by Bill Post

Shenanigans at the Oregon Senate – HB 4045 Moves On

Here we go again.

House Bill 4045, the CHL privacy bill has now been officially moved from Senate President Peter Courtney’s desk to the Rules Committee. Rep. Kim Thatcher had a good agreement with Sen. Floyd Prozanski, the chair of the Judiciary Committee, enough agreement to get some minor amendments put in that she could live with and that he would promise to move it to the floor for a vote. Instead, for whatever reason, Sen. Courtney moved it to Rules….. my suspicion is he knew it would go to a Senate floor vote and is trying to kill it.

So, now after putting a ton of pressure on Prozanski and Courtney, and it worked by the way, we need to contact these members of the Rules Committee and apply MORE pressure.

Rep. Thatcher is satisfied with the amendments and the CHL holder’s information will be private! It’s a good bill.

Please contact these members:

Senator Diane Rosenbaum (D) – Chair: sen.dianerosenbaum@state.or.us 503-986-1700
Senator Ted Ferrioli (R) – Chair: sen.tedferrioli@state.or.us 503-986-1950
Senator Jason Atkinson (R): sen.jasonatkinson@state.or.us 503-986-1702
Senator Lee Beyer (D): sen.leebeyer@state.or.us 503-986-1706
Senator Ginny Burdick (D): sen.ginnyburdick@state.or.us 503-986-1718

You want them to pass the bill with the amendments as is to the Senate floor for a vote as soon as possible. Keep in mind that Burdick and Rosenbaum are EXTREME anti-gun, stress to her that this is all about privacy.

We have a GOOD friend and advocate in Sen. Ferrioli.

Please work hard on this tomorrow friends! We need this done this year! Rep. Kim Thatcher has broke her back on this and more! Thank you!

Catch The Bill Post Radio Show every day at noon on AM 1430 KYKN, listen live on the Internet or listen to replays at http://www.bpshow.com

Oregon House Republicans

On Thursday, February 16, 2012, the House Rules Committee heard testimony from Debra Berkley, a Clackamas County resident whose dog agility business was shut down by Oregon’s land use laws.

After Debra lays out her story, Rep. Matt Wingard (R-Wilsonville) and Rep. Tim Freeman (R-Roseburg) attempt to confront the bureaucracy and draw attention to the human and economic costs of the nation’s most restrictive land use laws.

Right From the Start

If the Republican Party thinks it is going to defeat Pres. Barack Obama, it better get its act together. Right now it is being led around by the nose by America’s mainstream media (a group that overwhelming supports Mr. Obama) and they are having a field day – particularly during the televised “debates.”

Every national poll indicates that “jobs and the economy” are the most important issues on the minds of America’s voters. But the Republican candidates – at the prompting of the mainstream media and with the support of the hallelujah chorus of the Republicans’ pockets of single issue voters – have virtually abandoned serious discussion of how they would fix the economy and remove the barriers to increased employment. Instead they seize upon the nuances of “social conservatism” to beat the hell out of each other and to pander incessantly to those who are waiting to be offended by the innocent remarks of others.

The latest incident of this is some backwater bigot from Florida – who supports Sen. Rick Santorum – has stated that 22 percent of Americans will not vote for Gov. Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon. Apparently that figure is derived from a Gallup Poll conducted in June of 2011. Of course, the national media and Mr. Santorum’s supporters, focus on the 22 percent who indicate they would not vote for a Mormon instead of the 78 percent who say that they would vote for a candidate who is Mormon.

But here is the rub – and a critical fact that the mainstream media chooses to ignore – there is a critical difference in the resistance to Mormons based on political ideology. The June 2011 Gallup Poll indicates that when you look at the political breakdown of those opposing Mormons you find that among Democrats the figure is 27 percent while among Republicans it is only 18 percent. Religious bigotry among Democrats is fifty percent higher than among Republicans – so much for tolerance among Democrats. (Independents are much more aligned with Republican values on this issue at 19 percent.) Here’s the important part of this. The twenty-seven percent of knuckle dragging Democrats who wouldn’t vote for a Mormon wouldn’t vote for a Republican regardless of his/her religious persuasion. And the eighteen percent of Republicans who wouldn’t vote for a Mormon, aren’t going to vote for Mr. Obama whose religious commitments – according to them – range from Muslim to the antichrist with few stops at Christianity

Just as a side note, when the June Gallup Poll is compared to a December 2007 Gallup poll we see that the opposition from Democrats to a Mormon has grown from 18 percent to the current 27 percent – further proof that “concern” about Mr. Romney’s faith is more about politics than it is about religion.

And one of the more bizarre turn of events in this mudfest over trivia is that many of these social conservatives turn toward Rep. Ron Paul as their preferred choice – apparently unaware that Mr. Paul supports abortion on demand (just so long as the government doesn’t pay for it), abolition of drug laws (just so long as the government doesn’t pay for it), and gay union (just so long as the government doesn’t pay for it).

The fact of the matter is that there is very little difference amongst the Republican field of candidates (with the exception of Mr. Paul) on social issues. All of the candidates would reinstate the ban on taxpayer funded abortions. All of the candidates would effectively dismantle Obamacare and work for its repeal. All of the candidates oppose gay marriage. All of the candidates oppose legalization of drugs. And most importantly, all of the nuances surrounding these issues disappear when any of the candidates are compared to Mr. Obama.

And finally, the polls conducted on issues such as this assume a wide and hypothetical field of choices amongst the respondents. Assuming that there is no significant third party challenge, the choice this November is between two people – Mr. Obama and the Republican nominee. So while all those single issue voters wring their hands over whether Mr. Romney is a Mormon, whether Speaker Newt Gingrich was faithful to his wife, whether Rep. Michelle Bachmann was a submissive wife, whether Sen. Santorum stands for aspirin for contraception, or whether Rep. Ron Paul would leave America’s military might constricted – oops, that is a real issue – the real issues remain jobs and the economy. And on those particular issues Mr. Obama has an abysmal track record.

Despite the focus of the mainstream media on the unemployment numbers in an effort to boost Mr. Obama’s standing on the economy, the fact of the matter is that the unemployment numbers are virtually meaningless because of the significant number of people who have given up looking or who have exhausted their unemployment benefits. The real data on economic growth tracks the number of jobs created and by any measure at any time during Mr. Obama’s three plus years in office that number has either declined or failed to keep pace with the number of new entrants to the job market. The economic recovery remains anemic, the national debts continues to increase at a staggering rate and the only reason that the inflation numbers remain modest is because they refuse to include the price for gasoline or food. It is time to focus like a laser on these issues and these issues alone.

It is way past time for the Republican candidates to continue to curry favor with the mainstream media by pandering to questions and issues that remain divisive amongst Republicans. One only has to remember Sen. John McCain who gained media popularity because of his willingness to stab Pres. George W. Bush in the back at the drop of a hat. But when the race came down to Mr. McCain and a Democrat – any Democrat – those same media personalities turned on him like the biased jackals they are.

I recognize that the Republican candidate’ stump speeches focus on the differences between Republicans and Mr. Obama, but the media attention to the social issues – and the candidates willing participation – has distracted voters from the real agenda. The accusations – real and perceived – on social issues dominate the headlines. The Republican candidates would do themselves and all of us a favor by simply refusing to respond further to these questions and turn the conversation back to what is really important – jobs and the economy.

If Mr. Obama is re-elected, the blame lies largely with the Republican candidates for having let the mainstream media manipulate the agenda.

by Rep. Sal Esquivel (R-Medford)

Increasing State Timber Harvests Will Create Jobs for Rural Oregon

Oregon’s most abundant resource, timber, is being underutilized. This lack of productivity has hurt Oregon’s economy and our rural communities. The federal government owns 60 percent of Oregon’s forest land, and many in Southern Oregon understand that Washington DC does a very poor job managing our forests. Timber harvest on federal lands has declined, leading to high unemployment in rural communities.

As Co-Chair of the House Agriculture and Natural Resource Committee, I have been working to advance measures that allow Oregonians to responsibly utilize our natural resources to improve our economy. While the Oregon Legislature can do little to affect federal timber policies, we can act to properly manage our state forests and put rural Oregonians back to work.

Under current law, the state only permits harvests on 60 percent of what’s allowable under the Forest Practices Act. With so many Oregonians out of work, I am one of many legislators who believe these harvesting levels are too low. House Republicans, in particular, have introduced legislation for the 2012 session that would increase both sustainable harvesting and job creation on these state lands.

Our measure would direct the state to increase harvest levels on state forests to 85 percent of harvestable timber, this measure can create jobs and generate new revenue for local governments. This represents a modest change to Oregon’s current policy, and the increased harvesting would continue to fall within Forest Practices Act guidelines. This solution would provide a reliable supply of timber and create real living wage jobs in communities across the state.

Normally, state forestry policy is established by the Governor and officials within the Department of Forestry. In recent years, the state has kept these harvesting levels low partly to appease the powerful environmental community. These policies have come at the expense of rural Oregonians who consistently suffer higher unemployment than their city counterparts.

Legislative action is necessary whenever state policies cause economic hardships for many of our citizens. The Legislature must act because higher harvestings levels are allowed under current management practices, but the State Department of Forestry has failed to adopt policies that manage state forest lands to achieve the greatest permanent value and put people back to work in the woods.

Once implemented, timber harvested on state land under our bill would account for less than 3 percent of all timber harvested in forests across the state. This is a very small and sustainable amount. In addition, the bill would provide a reliable supply of timber and create real living wage jobs in communities across the state. As the federal government continues its gross mismanagement of federal forest and O&C lands, our measure will increase tax revenues for counties, cities, and even increase funding for education.

As the Legislature moves toward adjournment of the 2012 session, we should do everything we can to create jobs for Oregonians. Any broad job-creation strategy that doesn’t include leveraging Oregon’s abundant natural resources will fail to help rural Oregon– precisely where jobs are needed the most.

by Lars Larson

Would you rather go to jail or violate your most closely held religious beliefs?

The President of the United States has cooked up quite a mess. His Health and Human Services Secretary, Kathleen Sibelius, has ordered that religious-based institutions must provide insurance for their workers;insurance that includes contraceptive care and abortion pills. Now that’s just dead wrong and we all know it.

It’s unconstitutional. In fact, it violates a law passed during the Clinton administration, okayed by Congress, and signed off by President Clinton himself. And yet this President thinks he can do it.

Well a group of religious leaders met with the President last week, and you know what they told him? They would sooner go to jail and violate the President’s new edict than violate their most fervently held religious beliefs.

Good for them, and shame on President Obama for setting up this problem up in the first place just to keep his pro-abortion friends happy.

For more Lars Larson, visit Lars’ web site

SALEM—The House of Representatives today approved legislation introduced by Reps. Patrick Sheehan (R-Clackamas) and Matt Wand (R-Troutdale) to facilitate job-creating development within designated urban areas of the Metro region.

HB 4090 allows an owner of property that’s located within an urban growth boundary to secure access to infrastructure services if the owner pays all the costs and is willing to be annexed by the service provider.  The bill’s sponsors say the bill helps property owners seeking to develop land but can’t connect to services because of various bureaucratic and political barriers.

“This bill offers a common sense fix that will create hundreds of new jobs within Metro’s urban growth boundary,” Rep. Sheehan said.  “It helps property owners seeking to develop land that’s adjacent to infrastructure service providers, but can’t access the services because it’s landlocked between various and competing local governments, special districts and planning zones. HB 4090 is consistent with land use planning that ensures growth is planned, land is used as intended, and jobs are created.”

Rep. Wand said legislative action is necessary when land use planning is inconsistent, and the patchwork of jurisdictions and regulations serve as a barrier to economic development and job creation.

“The Metro area has a comprehensive land use system that is complicated and expensive,” Rep. Wand said.  “If our urban land use planning is not meaningful, and if we have barriers that are preventing areas that are properly zoned to be developed, then we should pass measures such as this to ensure the system works and tax dollars are spent as intended.”

HB 4090 now moves to the State Senate for further consideration.

The rumors in the State Capitol and news media last week were that the Governor had torpedoed the Legislature’s Budget Rebalance Plan and the fragile agreement between the Democrat and Republican Co-Chairs of the Ways & Means Committee was in jeopardy. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Legislature has the responsibility to produce and maintain a balanced budget and the Co-Chairs of the Ways & Means Committee will do so, using both one-time measures and lasting government reforms.

With only seven business days remaining before the Legislature is scheduled to adjourn, this is to provide Oregonians with a status report.

First, I will clear up the apparent “dust-up” between Oregon’s Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch.

The founders of our nation and state created a form of government with inherent tension among its three branches. We remember from our civics class in school that, in general terms, the Legislature is elected by the voters to represent them in creating laws for the public good and to fund government operations. The Governor is elected as the State’s Chief Executive and the Executive Branch implements or “executes” the laws passed by and with funding from the Legislature. The Judiciary is to oversee a court system that resolves civil and criminal matters and determines the constitutionality of laws passed and enforced by the other two branches of government.

Two weeks ago the Co-Chairs, after weeks of serious and sometimes intense negotiations, presented a plan to Rebalance the State Budget.

The Budget Rebalance is necessary because some of the revenue assumptions made when the 2011-13 State Budget was passed last year failed to materialize. This has resulted in Oregon currently having a $201 million “budget hole.”

Part of the Co-Chairs’ plan included an agreement for approximately $30 million in state government “reforms.” For the purposes of the Rebalance, “reforms” can be defined as changes in the operations or structure of state government that will result in both short and long-term savings.

Before leaving office, Oregon’s previous Governor produced a Reset Cabinet Report. The Report sounded the same alarm I have been warning of for the past eight years—Oregon’s spending is unsustainable and its operations must be made more efficient, effective and economical.

The rising costs of state payroll expenses must be brought in line with the state’s revenue resources. According to Public Employment Retirement System (PERS) records, in 2006 Oregon had 38,000 employees and by 2011 the number of employees had increased to 47,000.

Oregon finds itself in a conundrum. While 9,000 state employees were added to the state’s payroll, Oregon’s revenue forecasts dropped by more than $4 billion.

Every family knows that when there is not enough money to pay its bills it must either raise revenue or decrease expenses. The same applies to state government. Experience has shown a government cannot tax its way out of a recession. Regardless of what economists are saying, Oregon’s unemployed, under-employed and foreclosed citizens testify to the fact. In Oregon the Great Recession is not over.

So, the Co-Chairs’ Rebalance Plan contains nearly $30 million of reforms—primarily coming from restructuring operations in the larger state agencies by eliminating many middle management and other positions that can no longer be afforded.

The current “flap” between the legislature and the Governor resulted from the Legislative Branch placing the Executive Branch in difficult position. The Co-Chairs requested the Governor and the Director of the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to compile a list of position cuts that would result in savings of approximately $28 million. Due to the time constraints of this one-month legislative session, those recommendations were needed in less than two weeks.

There are those in the Executive Branch who believe the Legislature has no authority to determine how many managers or supervisors agencies should have. The Legislative Branch retorts that all matters regarding “the purse” are within the constitutionally granted authority of the Legislative Branch. Such tension is to be expected—it is part of the “checks and balances” of our system of government. In fact, the U.S. Congress goes much further than our State Legislature. Congress, in many instances, actually dictates how many positions are allowed in a given agency or classification.

Michael Jordan, the Director of DAS, and his staff worked long hours trying to address the Legislature’s request, and were able to compile $7.5 million of the requested position cuts. The Co-Chairs are grateful for the herculean work performed by the dedicated staff at DAS and the agency directors in such a short time frame.

Notwithstanding how difficult our request has been, after reducing the needed reforms by $7.5 million, the Co-Chairs still need an additional $20 million in operational restructuring reforms to implement the Rebalance Plan.

To solve this challenge the Co-Chairs, through the analysts in the Legislative Fiscal Office (LFO), will be working with the Directors of agencies over the next few months to accomplish an organizational restructuring that will generate the needed financial savings and do so in a thoughtful and rational manner.

The agency directors will be allotted their agency’s share of the $28 million of needed reforms. They are to collaborate with LFO analysts and determine what changes in operational staffing will enable their agency to accomplish the needed savings while accomplishing their agency’s mission.

The Legislature is reducing the agency’s allocation for payroll and asking the Directors to suggest how they can “lean” or reorganize their operational structures as needed to accomplish their agency’s mission within the revised budget limitations. In sum, each agency is to achieve its savings without cutting programs or services.

To place the request for creative operational reforms in context, I asked an agency Director the question, “If your agency were being created today, how would you organize it to accomplish its mission within the allocated funds and collective bargaining contracts in place?”

In conclusion, with the dramatic and sustained reductions in revenue, Oregon has undergone a financial paradigm shift. Such long-term economic constraints make it clear. Operational reforms must be implemented. The Legislature understands this reality and will work with agencies to adjust budgets, staffing levels and operations accordingly.

This is an admirable goal, but linking it to ongoing subsidies virtually guarantees that it won’t be met. There is no reason for private companies to develop inexpensive technology when politicians keep giving away money each year for research.

We’ve already seen this approach fail in Oregon. In 1999, the state legislature passed a law requiring that most consumers pay a three percent surcharge on their monthly electric bills to subsidize “market transformation” for renewable energy. Legislators and lobbyists agreed that the tax – which came to be known as the “Public Purpose Charge” – would go away after ten years, at which time green power was expected to be cost-competitive with coal and natural gas.

The ten-year anniversary of the Public Purpose tax will arrive on March 1, and solar energy is still wildly uncompetitive with other sources. And not surprisingly, politicians have reneged on the promise to end the tax; it was quietly extended five years ago to 2026 by the legislature, with no public discussion. This will cost consumers billions of dollars.

Politicians never seem to learn: Subsidizing failure simply begets more failure.

Oregon Transformation

The Biscuit Wheels are Falling off the Gravy Train

TriMet proposed big changes at the agency last week to fill a $12 to $17 million budget hole, which will mean more pain for its customers.

Longer waits, higher fares, more transfers, and no more “free rail zone” or using the same ticket for going back the same way you came.

So does the budget crunch mean TriMet has less money than it did last year? Not quite.

TriMet’s operating budget is expanding $50 million this year, or 12 percent.

In fact, since 2007 TriMet’s operating funding has increased 28 percent or $103 million. TriMet’s total resources have increased 65 percent or $392 million over the same period.

So what is TriMet giving its customers in return?

Between 2007 and 2011, total miles driven by TriMet buses has decreased almost three million miles, while being offset by an increase of only 500,000 rail miles.

In total, TriMet had a decrease in service by 2.5 million miles.

More money, less service.

Source: www.trimet.org

“This is just housekeeping legislation.” The Oregon Legislative House Rules Committee is looking at HB 4174. One of the things covered in this bill is related to election security: Secretary of State Kate Brown’s continuing attempt to set aside ORS 254.483. She says this law, mandating the destruction of unused ballots at 8 PM on Election Day, is poorly written, confusing, and left over from election laws in force prior to the institution of vote by mail. The elections offices do not follow this law currently. Blank ballots are kept in the elections office throughout an election cycle.

While I applaud Kate Brown for wanting to be a good housekeeper, I feel obligated to point out a few things regarding our election practices.

A few years ago, several of us started focusing our efforts on observing the election procedures in Multnomah County. We enlisted the help of several Oregonians including Andrew Nisbet and his associate Robert McCullough of McCullough Research. McCullough Research discovered and investigated the Enron scandal from its office in Portland, Oregon. In 2010, they were kind enough to come and evaluate the electronic security of election practices in Multnomah County as a public service. Their report can be read here.  After their evaluation, they let the Multnomah County Elections Division know of their concerns. Since then, we have presented these findings to County Commissioners, the County Auditor, and State Legislators.

Oregon law provides a check to insure our elections are fair: a public test of the counting machines. Tabulation of the ballots is supposed to be electronically isolated from outside influences. The system is, except for the fact that an untested USB drive collects the report from the Unity Machine USB port each time the election results are updated. That USB drive is taken to the outer office and put in one of the untested PCs in the office. The results of the election are then disseminated to the public through the media and reported to the Secretary of State’s office. The same procedure is repeated each time there is an update. We observed a box of USB drives in the ballot counting room, just sitting on a shelf next to the Unity Machine. Are the USB drives reused? These USB drives and the outside PCs (which are connected to the Internet) are not part of the public test that establishes the security of the election. Robert McCullough advised me that this does not meet industry standard for security. He said “It is similar to leaving keys to a convertible car in the ignition, parking it outside on the curb, and walking away. No one may have stolen it yet, but it is vulnerable.”

ORS 254.074 says the Secretary of State must approve of the ‘secret security plan’ for the Elections Office or the election will not go forward. It is her duty to see that the process is secure. Much of the plan is unavailable to the public as it is part of a ”secret security plan’. If there are breaches in the security, the Secretary of State is not obligated to tell the public. (sub section 3)

If the Unity Machine were to become compromised by malware, as McCullough reports is possible, and if someone were to call for a recount, we would see if the results in the precinct boxes matched the Unity Machine report. That is a valid check. Except…. in a regular election in Multnomah County, there are tens of thousands of extra blank ballots at the elections office because ORS 254.483 is being purposefully ignored. Could these ballots be utilized for mischief, to alter the precinct box count? Additionally, another 30-40 thousand returned undeliverable ballots are kept as ‘archival documents’ for as long as 7 months after an election, each with a blank ballot inside. These ballots left in play leave our elections vulnerable to fraud.

Oregon Legislators must retain ORS 254.483 as the law. The Secretary of State needs to be required to follow it.  Our Unity Machine needs to be isolated electronically, USB drives removed and software inspected with both political parties present and able to see the software. There is a simple solution for obtaining the election results: a printer. Scan the printed results into the office PCs for dissemination to the public and the Secretary of State’s office.  Shred all blank ballots in the Election office at 8 PM on election night as the law requires. It’s time for some REAL housekeeping.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/254.html

(1) The county clerk shall destroy all unused absentee and regular ballots in the county clerk’s possession.
(2) Each county shall provide for the security of, and shall account for, unused ballots. [Formerly 254.475; 2007 c.154 §43]