Loaded, Leading
Gordon Smith and the Klamath Fish Kill
The Smearing of Betsy Johnson


Mesothelioma


Learn more about mesothelioma cancer and other asbestos-related diseases.

NiewertAward NiewertAward


Poll
Should the Lieberman Health Care Bill Be Killed?
Yes
No
Wait and See
Not Sure

Results

LoadedO Blogger Archives
Loaded Orygun

Click here to find our archives from February 2006 through July 14, 2007

Search




Advanced Search


Send email to LoadedO!
Follow LoadedO on Twitter!
Find your favorite Trail Blazers memorabilia including jerseys and apparel

Marion County

Tax Fairness Opponents Get Double-Blow from Courts on Ballot Titles

by: torridjoe

Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 18:07:37 PM PST

It's not been a good week for those who are trying to build opposition to the tax fairness bills passed in the Leg last year and now referred to January's ballot. In two separate rulings at both the lowest and highest levels of Oregon's court system, teabagging plaintiffs who had sued for a change in the ballot titles were dealt strong rebukes--all but ensuring that the original (or even improved) titles will remain intact. 

Our friends at Yes For Oregon have the details on both. First, their statement on last week's OR Supremes ruling {google doc}, which not only rejected plaintiffs' arguments about the titles, but to my mind actually improved them in a way that is not only more accurate but a boon for M66/67 proponents:

In short, the Court ruled today that the opponents challenge was without merit. The core of the argument made by the opponents -- -- Oregonians against job killing taxes -- -- was that voters should be made aware that the revenue from measures 66 and 67 will be spent to protect education, healthcare, and public safety.

The Court rejected that argument for both measures, changing only the phrase "maintains funds currently budgeted for education, healthcare, public safety, other services" to "provides funds currently budgeted for education, healthcare, public safety, other services."

The court also ordered a modification in the "Result of a No" statement on both measures. "Reduces funding currently budgeted for education, healthcare, public safety, other services by estimated $472 million" is now "leaves amount currently budgeted for education healthcare, public safety, other services underfunded by estimated $472 million."

The Vote Yes for Oregon coalition agrees that this language is a more clear and accurate way of describing to voters what's at stake in January. [emph orig]

As it appears the coalition believes, the change from "reduces funding" to "leaves underfunded" is not only closer to the real truth of the matter, it better highlights the consequence--UNDERFUNDING. Reducing funding is one thing, and can sound like a prudent savings, but nobody should think leaving something "underfunded" is a good thing. To put it another way, would you like your caloric intake reduced, or would you prefer to take in fewer calories than you need?

And yesterday, a circuit court judge in Marion County refused to place an injunction on the ballot title process, essentially clearing the decks for moving forward on the matter. In the aftermath the coalition's Scott Moore had some snark to throw down:

"The corporate lobbyists had spent weeks misrepresenting the ballot titles in the process, and the courts have now thrown out all of their arguments" says Scott Moore, spokesperson for the Vote Yes for Oregon Coalition. "It's too bad there isn't a process that also allows the Supreme Court to throw out their committee name -- -- Oregonians Against Job-Killing Taxes -- -- for misrepresenting the impact of the measures."

Moore has a valid point of course, but it's hard to avoid the sense that they're gloating a little bit over the epic fail of the plaintiffs. That's usually how these kinds of things go when one side really doesn't have much of a leg to stand on, but throws whatever it can at the wall anyway. So I don't blame 'em for letting a little giddiness slip.

Feeling legalo-wonky? The two OSC decisions are readable in their entirety here {pdf}, and also here {pdf}(there were two rulings, one for each Measure.) The Marion County decision can be found in this Google Doc.

Discuss :: (0 Comments)

HinesSight M37 Compendium: Are You Vested?

by: torridjoe

Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 09:30:00 AM PST

Brian Hines takes his personal look at Measures 37 and 49 to a new level with yesterday's publish of seminal documents on the process of M37 vesting. If you have a pending claim post-M37-approval but pre finished-building, the issue of whether you are vested is not really important; it merely decides whether you have to stop building and lose your pending investment or not.

I say that not to be flip; it's reality for some people, and that really sucks. But I think two thirds of the state agreed it would suck more that the Hines and their neighbors ended up without water because some schmuck put up a subdivision on the wells, and so that's where we are. Somehow you have to draw the line as to who gets to keep going, and who has to stop. Anybody who hasn't broken ground ought not even to be part of the conversation, IMO, and probably won't be. So the question is for those who have moved forward, at least with surveying or contracting or something, all the way to partially finished buildings.

I suspect those folks will get to continue, and if Hines is correct, many more will on the grace of development-friendly council majorities in some areas of the state: {Brian explains, below}
There's More... :: (0 Comments, 291 words in story)

Marion Co. on M49: What Election?

by: torridjoe

Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:02:19 PM PST

I don't think there was a single blog in Oregon that provided as close and personal a look at what Measure 37 really meant to people on the ground, than the work Brian and Laurel Hines did at their HinesSight page. Their property neighbors a large subdivision claim which threatened the groundwater supply of the neighborhood.   I must confess, after Measure 49 passed so convincingly, I figured Brian and Laurel and their other neighbors had won the fight and all was once again well. Man, was I wrong:


 

{more}

There's More... :: (1 Comments, 429 words in story)

Why the GOP in Oregon keep losing

by: carla

Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 11:16:03 AM PDT

There are probably many examples I could list here demonstrating why the GOP in Oregon keep losing races.  But today a couple of stellar examples have leapt off the computer screen at me.

First (via Blue Oregon) is this piece of rhetorical diarreah from the new Marion County Vice Chair:

I Hope the Democrats have enjoyed their short lived pouncing of peoples paychecks while giving more to Illegal Aliens and Communist sympathizers.

Republicans will take back Oregon next year, I will make sure of it.

Oregon will not become a Communist State no matter how hard the Dem's keep trying to do so, as people wake up to their cradle to grave-Gov't (Unions-Mafia)knows best agenda, people will flee that backwards Damn the people, Party of far left wacko's.

America has hundreds of Millions of peoples from all over the World that want to live here for Freedom & Independence, not Oregon's Gov't dictators or Union's that also take your paycheck(Making them worse than Corp.s, at least you voluntarily give them $), very similar to where they live now and why they want to leave their Country and come here. Democrats keep forgetting that, because they are drunk with power and can't get on the 12 step program because they hate God.

It's OK people, the responsible, keep the money YOU earned & put American workers 1st, real Republicans will make it better soon.

I WILL MAKE SURE OF IT!

Rick Hickey, New Vice-Chair Marion Co. R's

This utterly irrational diatribe is ridiculously out of step with mainstream Oregonians.  It's fringe-y to the point of being absurd.  The Marion County GOP can't possibly believe this guy is an appropriate representative of their party. And if they do--well then I suppose they must love losing A LOT.

Even more striking to me however is this bizarre (and what I guess is supposed to be humorous) fake letter to Oregonians, ticking off a laundry list of things passed in the legislative session that the GOP of Oregon don't like.  This one really stands out:

Domestic PartnershipsWe passed HB 2007 – yeah it was somewhat different than SB 1000 (from last session) but we had to change it… “Domestic Partnerships” polled better than “Civil Unions.”  This bill flies in the face of traditional marriage and the overwhelmingly popular Measure 36, the Defense of Marriage Act of 2005, but so what – we know what’s best for Oregonians, not the voters.

So when those who campaigned for Measure 36 told us that it didn't preclude domestic partnerships or civil unions..that was just their funny little way of bullshitting us?

Not to mention the fact that the GOP is apparently very proud of their platform of denying equal rights to their fellow citizens.

The Republican Party can not and will not win in this state with this kind of bombastic speechifying.  Some of it may carry well in a more rural setting--but that's not where the vast majority of Oregonians live and it's sure as hell not what they believe.

Discuss :: (11 Comments)

Return to LO home...!


RSS Feed: http://www.loadedorygun.net/rss/rss2.xml
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Change.org|Start Petition

Put your message up top!


Blog ads are good karma...

Thanks for Saving Soapblox! (and by extension, LO!)


Loaded Links
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless

Powered by: SoapBlox