A couple of weeks ago we posted this letter from Senator Jeff Kruse.  The letter was insightful, and more straightfoward than we’re used to hearing from Salem.  Today, Senator Kruse followed up with this:

I received some very interesting responses to the last letter I sent out and some of them deserve a response.  First if it sounded like I was complaining, I was.  But I do this from the perspective of the fact the Democrats won the majority in both Houses and have therefore earned the right to run their own agenda.  I just don’t happen to agree with much of what they are doing.  After the Governor was re-elected he reorganized his staff.  His new chief of staff was the lobbyist for the teacher’s union and his assistant chief of staff was the head of the AFL-CIO which coordinates the other public employee unions.  So it is not surprising to see such a pro union agenda.  A union’s main purpose is to grow and sustain itself.  In the case of public employee unions this can only be achieved by growing government.  This mission runs contrary to the agenda of someone like me who would like to see more efficiency in government.  A prime example of the direction we should be going was uncovered by the Oregonian newspaper last fall.  Their research showed Oregon to have a significantly higher number average of mid management staff in the Department of Human Resources.  In fact, their report showed if we reduced staff to just the national average we could save 200 million dollars a year.  This savings level could fully fund our mental health delivery system and yet we will see no action as it would eliminate government jobs. 

 

 

In my last letter I expressed frustration with the new version of the bottle bill.  My opinion is we should not be dumping more of the waste stream on grocery stores and should be looking more towards a real recycling system.  There has been a new development on this front.  After the bill (SB 707) passed the Senate the grocery industry came forward with both a proposal for a comprehensive recycling system and a 60 million dollar commitment to get it started.  This is exactly the direction I think we should be going.  For reasons I can’t understand the leadership of the Legislature has rejected the offer.  I guess redeeming water bottles is more important than establishing a real program. 

 

 

We have also spent a great deal of time discussing Measure 37 or land use reform.  In the opinion of the Governor and Legislative leadership the people of Oregon did not know what they were voting for when they passed the measure.  To this end they have proposed sending a measure out to the ballot which would basically overturn Measure 37.  At this point this effort has been stalled because they don’t want it to appear to be partisan, but no Republicans will support it.  They are now trying to just pass a law repealing Measure 37 without going to the people, but even some of the Democrats cannot support this plan.  I hope it fails as I do believe Oregonians knew exactly what they were voting for. 

 

 

The last issue I want to bring up in this letter is gay rights (SB 2 and HB 2007).  I do not believe in discrimination and I also believe what people do in their private lives is none of government’s business.  But I opposed both measures and I want you to know why.  My main objections to SB 2 were the fact it gives protected class status to people based on behavior and puts religious and fraternal organizations at risk of a law suit for simply following their beliefs.  Dr. Martin Luther King’s widow was quoted saying “I know many people who used to be gay but I don’t know anyone who used to be black.”  I think this sums up the purpose for a protected class designation and with this bill we are going a step too far.  The bill also has the potential of requiring the teaching of alternative lifestyles in our public schools.  HB 2007 deals with legal rights and might have been a good bill if it also talked about legal rights for all rather than just homosexual couples.   

 

 

But the core issue here goes beyond these two bills. It is the fact we are moving farther away from a society based on moral principles to a society based on “social relativism”.  When no one is responsible or accountable for their actions we are in jeopardy as a country.  The result of this shift can be seen in an increase in teen pregnancy, alcohol and drug abuse, teen violence, increased divorce rates, and most other social problems facing our society.  In my opinion strong families and strong communities can go along way towards solving most of the social problems facing us.  I also believe without a strong moral foundation neither of these can exist.  I choose to take a stand for American values and against the progressive movement.  In many ways our future is at stake. 

 

 

Sincerely, 

 

 

Senator Jeff Kruse 

  

 

| Category: M37, Legislature