Daily Archives: June 7, 2012

Wisconsin Wave: Oregon Budget Hawks Consider Another Run at Union Check ‘Jacks

Oregon fiscal hawks should take a page from Wisconsin and try the “Paycheck Protection” initiative again. It’s time. In fact, some budget conscious Oregonians, emboldened by the Wisconsin vote, are considering reintroducing an initiative to force the unions to collect their own damn dues. Good. 

The last time voters looked at a measure like this was in 2008 and barely 1% separated No’s from Yes’s. 


The unionistas in Oregon are a monolithic lot. They support Democrats for office almost exclusively. I say “almost” because at some point in the universe of time there is a vestige of a scintilla of a possibility that they have supported a Republican. But even that’s iffy. 

These public employee unions support the party of government. That is the Democrat party. And in turn the Democrats take care of the unions. They vote for union spiffs, give money matches for pensions, and fight for more benefits for government union members. In return the unions take good care of the Democrats.



This has been going on for years. Check the OreStar C & E filings to see who the unions give money to. 

The Democrats love this. The unions pay people to canvass for them, make phone calls, give in-kind donations of time and resources and, of course, there are the millions of dollars they sprinkle around races every election cycle. They get that money from the union dues the state of Oregon is forced to withdraw from members’ checks.

In fact, unions are–in every way–a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat party or vice versa. Democrats want to be elected, unions give them money, Democrats are elected, they give vote to give unions more money, Democrats make sure the flow of money continues from taxpayers. Rinse. Repeat.

Measure 59 in 1998 came within 2% of winning. Unionistas threw everything they had to defeat the measure which was advertised as, 

This measure adds a new section to the Oregon Constitution that prohibits any person or organization from using public resources to collect or help collect political funds. Public resources that cannot be used to collect political funds include public moneys, public employee time, public property and public equipment and supplies.”

Anti high tax warrior Bill Sizemore’s efforts came close that time. When it was tried again in 2000 it went down in flames. But it was also advertised this way:

“Ballot Measure 92 would add a new section to the Oregon Constitution prohibiting public and private employee payroll deductions if any portion of the money will be used for a political purpose, unless the employee freely gives written permission each year on a form used only for that purpose.”

In other words, when the whole ‘paycheck protection’ aspect of it was highlighted it went down because it was seen as picking on unions exclusively.
In 2008 the initiative was tried again. But this time backers reverted back to the 1998 language. See how close it came? Fiscal hawks came a little closer to passage last time.

That’s why it’s inappropriate for taxpayers to foot the bill to ‘jack their union dues for them. Do we do this for Republican groups? Green Party groups? No. We do this only for the Democrats. It’s time this unfairness stopped. Democrats are always crying big crocodile tears about Citizens United or ‘getting money out of politics.’ 
I think we should help them.

Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com

Or Libs React to Wisconsin Vote: "Throw Your Children in Street and Burn Down Your House"

Oregon liberals are a caustic crowd to begin with, but TA Barnhart of the Blue Oregon blog is among the most cranky and was in high dungeon on Facebook on the night Scott Walker was re elected to Governor of Wisconsin.

TA is one of Oregon’s big liberal voices. And on Tuesday night TA was raging against the Wisconsin vote by urging union households who voted for Republican Governor Scott Walker to “quit their jobs, throw their children into the street and burn down their houses.”

Here TA begins his profanity laced bile-spewing by likening non voters in Wisconsin election to people being killed in Syria.

Then he moved on to failed state Yemen:

Here the crank yanker can’t believe that 36% of union families voted for fiscal responsibility by voting for Walker. In fact he’s so gobsmacked that he figures they should “throw their kids into the streets and burn down their houses.” No idea why that should be their fate, but with TA pretty much anything goes. Note his commenter Cheri is stunned she lives in an area that had Republican voters. She contemplates moving. Tolerant liberals.

Liberal activists in Oregon are not a very nice lot. If they’re this angry about Wisconsin’s vote, imagine what they’ll do when budget hawks introduce similar union measures in Oregon.

When that happens, mind your children and keep the liberals away from any matches. 

Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com

Wisconsin Wave: Oregon Budget Hawks Consider Another Run at Union Check ‘Jacks

Oregon fiscal hawks should take a page from Wisconsin and try the “Paycheck Protection” initiative again. It’s time. In fact, some budget conscious Oregonians, emboldened by the Wisconsin vote, are considering reintroducing an initiative to force the unions to collect their own damn dues. Good. 

The last time voters looked at a measure like this was in 2008 and barely 1% separated No’s from Yes’s. 


The unionistas in Oregon are a monolithic lot. They support Democrats for office almost exclusively. I say “almost” because at some point in the universe of time there is a vestige of a scintilla of a possibility that they have supported a Republican. But even that’s iffy. 

These public employee unions support the party of government. That is the Democrat party. And in turn the Democrats take care of the unions. They vote for union spiffs, give money matches for pensions, and fight for more benefits for government union members. In return the unions take good care of the Democrats.



This has been going on for years. Check the OreStar C & E filings to see who the unions give money to. 

The Democrats love this. The unions pay people to canvass for them, make phone calls, give in-kind donations of time and resources and, of course, there are the millions of dollars they sprinkle around races every election cycle. They get that money from the union dues the state of Oregon is forced to withdraw from members’ checks.

In fact, unions are–in every way–a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat party or vice versa. Democrats want to be elected, unions give them money, Democrats are elected, they give vote to give unions more money, Democrats make sure the flow of money continues from taxpayers. Rinse. Repeat.

Measure 59 in 1998 came within 2% of winning. Unionistas threw everything they had to defeat the measure which was advertised as, 

This measure adds a new section to the Oregon Constitution that prohibits any person or organization from using public resources to collect or help collect political funds. Public resources that cannot be used to collect political funds include public moneys, public employee time, public property and public equipment and supplies.”

Anti high tax warrior Bill Sizemore’s efforts came close that time. When it was tried again in 2000 it went down in flames. But it was also advertised this way:

“Ballot Measure 92 would add a new section to the Oregon Constitution prohibiting public and private employee payroll deductions if any portion of the money will be used for a political purpose, unless the employee freely gives written permission each year on a form used only for that purpose.”

In other words, when the whole ‘paycheck protection’ aspect of it was highlighted it went down because it was seen as picking on unions exclusively.
In 2008 the initiative was tried again. But this time backers reverted back to the 1998 language. See how close it came? Fiscal hawks came a little closer to passage last time.

That’s why it’s inappropriate for taxpayers to foot the bill to ‘jack their union dues for them. Do we do this for Republican groups? Green Party groups? No. We do this only for the Democrats. It’s time this unfairness stopped. Democrats are always crying big crocodile tears about Citizens United or ‘getting money out of politics.’ 
I think we should help them.

Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com

Or Libs React to Wisconsin Vote: "Throw Your Children in Street and Burn Down Your House"

Oregon liberals are a caustic crowd to begin with, but TA Barnhart of the Blue Oregon blog is among the most cranky and was in high dungeon on Facebook on the night Scott Walker was re elected to Governor of Wisconsin.

TA is one of Oregon’s big liberal voices. And on Tuesday night TA was raging against the Wisconsin vote by urging union households who voted for Republican Governor Scott Walker to “quit their jobs, throw their children into the street and burn down their houses.”

Here TA begins his profanity laced bile-spewing by likening non voters in Wisconsin election to people being killed in Syria.

Then he moved on to failed state Yemen:

Here the crank yanker can’t believe that 36% of union families voted for fiscal responsibility by voting for Walker. In fact he’s so gobsmacked that he figures they should “throw their kids into the streets and burn down their houses.” No idea why that should be their fate, but with TA pretty much anything goes. Note his commenter Cheri is stunned she lives in an area that had Republican voters. She contemplates moving. Tolerant liberals.

Liberal activists in Oregon are not a very nice lot. If they’re this angry about Wisconsin’s vote, imagine what they’ll do when budget hawks introduce similar union measures in Oregon.

When that happens, mind your children and keep the liberals away from any matches. 

Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com

After failing to report the Sheriff letter and presentation to the county the O delivers the county message in living color. 

Without even bothering to contact the Measure backers or attorney for input.

Clackamas County releases memo outlining possible legal options for anti-light rail initiative on September ballot

Published: Tuesday, June 05, 2012, 12:42 PM     Updated: Tuesday, June 05, 2012, 1:14 PM
Yuxing Zheng, The Oregonian By Yuxing Zheng, The Oregonian 
orange line bridge construction 5.22.12.JPGView full sizeDoug Beghtel/The Oregonian/May 2012Work continues on the new Portland-Milwaukie light rail bridge across the Willamette River. Construction started July 2011.

OREGON CITY — Clackamas County commissioners this morning released a memo outlining a number of legal options the county could pursue regarding the anti-light rail initiative measure on the Sept. 18 ballot, including challenging the measure prior to the special election or asking the measure be declared unconstitutional if passed. 

The initiative, if approved, would require Clackamas County voter approval before the county pays $25 million to TriMet for the $1.5 billion Portland-Milwaukie light rail project. It would also require countywide voter approval before officials can spend money to finance, design, construct or operate any rail lines in the county.

County and TriMet officials argue the initiative, if approved, would only apply to future projects and does not affect the county’s legally binding $25 million contract for Portland-Milwaukie light rail, an agreement that was signed in February 2010.

One option would be to challenge Measure 3-401 prior to the election, according to the June 4 legal memo written by County Counsel Stephen Madkour and Assistant County Counsel Alexander Gordon. The initiative process is intended for legislative acts, not administrative acts concerning the daily administration of municipal affairs, the pair write.

“The Ballot Measure goes beyond mere legislation and impermissibly intrudes into the general administrative and executive functions of County governance,” according to the memo.

More

The Oregonian’s continuing coverage of the planning and construction of TriMet’s Portland-Milwaukie light rail and the orange line bridge.

If the measure passes, it could still be challenged as an unlawful impairment of a contract. Both the U.S. and Oregon constitutions prohibit governments from passing laws that allow them to escape previously agreed upon contractual obligations, the memo says. Such a challenge would likely be initiated by TriMet as the aggrieved party. If that argument succeeds, it would result in the measure being declared unconstitutional, according to the memo.

County commissioners are scheduled to discuss their options at a 10 a.m. work session tomorrow.

Even if the measure passes, the county would still need to pay TriMet because the wording of the initiative states it would become effective upon passage, meaning it would only apply to prospective projects, not retroactively to previously approved contracts, the memo says.

No “cancellation fee” exists in the county’s agreement with TriMet, the memo says. If the county fails to pay the $25 million, it “would be a material breach” of the agreement. “TriMet could sue the County for money damages,” the memo says.

The legal memo also supports concerns voiced by commissioners that the measure is too broad and would likely hamper public safety and maintenance and affect other rail lines in the county, such as the MAX Green Line, Amtrak and Westside Express Service commuter rail.

“Arguably, these limitations could range from restricting CCOM (dispatchers) from taking a call concerning an Amtrak rail incident, to dispatching emergency responders to a situation on the Green Line, to striping a rail crossing on WES, to the Sheriff’s Office responding to a motor vehicle accident at a rail crossing,” the memo says. “Were the measure to pass, these situations would prove problematic.”

Federal and local transit officials signed off May 22 on the $1.5 billion funding package. Clackamas County’s contract with TriMet requires it pay the money by Sept. 3 or pay 5 percent interest to extend the deadline by a year. The Clackamas County Budget Committee last week approved a spending plan for the next fiscal year that includes a $250,000 “placeholder” for the Portland-Milwaukie light rail project.

— Yuxing Zheng

Tracking Rail Funding