recognize the citizen’s right to "just
compensation" when the government takes property, but Measure 7
was categorically more specific and rigid about when and how the
government should compensate owners. The law did not forbid
state and local regulations regulating property use. The crucial
aspect of Measure 7 was its possible costs.
Clearly Oregon's existing land-use planning and other
environmental regulations would be inoperable if the state and
local had to compensate owners for the full loss of value due to
regulations. For example, state Attorney General Hardy Meyers
determined that governments would have to compensate not only
landowners when land-use laws prevent them from subdividing
their land, but also store owners who have to set aside part of
their site to provide for bottle and can returns under the
Bottle Bill. Estimates of the possible costs of Measure 7 to
state and local governments ranged up to well over $5 billion. 9
Property rights advocates argued that this number is inflated,
14
and that such compensation is only fair because the public
benefits from the owner’s loss. They feel that the government
should never reduce property values without giving owners the
“just compensation” required by their interpretation of the
Oregon and United States constitutions.
All parties agreed that Measure 7 would have crippled
Oregon’s progressive environmental policies. Oregon would have
been transformed from being foremost in the control over land-
use to a leader in “property rights” protection. 10 Although
progressives may have breathed a sigh of relief with the court
ruling, their environmental policies are far from secure. The
primary sponsors of Measure 7, and their California allies in
the Pacific Legal Foundation, have pledged a "redoubled effort
to reclaim property rights for Oregonians." 11
Oregon Health Plan. The state’s recent efforts to ensure
adequate health care for all Oregonians also reflect the state’s
divided character. In 1989, the state adopted the Oregon Health
Plan, which promised to be the first state program in the nation
to provide nearly universal health care. Designed by John
Kitzhaber, then president of the state Senate, the plan was
intended to expand health-care coverage in two principal ways.
First, the plan broadened the state’s Medicaid program to cover
more low-income citizens by setting priorities on what would be
15
covered. In other words, the plan sought to help more people by
rationing services. Second, the legislation required private
employers to provide health-care coverage at least comparable to
the state’s basic package. 12
Combined, these proposed changes put Oregon in the
forefront of health-care reform by promising to close the major
gap in health insurance, namely, coverage for the working poor.
The program never developed as envisioned. In the election of
1990, Oregon voters provided conservative populists a decisive
victory by adopting Measure 5. Measure 5 strictly limits
property taxes and requires the state to compensate school
districts for the lost revenue.
Between 1990 and 1996, the state’s share of public school
(K-12) funding rose from about 28 to 66 percent, dramatically
squeezing the state funds available to implement the Oregon
Health Plan and other progressive programs. This budget pressure
was enhanced further by passage of even stricter property-tax
controls through Ballot Measure 50 in 1997. The Oregon
Legislative Revenue Office estimated that the state would have
to spend $2 billion per year in the 2001-2002 budget cycle to
compensate local school districts for property tax losses due to
Measures 5 and 50, thereby removing that much from the pool of
money available for programs such as the Oregon Health Plan. 13
The economic downturn that started in 2000 has continued the
16
cuts in health care, and the legislature’s Ways and Means
Committee’s draft Health Plan budget for 2003-2005 proposed
eliminating coverage for 158,000 adults. 14 In 1995, the state
legislature removed the other leg of the Oregon Health plan by
rescinding the employer mandate. Although Oregon still possesses
a unique system of rationed health-care insurance, budget
constraints and the 1995 changes in the plan make universal
health care a distant vision.
Political Geography
Oregon’s ideological heritage provides part of the explanation
for why there is a split between progressives and conservative
populists, but the divide also reflects trends influencing
politics across America today. Oregon, like the nation, is
sharply divided geographically. Conflicts between Portland’s
interest and values and the rest of the states have long haunted
Oregon politics. Urban residents are the most supportive of
progressive ideals, while rural residents tend to support
conservative populism. As in many parts of the country, the
suburbs have become the battleground between the two visions.
The political differences arise in part from economic and
demographic variation. The most urban part of the state is the
Willamette Valley, especially between the Portland metropolitan
area and Salem. This is Oregon’s most economically diverse and
17
densely populated region, with more than 70 percent of the
state’s residents. During the 1990s, the valley saw the largest
job growth rate of any part of the state. 15 Portland itself is
the most racially and ethnically diverse community in the state,
with a population of almost 8 percent black, and another 10
percent who are Asian, Pacific Islander, Latino, American
Indian, or Native Alaskan.
Eastern Oregon is the most rural area of the state. Unlike
the Willamette Valley, the eastern side of the state has a
narrow economic base, with a strong dependence on agriculture
and forest-product industries. Historically, many of the coastal
and southwestern communities have also had narrower economic
bases, focused on fisheries and timber. The diversity and high-
tech nature of the Willamette Valley’s economy fostered
considerable job growth in recent decades, whereas communities
dependent on natural resources faced harder times as their
industries adjusted to declining harvests and tougher
regulations.
There has always been a tension between the Portland area
and the rural areas of the state. Until the 1930s, Portland was
strongly Republican, while the rural areas supported Democrats,
a situation now reversed. 16 The distribution of votes in the 2000
presidential election, which are shown in figure 1.1, makes it
clear that important differences between urban and rural, and
18
east and west remain. As was true across the nation, the urban
areas of the Willamette Valley strongly supported Democrat Al
Gore; the more rural areas of the state supported Republican
George W. Bush. Figure 1.1 gives a rough sense of this
distribution, showing much of Gore’s support coming from Lane
and Benton counties in the southern part of the Willamette
Valley, and Multnomah and Washington counties in the northern
part.
(figure 1.1 about here)
Recent ballot measure battles show the differences between
these regions more clearly. Votes on these measures show that
general attitudes in more urban areas of the Willamette Valley
differ considerably from those held by voters in the eastern and
southern parts of the state. This was true, for example, in the
November 2000 election when there were 26 measures on the
ballot. These measures focused on a wide variety of issues,
including taxation, gay rights, gun control, animal rights,
health-care funding for the poor, and the rights of unions to
organize.
On almost all 26 measures, the residents of Multnomah,
Lane, and Benton counties, all of which are in the Willamette
Valley, either cast the highest percentage of votes in favor of
each measure or the lowest percentage. Such eastern Oregon
counties as Malheur, Lake, Grant, Wallowa, Crook, and Harney
19
were consistently at the other extreme. In other words, when the
urban voters were most likely to favor a measure, the eastern
counties were the least likely to support it. When urban voters
opposed a measure, the eastern counties provided the greatest
support.
These regional differences can be seen in table 1.1, which
shows the popular vote on four measures on the November 2000
ballot. Measure 97 was an animal-rights initiative that sought
to limit the use of animal traps. Measure 5 sought to extend
background checks on gun sales. Measure 9 called for a ban on
public school instruction promoting homosexuality. Measure 88,
the only legislative referral of the four, sought to increase
the maximum state tax deduction for federal income taxes paid.
The table lists the counties in each region. In the table, Lane
and Benton counties are identified as “university counties”
because they are the homes of the University of Oregon and
Oregon State. Despite the diverse content, the pattern of voting
on these measures remains quite consistent. These regional
voting patterns are discussed more fully in chapter 4.
(table 1.1 about here)
Certainly, not all the political conflict in Oregon
reflects the divide between progressive ideals and conservative
populist ones, as will be seen in other chapters. There are
times too when there can be considerable agreement throughout
20
Oregon. For example, the vote in 2000 on Measure 94, which would
have overturned the state’s strict sentencing law, demonstrates
some shared values across Oregon. Even though the voters in
Multnomah and the university counties were the most supportive
of Measure 94, and eastern county voters were the most opposed,
the measure was defeated soundly in every county. In a wide
variety of areas, however, the division between progressivism
and conservative populism plays a fundamental role in shaping
Oregon politics.
The State Constitution
Along with the split between progressives and conservative
populists, and these geographical differences, state law also
plays a fundamental role in shaping Oregon's political system.
The most important law in shaping the formal structure of Oregon
government and politics is the Oregon Constitution. The
constitution is the state’s highest law. When there is conflict
between the constitution and a state or local law, the
constitution takes precedence because it is the highest
expression of the people’s sovereign will. Oregon’s constitution
is among one of the oldest in the nation. It was approved by
Oregon voters in 1857, and took effect when the state entered
the Union on 14 February 1859. The original constitution still
provides the foundation for the state’s governance. 17
21
The drafters of Oregon’s basic constitution did not believe
in reinventing the wheel. They basically borrowed from
constitutions in the states of the upper Mississippi valley that
they knew well. Gordon Dodds states that the Oregon Constitution
was “hardly innovative in any respect.” 18 The original
constitution thus reflected the concerns of immigrants from the
agrarian states, and had elements reflecting the social tensions
that would lead to the rise of Populism. For example, there was
much concern that the state should regulate banking and
corporations to protect farmers from unbridled market forces.
The prejudices of the time were reflected in the section stating
that “No Negro, Chinaman, or Mulatto shall have the right to
vote.” Otherwise, the design of the government basically
followed what had become traditional in America: a balance of
power between three branches of government, citizen rights
similar to those granted in the federal Constitution, and
limitations on the size and scope of state and local
governments.
The distinctiveness of Oregon’s constitution arises from
the 228 constitutional amendments that have been adopted through
ballot measures since 1902, some of which have been reversed by
the courts or later ballot measures. 19 The “Oregon System” makes
it comparatively easy to place measures on the ballot and
enables both progressive and conservative reformers to inject
22
their policies into the heart of the government. Amendments to
the Oregon Constitution often are minor matters, such as
altering the rules for municipal bonding in specific
jurisdictions or establishing specific regulatory commissions.
Some changes have powerful impacts on policy, such as tax
reforms and alterations in the rules for the initiative process.
Since its original adoption, the constitution has grown from
11,200 to an estimated 49,326 words. 20
The constitution performs three important functions: it
lays out the general structure of the government, it protects
citizen rights and liberties, and it establishes the rules for
how it can be revised.
Government Structure. Oregon’s basic governmental structure has
never been altered and resembles the federal government’s
designs, with some important differences. As with the federal
government, the state constitution divides power among three
branches of government: legislative, executive, and judicial
(see figure 1.2). The constitution also provides for two houses
in the legislature (House of Representatives and Senate), and it
establishes the relationship between the state and its local
governments.
(figure 1.2 about here)
23
One of the major differences between the state and the
nation’s government is that the executive power in Oregon is
divided among several office holders. In Washington, D.C., the
president is the chief executive, overseeing the entire federal
administration. The Oregon Constitution, however, establishes
six executive offices, each with its own powers and
responsibilities. The governor is the chief executive, but
Oregon also has a secretary of state, a treasurer, an attorney
general, a commissioner of labor and industries, and a
superintendent of public instruction -– each of whom is elected
independently.
Another difference is that there is no state office
equivalent to the vice president. The secretary of state assumes
the governor’s office if there is a vacancy, but the secretary
of state is more independent and has a longer list of formal
duties than the vice president. In addition, state court judges
are elected by the people, rather than being appointed as they
are in the federal judiciary. Finally, the legislature is known
as the Legislative Assembly, not the Congress.
Rights and Liberties
Rights and Liberties. The first article of the Oregon
Constitution is the state’s Bill of Rights. Like the national
Bill of Rights, the state’s Bill of Rights serves to protect the
24
civil rights and liberties of citizens. Although similar, the
Oregon Bill of Rights and the national one have some
differences. As in the United States Constitution, the state
constitution guarantees some of the nation’s most cherished
rights and liberties. Among other provisions, it protects
Oregonian’s freedom of religion, speech, and press, and it
protects individuals from being subject to unreasonable searches
or being tried twice for the same offense.
The state Bill of Rights, however, goes beyond the United
States Constitution in protecting the rights and liberties of
state citizens. State governments cannot deny people the rights
spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, but they can guarantee
more extensive rights. One area in which Oregon provides greater
protection than the U.S. Constitution is in freedom of speech.
The Oregon Constitution has a very strong statement protecting
Oregonians’ rights to express their opinions freely. The
constitution states that there shall be no law passed
restricting the right to speak “on any subject whatsoever.” Even
though a large segment of the Oregon population supports this
protection, some Oregon citizens criticize the free-speech rule
for limiting the government’s ability to regulate the adult
entertainment industry and pornography. The clause has also made
it more difficult for the state to regulate campaign finance. 21
25
Amending the Constitution. State constitutions, and Oregon’s
particularly, differ from the federal Constitution also in the
ease and frequency of their amendment. Three different methods
can be used to amend the wording of Oregon’s constitution. The
first method is that the state legislature can place a proposed
constitutional amendment on the ballot for voters to accept or
reject, or what is called a “legislative referral.” A majority
of members of both state houses must vote for the amendment for
it to go to the voters. If a majority of the voters who cast a
ballot approve, the amendment becomes part of the constitution. 22
The second method is through the initiative process. This
method, described more fully in chapter 5, enables citizens to
place amendments directly on the ballot themselves. To get their
proposal on the ballot, amendment supporters must gather
signatures from approximately 100,000 voters. Once on the
ballot, an amendment needs to receive a majority of the votes
cast on the measure for it to be added to the constitution.
The state constitution also allows the legislature to call
for a state-wide convention to amend the constitution if state
voters approve such a convention. There has never been a state
constitutional convention since 1857.
Just as with the federal Constitution, changes in how the
words of the state constitution are interpreted may be as
important as changes in the words themselves. The legislature,
26
governor, attorney general, and others in the executive branch
often influence how the constitution is interpreted, but the
Oregon Supreme Court has the ultimate authority in determining
what the constitution means. The supreme court's use of that
authority has had important consequences for state politics. For
example, the court ruled in 1998 that the clause allowing
initiatives to amend only one part of the constitution should be
interpreted to mean a single ballot measure can change only one
very narrow part of the constitution. 23 The court's ruling, as
explained more precisely in chapters five and eleven, has
resulted in several voter-approved initiatives to be struck
down. As powerful as the court’s interpretative role can be, the
ease by which Oregon’s constitution can be amended through
referrals and initiatives ensures that interpretations that are
publicly unacceptable can be countered by amending the
constitution relatively quickly.
The New Oregon Story
Oregonians tend to be very proud of their state. One particular
source of this pride is the perception that “things are
different here,” that somehow Oregon pursues a unique course of
history. This perception is frequently conveyed in state
histories and in the biographies of state leaders. 24 Oregon is
often seen as being a policy innovator and the home of maverick
27
politicians. State political leaders and political commentators
emphasize this uniqueness by attaching Oregon’s name to state
programs; thus, we have the Oregon System, the Oregon Health
Plan, and the Oregon Story. The notion that there is something
special about Oregon politics has, in many ways, become a part
of Oregon political lore.
One cannot help but believe the reason many Oregonians feel
the state is different is that it is a reflection of the way the
state's progressive heritage has often been romanticized, which
is understandable, for it is this heritage that has frequently
brought the state national attention. Yet if Oregon is indeed
special today, it is not because it is a progressive state.
Certainly, the state has an important progressive side to it,
one that has long historical roots. Yet Oregon also has a very
strong attachment to conservative populism. Despite the lore,
Oregon today is a divided state, one in which two different sets
of ideals compete to influence state policies. The conflict is
not seen on every issue or in every political campaign, but it
is surely the dominant feature of Oregon politics. In the
chapters that follow, the authors describe the structure of
Oregon government as it is laid out in the constitution and
state law, and they frequently discuss the importance of
geography in shaping the state’s politics. But more than
anything else, the book tries to explain how this split between
28
progressives and conservative populists shapes the different
aspects of the state’s politics, for this split is, in many
ways, the Oregon Story today.
Figure 1.1. Counties Supporting Democratic Vice President Al
Gore in the 2001 Presidential Election
29
Table 1.1. Percent of Voter Support for Four Measures on 2000
Ballot
Region
Measure
97
Pro-
Animal
Rights
(Progress
ive)
Measure 5
Pro- Gun
Control
(Progressi
ve)
Measure 9
Restrict
Gay
Advocacy
in Schools
(Conservat
ive
Populist)
Measure 88
Cut Taxes
(Conservat
ive
Populist)
Portland
(Multnomah)
53.6 75.5 32.8 42.4
University
Counties
(Benton, Lane)
46.8 66.2 41.2 42.2
Portland
Suburbs
(Clackamas,
Washington)
42.1 66.8 46.4 55.1
North Coast
(Clatsop,
Columbia,
37.2 57.4 47.5 51.4
30
Tillamook,
Lincoln)
Mid-Willamette
Valley
(Marion, Polk,
Linn, Yamhill)
35.6 58.1 53.6 52.9
Southern
Oregon
(Douglas,
Josephine,
Jackson, Coos,
Curry)
36.9 50.1 57.3 54.5
Eastern Oregon
(18 counties)
28.1 46.5 57.4 55.3
Statewide
Total
41.1 61.7
47.1
50.5
31
Figure 1.2. Government Structure
Voters
Executive Judicial Legislative
Governor Supreme Court
Secretary of State
State Treasurer Court of Appeals
Attorney General
Commissioner of Labor & Industries Tax Court
Superintendent of Public Instruction Circuit Court
County Court
State Bureaucracy Justice Court
Municipal Court
Senate House of
Representatives
Issue 1/dt.common.streams.StreamServer.jpg
Issue 1/Issue #1 - 2016 urban v. rural divide.pdf
The Oregon Catalyst http://oregoncatalyst.com
The urbanrural divide in Oregon Posted By In the news On March 18, 2016 @ 5:00 am In Economy,Employment,Energy,OR 78th Legislative Session | 1 Comment
by Senator Ted Ferrioli
I can’t remember a more contentious or difficult legislative session. The issues of the urbanrural divide loomed large over the session, and many large and complicated bills that will have a negative impact on Eastern Oregon were forced through at record speed.
Minimum Wage
One of the most obvious effects of the urbanrural divide can be seen in the map of three different minimum wages across the state. How can I possibly explain to people in Jefferson County that one hour of your work is worth less than one hour of work in Wasco County? And to both, your hour of work is worth far less than one hour of work in PDX?
How can I explain to business owners who have small profit margins that they not only have to shoulder the burden of mandatory paid sick leave from actions of the 2015 session, but as a result of SB 1532, they have to phase in minimum wage mandates that will further diminish those fragile margins?
The base assumption of Portland legislators is that business is good, the economy is thriving and that meeting these mandates is like a tax imposed for the privilege of owning a business in Oregon. The smugness of urban legislators is reinforced by a Bloomberg study designating
Oregon’s economy “Strongest in the Nation.” [1]
The reality is, Oregon has one of the worst business climates in the country. This recent
article from the National Federation of Independent Business [2] tells a much different story than the one we’re hearing from Portland legislators.
Energy Policy
Tom McCall warned us about the greed of developers who might pour into Oregon bringing sprawl, tickytacky subdivisions, ruined view sheds and a despoiled landscape, but nobody warned us about the “energy buccaneers” who crept into Oregon clothed in the camouflage of the green revolution.
We once called hydropower “The Oregon Advantage,” since it was low cost energy that spawned the Aluminum industry, foodprocessing sector and large industrial investments in sawmills and forest product manufacturing, all important to District 30. Today, we are not even allowed to count hydropower toward the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS).
Once upon a time in Oregon, we protected citizens against rate spikes driven by the stock market’s insatiable need for increased dividends. The threat of the formation or expansion of Electrical CoOps and Public Utility Districts served to put a brake on rates charged by investorowned utilities.
In addition to those protections, we had the Public Utility Commission (PUC), an independent agency through which all rate increase proposals were approved or denied. More recently, the Citizens Utility Board (CUB) was created to represent citizen/ratepayers in all rate and electrical energy policies.
Today, both organizations have become dysfunctional. The PUC was pointedly ordered by Governor Brown not to weigh in on the “Clean to Coal” bills, and CUB is populated by individuals who have a direct financial interest in the success of alternative energy suppliers.
That is the backdrop against which the “Coal to Clean” bill was adopted.
We’re told the proposal, as adopted, will only raise rates from 1.5%2% per year. But between now and 2040 we estimate a potential 40% increase above the normal inflation costs, with little or no carbon reduction.
Why does that matter to Rural Oregonians? Because the largest consumer of electrical energy in District 30 are irrigation systems. Water for agriculture and energy for food processing, sawmilling and small manufacturers constitutes the majority of the energy “load” in frontier Oregon. A 40% rate increase will be devastating.
Wolf Bill
Perhaps no other bill before the legislature exemplifies the divide between Urban and Rural Oregon more than HB 4040.
The bill is advisory. It supports the decision reached by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to delist the Grey Wolf in Oregon. The decision to delist was science based, peer reviewed and is supported widely by rural Oregonians.
This decision represents the culmination of more than a decade of collaboration between private landowners, cattle ranchers, county elected officials, state agencies and several Governors with full participation and support by environmental groups and wolf reintroduction advocates.
The Oregon Wolf Plan was adopted with the express agreement that when wolf populations reached a level judged to be sustainable, the wolf would be delisted, enabling the full range of management options including lethal “take” of problem animals when all other means failed.
Landowners and cattle producers voluntarily participated in wolf management actions, which are costly and difficult, knowing that included uncompensated losses through predation, lower weight gain and other negative consequences, precisely because they were assured that in the future, regulations would become more flexible.
If HB 4040 had failed in the Legislature, or is vetoed by the Governor, it may signal an end to voluntary participation by landowners in current and future voluntary conservation efforts. These voluntary efforts are critical to the success of recovery for species like Sage Grouse in five Eastern Oregon counties and the Green Spotted Frog in Central Oregon.
HB 4040 isn’t even precedentsetting. The Legislature in 2005 voted unanimously to support a delisting decision made for the Aleutian Canada Goose (HB 2881), but it stands as a symbol for the success or failure of partnerships and voluntary participation by landowners.
The urbanrural divide is painfully real. Rural Legislators know that bridging the divide is critical to the sustainability of lifelong commitments to community, family and heritage. It is the central issue of our time.
Sen. Ted Ferrioli [3] (RJohn Day) is the Oregon Senate Republican Leader
[4] [5] [6] [7]
Related posts:
Wolves and min wage: Oregon’s urbanrural divide deepens [8]
Ecoelites forced rural Oregon onto federal timber welfare [9]
Punishment of rural Oregon continues by Portland elites [10]
Restore health of “O&C” forests & Oregon’s rural communities [11]
Article printed from The Oregon Catalyst: http://oregoncatalyst.com
URL to article: http://oregoncatalyst.com/33156urbanruraldivideoregon.html
URLs in this post:
[1] “Strongest in the Nation.”: http://www.oregonlive.com/trending/2016/02/oregon_has_nations_best
perfor.html [2] This recent article from the National Federation of Independent Business: http://www.nfib.com/article/oregonranksasoneoftheworststatesforsmall businesspolicies73158/ [3] Sen. Ted Ferrioli: https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/ferrioli [4] Image: http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The+urban rural+divide+in+Oregon+http%3A%2F%2Foregoncatalyst.com%2F%3Fp%3D331 56 [5] Image: http://www.facebook.com/share.php? u=http://oregoncatalyst.com/33156urbanruraldivide oregon.html&t=The+urbanrural+divide+in+Oregon [6] Image: http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle? mini=true&url=http://oregoncatalyst.com/33156urbanruraldivide oregon.html&title=The+urban rural+divide+in+Oregon&summary=%0D%0A%0D%0Aby+Senator+Ted+Ferrioli %0D%0A%0D%0AI+can%27t+remember+a+more+contentious+or+difficult+legi slative+session.+The+issues+of+the+urban rural+divide+loomed+la...&source=The Oregon Catalyst [7] Image: http://reddit.com/submit?url=http://oregoncatalyst.com/33156 urbanruraldivideoregon.html&title=The+urbanrural+divide+in+Oregon [8] Wolves and min wage: Oregon’s urbanrural divide deepens : http://oregoncatalyst.com/33000wolvesminwageoregonsurbanruraldivide deepens.html [9] Ecoelites forced rural Oregon onto federal timber welfare : http://oregoncatalyst.com/12008ecoelitesforcedruraloregonfederaltimber welfare.html [10] Punishment of rural Oregon continues by Portland elites : http://oregoncatalyst.com/30666punishmentruraloregoncontinuesportland elites.html [11] Restore health of “O&C” forests & Oregon’s rural communities : http://oregoncatalyst.com/24401restorehealthocforestsoregonsrural communities.html
Copyright © 2011 The Oregon Catalyst. All rights reserved.
Issue 1/Issue #1 - Rural vs urban.pdf
Issue 1/Issue #1 - state budgets.pdf
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/politics/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/634079266/Tower/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
Oregon Sign in | Join
Search
13 comments
Print (http://blog.oregonlive.com/politics_impact/print.html?
entry=/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html)
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/)
OREGON LEGISLATURE » Find your legislators, track bills
and get involved
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/)
The Oregon Legislature convenes Monday for a session expected to last until the end of June. (Photo by Don Ryan/Associated
Press)
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/hesteve/index.html) By Harry Esteve, The Oregonian
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/hesteve/posts.html)
on February 03, 2013 at 9:00 AM, updated February 03, 2013 at 1:58 PM
BUDGET/TAXES
Gov. John Kitzhaber (http://gov.oregonlive.com/governor/) presented
lawmakers with a two-year, $16.5 billion general fund budget
(http://www.oregon.gov/gov/priorities/pages/budget.aspx) that relies heavily
on cost-cutting in some areas of government to beef up spending in other areas,
especially education. The governor's budget is based on saving $800 million by capping
cost of living increases in public employee retiree pensions, and achieving more savings
by changing prison sentences to lower the number of nonviolent inmates. Democrats
reacted cautiously to his proposals, but so far have offered no concrete alternatives.
Some lawmakers are studying ways to raise additional revenue by reducing tax breaks.
State budget, schools, PERS, prisons dominate Oregon Legislature's agenda
Sponsored By:
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/politics/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/L27/1263581988/SecSponsor/OREGONLIVE/UofOregon16_OR_News_SecSpon/thMA00596.html/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
() () () () ()
PERS
The challenge of Oregon's public retirement system (http://gov.oregonlive.com/pers/)
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/pers/)
(http://info.criteo.com/pac/privacy/informations?
infonorm=2&partner=4805&campaignid=17837&zoneid=54015&bannerid=751558&displayid=f2b252daf3)
Politics 2012 Election Results Education Environment Jeff Mapes Opinion PolitiFact Oregon Portland City Hall Watch US & World Newsletters more
Set Weather
NEWS BUSINESS SPORTS H.S. SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT LOCAL
IN YOUR COMMUNITY: JOBS AUTOS REAL ESTATE RENTALS CLASSIFIEDS OBITUARIES FIND&SAVE LOCAL BUSINESSES PLACE AN AD
Page 1 of 9State budget, schools, PERS, prisons dominate Oregon Legislature's agenda | OregonLive...
9/29/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html
Watch list: Most of the early action takes place behind closed doors. Ways and Means
Co-Chairs Sen. Richard Devlin, D-Tualatin
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/legislators/Richard-Devlin/), and Rep. Peter
Buckley (http://gov.oregonlive.com/legislators/Peter-Buckley/), D-Ashland,
sit down regularly with Legislative Fiscal Officer Ken Rocco to dissect state agency
spending requests. The three report to Kitzhaber's staff as needed. Devlin and Buckley
say they will have their own budget proposal ready by late this month or early next.
Politics: Democrats are uncomfortable cutting PERS, but understand Kitzhaber's
point that something has to be done to rein in costs. Republicans don't like the idea of
easing prison sentences for felons. At some point, there will have to be a grand
compromise to deal with Kitzhaber's ideas, where Democratic leaders want to go, and
what Republicans want as trade-off for needed votes.
– Harry Esteve (mailto:[email protected])
EDUCATION
As usual, most of the attention will be on money. Kitzhaber has proposed $6.15 billion
for K-12 schools in 2013-15, an 8 percent increase from the current two-year budget.
School advocates want more. Kitzhaber says he can deliver what he has proposed only if
the Legislature approves controversial changes to the Public Employee Retirement
System. He and his chief education officer, Rudy Crew, also will ask lawmakers to
earmark $10 million to $120 million for four key initiatives -- early childhood reading;
science, math and engineering; advising to nudge students toward college; and
recruiting, training and mentoring of teachers.
In the higher ed arena, Kitzhaber wants the Legislature to recast the power structure to
create a new postsecondary board
(http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2012/11/kitzhaber_consolidating_power.html)
over universities, community colleges and state financial aid. University champions also
want to permit some universities to create their own boards, independent of
systemwide control.
Watch list: Kitzhaber and his handpicked education lieutenants, Crew and schools
chief Rob Saxton, will make the case for their spending and governance changes. The
Oregon Education Association, which was unhappy with the education package the
governor helped push through last session, should never be counted out.
Politics: School boards, superintendents and the teachers union all are expected to
oppose parts of Kitzhaber's plans, instead advocating higher spending on schools and
less earmarking of how that money can be spent. Democrats are looking at alternative
ways to pump more money into schools.
-- Betsy Hammond (mailto:[email protected])
JOBS/ECONOMY
Lawmakers met in December for a one-day special session so Kitzhaber could sign an
agreement with Nike giving the company tax certainty for 30 years. Republicans want
to make similar agreements available to any business. Democrats are cool to the idea,
but it fits a theme. Rural counties are still struggling with double-digit unemployment
as the state's urban areas continue to recover. Kitzhaber recommends selling more than
$1 billion in state bonds for transportation projects and seismic upgrades throughout
the state, putting an emphasis on rural areas. He also wants legislators to boost funding
to Oregon InC (http://www.oregon4biz.com/Innovation-in-Oregon/About-
Oregon-InC/) and the Oregon Growth Board, two state programs that invest in
business innovation and start-ups.
Watch list: Sen. Lee Beyer (http://gov.oregonlive.com/legislators/Lee-
Beyer/), D-Springfield, is exploring a number of tweaks to Oregon's land use laws
aimed at making it easier for local governments to lure industrial development.
Lawmakers will also take up a property tax quirk that has led to clashes with Facebook
and Comcast.
Laws and lawmakers
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/)
Your Government resource (http://gov.oregonlive.com/#incart_special- report) Keep tabs on the people who represent your
interests in Salem and Washington, D.C.
Your Government » (http://gov.oregonlive.com)
More politics
Jeff Mapes on Politics
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/)
PolitiFact Oregon: Is it True, False or a Pants-on-Fire lie?
(http://www.politifact.com/oregon/)
Guide to lobbyists in Salem
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/lobbying/lobbyists/2012/)
Prospects for reforming Oregon’s troubled
Public Employees Retirement System rest in the
hands of lawmakers. ... More PERS
coverage» (http://gov.oregonlive.com/pers/)
Most Comments Most Read
Federal government shutdown: House bill
delays 'Obamacare' 1 year, pays troops
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/federal_government_shutdown_ho.html#incart_most-
comments)
307 (http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/federal_government_shutdown_ho.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
No. 2 Oregon Ducks- California Golden
Bears live chat: In-game updates, photos,
commentary and questions
(http://oregonlive.com/ducks/index.ssf/2013/09/no_2_oregon_ducks-
_california.html#incart_most-comments)
237 (http://oregonlive.com/ducks/index.ssf/2013/09/no_2_oregon_ducks- _california.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Oregon State Beavers-Colorado live chat:
In-game updates, photos, commentary and
questions
(http://oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2013/09/oregon-
state-beavers-colorado-football-live-
updates.html#incart_most-comments)
188 (http://oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2013/09/oregon- state- beavers- colorado- football- live- updates.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Sex offenders in Oregon: Oregonian
exclusive (http://oregonlive.com/pacific-
Page 2 of 9State budget, schools, PERS, prisons dominate Oregon Legislature's agenda | OregonLive...
9/29/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html
180 (http://oregonlive.com/pacific- northwest- news/index.ssf/2013/09/sex_offenders_in_oregon_oregon.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
Politics: When the economy is weak, every legislator wants to be a job creator. That
creates a positive environment for infrastructure spending, but one project, the
Columbia River Crossing, could hit the rocks. In order to apply for federal money,
legislators need to approve $450 million in local funding for the $3.4 billion
replacement of the Interstate-5 bridge over the Columbia River. Kitzhaber included the
funding in his budget and House Speaker Tina Kotek,
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/legislators/Tina-Kotek/) D-Portland, supports the
project. But lawmakers will have to produce up to $35 million a year through new
vehicle fees or a hike to the gas tax to pay for it
-- Christian Gaston (mailto:[email protected])
HEALTH CARE
Much of the action took place over the past two years as Kitzhaber pushed his
"transformation" ideas through the Legislature. Now it's time to monitor and refine
programs the state created, namely coordinated care organizations and the insurance
exchange. Kitzhaber has built his budget around cost savings that keep Medicaid
inflation to around 3 percent -- a level unheard of in recent years. His budget also
depends on renewing a hospital tax, which requires a three-fifths majority to pass.
Some lawmakers want to limit or means-test the tax breaks given to seniors for medical
expenses. Others want a hard look at medical malpractice costs, with some Republicans
arguing for a dollar limit on tort claims, and the governor pushing for a mediation
program between doctors and patients
Watch list: A key report on cost savings -- or not -- by coordinated care organizations
comes out in early March. Concerns are rising about the impact of the health insurance
exchange on the private market.
Politics: Democrats are confident they can get a bipartisan vote on the hospital tax,
but Republicans may demand something in exchange for their support. GOP leaders
also may push for tougher tort reform, including monetary limits on medical
malpractice lawsuits, rather than the voluntary mediation process supported by
Kitzhaber.
-- Harry Esteve (mailto:[email protected])
PUBLIC SAFETY
Kitzhaber has been clear that he wants to spend more money on schools and children,
partly by curbing the cost of future spending on prisons. State forecasters say that
Oregon will need to spend $600 million over the next decade to build facilities for
2,300 more beds. Kitzhaber, who wants to keep the prison population flat, asked a
bipartisan Commission on Public Safety to study trends and report on ways to address
long-term growth. The group offered a la carte recommendations -- from little reform to
more aggressive options -- but offered no set path.
Gun control could become a polarizing issue. Sen. Ginny Burdick
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/legislators/Ginny-Burdick/), D-Portland, wants
lawmakers to take up a number of bills, such as more background checks and a ban on
high-capacity magazines.
Watch list: The Joint Committee on Public Safety will take up policy
recommendations, which include trimming daily inmate prison costs, increasing the
amount of marijuana needed to trigger prison sentences, and modifying or removing
mandatory sentences approved by voters. The panel has four co-chairs, a Republican
and Democrat from each chamber. There's also a budget subcommittee on public safety
to stitch the numbers.
Politics: This is a dicey area, one that Kitzhaber acknowledges could mean hard votes
for some lawmakers. Elected officials don't like being painted as soft on crime and
district attorneys, victims' advocates and law enforcement are prepared to do just that if
they think legislators are rolling back sentencing provisions. There's disagreement over
(http://ads.oregonlive.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.oregonlive.com/politics/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/702302408/Marketing1/OREGONLIVE/default/empty.gif/6e336d6d59314464362f55414158576c)
See more comments
» (http://www.oregonlive.com/interact/)
northwest-
news/index.ssf/2013/09/sex_offenders_in_oregon_oregon.html#incart_most-
comments)
Game thread: Seattle Thunderbirds at
Portland Winterhawks
(http://oregonlive.com/hawks/index.ssf/2013/09/seattle_2013_09_28.html#incart_most-
comments)
132 (http://oregonlive.com/hawks/index.ssf/2013/09/seattle_2013_09_28.html#comments#incart_most- comments)
infonorm=2&partner=4805&campaignid=17837&zoneid=24801&bannerid=751546&displayid=a28af8ea29)
Page 3 of 9State budget, schools, PERS, prisons dominate Oregon Legislature's agenda | OregonLive...
9/29/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html
the projected growth in prison beds. On the other hand, commission recommendations
are bipartisan and the two sides may not be so far apart. On guns, Republicans
generally don’t want more restrictions, while Democrats do.
-- Janie Har (mailto:[email protected])
SOCIAL SERVICES
Kitzhaber's budget recommends shortening the lifetime limit for residents who receive
cash welfare payments. The governor says he needs to reduce the time limit from five to
three years to help plug a $10 million hole in the program's budget. The two-year
budget also includes plans to revamp the Oregon Housing and Community Services
agency, which Kitzhaber proposed funding for only the first year.
Kotek is renewing her effort to ban discrimination against those who receive federal
Section 8 housing vouchers. Several bills propose creating a Foster Children's Bill of
Rights. Meanwhile, Rep. Carolyn Tomei
(http://gov.oregonlive.com/legislators/Carolyn-Tomei/), D-Milwaukie, is
leading efforts to curb gambling addiction.
Watch list: Misuse of public assistance programs, such as food stamps, increasingly
worry lawmakers. When budgets for social services come up, expect Republicans
especially to push for more accountability and a crackdown on fraud before the
Department of Human Services and other similar agencies get any more money.
Politics: Expect significant pushback from a number of Democratic lawmakers on
Kitzhaber's proposed cuts to the cash assistance program.
-- Yuxing Zheng (mailto:[email protected])
ENVIRONMENT/LAND USE
Water -- and who gets to use it -- will get a lot of attention. The state's first
comprehensive, long-term water strategy, adopted last year, will get further treatment.
The viability of storing wintertime Columbia River water in Northeast Oregon for
summertime agriculture and other uses remains a key issue.
Democrats will lead efforts to continue low-carbon fuel standards, which require
distributors to cut carbon in fuels by 10 percent in 10 years. Another effort is under way
to require disclosure and phase out of potentially toxic chemicals, such as Bisphenol A,
in more products.
On the land use side, expect bills aimed at streamlining the process of expanding the
urban growth boundary and allowing more agritourism.
Watch list: Sure to get big buzz is a proposed statewide ban on plastic bags, an issue
that returns after a bruising battle in 2011. The controversial bill will signal just how
much political muscle the environmental lobby will enjoy now that Democrats control
both chambers.
Politics: Republican legislators have introduced bills aimed at curbing what they see
as restrictive requirements, such as a land-use exception for certain businesses, but
most of those bills stand little chance of passing with Democrats in charge.
-- Yuxing Zheng (mailto:[email protected])
Tweet 9 0 Email
Real Estate
Aurora, OR Salem, OR
Page 4 of 9State budget, schools, PERS, prisons dominate Oregon Legislature's agenda | OregonLive...
9/29/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html
(http://www.oregonlive.com/hillsboro/index.ssf/2013/09/hillsboro_legislator_reflects.html) Hillsboro legislator reflects on 'psychology of obedience' and Oregon's citizen legislature: Guest opinion (http://www.oregonlive.com/hillsboro/index.ssf/2013/09/hillsboro_legislator_reflects.html)
Letters: Clarence Thomas, Beavers, Navy Yard shooting, Portland budget windfall, Portland arts tax, Lake Oswego (http://blog.oregonlive.com/myoregon/2013/09/letters_pers_grand_bargain_bea.html)
pause live updates
Related Stories
Sign in with your OregonLive.com, Facebook or Google account or sign up
(https://signup.oregonlive.com/register/?return_to=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.oregonlive.com%2Fpolitics%2Findex.ssf%2F2013%2F02%
2Fstate_budget_schools_pers_pris.html%23comments)
Please review the Community Rules (http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/index.ssf?rules.html) before posting
Like 24
Comments (13) Shared (10) Popular Topics
greenteacher (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/greenteacher/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/greenteacher/index.html)
7 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pri
s.html/post/2013-02-04/1359992300-587-301.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/post/20
13-02-04/1359992300-587-301.html)
Some schools were performing very poorly when they had WAY TOO MUCH money:
BEAVERTON DISTRICT has $66 MILLION SURPLUS by Victoria Blake BEAVERTON
VALLEY TIMES 04/29/04
BEAVERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT FACING $40 MILLION BUDGET SHORTFALL
NEXT SCHOOL YEAR by Wendy Owen OREGONIAN 01/27/11
...while creating PERS millionaires who will be paid for life for work they never had to
do:
*Yvonne Katz, former superintendent "IS DISTRICT CLEANING UP KATZ' LITTER?"
http://www.chron.com/news/casey/article/Casey-Is-d...
(http://www.chron.com/news/casey/article/Casey-Is-district-cleaning-up-Katz-
litter-1494000.php)
*Holly Lekas, outgoing president of COSA and former HR chief of certified personnel
and
*Linda Borquist, former HR associate supt. "BEAVERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT
SETTLES RACIAL BIAS SUIT" by Anitha Reddy OREGONIAN January 10, 2005
*Len Case, principal (retired Westview HS 2002; retired Southridge HS 2007; retired
Beaverton HS 2012) "BEAVERTON SCHOOLS WILL SEE CHANGES IN LEADERS,
STAFF" by Melissa Navas, OREGONIAN July 23, 2010 www.youtube.com/watch?
v=r75lrvGrSh0
The OEA and the PERS share parking lots and law firms. "Public" school board
members are inclined to become secretive about employee misconduct to avoid
unsavory publicity and fiduciary-trust legal trouble.
Vulnerable classroom teachers are disposable chattel while unaccountable
administrators (see: Yvonne Deckard, PPS "consultant") legally steal from the
taxpayers.
Education is a great gig for lawyers.
It's not more money that school leaders need. It's more accountability:
"SCHOOLS LET SEX CASES SLIDE" By Amy Hsuan, Melissa Navas and Bill Graves
OREGONIAN
http://www.oregonlive.com/special/index.ssf/2008/0...
(http://www.oregonlive.com/special/index.ssf/2008/02/schools_let_sex_abuse_ca
ses_sl.html)
Page 5 of 9State budget, schools, PERS, prisons dominate Oregon Legislature's agenda | OregonLive...
9/29/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html
"Hope has two daughters: Anger and Courage." Saroyan
StateSponsoredTheft.blogspot.com
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Janus1038 (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Janus1038/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Janus1038/index.html)
7 months ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Heldtoanswer/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pri
s.html/post/2013-02-03/1359934700-572-370.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/post/20
13-02-03/1359934700-572-370.html)
Apart from the fact that despite months of one-sided discussions the much-ballyhooed
Commission never actually voted on ANYTHING. They "passed on" some
recommendation, including reasonable ones to pretty much delete any possibility of
prison for marijuana dealers or those with felony driving while suspended. Less smart
are attempts to unravel the lower end of Measure11, despite Oregon voters having
TWICE said they want it and an attempt to eliminate Measure 57, the compromise
measure that simply allowed judges to give short prison terms to repeat property
felons. The people at DOC ( the Gov's mouthpieces) are falsely claiming M57 are
"virtual minimum mandatory" sentences. That is just not true.
75 percent of Oregon felons never go to prison and Oregon has the LOWEST rate of
"non-violent" inmates in prison. Keep in mind that in Oregon that definition includes
dealing meth to teenagers or breaking into your home if you aren't home when it's
trashed.
What this all really comes down to is why we are looking at less than 10% of the budget
(corrections) so we can pour more money into the failing education system that takes
up more than 50% of all discretionary funds.
IF, as some claim, the Gov is just looking for $30 million to pour down the gaping maw
of education it shouldn't be hard. But if the hug-a-thugs who helped create high rates of
violent crime in the 70s and 80s are REALLY driving the debate then voters may have
to step in with initiatives..again.
This isn't about being soft on crime. Oregon already is - ask any felony victim.
It's about truth in sentencing and keeping faith with voters and being honest with them
so a 48 month prison sentence for attempted rape doesn't end up being 9 months in an
"alternative incarceration program."
(http://
oregonlive.
com/)
ourkidzrock (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/ourkidzrock/index.html)
7 months ago
(http://or
egonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/po
st/2013-02-03/1359931418-127-23.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/post/20
13-02-03/1359931418-127-23.html)
Shame on us regular citizens allowing our elected officials to abuse us and our money
for so long. Time is WAY over due to reform PERS in a BIG way so it, and our state,
are economically viable. I am ashamed at the of ALL the people that keep thinking of
themselves and not the impact on our great state.
Fix our education funding issue by instituting a sales tax. 1 or 2% so that ALL people in
Oregon get taxed.
I am TIRED of being a home owner, small business owner, employee, and getting the
heck taxed out of me every time. Just institute a levy to fix the school budget they say.
Do they think that extra money simple grows on my money tree?
Maybe its time for me to stop trying so hard, along with volunteering my time
everywhere I do, and simple step up to the trough and get my fair share of socialism.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
teabagger57 (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/teabagger57/index.html)
7 months ago
(
http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_per
s_pris.html/post/2013-02-04/1359935483-643-272.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/p
ost/2013-02-04/1359935483-643-272.html)
a sales tax? just a waste of money, will only enable the people currently looting
the treasury.
Page 6 of 9State budget, schools, PERS, prisons dominate Oregon Legislature's agenda | OregonLive...
9/29/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Heldtoanswer/index.html)1
you want reform?? pass an initiative to repeal the income tax. this will shove the
state into bankruptcy, at which point PERS recipients become one of many
claimants, and their deal will get re-written.
then, with the income tax *completely* gone, and only then, argue for a sales tax
to fund the government, and fund it at a much less intrusive level than we have
today.
(
http:
//oregonlive.com/)
Heldtoanswer (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Heldtoanswer/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/Heldtoanswer/index.html)
7 months ago
(http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/teabagger57/index.html)1
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schoo
ls_pers_pris.html/post/2013-02-03/1359943654-410-790.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.
html/post/2013-02-03/1359943654-410-790.html)
I would gladly vote for a sales tax to replace the state income tax.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
mammakatt (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/mammakatt/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/mammakatt/index.html)
7 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pri
s.html/post/2013-02-03/1359926378-206-135.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/post/20
13-02-03/1359926378-206-135.html)
More money for the schools is not the answer as Oregon spends more than many other
states but get much poorer results.
Other states face the same problems that Oregon does with kids who do not speak
English well, apathetic parents and even funding their own version of PERS but still
manage to do a better job of educating students. Part of the reason for that is that they
do a better job of bringing new teachers up to speed so that they can be effective.
Until Oregon makes changes to how it spends money on education including
implementing things that other states have shown to actually help with educating kids I
see no reason to give them more money. instead spend more money on seniors and
mental health programs.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Bob Dunton (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/bob_ccs/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/bob_ccs/index.html)
7 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pri
s.html/post/2013-02-03/1359926273-798-464.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/post/20
13-02-03/1359926273-798-464.html)
So K-12 schools get an 8% increase and the PERS contribution required from schools
goes up 7%. Meanwhile K-12 education gets an ever-smaller piece of the Oregon
revenue pie. Sounds like just another year. Best of all, we will have to listen to the
profoundly uninformed talk about the increase in spending on K-12. Insult to injury: our
state education leaders wanting to earmark part of the K-12 allocation to pet programs,
which constitutes another cut to the real work of classroom teachers.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
jon1951 (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/jon1951/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/jon1951/index.html)
7 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_per
s_pris.html/post/2013-02-03/1359963157-469-753.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/p
ost/2013-02-03/1359963157-469-753.html)
It's all for PERS! Every school board is complaining that PERS is killing their
budget.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Leander (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/wallydallas/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/wallydallas/index.html)
Page 7 of 9State budget, schools, PERS, prisons dominate Oregon Legislature's agenda | OregonLive...
9/29/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html
7 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pri
s.html/post/2013-02-03/1359919392-281-128.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/post/20
13-02-03/1359919392-281-128.html)
I'm glad to see a reporter finally mention the $450 million for a freeway in a year we are
cutting funds for education. Most of this 4 mile freeway project is in Washington state,
yet Oregon will suffer more of the pollution and funding problems. 40% of the funding is
for on/off ramps.
Here's more facts on the CRC freeway in the 2013 Oregon budget
http://goo.gl/IpMq8 (http://goo.gl/IpMq8)
If you want to stop the freeway, sign this move on petition or call Salem
http://signon.org/sign/stop-the-5-billion-crc (http://signon.org/sign/stop-the-5-
billion-crc)
You make the call: fund schools or $10 billion to widen 4 miles of freeway?
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Cut Spending (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/pforlife/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/pforlife/index.html)
7 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pri
s.html/post/2013-02-03/1359916779-41-984.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/post/20
13-02-03/1359916779-41-984.html)
Democrats are looking at alternative ways to pump more money into schools.
Betsy,
Money is not going to solve anything. I have put 2 children through BSD and when my
child asks any question the teacher says they do not have time! All the schools do here
is make children ready to call paper or plastic at a grocery store. Did you not just read
that Oregon is one of the 10 worst states in school performance and only one of
handful where teacher evaluation is not done? Start investigating about the poor
performance of our schools and colleges and you will find that it is due to due to poor
teacher performance and inaction by the legislature and governor and the unions. It is
obvious teachers are there just for PERS and not for teaching. More money is not
going to do anything. This is union corruption at its best, with the legislature pleasing
their union masters, driving our state into the ground with class warfare.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
soulcall (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/soulcall/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/soulcall/index.html)
7 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pri
s.html/post/2013-02-03/1359915384-190-786.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/post/20
13-02-03/1359915384-190-786.html)
Let's see, I don't have children so why am I paying a huge tax bill for schools?...I am
not a religious nut so why do churches pay no taxes?
I know we all pay for unused services and I do not mind paying my share.
But...however etc.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
soulcall (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/soulcall/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/soulcall/index.html)
7 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pri
s.html/post/2013-02-03/1359915257-98-97.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/post/20
13-02-03/1359915257-98-97.html)
Let's see, I don't have children so why am I paying a huge tax bill for schools?...I am
not a religious nut so why do churches pay no taxes?
(do they pay a real estate tax?) But ,I do not mind paying my share of public services.
(http://oregonlive.com/)
soulcall (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/soulcall/index.html) (http://connect.oregonlive.com/user/soulcall/index.html)
7 months ago(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_per
s_pris.html/post/2013-02-03/1359915424-83-827.html)
(http://oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html/p
ost/2013-02-03/1359915424-83-827.html)
redundant sorry....
Page 8 of 9State budget, schools, PERS, prisons dominate Oregon Legislature's agenda | OregonLive...
9/29/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html
(http://www.advancedigital.com/)
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement (http://www.oregonlive.com/useragreement/) and Privacy
Policy (http://www.oregonlive.com/privacypolicy/)
© 2013 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us (http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/)).
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of
Oregon Live LLC.
Community Rules (http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/index.ssf?rules.html) apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
Contact interactivity management. (http://www.oregonlive.com/interactivity/)
Ad Choices (http://www.advance.net/advancedigitalUserAgreement#opt_out)
About OregonLive.com
(http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/)
Advertise with us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/advertise/)
Contact Us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/contactus/)
Jobs at OregonLive.com
(http://jobs.oregonlive.com/careers/company/detail/id/116368/page/jobs)
FAQ
(http://www.oregonlive.com/aboutus/index.ssf?/aboutus/content/faq.html)
Newsletters (http://www.oregonlive.com/newsletters/)
Text Alerts (http://www.oregonlive.com/text-alerts/)
RSS (http://www.oregonlive.com/siteindex/)
Mix Magazine (http://www.oregonlive.com/mixsubscribe/index.ssf?/cgi-bin/gfv.cgi/mixsubscribe/affiliate_media/subscribe.ata)
The Oregonian (http://biz.oregonian.com/readerservices/)
The Hillsboro Argus (http://www.oregonlive.com/argus/subscribe/)
About Us
Subscriptions
News
(http://www.oregonlive.com/news/)
Business
(http://www.oregonlive.com/business/)
Sports
(http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/)
High School Sports
(http://highschoolsports.oregonlive.com/)
Entertainment
(http://www.oregonlive.com/entertainment/)
Living
(http://www.oregonlive.com/living/)
Travel
(http://www.oregonlive.com/travel/)
Opinion
(http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/)
Obituaries
(http://www.oregonlive.com/obituaries/)
Jobs
(http://www.oregonlive.com/jobs/)
Autos
(http://autos.oregonlive.com/)
Real Estate
(http://realestate.oregonlive.com/)
Rentals
(http://realestate.oregonlive.com/for-
rent)
Classifieds
(http://classifieds.oregonlive.com/)
Local Deals
(http://www.oregonlive.com/shopping/)
Local Businesses
(http://www.oregonlive.com/business/)
Clackamas County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/)
Clark County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/clark-
county/)
Gresham
(http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/)
Portland
(http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/)
Washington County
(http://www.oregonlive.com/washingtoncounty/)
More Local News
(http://www.oregonlive.com/local/)
OregonLive.com Sections
Your Regional News Pages
Mobile Mobile site (http://mobile.oregonlive.com/) | iPhone,
Android apps (http://www.oregonlive.com/mobile-
device/) | Tablet Apps
(http://www.oregonlive.com/mobile-device/)
Forums
(http://www.oregonlive.com/forums/)
Videos
(http://videos.oregonlive.com/)
Photos
(http://photos.oregonlive.com/photogallery/)
Interact with us
(http://www.oregonlive.com/interact/)
Weather
(http://www.oregonlive.com/weather/)
Post a job
(http://www.oregonlive.com/jobs/products/index.ssf)
Post a classified ad
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sell your car
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sell/rent your home
(http://www.oregonlive.com/placead/)
Sitemap & search
(http://www.oregonlive.com/sitemap/)
More on OregonLive.com
Follow Us Twitter
(http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/twitter/)
|
(http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/facebook/)
Google+ (http://www.oregonlive.com/connect/)|
(http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/stakes_rise_for_gov_john_kitzh.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of) 2013 special session: Stakes rise for Gov. John Kitzhaber... (http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/stakes_rise_for_gov_john_kitzh.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/travel/index.ssf/2013/09/mount_st_helens_listed_on_nati.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of)Mount St. Helens listed on National Register of Historic... (http://www.oregonlive.com/travel/index.ssf/2013/09/mount_st_helens_listed_on_nati.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of)
(http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2013/09/health_reform_wrinkles_emerge.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of) Oregonians see health reform wrinkles emerge as enrollment... (http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2013/09/health_reform_wrinkles_emerge.html#incart_hbx#incart_best- of)
Best of OregonLive.com
(http://oregonlive.com/)
Page 9 of 9State budget, schools, PERS, prisons dominate Oregon Legislature's agenda | OregonLive...
9/29/2013http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/state_budget_schools_pers_pris.html
Issue 1/Issue #1 - Urban meets Rural.pdf
East meets west for legislative visit George Plaven East Oregonian
Published: October 26, 2015 12:01AM
Last changed: October 26, 2015 11:03PM
Sen. Bill Hansell, RAthena, and Rep. Greg Barreto, RCove, hosted five western Oregon legislators Monday in Hermiston and Boardman.
Bill Hansell didn’t mince words when emphasizing the importance of bringing five democratic lawmakers from western Oregon to the state’s more rural, conservative east side.
“This could be historic,” said Hansell, the local Republican senator from Athena. “It’s very important they see what we’re trying to do here.”
Hansell, along with Rep. Greg Barreto, RCove, invited their legislative colleagues from across the political aisle over for a field trip Monday to Hermiston and Boardman, where they toured Stahl Farms, the former Umatilla Chemical Depot and Port of Morrow. The goal, Hansell said, was to give them a firsthand look at the region and better understanding of how they can help the natural resourcesbased economy grow.
“I want them to see the potential of what we can do and how we can do it,” Hansell said. “Agriculture is key, but it spins off into all the supporting industries.”
Five legislators flew in Monday morning to the Hermiston Municipal Airport, including: Senate Majority Leader Ginny Burdick, DPortland; Sen. Betsy Johnson, DScappoose; Sen. Chris Edwards, DEugene and chairman of the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee; Sen. Lee Beyer, DSpringfield; and Rep. Caddy McKeown, DCoos Bay.
Also making the trip were Curt Melcher, director of the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife; Tom Byler, director of the Oregon Water Resources Department; and Brett Brownscombe, natural resources advisor to Gov. Kate Brown. They were greeted by a team of local farmers and community leaders, led by five members of the Northeast Oregon Water Association, which is pursuing new water rights from the Columbia River to expand the area’s highvalue farming base.
J.R. Cook, founder and director of NOWA, said it takes a lot of education for people to realize not only the benefits of the project, but how it will be mitigated through upstream conservation and groundwater recharge. Events like Monday only create more opportunities for discussion and understanding, Cook said.
“We think we’ve got a good plan, and we hope they saw that we will be good stewards of what is handed to us,” Cook said.
The day started with a drive along Feedville Road to Stahl Farms, where growers demonstrated the latest technology and
The day started with a drive along Feedville Road to Stahl Farms, where growers demonstrated the latest technology and practices to conserve water. Burdick, whose senate district covers portions of western Portland and Tigard, said she was especially impressed by how farms are using water more efficiently in the face of drought.
“For me, the whole issue of water and how it’s tied to economic development and economic success made a deep impression,” Burdick said.
The Port of Morrow was another highlight of the day’s tour, as general manager Gary Neal showcased a diversity of industries from food processors to biofuels and wood products. Port industries now employ more roughly 4,500 people, and are a major reason why Morrow County has the state’s fifthhighest median family wage.
“I had no idea there was this much going on here,” Burdick said.
This isn’t the first time Hansell has organized an Eastern Oregon outing for his western Oregon counterparts, but it is so far the largest. Two years ago, he hosted former Senator Jackie Dingfelder in Wallowa County to talk about how ranchers there were dealing with the reintroduction of wolves into the state. Hansell has frequently said that trip was a major catalyst for the legislature finally passing a wolf bill in 2013.
Then again last year, Hansell invited Sen. Michael Dembrow, DPortland, to Umatilla and Morrow counties. Hansell pointed out the legislature thereafter passed a $50 million funding package for water projects statewide — including $11 million earmarked for the Umatilla Basin.
This year’s trip started with a meeting between Hansell and Edwards at the Pendleton RoundUp Grounds. Edwards told Hansell that if they wanted movement on some of these issues, he would need support from other members of the caucus. Hansell took to inviting other west side Democrats from the Senate, and Barreto reached out to members of the House.
The group will continue their trip Tuesday with a visit to Barreto’s district in Wallowa County, where they will cover issues surrounding forestry and wolves.
“This has been a team effort,” Hansell said. “I’ve built bridges with people in Portland and the Valley, and we have a great group of folks here who can tell our story.”
Edwards, who represents Eugene and Junction City, said he couldn’t help but be impressed with the region’s irrigation, and acknowledged there might be a lack of understanding in his district at how sophisticated the technology has become.
“My constituents need to understand east side agriculture has a really good story to tell,” Edwards said. “It’s important we make investments in public infrastructure to help build that future.”
Beyer said that, while the visit doesn’t necessarily change his mindset at the legislature, it does help him to become a better advocate for the entire state.
Johnson, who hails from far northwest Oregon, said this is not her first visit to the basin and she has already been advocating shamelessly for the NOWA project.
“All you have to do is fly over this place to see it more vividly, the effects of these pivots on irrigated land,” Johnson said. “It makes all the difference in the world.”
Each lawmaker said they are aware of the socalled ruralurban divide in Oregon. Edwards said trips like these show they take their job seriously.
“Nobody is out here for votes,” he said.
Johnson said the public sometimes views the legislature as dysfunctional and insulated within their own parts of the state,
but that’s simply not the case.
“There are unique characteristics to all of Oregon,” she said. “The more we can understand each other’s places and issues, the better we’ll be.”
———
Contact George Plaven at [email protected] or 5419660825.
Issue 1/Issue #1 - Wolves and min wage_ Oregon’s urban-rural divide deepens
2/28/2016 Wolves and min wage: Oregon’s urbanrural divide deepens | The Oregon Catalyst
http://oregoncatalyst.com/33000wolvesminwageoregonsurbanruraldividedeepens.html/print/ 1/7
The Oregon Catalyst http://oregoncatalyst.com
Wolves and min wage: Oregon’s urbanrural divide deepens Posted By In the news On February 28, 2016 @ 9:33 am In OR 78th Legislative Session,Rural Oregon | No Comments
by Sen. Doug Whitsett
Oregon’s urbanrural divide has been a constant theme of my weekly updates during my three terms serving in the Senate. Both the 2015 and the current 2016 Legislative Assemblies have served to highlight that everincreasing split. It will only continue to get worse over time.
Two contentious issues being debated in recent weeks illustrate the extent of the gulf.
Wolf Conservation and Management
Last November, the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission (OFWC) voted to remove the
Canadian gray wolf [1] from the state’s endangered species list. My staff attended the OFWC meeting and entered the support that I and Rep. Gail Whitsett (RKlamath Falls) have for the delisting decision. The meeting’s attendees were evenly divided between prowolf activists
from the Willamette Valley, where none of the wolves are actually located [2], and ranchers and elected representatives from the areas that wolves do inhabit.
The OFWC decision came days after it was reported that [3] a calf was killed and eaten in Klamath County and two others were badly mauled in the first confirmed wolf attacks on
livestock outside Northeast Oregon. Recently, an article was published [4] in the Klamath Falls Herald and News, stating that a fifth radiocollared wolf is now located in Klamath County.
According to the article, the public has reported sightings of the wolf to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and its presence in the area was confirmed through an aerial helicopter survey. That article goes on to state that the wolf was scavenging on cow carcasses on private property, and that it has been spotted in the North Poe Valley and the Swan Lake Area.
Last week, a 500 pound heifer [5] calf was severely mauled by that collared wolf that is now ranging directly behind our own Klamath County farm. The new wolf brings the total count of wolves in the region to seven, not counting their pups.
2/28/2016 Wolves and min wage: Oregon’s urbanrural divide deepens | The Oregon Catalyst
http://oregoncatalyst.com/33000wolvesminwageoregonsurbanruraldividedeepens.html/print/ 2/7
Prowolf environmental advocacy organizations had previously spoken out against House Bill
3515 [6] during the 2015 session. The stridently claimed that only ODFW scientists had the expertise to make the delisting determination and must be allowed to make the decision based on the best available science. However, when the OFWC made their science based
decision they were sued by some of the same advocacy groups [7] who demanded the ODFW scientists be allowed to make the delisting determination. .
House Bill 4040A [8] serves to ratify the OFWC’s decision to remove the gray wolf from the state list of endangered species. It would confirm the Legislative Assembly’s confidence that the ODFW scientists did their job based on the scientific criteria established in the Oregon
Wolf Conservation and Management Plan [9].
The first public hearing [10] on HB 4040A was held in the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee on February 4. Rep. Whitsett is a member of that committee. The bill
passed out of that committee during a February 9 work session [11] on an 81 vote, with Rep. Greg Barreto (RPendleton), Rep. Sal Esquivel (RMedford), Rep. Wayne Krieger (RGold Beach) and Rep. Whitsett joined by four Democrats in support. The bill then passed the House February 12 on a 3323 bipartisan vote, with mostly Willamette Valley Democrats in opposition.
HB 4040A was then referred to the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee. I
am a member of that committee where a two and a half hour public hearing [12] was held on that bill on February 16. It was the sole item on the agenda.
Environmental advocacy groups made a fullcourt press to oppose HB 4040A. They’ve even encouraged their activists to call my office asking me to vote against it. The vast majority of the callers were from the Willamette Valley, where, once again, not a single wolf is currently living.
Often times, environmentalists make emotionbased appeals regarding this issue showing no regard to the very real effects that wolves have on the people who actually live in wolf inhabited areas. Those appeals typically contain much misinformation, seemingly deliberately aimed at tugging at the heartstrings of people who may be less knowledgeable about the subject.
But the simple facts are that HB 4040A honors the work done on the Wolf Conservation and Management Plan for more than 15 years by a wide range of stakeholders. As expected, conservation groups immediately filed legal appeals to the OFWC’s decision.
In my opinion, the Plan’s details and buyin from stakeholder groups are jeopardized when people who don’t get what they want can force ODFW into closeddoor settlement talks. It is
2/28/2016 Wolves and min wage: Oregon’s urbanrural divide deepens | The Oregon Catalyst
http://oregoncatalyst.com/33000wolvesminwageoregonsurbanruraldividedeepens.html/print/ 3/7
typical for environmental groups to use these kinds of tactics, which enable them to essentially hijack the public process and try to use the courts to advance their political agenda.
What’s worse, taxpayers must fund the legal defense of the agency’s decision, regardless of the merits of the appeal, or the lack thereof. Settlements too often result in the environmental advocate plaintiffs recovering their legal fees and court costs from the public.
To be clear, HB 4040A does not remove any current protections for the wolves under the law. Despite the fearmongering from environmental groups to the contrary, it does not change the wolf plan or legalize the hunting or killing of wolves.
All things considered, HB 4040A represents a reasonable approach to a difficult problem facing people in rural areas. The bill is certainly more moderate than a bill introduced by an Eastern Washington lawmaker, whose district has 11 of that state’s 13 wolf packs. That
proposal calls for packs to be established in Western Washington [13], where there is presumably more political support for the creatures.
Minimum Wage Increase
Senate Bill 1532A [14] also will serve to accentuate Oregon’s urbanrural divide. This bill
essentially creates three Oregons, with separate minimum wages based on geography [15].
Republican Senators begged, cajoled and used every parliamentary procedure in the book in our attempt to either stop the bill or make it less destructive to rural Oregon farms and businesses. The final vote came following a marathon sevenhour Senate floor debate. SB 1532A passed the Senate February 11 on a 1612 mostly partisan vote, with Sen. Betsy Johnson (DScappoose) joining Republicans in opposition.
The bill then passed the House February 18 on a 3226 vote after a similar long session, with Democrats John Lively (DSpringfield) and Caddie McKeown (DCoos Bay) joining all House Republicans in voting against it.
Under SB 1532A, minimum wage workers in the Portland metropolitan area would see an increase from the current statewide $9.25 per hour to $9.75 July 1, 2016. The rate for those workers would then increase in graduated steps to $14.75 by June 30, 2023.
Counties defined as “nonurban,” which include Baker, Coos, Curry, Douglas, Gilliam, Grant, Harney, Jefferson, Malheur, Morrow, Sherman, Umatilla, Union Wallowa and Wheeler, as well as Crook, Klamath and Lake in the district that I represent, would be under a completely different set of wage rates. Minimum wage workers in those counties would see an increase from $9.25 per hour to $9.50 by July 1. Mandated minimum wage would then increase to
2/28/2016 Wolves and min wage: Oregon’s urbanrural divide deepens | The Oregon Catalyst
http://oregoncatalyst.com/33000wolvesminwageoregonsurbanruraldividedeepens.html/print/ 4/7
$12.50 per hour in graduated steps by June 30, 2023.
Workers in all other areas of the state would see an increase to $9.75 per hour by July 1, with an increase in graduated steps to $13.50 by June 30, 2023.
Governor Brown appears eager to sign the bill into Oregon law.
The ultimate irony of this wage mandate is that Salem Democrats have made a habit, for the past several years, of claiming to be against income inequality. Their proposed solution, in this instance, is to institutionalize the exact same kind of inequality that they claim to be against.
There may be other problems associated with SB 1532A.
Linn County has obtained a legal opinion [16] stating that the provisions of the bill are
tantamount to an unconstitutional unfunded mandate [17] from the state. What’s worse, SB
1532A may be in violation of Article I, Section 30 of the Oregon Constitution [18], which states quite simply that “no law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.”
The bill mandates that people must be paid different compensation for performing the same work. Consider how this bill would be received if it required different pay for different genders.
I understand that residents of the Portland area are feeling the crunch of rising housing prices. I do feel, however, that there is a growing recognition that it is due to decades of the
same nogrowth policies [19] that have made it against the law to build houses or conduct industry or commerce on the vast majority of the land within Oregon.
Those policies have also been a key contributing factor to the poverty that has been crippling rural parts of the state. Unfortunately, instead of solving the root of the problem, Salem Democrats have chosen to double down on the same mentality and policies that caused it.
Moreover, the bill will certainly result in widespread reductions in hours worked, reductions in other benefits that are not mandated by state law, and outright termination of jobs. Increasing joblessness will not improve the plight of Oregonians living in poverty. It is the antithesis of social justice.
Rather than creating a more prosperous Oregon, SB 1532A will serve to worsen our urban rural divide, instead of creating a prosperous Oregon for everyone in it.