Rep. Jeff Kropf Song: Bye Bye Rainy Day Pie!

In case you missed it during last week’s Special Session. Rep. Jeff Kropf did a perfect paraody of the famous “American Pie” song and sang it on the House floor. Kropf tied the song to the vote on taking new lottery funds destined for a reserve fund and instead spending them now. The song is below,

Bye Bye Rainey Day Pie
Words by Jeff Kropf,
Sung to the tune of American Pie, 4/20/06

Same old story, different day
For eight years now, I’ve heard you say.
Schools are broke, can’t save a dime.
It’s the day common sense died.

Chorus:
And they were singing, bye, bye my rainy day pie,
Drove my school kids in their buses to the special session fry
And them good ole lobbyists are toasting champagne and wine
Sayin’ “Today we killed the rainy day pie”
“Spend it all no rainy day pie”

So come on we could have saved it in a rainy day fund
To help our schools when recession comes
You won’t look on down the road
It’s the day, common sense died.

Chorus

An the three things I hold dear the most
My principles, passion and common sense,
They just took the last train to Portland coast
It’s the day common sense died.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 09:27 | Posted in Measure 37 | 9 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • David Grappo

    I think that what happened with the lottery funds explains why there will never ever be a “rainy day fund.” As soon as the politicians see that there is money to spend – they will spend it. There will always be an available “emergency.”

    Anyone who thinks our Legislature will ever create a rainy day fund is singing the wrong song. Try: The Great Pretender!

  • Bob

    I agree, there will be no rainy day fund until and unless the following things happen:

    1. Get rid of the kicker (which the voters would proabbly reject).
    2. Stabilize the tax structure, cut the income tax out and replace it with a consumption tax. Heck, maybe the 10th time is the charm.

  • Steve Plunk

    Bob, would please explain how getting rid of the kicker or instituting a sales tax would move us toward a rainy day fund? Both would increase the available money that the legislature could spend (available money certainly would be spent).

  • Bob

    It would if you insituted a rule with getting rid of the kicker than $ that would have previously gotten kicked back went into a rainy day fund.

    As for the sales tax, it would mean more revenue and make Portland more business-friendly.

  • Brad

    Compromise: Add a rainy day fund and keep the kicker. RDF would be capped at 15% of the previous bi-ennium budget (and draw interest). Access to the fund requires 2/3 legis. approval and majority voter approval.

    Once the cap is met, same rules for kicker would apply, including any extra interest earned by the RDF in excess of the cap.

  • Just to mention it.

    The ballot measure coming down the pipe that caps the state’s budget growth by inflation and population would go along way towards establishing a rainy day fund.

    All excess funds above inflation and population growth would then be rolled over into a fund that would bear interest.

    This is the only proposal that I’ve seen that I believe would actually cause a rainy day fund. Everything else is just lip service for more revenue (like someone deeply in debt pleading for an extension so they can have a cushion).

  • David Grappo

    I don’t think limiting access to a rainy day fund by requiring voter approval solves anything. Measures 28 and 30 are perfect examples. The legislature adopted irresponsible budgets prior to each of these measures being submitted to the voters. This created an “emergency” requiring new taxes, according to the legislature. After the voters rejected each of these measures, life went on and the legislature simply learned to live with the funds it had.

    A rainy day fund, even requiring voter approval, would cause the same kind of “emergency” to occur with every budget biennium. As long as the funds are available the legislature will always be wanting to tap into them.

    I think the whole rainy-day-fund concept is based upon a fallacy. The idea is supposedly to create something called “stable funding.” Well, if you look at the state budget over the past 10 (50?) years, you will see one constant factor: the budget always goes up. Sometimes it goes up faster than at other times, but it always goes up. We obviously have already achieved “stable funding” for the state budget. There are no ups and downs. It always goes up. How much more stable can you get?

    If the legislature could learn to cope with the constant growth we now have, there would be no need to talk about “stable funding” and no need for a rainy-day-fund.

  • It was attatching the rainy day fund to the limit on the size of the budget’s growth that I like.

    The essence of its appeal to me is that you make a TABOR like initiative more swingable as you speak right to the talking points of the service based budgeting crowd. You take their message from the last decades and corrupt it into a statewide spending cap.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)