HB 2544: The voter punishment act of 2011?

The voter punishment act of 2011?
By Taxpayer Association of Oregon,

The Taxpayer Association is sorting through a flood of new bills in the Oregon 2011 Legislature and some are alarming like HB 2544.   With no official lawmaker sponsor or detailed explanatory statement  it is hard to decidedly interpret these bills.  Our first estimate of  HB 2544 is that if voters pass a ballot measure that costs money it then triggers an automatic payroll surtax on people’s income taxes  to cover the cost.   In other words, if a voter approved ballot measure requires an increase in General Fund spending, taxes can be raised to cover whatever amounts the Legislature decides to appropriate to cover the new law.  HB 2544 summary statement: “Requires imposition of surtax on personal income and corporate income and excise taxpayers if implementation of one or more initiatives approved by voters requires appropriation that equals or exceeds certain percentage of combined total of General Fund revenues and un-obligated net lottery proceeds for biennium.”

We hope our interpretation is not the case because the first look on the bill makes it seem like the height of lawmaker arrogance and voter revenge.   It sounds like lawmakers are telling voters they are not constitutionally bound to balance the budget with priorities, cuts and cost savings as long as an idea comes from voters.

Read HB 2544 for yourself and give us your feedback and interpretation.

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

Posted by at 04:50 | Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • davidg

    If voters try to make any substantive policy change via initiative, and combine that with tax increases or spending cuts to pay for the program, the courts will strike down the whole effort as violating the “one-subject” rule for initiatives.

    This proposal should be renumbered as “Catch 22.”

  • Kenny

    Who is teh sponsor, I see no sponsor.

  • Reper

    Isn’t a catch 22 about insanity?

  • Marvin McConoughey

    The fact that voters approve a given initiative can mean that they wish a commensurate cut in other spending. In other terms, voter approval of an initiative can signal a desired shift in legislative spending priorities rather than an overall increase in spending. The bill would remove that power from voters.

  • Ron Marquez

    I tried reading the bill but legislative gobbledy gook is not my forte. I’m going to ask Dennis Richardson for his take and if he’d be willing to post something here.

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)