Archive for February, 2007
No Rainy Day Fund from the House
I received two emails at 4:12 today. Here’s the headline on the one from House Republican Leader Wayne Scott:
HOUSE REPUBLICANS SUPPPORT RESPONSIBLE RAINY DAY FUND; BRING PLAN TO HOUSE FLOOR FOR VOTE
House Democrats Reject Plan on Party-Line Vote
And here’s the headline on the one from House Majority Leader Dave Hunt:
HOUSE REPUBLICANS FAIL TO COMMIT TO OREGON RAINY DAY FUND
All House Republicans vote against saving for Oregon’s future, Democrats vow to press ahead on ballot measure referral
What’s clear is that there was a sharp, party line disagreement in the House today. This is what they had to say about the vote at Oregonlive:
Democrats and Republicans each backed slightly different plans to divert this year’s corporate kicker rebate into a new state rainy day fund — and refused to give a single vote to the other party’s plan, dooming both.
To pass, a plan to put the corporate kicker into savings needed a two-thirds majority, or 40 votes, in chamber where Democrats have a slight edge with 31 members.
With three Republicans absent Tuesday, the chamber cast three party-line votes:
26-31 against the Republican plan to cancel $240 million in kicker rebates, 26-31 against a plan to send the bill back to committee in hopes of finding bipartisan compromise and 31-26 in favor of the Democrats’ plan to put the entire $275 of corporate rebates into savings.
The House spent more than two hours debating the difference between the two plans — a difference that might have escaped many voters.
The upshot was that the Democrats were unable to build a supermajority to get the corporate kicker changed by lawmakers, as Gov. Ted Kulongoski and a coalition of the state’s leading business associations had urged.
Because the House couldn’t come to an agreement, it is likely that voters will be faced with the Senate’s plan: asking the people to vote on taking the corporate kicker in the May election.
Social costs of Oregon’s addiction
Oregon is addicted to the lottery. It funds schools, salmon recovery, economic development, you name it. When I hear lottery funds are being used for a project I think “oh good, they don’t have to raise taxes.”
Lottery money isn’t free. As several House committees heard last week, Oregonians lost $1.27 billion dollars gambling in 2004. That equals $457 for every Oregon adult. 1 in 25 Oregon teenagers (who can’t gamble legally) are either problem or pathological gamblers. That means at least one addicted teen in most high school classrooms across the state.
Sure, not all of people with gambling addictions are playing video poker, or buying Sports Action tickets. They might be at Spirit Mountain, or Chinook Winds, or other places that gaming is legal. The state can do little to change federal policy on Indian casinos. But, is it right for the state to ignore the human cost of gambling, just to fund state parks?
Those least able to afford gambling are most likely to become addicted. Is the $449 million in socio-economic costs – child neglect, domestic violence, bankruptcy, even suicide – worth it?
Oregonians voted for the lottery, and now we’re addicted to the funds. I, for one, would be willing to kick in an extra $457, and get rid of state sponsored gaming, and the human cost that comes with it.
Senator Atkinson: Can you hear me now?
State Senator Jason Atkinson (R-Grants Pass) had this to say in the Senate Republican’s weekly Capitol Update.
Like the goofy Verizon spokesman in horn rimmed glasses, Oregon voters are tired of asking Salem “Can you hear me now?” It doesn’t take much to look back over the last few decades and see how Salem has ignored the clear voice of voters again and again.
For example, Oregonians have without exception turned down tax increase after tax increase, yet Salem continues to send them proposals for more spending at taxpayer expense. Voters ask themselves, “Can they hear us now?” When Oregonians put the personal kicker in to the state constitution, Salem thought they knew better and temporarily suspended it. Oregonians said “Can you hear us now?”
With Measure 37, 61% of Oregonians spoke with a united voice to declare that our land use system was broken. They clearly took a stand for the rights of property owners.
Since then, people have invested their last pennies to navigate paperwork and prepare their property for construction, yet the governor has turned a deaf ear on Oregon and wants to suspend their clearly stated will, and the dreams of property owners across the state. He stands in his office, shaking his finger at voters, telling them he knows best and we need to have a “time out” in the corner.
The governor complains about costs, about the logistics of implementation, or conjectures about the “intended will of the voters.” But those sound more like excuses then they do reasons. Voters have been clear about what they want; it is up to Salem to make sure it happens. The governor doesn’t have the luxury of second guessing what it was the voters meant. It is pretty clear. The time has come to end the dysfunction in land use planning. Oregonians are entitled to their property rights, and the rest of the state will reap the rewards of economic growth. Voters couldn’t have been clearer on the matter.
Governor, can you hear them now?
3 commentsWhich has a greater public health risk: tanning or abortion?
Oregon Right to Life’s Life Lobby Update is reporting on SB 340, which would ban tanning for teens under 14. Amendments have been proposed that would expand the ban to those under 18. Right to Life is pointing out the similarities between this bill, and parental notification before teen abortion.
There is already a law that requires parental consent for anyone under the age of 18 to use a tanning bed. The motivation behind the ban is concern for the safety of teens that use tanning beds, because of the health risk of repeated use. What is troubling about this bill is that it is supported by those who strongly opposed Measure 43. Apparently some Senators are concerned about teen health when it comes to tanning but not when it comes to abortion. It seems that their objection to parental notification was purely political and not because of their concern for teen health.
I don’t have a problem with parental consent for tanning, and there are probably good health reasons to ban it for those under 18. But, aren’t the risks of tanning lower than those of surgery? Why is abortion the exception?
8 commentsOpposition to Education Reform
At Oregon Catalyst Matt Wingard is talking about SB 621, and the Oregon Education Association.
I’ve been thinking all day about how best to respond to Senate Bill 621, which appeared at the Oregon State Legislature this week. Nowhere in the bill does SB 621 mention the Oregon Education Association. It doesn’t have to. Besides, the teacher’s union prefers to work behind the scenes. In all public venues (on billboards as well as on their website, for instance) they claim to be fighting for Oregon’s kids. In fact, on their website they say “the top priority of the Oregon Education Association is to ensure that all students in Oregon receive a quality education.”
I challenge anyone to read SB 621 and conclude that the OEA is telling the truth.
Many of you do not have first-hand knowledge of how the teacher’s union in your state operates. Why would you? Unless you’re a teacher who has disagreed with union orthodoxy (or heaven forbid openly supported a candidate for office who supports school choice), or you’ve tried to open a charter school, or fought in the legislature for real education reform, you’d never come into contact with your state’s teacher’s union.
Sometimes I wish I were still ignorant of the union’s deviousness and power. But when you work in and around the public education system it’s impossible not to notice the high percentage of students who are not receiving the “quality education” the OEA claims to desire. The sad fact of the matter is that teacher’s unions are responsible for most of what’s wrong in today’s public education system. If their policies didn’t create the problems, they are often immovable objects to eliminating the problems that have developed.
Head on over here to read the rest.
Global Warming Stinks.
This just in from the global warming lab. A new study finds the real reason for global warming isn’t actually chlorofluorocarbons or carbon dioxide emissions at all. It’s something more silent but deadly than anyone ever imagined. The study finds, get this, cattle flatulence as a significant contributor to greenhouse–ahem–gases. Yes, the claim made by the Food and Agriculture Organization and reported in yesterday’s Christian Science Monitor says cattle flatulence is affecting the planet’s fickle ozone layer and causing climate change. You can’t make this stuff up.
Folks, listen: it was somewhat believable why petroleum guzzling SUVs came under attack for their adverse effect on the planet, and so the world acquiesced to the demands of pseudo-science and everyone bought a hybrid car.
But now… this. Cows can’t even pass gas without someone fingering them in the latest lineup of global warming whodunnit. One minute these gentle creatures are harmlessly nibbling grass out on the farm, and then -POOF- they’re suddenly the latest cause of Hurricane Bovina.
This raises a few questions. The obvious one is, where’s PETA in all this? But further, where’s the American Dairy Association? Will nobody stand up and defend these animals’ freedom to pass greenhouse gas as a fundamental right? If a cow can’t break wind on the farm, then for the love of God where is a cow to turn?
And why target only cattle? What about elephants? What about horses or whales? And finally, what is the proposed solution… bovine portions of Bean-O for every bull, heifer and calf on the planet? Gigantic cow corks?
At some point–though exactly where or when doesn’t yet seem apparent–the global warming madness has to stop. It stinks.
9 commentsDemocratic Drama
It’s over a year before the first votes will be cast in the presidential primary. But, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are already ramping up the rhetoric, this time over who gets the support of big money Democratic donors. Ridiculous candidate posturing, especially this early in the race, makes me want to change the channel. Latest Britney gossip, anyone?
2 commentsBill Rant
I know there are more important bills out there. But this one has me at a loss. Apparently, we have to pass laws so that state agencies will talk to one another. HB 2689 requires the Dept. of Transportation and the Parks and Recreation Dept. to include the Travel Information Council when they plan to close or relocate rest areas.
The TIC is the self-supporting state agency that “links Oregon motorists with businesses.” They put up those “Food/Lodging Next Exit” signs, staff the state’s welcome centers and facilitate advertising at rest areas.
Because they take care of the advertising at rest areas, doesn’t it make sense that they be at the table to discuss closing or relocating rest areas? Shouldn’t they be the first to know? There must have been communication problems, or the TIC wouldn’t have requested the bill. I hope it passes. But, why on earth do we need this bill to make sure that state agencies check in with one another?
No commentsPoll Released Today
House Republicans today released a Jan. 23 Moore Information poll showing a strong majority of Oregonians remain strongly opposed to raising taxes. The poll was released as the Oregon Legislature considers tax increases, mostly on small businesses.
In the statewide survey of 500 Oregonians, 68 percent of respondents said they believed “state government has the money it needs, it just needs to spend it more wisely,” while only 28 percent believed state government “needs to raise taxes to fund additional programs.”
“The Moore poll should send a strong message to those at the Capitol who think it’s OK to raise taxes and spend money at unsustainable levels,” said House Republican Leader Wayne Scott (R-Canby). “Oregonians are not convinced that state government is spending its money wisely, and pursuing tax increases will not restore the Legislature’s credibility. Oregonians will remember those who stood their ground for responsible government, and those who supported tax increases out of political expediency.”
Too bad 68% of the legislature doesn’t seem opposed to new taxes this year.
No commentsDick Morris visits Eugene, predicts a GOP primary race between Gingrich and Giuliani.
Former Clinton adviser and political prognosticator, Dick Morris, visited Eugene Monday speaking at a dinner held by Lane County Republicans. In his weekly column in Congressional news rag, The Hill, Morris wrote Wednesday, “Episodically, I just addressed a 450-person Lincoln Day dinner of the Lane County Republican Party in Eugene, Ore. A show of hands brought these results: Giuliani, 50 percent; Gingrich, 30 percent; McCain, 6 percent; Romney, 4 percent. A few days before, a speech to an Orlando investors group produced similar results.”
Morris writes, “Enter Newt. Hungry for new ideas and desperate after losing Congress, Republican voters seem to be rallying to the only real genius in the race — the former Speaker. The statute of limitations seems to have expired on his personal scandals and Gingrich is striking a responsive chord among conservatives.“
Morris, of course, has been plenty wrong before and nobody should be placing their bets on the GOP nom just yet. Remember, in 2004 he predicted that Hillary Clinton would face a “nightmare” in her 2006 senate race against moderate Republican candidate Jeanine Pirro. Obviously, Pirro was so schooled by Clinton that her campaign collapsed after just two months.
Dick Morris-right or wrong-will make predictions, but only time will tell.
5 comments
