Tag Archive for 'election 2006'

No one to blame but the Republicans

Published
by
Brent Logan
on 11/8/2006
in Politics
. 3 Comments

In the closing weeks of the campaign season, I felt like I was a lawyer who had a bad client while writing this blog. That client was the Republican Party which had broken its Contract with America from 1994 and had become unmoored from its conservative principles. As its advocate, I couldn’t make a more compelling case for Republicans staying in power than the fact that the Democrats would be worse. I believed in that case, but when that’s all the party gave its advocates to work with, you can honestly conclude that Republicans got this drubbing the old fashioned way – we earned it.

—Dean Barnett writing on Hugh Hewitt’s blog.

If you liked this post, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Additional info on subscribing can be found here. Thanks for visiting!

The Oregonian tilts to the left?

Published
by
Brent Logan
on 11/8/2006
in Politics
. 0 Comments

2006 Congress election results

This morning’s edition of The Oregonian summarizes the congressional election results with the chart shown above. Although the Senate looks close, the House looks like a blowout for the Democrats until you realize that all the Undecided races are placed on the bottom right, pushing the dividing line between Republicans and Democrats to the left.

If the 24 Undecided races had been placed between the Republican and Democrat sectors, like the Independent races were for the Senate results, the charts would not be misleading. In fact, if this had been done for the Senate results, you might be able to see that the Republicans have more seats than the Democrats, not less like it appears in the chart.

Yes, I know the Democrats won the House, but let’s not overstate the results with misleading charts.

Oregon General Election 2006—Measure recap

Published
by
Brent Logan
on 11/8/2006
in Politics
. 0 Comments

The election is over; how did my measures do?

Measure Description blogan Recommends Results
39 Prohibit condemnation to transfer to private parties Yes Passed
40 Create districts for appellate and supreme court judges No Failed
41 Make Oregon tax deduction equals Federal exemption Yes Failed
42 Prohibit credit scoring in setting insurance rates or premiums No Failed
43 Require parental notification for minors, with exceptions Yes Failed
44 Expand prescription drug coverage Yes Failed
45 Term limits No Failed
46 Amend constitution to allow limits on campaign donations and expenditures No Failed
47 Limit campaign donations and independent expenditures No Passed
48 Limit budget growth to population and inflation increases No Failed

Note, these results are according to The Oregonian, November 8, 2006, Sunrise Edition.

It will be interesting to watch the court battles surrounding Measure 47. My limited understanding of Oregon constitutional law is that Oregon’s freedom of speech is one of the most protected in the nation. I don’t believe that Measure 47 is constitutional without the enabling amendment included in Measure 46, which failed. We shall see.

Election 2006 — Vote today

Published
by
Brent Logan
on 11/7/2006
in Politics
. 0 Comments

Vote!

Measure 43’s opposition: Incredible…

Published
by
Brent Logan
on 10/23/2006
in Politics
. 2 Comments

Incredible...

Notice anything “interesting” about John’s and Marie’s comments to my post on Measure 43? Looks to me like they went to the same seminar.

Incredible…

Oregon General Election 2006—Measure recommendations

Published
by
Brent Logan
on 10/23/2006
in Politics
. 0 Comments

For your voting convenience, here is a summary of blogan’s recommendation on the ballot measures for the 2006 Oregon general election.

Measure Description blogan Recommends
39 Prohibit condemnation to transfer to private parties   Yes
40 Create districts for appellate and supreme court judges No  
41 Make Oregon tax deduction equals Federal exemption   Yes
42 Prohibit credit scoring in setting insurance rates or premiums No  
43 Require parental notification for minors, with exceptions   Yes
44 Expand prescription drug coverage   Yes
45 Term limits No  
46 Amend constitution to allow limits on campaign donations and expenditures No  
47 Limit campaign donations and independent expenditures No  
48 Limit budget growth to population and inflation increases No  

Oregon General Election 2006—Measure 48

Published
by
Brent Logan
on 10/23/2006
in Politics
. 0 Comments

Ballot Measure 48 proposes to limit state spending by amending the Oregon Constitution to provide that, unless approved by a 2/3 vote of both the Oregon House and Senate and a subsequent approval by a majority of the voters, spending for state services in a two-year period cannot exceed the amount spent in the previous two-year period plus the combined rate of the increase of the state’s population and inflation in that same, previous, two-year period. [...]

The measure would not apply to money spent for the following purposes: tax and “kicker” refunds or money placed in an emergency fund or a “rainy day” reserve fund. (Money placed into an emergency or “rainy day” fund would not be available for state spending in excess of the spending limit without a 2/3 vote of the House and Senate and approval by the voters.) (From Measure 48 Explanatory Statement.)

I like the sound of Measure 48. Those are changes I could support.

If I were to believe those who oppose Measure 48, Oregon is already in a critical situation.

  • If Measure 48 passes, we will have deep cuts in our public safety programs. [In other words, we need to increase our taxes faster than population and inflation growth just to keep our public safety programs the way they are now---because the government will spend the money first on other programs. ---blogan]
  • If Measure 48 passes, the reserve funds would be hard to get to. [Of course, if Measure 48 doesn't pass, those reserve funds wouldn't exist. ---blogan]

Arguments like that make me want to vote for Measure 48—they really do. I’m very concerned that without Measure 48, our taxes will go up substantially and slow Oregon’s rebounding economy.

On the other hand, when I have doubts about a measure, especially one that would amend Oregon’s constitutional, I vote “no.” And I have my doubts about Measure 48. When I looked for the text of the measure, I assumed something was wrong with the Secretary of State’s website. But no, that’s the full text. This text is ripe for court challenges. For example, when would the measure take effect—this budget or the next? Why couldn’t the text of Measure 48 have been written as well as the arguments in favor of it?

As much as it pains me to do so, I recommend voting “No” on Measure 48. (And I’m hoping that it comes back cleaned up in a future election so I can vote “Yes.” If you’d rather have the tax savings now and spend them on defending this measure in court battles, vote “Yes.” Hmm…Wink

Source: The Oregon Secretary of State publishes a Voters’ Pamphlet which lists all of the Oregon statewide measures, including ballot title, text of measure, explanatory statement (excepted above), and arguments in favor and opposition.

Related:

Issue blogan Recommends
Measure 39 Yes
Measure 40 No
Measure 41 Yes
Measure 42 No
Measure 43 Yes
Measure 44 Yes
Measure 45 No
Measure 46 No
Measure 47 No
Measure 48 No

Oregon General Election 2006—Measure 47

Published
by
Brent Logan
on 10/22/2006
in Politics
. 3 Comments

Ballot Measure 47 limits or prohibits certain political campaign contributions and expenditures. (From Measure 47 Explanatory Statement.)

Oh, if only it were that simple. It’s not. Vote “No.”

  • Measure 47 is complex. The text of Measure 47 consumes eight double-column pages in the Voters’ Pamphlet. Ballot measures are appropriate for certain types of issues; complex issues are an exception. Complex issues are best considered by the legislation where issues can be debated and the text of the law can be refined in the process, rather than argued over in court. Ballot measures are a take it or leave it proposition. Vote this one down.
  • Measure 47 limits the money you can spend on political issues. I’m not talking about money you donate; this is the money you spend directly. That’s not getting just big money out of politics. It’s getting your and my money out, too. Do you want to get some flyers printed up to hand out to neighbors, take out an ad on radio, TV, or the newspaper, or lease space on a bill board? Better watch out that you don’t run afoul of any new limits that get passed. Even expenditures on blogging, if you attempt to influence an election (like I’m trying to do here), could be limited.
  • Measure 47 discourages participation in politics. It’s so complex that only those who hire lawyers to make sure they are legal will risk it. That doesn’t describe the little guy. The political pros, the big money guys stay in the game; they just learn how to play under the new rules. The rest of us just leave. Limiting who participates in the political discussion is not good for a healthy democracy.
  • If Measure 47 is successful in removing the power of big money in politics, who’s left? Big media won’t be touched by it. At least “Big Money” admits to being partisan.
  • Measure 47 has big penalties if you run afoul: at least five times the amount contributed or expended unlawfully! Is that an amount you’re willing to risk? I’m not.
  • Most important, and what I find most objectionable, Measure 47 limits a individual’s independent political speech. This is the most sacred form of speech recognized by a government, and which a government should not attempt to limit.

Measure 47 is dependent on Measure 46 passing.

Please vote “No” on Measures 46 and 47.

Source: The Oregon Secretary of State publishes a Voters’ Pamphlet which lists all of the Oregon statewide measures, including ballot title, text of measure, explanatory statement (excepted above), and arguments in favor and opposition.

Related:

Issue blogan Recommends
Measure 39 Yes
Measure 40 No
Measure 41 Yes
Measure 42 No
Measure 43 Yes
Measure 44 Yes
Measure 45 No
Measure 46 No
Measure 47 No
Measure 48 No

Oregon General Election 2006—Measure 46

Published
by
Brent Logan
on 10/22/2006
in Politics
. 4 Comments

Ballot Measure 46 amends the Oregon Constitution to allow laws to be passed or amended that would prohibit or limit contributions and expenditures of any kind to influence the outcome of any election. Under the measure, laws could be passed that prohibit or limit how much an individual or entity can give to a candidate for state or local (but not federal) office or other political campaign and how much an individual, entity, candidate or other political campaign can spend to influence the outcome of any state or local election. (From Measure 46 Explanatory Statement.)

Vote “No.”

At first glance, Measure 46 looks like a good idea. After all, who doesn’t want to “Get Big Money Out of Oregon Politics!”? I don’t. Not if this is the way it has to be done.

If this measure passes, the government will be able to limit the amount you can donate to political candidates, political committees, and parties. No big deal, right?

The government will also be able to limit the amount, but also the amount you can spend on your own campaigning for an election. In other words, the government will be able to limit your freedom of speech in the most crucial area of all — politics!

Do you want to get some flyers printed up to hand out to neighbors, take out an ad on radio, TV, or the newspaper, or lease space on a bill board? Better watch out that you don’t run afoul of any new limits that get passed. Even expenditures on blogging, if you attempt to influence an election (like I’m trying to do here), could be limited.

And we don’t have to guess at what sorts of laws people want passed. Just look at Measure 47. In its attempt to take big money out of politics, Measure 46 could result in the little guy removed from politics, too, leaving just the professional media, more powerful than ever.

Please vote “No” on Measures 46 and 47.

Source: The Oregon Secretary of State publishes a Voters’ Pamphlet which lists all of the Oregon statewide measures, including ballot title, text of measure, explanatory statement (excepted above), and arguments in favor and opposition.

Related:

Issue blogan Recommends
Measure 39 Yes
Measure 40 No
Measure 41 Yes
Measure 42 No
Measure 43 Yes
Measure 44 Yes
Measure 45 No
Measure 46 No
Measure 47 No
Measure 48 No

Oregon General Election 2006—Measure 45

Published
by
Brent Logan
on 10/20/2006
in Politics
. 1 Comment

Ballot Measure 45 amends the Oregon Constitution to add a new section limiting the number of years that a person can serve as a state Representative, the number of years that a person can serve as a state Senator, and the total number of years that a person can serve in the Oregon Legislative Assembly as either a state Representative or a state Senator. (Source.)

Measure 45 is a bad idea for a couple reasons (and probably more):

  • Government is like any other human endeavor: it’s done best by those with experience. Term limits decrease the amount of government experience our elected officials would have.
  • When our elected officials have less experience, the government doesn’t become less powerful, just the elected officials. The power shifts elsewhere—to lobbyists and to government staffers. These other groups cannot be held accountable by voters.

Please join me in voting “No” on Measure 45.

Source: The Oregon Secretary of State publishes a Voters’ Pamphlet which lists all of the Oregon statewide measures, including ballot title, text of measure, explanatory statement (excepted above), and arguments in favor and opposition.

Related:

Issue blogan Recommends
Measure 39 Yes
Measure 40 No
Measure 41 Yes
Measure 42 No
Measure 43 Yes
Measure 44 Yes
Measure 45 No
Measure 46 No
Measure 47 No
Measure 48 No

[tags]Oregon, General Election, Measure 45[/tags]