The cite I'm using (the excellent CAUSA blog) notes that, as with similar ordinances in places like Hazelton, PA, the wishes of the area's residents ran afoul of well-established law regarding who and what are possible when it comes to controlling immigration. Short answer: the federal government, not county sheriffs. In addition, things that the ordinance had directed officials to do, like revoking all business licenses the violator held, failed to take into account the simple fact that the county isn't necessarily the one who issues the license.
Citing the Federal Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1983 was pretty much all it took, since a key part of that act says "The provisions of this section preempt any state or local law imposing civil or criminal sanctions (other than through licensing or similar laws) upon those who employ or recruit or refer for a fee employment, unauthorized aliens." Grove went on to note these slight problems with the initiative:
The measure's $10,000 mandatory fine "clearly violates" the preemption of immigration enforcement by federal law;
The measure's provision that violations would be reviewed according to state law but would be appealed to Justice Court, violated state law that requires that such appeals be heard by the Oregon Court of Appeals;
The measure's requirement that violations result in suspension of all licenses and permits were beyond the authority of both the Justice Court and the County Commissioners because many of the relevant licenses and permits are not issued by the county; and
The many enforcement provisions of the measure rose to the level of criminal or civil sanctions which are also preempted by federal law.
The measure passed relatively strongly at 57%, but the state ACLU, Northwest Workers' Justice Project and a coalition of county businesses quickly worked to formally object, and yesterday was their payoff. Victory for rule of law, and hopefully a signal to other localities in the state to leave immigration enforcement to the feds--and maybe it's time to quit hating and scapegoating on Latinos now?
Cause let's be real--anti-immigrant sentiment is not typically addressed at the roughly half of undocument aliens NOT from Mexico, and the roughly half who did NOT enter illegally and are simply on expired visas or waiting for renewal. Illegal yes, but the Indian physicist waiting to hear back on his work extension don't exactly allow you to get your xenophobe on in the same way. This is about simple bigotry against Mexican immigrants, when efforts to deal with problems of undocumentation turn into bad law.
It's become fairly de rigeur the last couple cycles, for candidates and advocacy groups to put together a website against your political opponent. Anyone remember "NovickInsultsDemocrats.com?" Yes, it even happens between candidates of the same party, shamefully enough.
I think this site will be a lot more broadly popular, however--NoMoreSizemore.com. Unless you're a cavedweller (not that there's anything wrong with that), you've probably heard of Bill Sizemore, the enormous git who makes a living from pushing ballot initiatives that invariably fail, but cost his opponents millions in "pushback dollars" in the process. And, oh yeah, he's got a shady criminal record too--he's currently back in court fighting contempt charges, based on the fact that he (or any of his cash cow organizations that hide his money and support his business) has yet to pay a dime in retribution for previous convictions.
Speaking of the money trail, the court proceedings have revealed some details about just how much Sizemore has gotten from his campaigns, mostly from Senor Love Daddy of the Desert, Loren Parks (pictured at right). The exceedingly wrinkled Parks is said to have pushed hundreds of thousands of dollars Sizemore's way...BEYOND what he was putting into the campaign coffers of Sizemore's iniatives. I don't have much more to say on Parks, but I don't think I've ever seen a picture of the creepy sex hypnotist who has such an outsized influence on Oregon politics, so I thought I'd treat everyone this Friday. (No, don't thank me! Part of the job).
Now, back to NoSizemore.com. A service of the union-backed Defend Oregon (unions primarily being the groups currently on the hook for beating back Sizemore's dreck, and waiting for their restitution money), the site takes you into Sizemore's brain, showing the four lobes (Fraud, Making Money from the Initiative System, Recycling Bad Ideas, and Attacking Workers and Schools) and trying to ascertain how they work: The graphics and animation are pretty humorous, and of course the research is typically solid.
Here's what DO had to say for themselves:
No matter how many times Oregon voters tell him no, and no matter how many times he and his organizations get caught using fraud and forgery to get measures on the ballot, Bill Sizemore keeps coming back with more ballot measures.
That leaves many Oregonians asking: What is Bill Sizemore thinking?
NoMoreSizemore.com details Sizemore's troubled history with election law, his ongoing violations and contempt of court judgments, investigations into signature fraud, and his long track record of sponsoring vague, poorly worded ballot measures that attack working Oregonians.
As voters begin casting their ballots in two short weeks, it's important that they know who is behind the measures they're deciding on—and what his motives are. NoMoreSizemore.com is designed to give voters a look inside the mind of Oregon's most notorious initiative profiteer.
Sizemore is the author of five of this year's ballot measures: 58, 59, 60, 63, and 64. The same operation—funders and signature gatherers—were also responsible for qualifying 61 and 62, which were filed by Kevin Mannix.
Being a journalist type, I asked Communications Director Scott Moore for his take on things. Being a kick ass guy, Scott delivered:
Bill Sizemore has hijacked Oregon's initiative system for his own profit. His methods of fraud, forgery, racketeering, and getting money from out-of-state millionaires have made a mockery of the system. We invite you to take a look inside his brain--if you dare.
Go check it out, and remember: if it's a Sizemore, say No More and vote NO.
Then go wash your hands and cleanse your eyeballs.
This is just an outstanding idea, one perfectly suited to address the serious malfunctions in our state's well-intentioned initiative system that the executive and legislative branches seem unable or unwilling to tackle: Healthy Democracy Oregon is undertaking a project to establish a Citizen's Initiative Review panel, to publicly and objectively analyze the ballot initiatives set to appear on the general election ballot.
The board would be comprised of 18-24 randomly selected Oregonians, adjusted for demographic representation. They'd hear witness testimony, research the background issues, and deliver a report and recommendation that they hope would ultimately appear as part of the Voter's Pamphlet.
Others already try to do this in some fashion; the Portland City Club is one I know of. But the club is private and the selection process for review panels is rather subjective. Modeled after a program developed in Minnesota by the Jefferson Center called the Citizen's Jury, if democracy were heroin the citizen's jury would be so pure as to cause a wave of ODs--people randomly selected to review testimony and render a public analysis? Mmmm....particpatory.
In what I sincerely consider a public service, The Oregonian took the time to review just who the hell Bill Sizemore is, what he's done in Oregon politics, what his record is, and which of the ballot measures this fall are backed by him and his nutjob financiers. (Left unanalyzed is just who the hell he thinks he is, or how he gets off disrupting the public process with repeated contempt.) To jostle your own memory, or tell the story for your first hearing:
During the past 14 years, Sizemore and his anti-tax, anti-union allies have come to dominate Oregon's initiative system, although every Sizemore measure has been rejected by voters, overturned by the courts or changed by legislators.
After a six-year period in which Sizemore qualified only one measure for the ballot and seemed to be fading from the state's political scene, the 57-year-old activist is back.
Five of the eight citizen initiatives on the Nov. 4 ballot are authored by Sizemore, including three that are versions of earlier measures he sponsored that voters rejected.
Sizemore has returned despite multiple setbacks, including a disastrous campaign as the 1998 Republican candidate for governor and mounting legal troubles. In 2002, in a civil case brought by two teachers unions, a Multnomah County jury found that Sizemore had engaged in a pattern of racketeering that included forged signatures and filing of false financial reports as part of his effort to put two anti-union initiatives on the 2000 ballot.
The jury awarded $2.5 million plus attorney fees to the unions from two now-defunct Taxpayers United organizations that Sizemore controlled. The money has not been paid, and Sizemore has been held in contempt of court three times for violating an injunction stemming from the lawsuit.
And because Sizemore has not gone away, a coalition that stretches from labor unions to civic, religious and environmental groups to business organizations is preparing to spend millions of dollars this fall to defeat his five ballot measures and two others that were authored by another prolific initiative activist, Kevin Mannix, the former Republican Party chairman.
Is there much reason to give this scourge on the process any more consideration and analysis of his twisted motives and shameless disregard for jurisprudence and the rather obvious hint being dropped to KNOCK IT OFF? I don't think so.
But it's important that Oregon voters be clear on who Bill Sizemore is and why he has so many initiatives on the ballot. He says so himself; his intent is to get them on the ballot, not necessarily pass them. (Hint--that's a good way to make money, floating expenses from measure campaign to campaign).
Below the fold, the measure's he's sponsoring this year, so you can know in advance which to reject out of hand.
With the submission of signatures for this year's Oregon Ballot Measures, I thought I'd run down their chances of making the ballot and what they mean, along with listing those ideas that will not make it this year.
Apparently Steve Novick has recharged his batteries, and is back on the horse taking folks like old nemesis Bill Sizemore to task. After a tumultuous spring the clouds have parted, the sun is shining like it's supposed to, and The Hook is giving our lesser, aggrieving citizens the what-for. All is right with the world:
On Tuesday, Bill Sizemore's measure to allow an unlimited deduction of federal taxes on Oregon income tax returns -- a repeat of a measure Oregon voters defeated in 2000 -- qualified for the November ballot. Sizemore's measure will join, among other things, Kevin Mannix's measure to impose mandatory minimum prison sentences for certain property crimes. What the two ballot titles won't tell voters is what impact either measure would have on education, health care, senior services and child protective services in Oregon. But, in fact, the measures will divert money that would otherwise be spent on those services.
...it's not possible to slash taxes for wealthy people or to spend lots of new money on prisons without affecting education, health care, senior services and child welfare. Repeat: It's not possible to slash taxes for wealthy people or to divert money to prisons, without affecting education, health care, senior services and child welfare.
That's not spin; it's arithmetic. There simply isn't enough "other" spending to cut. The entire "other" budget for 2007-09 is less than the amount of the Sizemore tax cut, once it's fully implemented.
Now, why won't the ballot tell people that these measures affect education and health care? By tradition, the "ballot titles" address the things a measure says it will do, but devote little if any attention to the trade-offs a measure will force. That's a disservice to voters. When measures, as these do, have clear, unavoidable and significant effects on vital services, the ballot itself should provide that information -- a surgeon general's warning, if you will.
The next Legislature should change the ballot title law to ensure that next time, Oregon's voters get that critical information upfront.
Such the man crush, have I! And why the hell not? The silver lining in not sending Steve to Washington is that as a result he stays here and Oregonians get to hog all the benefits of his advocacy. Send Merkley to DC, but let's keep the real ace down on the farm. :)
Apparently sufficiently recovered from his loss in the Democratic primary for Attorney General last month, former Rep. Greg Macpherson is back on the horse again, riding hard for a new cause: the "top two" primary system. What's that? I'll let Greg tell you, from his recent email to his mailing list:
Under this initiative, all candidates for an Oregon office would be listed on a single ballot in the primary election. Every registered voter, regardless of party affiliation could vote for any candidate. The top two vote-getters, regardless of party, would go forward to the general election.
I favor an open political process that invites broad participation. I support the open primary because it would broaden voter participation. Nonaffiliated voters would be given a voice in the primary election. Voters registered in a political party that has smaller numbers would have a voice in both primary and general elections.
An initiative to create an open primary in Oregon is on the verge of qualifying for the November ballot. It needs 82,769 valid signatures by July 3. Based on sampling done by the Secretary of State's office on the signatures already submitted, it needs about 14,000 more.
First of all, "on the verge" appears to also mean "nearly dead if we don't kick ass in the next two weeks and find 14,000 signatures." For hot-button issues like gay marriage or immigration, I could see them scaring up that many in a short time (maybe not likely, but I could imagine it)--but top-two, something most people don't even fundamentally understand yet? Hmmmm...
It's sad that the unions have to pay for this, instead of seeing state prosecutors enforcing injunctions by using contempt filings against Sizemore for flouting judgements. But they do, and they are:
The Oregon Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers-Oregon filed a contempt claim this week centering on political activist and initiative baron Bill Sizemore's fraudulent use of a 501(c)(3) charitable organization for political purposes.
By using a charitable organization for his political (initiative) purposes, Sizemore avoids contribution and expenditure reporting requirements. This is the same type of illegal act that got him in hot water in 2002, when a jury found that Sizemore had engaged in racketeering (fraudulently using a charitable organization to raise funds for political purposes).
The OEA claim is that Sizemore is in violation of a court (injunction) order against the Sizemore organizations preventing future violations and harm to the public, which occurs when ongoing criminal acts are committed through legitimate organizations and businesses.
That's an editorial view from the Argus, but The O's version that includes Sizemore's "the money fell from heaven for me to file these initiatives--but hey, not the big checks from ATR for updating their pissant website (which was inoperative as of last night--great job Bill!)" excuse is not much more illuminating. The bottom line is that this scourge on the political discourse shouldn't be allowed within 500 feet of the Secretary of State's office in order to file anything. That privilege is for people who follow the rules, like he can't seem to.
RSS Feed: http://www.loadedorygun.net/rss/rss2.xml
Speaking of the money trail, the court proceedings have revealed some details about just how much Sizemore has gotten from his campaigns, mostly from Senor Love Daddy of the Desert, Loren Parks (pictured at right). The exceedingly wrinkled Parks is said to have pushed hundreds of thousands of dollars Sizemore's way...BEYOND what he was putting into the campaign coffers of Sizemore's iniatives. I don't have much more to say on Parks, but I don't think I've ever seen a picture of the creepy sex hypnotist who has such an outsized influence on Oregon politics, so I thought I'd treat everyone this Friday. (No, don't thank me! Part of the job). 