Oregon voters bucked decades of anti-tax and anti-Salem sentiment Tuesday, raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy to prevent further erosion of public schools and other state services.
The tax measures passed easily, with late returns showing a 54 percent to 46 percent ratio. Measure 66 raises taxes on households with taxable income above $250,000, and Measure 67 sets higher minimum taxes on corporations and increases the tax rate on upper-level profits.
Turnout was over 60% and voters in initiative-heavy Oregon hadn't passed a tax hike in close to 80 years...so this vote is huge.
The message out of Oregon, like the message out of Massachusetts, is resonating: Voters are in a populist mood right now -- not an anti-government one, necessarily, but a populist one nevertheless. The progressive brand of populism that resonated with Oregonians this month is slightly different than the one that rang true in Massachusetts. Yet the message is just as clear.
The real question now is whether DC will listen, or if instead it will continue to cling to its common wisdom.
Additionally, let me vouch for the Oregonians behind this campaign. Kevin Looper is hella smart and one of the best field minds in the country. From what I can tell, their campaign pulled out the stops. They registered and re-registered voters, knocked hundreds of thousands of doors, and made something like a million phone calls.
You want to win? Hone your messaging, mobilize your base, and even in a recession, we can hike taxes on the rich to pay for necessary services.
Here we go again. I am sitting with my friends this year at the 2008 Rebooting Democracy Conference. Two years ago I met The Bus Project and some progressive political activists at this event. Through this blog, The Bus met me, and I have had a great time working with them on a myriad of voter engagement projects over the years.
The 2008 event is special thrill for me. I have been working on and planning this event at evening meetings throughout the last 11 months. Struggling to find out if its possible to get excited about politics. The staff of Montana's own Forward Montana are sitting in attendance wearing their bunny ears, and my employer and professional colleagues are here representing a slate of progressive polices for consideration during the Policy Battle Royale. High times for a big democracy dork like me.
This may not be the best venue for a glimpse into Oregon's current special election on an important ballot initiative. But thats not going to stop me.
California's Canada, otherwise known as Oregon is facing one of its most important choices in decades. In thirteen days we will be voting on Measure 49.
Oregon is unique among states in that it has a comprehensive statewide land use planning program. This program has essentially helped create the Urban Growth Boundary, which limits residential and commercial development to designated areas near existing town centers. The result, as you can imagine, is orderly growth based on anticipated needs and access to adequate infrustructure while limiting conflicting uses.
A novel benefit is our truly vibrant local agriculture. Family farms are prolific in Oregon, and we have a booming local food scene in metropolitan Portland. So booming as to garner the attention of the New York Times lately.
In 2004, property rights fanatics threw it all out the window with a deceptively worded ballot initiative. Essentialy they passed the sexy sounding Measure 37 with the following ballot title:
After Montana voters passed the minimum wage hike last November, a lot of right-wingers were apoplectic. Unemployment would reach heights not known since Herbert Hoover was President! We'd have Carter-era inflation! Our economy would stagnate! All the first borns would die!
Turns out none of that is the case. What is our unemployment? Lowest in the nation (and very low, even by non-relative standards). Job growth? It's high. Inflation? Doesn't seem to be a huge local problem (Oh, the right-wingers cry, my $4.00 burritos cost $.50 more now, it is oh so horrible).
In other words, raising the minimum wage worked. Ask low wage workers, they know (check the comments on that post, by the way, as the author does a pretty good job of debunking the inflation myth for small minimum wage increases).
Similar good news comes from Oregon, where the Oregon Center for Public Policy has crunched the numbers once more with their in-state minimum wage rising to just shy of $8.00. During the time that they've had the minimum wage in place, Oregon's payroll growth has been huge. In addition, Portland area restaurant prices have actually grown more slowly than around the country.
The reactionaries are wrong. Minimum wages actually compensate for some standard market problems, including the fact that many business owners apparently undercompensate low-skilled labor (given the elitism of the anti-minimum wage crowd, this doesn't surprise me).
Just an update from the hinterlands of Oregon. For those of us who remember I-154 consider Montana blessed. I mean that. We should all remember the invalidation of Trevis Butcher's terrible trio of initiatives as one of the greatest days in recent Montana political history.
I find myself in the smack dab middle of the never ending fight against the insanity that is Measure 37. It is downright staggering what this piece of shit law is going to do to Oregon's farm and forest land. (.pdf link) Here is a hint Portland = LA.
Over the last 4 months of legislative wrangling we have come a long way towards reforming this terrible law. Dems control both houses and the Gov's Mansion and we have been able to think rationally about how to limit the damage. Their thinking brought about two sensible reforms that passed the house last week and are expected to pass the senate this week.
Good news to be sure, the problem is they are going to send it back to the voters. Now, I am all for voting don't get me wrong but they want to call a special election to validate their position on this highly contentious issue. They are too afraid to reform the broken law like legislators, they negotiated for 4 months in order to refer a ballot initiative. The Oregonian today captures the effects of this decision well.
Oregonians fancy themselves to be a bit like Montanans, independent minded. No matter how good the reform is, and it is much better than the original Measure 37, Oregonians are likely to be skeptical of an election on this topic in November, 2007.
That is how things are shaping up out west. Remember how awesome it was to be free of I-154 and say a prayer for the future of Oregon.
Sen. Hillary Clinton has a strong lead in one of the first polls that is out for 2008 from the Pacific Northwest. A new Riley Research poll shows Clinton with a 10 point lead over her nearest challenger Sen. Barack Obama. All other candidates finished in single digits behind Clinton and Obama with John Edwards in third, Al Gore in fourth, Bill Richardson in fifth, Randy Crow in sixth, and Chris Dodd in seventh.
USA Today is reporting that five Western states (AZ, CA, NM, OR, and WA) are banding together to launch a regional cap-and-trade initiative to fight global warming. This is the sort of thing that (I think) Montana should do. If we can reach a regional agreement and cap-and-trade is the method, it does not put Montana at a competitive disadvantage economically (put that in your pipe and smoke it, develop-at-any-cost crowd) and it does take a meaningful step forward toward reducing greenhouse gases.
Cap-and-trade isn't idea, but, structured properly, it may actually be preferable to a mediocre cap. And, let's face it, it is a significant step forward from the status quo.
Oregon Senator Ron Wyden has rolled out a very intriguing health care proposal that has already drawn support from both the SEIU and Safeway. The meat of the proposal from what I can tell is this:
All Americans buy their own health insurance. Employer-based health insurance becomes something of the past.
Employers that previously contributed to health insurance premiums would have to convert their savings into a wage hike. The tax code would be adjusted accordingly.
The federal government would provide subsidies to low-income Americans to make health insurance plans more affordable.
The federal government would mandate a minimum-quality health care plan, based on federal health insurance.
Insurance companies would be prohibited from denying coverage to people.
Health insurance rates could only be varied based on geography, family size, and smoking status. In other words, pre-existing conditions could not be a basis for either higher rates or rejection by the insurance company.
An independent top-notch health care consulting firm predicted net cost savings despite this being a move to truly universal health insurance. The insurance, although mandated, would be through private firms, which would still compete.
This isn't my dream plan, but it is pretty decent. It's also getting support from both business and labor -- a good sign that this may be a real common ground.
I'll be on a conference call with Senator Wyden soon to discuss the plan. If you have questions for him, please get them into comments quickly.
