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 

With two months left in the 2007 Legislative Session it is time to take a look back at what has been accomplished so far.  The first major thing we did was to create a “rainy day fund”.  We did this by stealing part of the kicker refund and we called the action historic.  It seems we had forgotten the rainy day fund for education we had created in 2003 which currently has a value three times as great as the new one.  As this new fund is actually a state savings account I argued we should create it the way most people and businesses do by not spending all of our income and putting some aside. With 2.5 billion more dollars to spend this would seem like a reasonable approach, but it was not to be.  Next we created a state health insurance pool for teachers.  Every school in my Senate District told me this would actually cost them more money, but the bill moved through the Legislature and was signed by the Governor.  The reason being this was the teachers union’s number one priority and political payback was due.  We asked for the ability to get an independent analysis of the actual cost or savings and were denied the opportunity. Next was the renewable energy bill.  This had the potential to be a great piece of legislation, but ended up falling short.  First Oregon will be the only state in the nation not to count hydro power as renewable.  Additionally any renewable energy facility sited before 1996 also would not count.  Thirdly the bill drives too much towards wind power which is not dependable as the wind does not always blow.  There are some exciting alternative energy sources out there such as wave energy and methane conversion, but the technology is several years away.  This bill assumes policy can drive technology, which is a flawed concept and will end up costing all of us more on our electric bills. 

Next was the update of the bottle bill.  We will now be including water bottles and all carbonated drink bottles in what can be redeemed at the grocery store.  This is considered a victory for recycling.  In reality we are impacting 1% of the waste stream and 3% of the litter stream and putting more of a burden on the private sector.  I have argued for the creation of a real recycling program so we could recover all glass, plastic and metal from the waste stream.  If we truly want recycling we should take a comprehensive approach and not just nibble around the edges. There are several other bills I could mention, but to save space I will stop here for now.  All of the issues listed above have merit and are issues I would have liked to have been able to support.  Unfortunately the agenda seems to be driven by politics, sound bites and head lines.  All of these issues have been put on the fast track without much opportunity to fully explore the underlying policy implications.  It is the job of the Legislature to make sound decisions on public policy.  We have fallen short of that objective.  I find it very frustrating to have to oppose issues I would like to support simply because the legislation is poorly written creating serious unintended consequences.  The people of Oregon deserve more from the people they elect to serve them.  I will continue to work hard to try and find common ground solutions on the issues yet to be resolved.   

Sincerely, 

Senator Jeff Kruse    

A bill which would have required 65% of teachers at charter schools be state certified appears to be dead.  Sponsor Sen. Vicki Walker (D-Eugene) pulled SB 621 from the Senate floor because it did not have the votes to pass.
 
Originally, the bill would have required that all teachers at charter schools be certified, instead of the current 50%. 
 
There is little correlation between teacher certification and student achievement, as most private and home schools prove year after year. 
 
There are 70 publicly funded charter schools in the state.  They operate independently and are providing a valuable education alternative for Oregon families.
 
This regulation was unnecessary, and intrusive, and I’m pleased that even in the heavily democrat Senate, the bill didn’t have the votes to pass.
 
Read more in the Oregonian or the Statesman Journal.

In a press release, Rural Senate Republicans react to the passage of SB 694, which makes it a crime to confine a pig.

“Where is the vision of hope and opportunity for our state? Oregonians are looking for more from Salem than just another piece of pork,” said Senator Ted Ferrioli (R-John Day). “The day we start regulating how a farmer can best go about his business should be the day pigs fly.”

Senate Bill 694 says that a pig must be able to “turn around freely” and “lie down with legs extended.” Violation of this statute carries a steep penalty of one year’s imprisonment and a $6,250 fine. All this for a practice not used in Oregon.

“Since when is Salem the expert on best farm practices?” said Senator Doug Whitsett (R-Klamath Falls), a veterinarian. “This is another example of over-regulation and unnecessary lawmaking. We should be doing the people’s business, which is Oregon classrooms, public safety, and healthy kids.”

Today is the 81^st day of the Oregon legislature’s 2007 session.  If Senator Jason Atkinson (R-Grants Pass) has his way, by this time in 2009 school districts around the state will know exactly how much money they’ll have for their next school year. 
 
SJR 16 would require the legislature to pass the budget for k-12 schools by 81^st day of legislative session, or to lose their pay. 
 
Why 81 days?  Here’s what Senator Atkinson has to say:
 
Well to be honest, it’s a little art, somewhat out of my hat, but all very generous.  81 days is 21 more days than other states like Washington, Utah, and Idaho who can pass their entire state budget in 60 days.
 
Special interests tell me, “Senator Atkinson, if we wait until the revenue forecast we’d get more money.”  Let me tell every Oregonian one thing: that’s not true.  We know roughly how much education will get in January. The revenue forecast in my experience has never changed the k-12 budget one dime, and the delay is for politicians and special interests to beat each other over the heads with and make campaign fodder for the next round.
 
Imagine if you bought groceries, went to the movies, got back from vacation or clothes shopping, bought a new car, and then paid your mortgage seven months late every two years.  In Salem, its how its always been done.   No wonder Oregonians don’t trust us to manage their money. 

Over the weekend, the Oregonian’s editorial board recommended that the state pass HJR 43, which would allow election day voter registration.
 
“Students and young adults change residences more frequently than older, more established Oregonians and many pay less attention to elections until late in the campaign cycle,” said Representative Ben Cannon (D-Portland).  “Oregon’s early registration cutoff means that many young people learn too late that they are not registered to vote and are consequently disenfranchised from our democracy.”
 
Same day registration does seem reasonable – after all, isn’t voter participation what makes our country work?
 
But, if you, like me, have ever been to the Multnomah County Election office on voting day, you know how wild it is already.  People who need replacement ballots line up out the door to vote, and workers are doing their best to keep up with demand.  Allowing same day voter registration would only increase the confusion and long lines.  And, do we really want people to vote who had no idea the election was even happening?
 
I know we have a statewide voter file now, but it seems this bill would increase fraudulent registrations.  Would there be enough time to check out that the social security number or driver’s license of every person in that line stretching out the door? 
 
I’m all for increasing voter participation, but I also want to make sure that the people voting are actually eligible.

At 9:30 pm Monday night the Senate Judiciary Committee passed Senate Bill 2 to the floor. The bill would grant minority status to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered individuals.

In five hours of testimony, nearly 100 people had a chance to testify (basically equal numbers on each side). Nearly every person opposed to the bill seemed concerned about the religious exemption; yet, when the committee voted on the bill, they gave no opportunity for amendments.

Here are just two of the problems that I see with SB 2:

1. SB 2 contains inadequate religious protection. Under the bill religious organizations could be legally forced to hire people based on their sexual orientation.

2. It also allows judges to define the primary purpose of a church. If a church is sued for not hiring someone based on their sexual orientation, to determine fault the judge must decide whether the position in question is par of the primary purpose of the church or religious organization. What is a religious organization’s primary purpose? Won’t it differ among organizations? How will a judge decide.

In one of the more shocking parts of the evening, Senator Vicki Walker (D-Eugene) went so far to state that, if she had her way, there wouldn’t be a religious exemption at all. I’m paraphrasing here, but she basically said that only the Constitution was keeping her from asking that churches never be exempt from any law.

The bill will likely be voted on in the Senate in the next few days. I’ll try to keep you updated on its progress.

In his Chuck Colson’s BreakPoint Commentary yesterday he talked about The Jihad Against Pregnancy Care Centers, and charges that resource centers that don’t offer or refer for abortion “aren’t playing fair.”

Are pregnancy care centers playing fair? That depends on where you stand. Clearly, the abortion industry thinks it’s not fair that women are increasingly choosing childbirth over abortion. They think it’s not fair that pregnancy care centers tell women the truth about the physical, emotional, and spiritual after-effects of abortion. They think it’s not fair that pregnancy care centers are equipping themselves with ultrasound machines that allow women to see their tiny, unborn babies in action: a boy sucking his thumb, or a little girl turning somersaults.

America’s abortion rate is at its lowest point since 1993. Clearly, the abortion industry is running scared. Pregnancy care centers—with compassion, mercy, and the truth—are changing the hearts of abortion-minded women.

It looks like Oregon pregnancy care centers will be facing their own battles soon enough. Here’s the opening text of SB 776, introduced at the request of Planned Parenthood:
Whereas ‘alternative-to-abortion organizations,’ also called
‘crisis pregnancy centers,’ misinform and mislead women to deter
or to delay them from having abortions; and
Whereas there are 51 alternative-to-abortion organizations or
crisis pregnancy centers operating in Oregon; and
Whereas some crisis pregnancy centers intentionally choose
their names to mislead women into believing that the centers
offer a wide range of family planning and abortion care when they
do not; and
Whereas in order to confuse their clients and capitalize on
their patients’ confusion, crisis pregnancy centers design their
facilities to look like health care facilities and locate the
facilities near clinics that offer family planning and abortion
care; and
Whereas many crisis pregnancy centers not only mislead women
about abortion care but also will not provide information about birth control…

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.