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 

“It is shocking to me to see how outraged some politicians and the media are about the possibility a government agency might violate someone’s civil rights by listening in on a private phone conversation (in the course of protecting national security), while those same people seem to have no concern whatsoever when government violates property rights, our most basic civil rights, by imposing land use reglations that literally ’steal’ the use and value of private property to provide benefits to the public such as opensace and wildlife habitat.

While certainly protection for rights to privacy in phone conversations is important, the protection of property rights (rights to one’s property) is just as or even mor important.

Property rights are the cornerstone of our entire economic system, and without them our other civil rights could not survive.”

-Bill Moshofsky, President, Oregonians in Action

The Oregonian is reporting that on a party-line vote, the House approved sending a vastly complicated 23 page “fix” to Measure 37 to the voters.  (Remember, Measure 37 was the 3 page bill passed by 35 of Oregon’s 36 counties.) 
 
Representative Susan Morgan (R-Green) said, “Measure 37 was passed because Oregonians were tired of heavy-handed government planners dictating what they could or couldn’t do with their own land.  This legislation vastly and unnecessarily complicates the Measure 37 process, which the Legislature should have clarified and implemented after the initiative was passed.”
 
According to Senator Dave Nelson (R-Pendleton), here’s part of what HB 3540 would do.

• Modifications to the process for compensation of landowners for lost value due to land use regulations created in Measure 37;
• Allows persons who have already submitted a claim for compensation on land entirely outside an urban growth boundary and city limits to select one of three pathways – the unconditional path or “express lane” and which allows the claimant to establish up to three home sites on the property, the conditional pathway allows the claimant to establish between four and ten home sites on the property, or the vested rights pathway, which allows the claimant to continue to pursue their claim under M 37 if they have a vested right as of the effective date of the measure;
• It specifies requirements for the express land and conditional pathways;
• It establishes timelines for electing which pathway to pursue and for the processing of claims;
• Provides for transferability of development rights granted through the express and conditional pathways and specifies that development must be carried out within 10 years following the transfer of the property to a new owner;
• It revises the Measure 37 process for claims against future land use regulations;
• Restricts claims under Measure 37 to regulations affecting home sites, farm or forest practices;
• Limits relief under Measure 37 to development rights for home sites for dwellings or monetary compensation.
• Creates a position of Compensation & Conservation Ombudsman, to be appointed by the Land Conservation & Development Commission to assist landowners with submission of claims; and
• It clarifies other provisions within M 37.

According to the Oregonian, the bill also bans all commercial development, and many claimants would be limited to three homes.

Despite the fact that voters overwhelming approved Measure 7, and Measure 37 the legislature is forcing the bill back to the voter’s once again.  The special election, which will be held in September or November will cost taxpayers $1.6-1.8 million dollars.
This direct affront to Oregon voters by House Democrats is unbelievable.  When Representatives like Arnie Roblan, (D-Coos Bay) whose district approved of Measure 37 by 69% choose to follow party leadership instead of the will of their district, its clear that its time for a change.
 
It looks like Oregonians will have to lay the smack down on “heavy-handed government planners” once again. 

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.