Wall Street Journal calls Oregon vote a Tax Ambush

Taxpayer Ambush in Oregon –The public unions win in Portland
Wall Street Journal Editorial Board

It’s not often that citizens vote for higher taxes, but 54% of Oregonians have done precisely that. In a rolling month-long referendum by mail that ended Tuesday, they approved some $700 million in tax hikes on business and wealthy residents. The highest income tax rate in the state moves to 11% from 9%, which will give Oregon close to the highest rate in the nation. (New York City residents pay 12.6%.) This ballot outcome runs contrary to the current public mood about spending and taxes, so it’s worth exploring how it happened.

First, a deluge of money. Local and national public employee unions bankrolled the “yes” campaign, with a $6.5 million blitz in TV and radio ads. That was $2 million more than the business community and taxpayer advocates raised. The cash helped the tax increase roll up a 71% margin in the liberal precincts in and around Portland, even as it lost in most of the rest of the state.The union message was also as clever as it was disingenuous: All of these taxes will be paid by someone else, such as Wall Street bankers, out-of-state credit card companies, CEOs. Only the richest 2.5% will pay a little more in taxes, the unions also claimed.

The reality is that these taxes will be absorbed by employers who sign worker paychecks””from Nike Inc. to the corner grocer. Two-thirds of those hit with the new 11% tax rate are small and medium-sized business owners. Phil Knight of Nike dubbed the tax initiatives Oregon’s “assisted suicide” for business. The real victims of these taxes won’t be wealthy business owners, who can always move away or shelter income, but less mobile Oregonians who will find it harder to get or keep a job.

One national consequence of the Oregon vote is that we are likely to see unions finance more of these tax-the-rich campaigns in other states with big deficits. Public employee unions have a lucrative racket: They essentially leverage the tax dollars they receive in dues from the salaries and benefits of their members to lobby for more tax dollars to secure even fatter pensions and pay.

The teachers unions exulted yesterday that Oregonians voted to “protect our schools and vital public services.” What was really protected was the $83,402 a year average in pay and benefits to Oregon state workers, 30% higher than what private workers receive. This is bankrupting states like Oregon, California, New York and New Jersey. On the other hand, Oregon’s folly will be some other state’s gain.

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

Posted by at 09:18 | Posted in Measure 37 | 64 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • eagle eye

    In Oregon, it’s called an election. And the WSJ guys are sore losers.

    • Rupert in Springfield

      Oh Puh-Leeeese, commenting on the results of an election hardly makes the WSJ a sore loser.

      What? After Bush 2 won all the libs were supposed to either shut up or be gung-ho Bush? After BO won Republicans were supposed to all of a sudden be just giddy?

      Get real.

      • eagle eye

        Oh go puh-leeese yourself with the indignation.

        Commenting on the election is one thing, calling it an “ambush” is another.

        Nobody was ambushed, it was a clear electoral victory for the pro-tax people. Saying that it “runs contrary to the current public mood” makes the WSJ the disingenuous party. The current public mood in Oregon was to give the anti-tax side a good shellacking.

        • Rupert in Springfield

          >Oh go puh-leeese yourself with the indignation.

          Indignation? More like disbelief.

          Your union buddies won, get over it and learn to take a little criticism.

          The WSJ editorialized about this issue prior to the election, it seems pretty reasonable they would do so afterwards as well, with an analysis for the national implications of the vote.

          >Saying that it “runs contrary to the current public mood” makes the WSJ the disingenuous party.

          Oh good lord. Ok, so you are maintaining that you read that to mean the public mood locally, not nationally? That’s really a little absurd.

          The WSJ is not a local paper – If you thought they were speaking about the local mood, as you indicate in this statement:

          “The current public mood in Oregon was to give the anti-tax side a good shellacking. ”

          Then you are the one who is being totally disingenuous.

          As a national paper the WSJ was clearly speaking about the national mood, and in the wake of the MA election and two governor elections clearly they are right.

          For you to contort that into an analysis of the local mood is where the disingenuousness occures here.

          Frankly this is a case of a commentary being read by a guy who is looking for any opportunity to be a sore winner and nothing more.

          • eagle eye

            For an outfit that is supposedly a national institution, the WSJ sure took a lot of interest in poor little ol’ Oregon’s provincial affairs, the “ambush” by the union “racket” that supposedly goes against the current public mood.

            But wait. “One national consequence of the Oregon vote is that we are likely to see unions finance more of these tax-the-rich campaigns in other states with big deficits.” So they are worried, very worried about the national implications.

            They can be as critical as they want, but they sure sound like sore losers to me.

            If they want to call it an “ambush”, that’s their privilege, but it looks to me like the people of Oregon have spoken, and the WSJ people don’t like what the people said.

            And I voted against the tax increases. I think it would be a good idea for the anti-tax people in Oregon to engage in some reflection. Because if they keep going the same way, they’re going to lose again and again and again and again.

            A good example is GOP head Bob Tiernan who basically called the Oregon voters “stupid” and blamed the unions for “buying” the election. This is not the way to move forward.

          • Steve Plunk

            My take is the proven tactic of holding education hostage worked again. The unions and the state government itself both love to put public education first in line for cuts during any fiscal crisis. If we could ever get a proper set of priorities in place perhaps the voters wouldn’t feel like they’re hurting kids with a no vote.

            Commenting on the election immediately afterward is part of what opinion pages are meant for, it’s not being a sore loser. A sore loser is one who still gripes about the 2000 election and the Supreme Court’s involvement. There are still those malcontents out there.

            We will live with the results of this election but we could have lived better had the outcome been different.

          • Dian

            If only they would use the money to teach our kids to read and write. We know it doesn’t go to education, it goes to the educators which in turn share with the union

          • eagle eye

            The teachers expect to be paid, strange idea that!

          • dian

            I have no problem with them being paid, but they need to do what they’re being paid for. That is teach our kids. Look around. Retirement is great, but it causes you to miss seeing the forest for the trees.

          • eagle eye

            You must be confusing me with someone else. The retired prof?

            But back to education. I guess you don’t think the teachers are doing their jobs well. To say that they’re going to spend the money on the “educators, not on education” is a kind of weird way to put it.

            From what I can tell — test scores and other things — in Oregon they’re doing their job not better and not worse than in the past, the past few decades.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            >A good example is GOP head Bob Tiernan who basically called the Oregon voters “stupid” and blamed the unions for “buying” the election. This is not the way to move forward.

            Well, I would totally agree with you there.

            I just got back from making the rounds at the steel yard. I was stunned at the number of people who first of all had no concept that the taxes were retroactive and second of all had no idea how a corporation that lost money or broke even was going to have their taxes raised.

            Over and over I heard it repeated “wait a second, I thought if you made less than $125k you didn’t pay a penny more in taxes?”

            That tells me the pro tax side got their message out very well and the anti tax side was MIA. Sure the pro tax side had way more money and repetition in advertising works well. However the fact that not a soul I talked to had any concept that first of all the $10 is a filing fee, not a minimum tax, and that people making less than $125k were most definitely going to be affected says a lot.

            Of course the WSJ is worried about the national implications of this. You are right there. Will we see public employee unions emboldened by Oregon try and raise taxes in other states? I sure think so.

            The vote counting machines had barely cooled down before we saw Ted trying to come in and grab the kicker money yet again. Many people, myself included, said that passage of 66/67 meant the trough feeders would be back for more tax money quicker than you can say “step raise”. That’s a no brainer. What will take brains, at least more brains than we saw over this issue, is for the anti tax people to get their act together a little bit better than we saw on this go round.

          • rural resident

            Rupert, can you explain exactly how a single person making $125K or less or a married couple filing jointly making $250K or less will pay higher taxes under this new rate structure?

            In other bills that weren’t part of M66/67, the legislature made some subtle changes to the additions and subtractions sections of Form 40 that will affect some taxpayers. (This happens almost every biennium.) There were also many changes to things like auto registration fees, driver’s license renewal fees, fees for occupational licenses, and other revenue items. Again, these weren’t part of the measures we voted on. However, the claim that taxpayers making less than $125K or $250K, depending upon filing status, will have to pay higher taxes under M66 appears to be false. (Again, I voted against both measures, both for reasons unrelated to the tax impact on taxpayers at lower income levels.)

          • sybella

            No, lower income and people earning under $125k won’t see higher taxes as such, What they will see is higher cost for basic necessities. I predict a minimum of !0% increase the cost of food ASAP. Clothing will cost more, entertainment, and virtually everything you will consume.

            I am in serious need of a new vehicle, which I was going to purchase locally, but now will now not buy in Oregon because that is going to cost more also. The people who voted for this tax increase will soon rue the day.

          • Anonymous

            If you think purchasing a vehicle in Oregon will cost you more than it will in Washington or California then you really need to learn how to negotiate.

          • eagle eye

            What is the steel yard and why making rounds and quizzing them? Business or pleasure?

        • G. Beveridge

          Oh “puleeeese” yourself. The electoral result was a vote by Portland public employees and the other public employees around the state, against the rest of the voters in this state do not out number them. The few private individuals who did vote in favor were the poor little old ladies and uneducated welfare recipients who fell for the fear mongering. Enriching yourselves with other peoples money only works until the other people run out of money or leave. Then your jobs will be on the line as well.

    • PF

      I would really like to see the supporters of 67 put their own money where their mouths are. Take your gross income…put it on your tax form. Take the amount that has already been with held and subtract that. Find out how much you owe. You now can pay on gross instead of net, just like you voted for someone else to do. There. Ted no longer needs the kicker and the democrats can spend that money better then you anyway. problem solved.

    • brad delzer

      I own a small retail shop. All of my profits go to taxes and I will be affected by this stupid tax. In the end no one can afford to have any small shops in oregon. Any store or business will price adjust for the extra money they have to shell out. So in the end the Liberals will end up paying for thier inability of understanding that we are in a crisis. We will always stand up to you and fight you the whole way.

  • OI

    If these taxes were as crippling to business as opponents claim, they would have spent more money killing it. All you need to do is look at the Healthy Kids initiative to see how much businesses will spend if they believe that their economic interests are seriously threatened.

    • Steve Plunk

      Maybe business was already too broke to kick in money. The measures both polled as winning so why waste what is a scarce resource.

  • Hawk

    Hahahahahah! The value of commercial real estate in Clark County, Washington has gone up since Tuesday. I know of two companies with a total of 24 employees that are moving north. Oregon is dying economically. I cannot wait for Oregon to go the way of California and file bankruptcy.

    Hey Oregon, keep passing more taxes and fees. It will drive more companies out and unemployment up. Other States have figured out its smart not to strangle the chickens that lay the eggs if you want more eggs.

    • Anonymous

      Well which is it? Unemployment or inflation? You can’t have it both ways.

  • dblulu

    This is absolutely true –
    “The real victims of these taxes won’t be wealthy business owners, who can always move away or shelter income, but less mobile Oregonians who will find it harder to get or keep a job.”

    It is also very likely if not downright guaranteed that the fall out of these tax increases will cause enough damage to business that there won’t be the additional $350Mill in tax receipts per year.

    Since the Democrats and Unions believe they were vindicated by Tuesday’s vote – Your taxes will be next. This is in addition to the increased taxes we didn’t vote on – gas and a tax on health insurance. Inflation on top of a recession – perfect.

    • Rupert in Springfield

      >Since the Democrats and Unions believe they were vindicated by Tuesday’s vote – Your taxes will be next.

      Looks like Ted is wasting no time. He is coming after the kicker yet again.

      So they got their tax increase and in a matter of hours they are coming after more?

      They are back to the trough a little faster than I thought.

    • Anonymous

      The Phillips curve… look it up.

  • Sam

    Congratulations, Oregon!

    Watch your list of WARN Act filings grow:

    https://www.odccwd.state.or.us/warn/Default.aspx

    And this is just the tip of the iceberg since WARN data is only collected from companies with over 100 workers and, in some cases, only if 50 or more are laid off.

    What is needed is small business layoff tracker to show the full folly of these ballot measures.

  • rural resident

    “Hahahahahah! The value of commercial real estate in Clark County, Washington has gone up since Tuesday. I know of two companies with a total of 24 employees that are moving north.”
    Hawk … TWO companies with 24 people moving to Clark County has led to an increase in the value of real estate for the whole county? Property values must not only be unstable there, but at rock bottom before Tuesday.

    According to conservative orthodoxy, New York City–with a top city marginal income tax rate of 12.6%, high property taxes, a heavy state income tax, and state and local sales taxes–ought to be devoid of the presence of high income residents. Yet, many more rich people live there than in areas with relatively little taxation. Is it possible–just possible–that there are other reasons people choose to live, work, and own businesses in a certain location besides taxes?

    • Rupert in Springfield

      >Yet, many more rich people live there than in areas with relatively little taxation.

      Well, that’s a lie.

      There are plenty of areas with lower taxation with more rich people in them than NYC. How did this silly notion pop into your head?

      >Is it possible–just possible–that there are other reasons people choose to live, work, and own businesses in a certain location besides taxes?

      Of course. And is it possible, just possible, that you could for once stop this nonsense of taking a statement about some things to be a statement about all things.

      Please name for us one conservative, ever, since the dawn of time, who made the statement that the tax rate was the sole determining factor in where a business or residence is sited.

      • Anonymous

        “Please name for us one conservative, ever, since the dawn of time, who made the statement that the tax rate was the sole determining factor in where a business or residence is sited.”

        I think you guys are basically trying to say the same thing.

      • vp

        “even as it lost in most of the rest of the state.”

        Really? Depends on what you mean by “most of the state.” Nearly all the populated parts of the state voted yes on both measures. The more unpopulated parts voted no. Morrow County for example, was a huge no vote, I think 200 to 100. As usual, conservatives won territory but not people. Sort of like the Taliban.

        “Please name for us one conservative, ever, since the dawn of time, who made the statement that the tax rate was the sole determining factor in where a business or residence is sited.”

        Were there conservative gasses at the dawn of time that resisted forming into solids? They would have if they could have. Come on Rupert. Lighten up. What passes for “Conservatives” have been arguing that cutting taxes equals economic development at least since Reagan. And the only other arrow in the quiver appears to be deregulation. Dance with the girl that brung ya. Don’t deny you even know her.

        • Rupert in Springfield

          >Come on Rupert.

          I figured you would do the ritual Dean dance of nonsense on this one.

          You made the point, not I, so again I will ask:

          Name one conservative in all of human history who ever claimed tax rates were the sole determining factor in where a business or person locates.

          You claimed this was conservative orthodoxy, so I would think you would have at least one example of someone saying such a thing.

          We all know you have no such example.

          I’m afraid Dean that you are dancing by yourself to music that only you can hear.

          • vally single person

            “You claimed this was conservative orthodoxy…”

            Uh no Rupert. You need to brush up on your reading skills. It was Rural Resident who made that claim.

            By the way, our strange friend seems to have no blocked posting under the name “v person.” I’ll have to find a new label. Stay tuned.

        • Mary

          One of the most populous counties in the Portland metro area is Clackamas county and both measures were defeated there in spite of Oregon house speaker Dave Hunt (who spent an enormous amount of time campaigning for them) being from that district.
          Class warfare indeed. At its worst in Oregon. I grieve for the Oregon I grew up in and will now leave.

          • Diamond Jim

            Don’t let the door hit you in the ass. See ya!

  • davidg

    One of Margaret Thatcher’s famous quotations is that: the trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money to spend.

    As noted by the WSJ, measures 66 and 67 were heavily marketed as taxes that someone else will pay, but not you.

    We all know that 66 and 67 will not solve any budgetary problems for Oregon. At the next biennium meeting of the legislature when the legislature faces its next budget, the legislature will once again discover major “shortfalls” in revenue and enact more taxes. The reaction to measures 28 and 30 a few years ago taught the legislature not to enact general tax increases for raising revenue. The legislature will see measures 66 and 67 as the path to follow: tax the rich. How long will it take before Margaret Thatcher’s maxim takes effect?

    On a separate note, in today’s paper Ted K. is quoted as demanding that the legislature do something about Oregon’s tax system which has created a “roller-coaster” effect for Oregon’s budget. Ted has his metaphors wrong. For the last 40 or more years, with maybe one exception, the Oregon state budget has been constantly going UP. Sometimes it goes up faster than other times, but the clear direction is UP, and this has occurred in good times and bad. This is not a roller-coaster ride, it is a rocket ship ride – and it is still going in the same direction since blastoff: UP. Ted really has no intention of doing anything about that.

    • Steve Plunk

      Get ready David, the PERS board is meeting to set 2011 rates this week (I believe today). Those new rates are expected to be substantially higher and if so will propel government into a bigger financial mess. Government employees will bankrupt this state unless steps are taken soon.

      • eagle eye

        We’ll see. You know, the rates for 2009-11 were substantially lower than the previous (very high) rates. With the mini stock boom since May, maybe it won’t be as bad over the next few years as you think. Maybe not good, but maybe not a catastrophe.

        • Steve Plunk

          Let’s hope it’s good news.

      • Steve Walter

        Here we go again … blame it on the Public Employee. I am one. Yes … one of those rotten to the core no good heartless bums who steal from the taxpayers. Let me fill you all in on a well kept secret. In two years I will retire after having worked as a Correctional Officer at the State Pen for 25 years. I will get, after taxes, after buying health insurance, a little over $800 a month to live on. Sound to you like I am going to live the life of luxury we all hear the state employees get? How much are you going to take home from your pension?

  • Arthur

    I don’t know how these tax measures can be constitutional. Retroactive taxes? This class warfare in Oregon is ugly Obama politics. Oregon just went from bad to worse.

  • Pinkie French

    I will never again purchase the following: ads in yearbooks, calendar ads, candy bars, candles, gift wrap, candy, jerky, pepperoni sticks, 50/50 tickets, or raffles for anything or any sort. I will no longer be nickeled and dimed by cute little kids raising money for a field trip, playground equipment etc. I have had enough! I standard answer from this point forward is going to be, sorry, I have to pay extra taxes because of measures 66 & 67, perhaps you can ask the people that voted for me to pay extra taxes, to buy your stuff and send you one your trip.

    Pinkie French

    • Anonymous

      Thankfully not everyone is as bitter as you.

      • Pinkie French

        I am not bitter, just out of money. FYI, cash does not grow on trees.

        Since you feel so stongly, please call your local schools and let those little kids know..you will put your own money where your mouth is and buy what ever little $1+ item they are selling.

        Frankly, I am surprised you would have any objection to my comments. I am also shocked you dont buy your own yearbook ad, sports calander ad, etc…What is wrong with you anon 13:39?

        • eagle eye

          You really can’t afford to buy candy bars and beef jerky because of these tax measures? Please explain. If you’re one of the $125/250 K people, the story better be good.

          • Pinkie French

            This is not about affording anything. This is about an election that now has consiquences. Children need to understand those consiquences, there is less money now for the “little” things. I now have to pay taxes retroactively. ( that means for last year 2009) Where is that money going to come from in the budget? Advertising? Payroll? Inventory? Where? Since you feel so stongly about this, why dont YOU just open up YOUR checkbook and buy that ad?

          • eagle eye

            I thought so. You want to punish the children because the voters didn’t go your way. You sound very bitter and spiteful. Like so many of the anti-tax people this time. I think that’s a big part of why you lost. I hesitate, but I should say “why we lost”, since I too was anti-tax.

          • Chris McMullen

            I think Pinkie is doing it on principle. The union scum out there had no problem using the schools and kids as fodder to pass their tax — and I agree with him/her. Schools and the OEA need to pay some sort of penance for being so underhanded.

          • Pinkie French

            Thank you Chris, at least YOU get it.

          • Anonymous

            Oh, we understand where you’re coming from, we just think your “principles” suck and that your bitterness is ugly.

          • wetshoes

            Dude. 50% of the state budget goes to education. If you have a shortfall, how can it NOT be taken out of education? We’re already letting people out of prison early, so that’s not an option. We could eliminate health care for kids. There is no “government” to tighten its belt; it’s the recipient of govt services that have to tighten their belts, and that has dire consequences for lots of them.

            The state’s income came out something like 20% below original projections. If you had a company and your revenue fell short by 20% one year, I bet you would show a loss, use capital reserves or get a bank loan to get through it, not just automatically fire a bunch of trained workers. The state is prohibited from having reserves (by the stupid kicker law) and can’t borrow. The kicker law is like a law that says a corporation has to return 100% of its profits to stockholders every year. It cannot build reserves.
            If the kicker law had been fixed 2 years ago, they would NOT have had to go for a tax increase this year.

  • Jan

    I have a sense of unease when elections clerks with a vest interest in the outcome of these tax measures are permitted to open and scan ballots before 8 PM on election day. Behind closed doors with no observers?

  • Diamond Jim

    Hey, at least the rich are finally going to pay their fair share so that those of us on the dole can relax and take it easy.
    I love this state!
    I apply for all the assistance I can get and believe me, I get a lot. I have food stamps, unemployment, disability, etc.
    Why work if you don’t have to. I don’t have to so I don’t.
    Now all I need to complete my don’t work package is free health care, and I will get that soon enough thanks to the rich people of Oregon.

    • LFTOREGON

      Hey Diamond Jim, you have the system figured out and will “capitalize” on other people’s money. What a unique idea…When you run out of rich people in Oregon where will you go? Especially the businesses who can pick up and move and leave you on the street with a tin cup in your hand. Oh well, you all certainly did show those “rich Oregonians”…

      • rural resident

        LFTOREGON … “Diamond Jim” is Oregon Catalyst’s own bloggy poltergeist, Jerry. He has a strange sense of humor and more aliases than your average con man. None of the claims he makes above in #11 at 14:29 are true. He’s pulling everyone’s chain.

  • Harry

    Okay, all that ranting and not a sentence about the big average paycheck?

    “…$83,402 a year average in pay and benefits to Oregon state workers, 30% higher than what private workers receive. This is bankrupting states like Oregon, California, New York and New Jersey.”
    ===

    AVERAGE!!!

    $83,402 a year
    ===========

    Unions only talk salary. But I like to talk compensation. Including Gold Plated PERS and Cadillac Healthcare. Takes the conversation from $45-50K right up to the actual number: $83,000 average! Average means that half get MORE than $83K!!!!!

    • Balls

      I wonder what the ratio of state employees who hold graduate degrees to those who don’t is? And I wonder how that ratio would compare with private sector employees? I’m just wondering.

    • eagle eye

      Actually, you’re mixing up “median” and “average”. The median — half above, half below — is undoubtedly somewhat lower than the average.

      The question of Balls about educational level is a good one.

  • Clem

    Maybe we should put together a measure that states “Public employees insurance benefits shall be no greater than the average of the top 50 companines in Oregon.” Tie their benefits to the average in the private sector.

  • JAC the Tax Office guy

    Phil Knight and WSJ are making a point about the Salem tax and business policies that are cooling the Oregon business climate for new start up businesses. I predict that once Phil Knight dies, Nike will be headquarter somewhere else within 20 years (like Tek, US Bank, etc.). Will a new Tek or Nike grow up in Oregon again? Time will tell. But reading Porter’s Five Forces sure reads a lot like what Oregon Dems are doing to make it hard on Oregon businesses to grow or be competitive today (tweaking markets by creating barriers, controlling suppliers and buyers, picking rivalry winners ~ losers ~ and substitutes) …

    REMEMBER government doesn’t produce revenue, it funds programs by taxing those that do create revenue and profit.

  • Anonymous

    I found it interesting that when I turned on the 8 pm news, you know that’s when the polls close, They already had a 70 % for the new tax. How can that be? We know most if not all came from Portland, we also know they could start counting a week early. I wonder how many acorn people there are in portland.

    I seriously question how much cheating there was this time. We need to get rid of the vote by mail. It’s too easy to cheat and I know for a fact, some do.

    • vp

      “They already had a 70 % for the new tax. How can that be? ”

      Because in a mail in ballot most of the counting could be done before the polls closed. Its not that complicated.

      • debi

        There was a comment about education being held hostage. It was, along with senior and protective services. Whenever there is a shortfall in taxes in Oregon (remember measure 5 that dealt with property taxes way back when) these services are “threatened”. There is always the threat to education but not to other more general public services. More specifically teachers. Teachers in Oregon are not generally over paid, but this is always the foremost public thought. I worked 16 years in higher education at the management level believe me there is a lot of waste in education but it typically is not at the teaching level.

        Voters in Oregon believed the only way to continue to provide a reasonable public education was to raise taxes.

        Additionally, advertisement commented about persons making over $125K/$250K PAY their fair share. They don’t realize they already pay a higher percentage . I’ve a hard time explaining to people the difference between a tax credit and tax deduction. The general public does not understand the gain of an energy or child tax credit versus a deduction.

        No one included that the bill had an amendment that the first $2500 unemployment was tax free. Anyone on unemployment would be crazy not to vote to decrease their taxes.

        As an Oregon voter I am unhappy with the results of the election. However, I expect nationally more of the same will occur. We can not educate those that do not have the initiative to learn. They chose the path of least resistance for their situation and will continue to do the same.

        Lastly, the Oregon government fell short. It may not be responsible for creating revenue, however it had a choice to encourage business or not, thus affecting the total taxes received. They choose not.

  • cheap nfl jerseys

    Hey! fantastic idea, but will this really work?

  • WP Themes

    Nice post and this enter helped me alot in my college assignement. Say thank you you for your information.

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)