tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18251485.post116172654592241528..comments2023-10-31T09:35:17.651-07:00Comments on underground science: My Endorsements 2006Garlynn Woodsonghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17400252855809671287noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18251485.post-1162349405689299562006-10-31T18:50:00.000-08:002006-10-31T18:50:00.000-08:00I may be stupid about the legalities of such measu...I may be stupid about the legalities of such measures but what other ways do we have to express our dissatisfaction with the status quo, if not with our votes. (Anarchism, Revolution?)<BR/><BR/>I doubt if any of these measures will pass because of the bad publicity that they've gotten. Nevertheless, I think we should show our support for such measures in order to gather up momentum towards creating change. Maybe we can get some "legal heads" to wrap their brains around these issues and draw up some iniatives "with balls" ready for the next round of elections. <BR/><BR/>We need to keep a tight hold on our hopes while we "keep on truckin'" for change.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18251485.post-1162261506032795642006-10-30T18:25:00.000-08:002006-10-30T18:25:00.000-08:00BTW, here's the website for the pro-46/47 camp.htt...BTW, <A HREF="http://www.fairelections.net/" REL="nofollow">here's the website for the pro-46/47 camp.</A><BR/><BR/>http://www.fairelections.net/<BR/><BR/>The measures were written by Dan Meek (the guy who got you that PGE rate refund recently) and other people who genuinely want to take the excessive money out of Oregon politics. The quibble with these measures -- with Measure 47, really -- basically comes down to the fact that it almost certainly will face a court challenge if passed. It is structued as a plumbing system, with little pipes, medium sized pipes and large pipes. The potential problem is that a court challenge could potentially just remove one or more of the pipes, leaving a large hole much larger than any of the other pipes -- a loophole, which could become a negation of the law, a situation that would almost certainly favor large donors over small ones.<BR/><BR/>However, I still think we should pass this measure, then worry about fixing it in '08 or 2010, after we've seen what court challenges actually *do* stick.<BR/><BR/>cheers,<BR/>~GarlynnGarlynn Woodsonghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17400252855809671287noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18251485.post-1162250164399160402006-10-30T15:16:00.000-08:002006-10-30T15:16:00.000-08:00bong-That's a very good point about term limits. ...bong-<BR/><BR/>That's a very good point about term limits. I've also heard the argument that we lose legislative expertise with term limits, because every second term, every seat turns over. This limits the ability for educated legislators to stay and work on issues that take a long time to resolve.<BR/><BR/>However, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and the longer a legislators stays in office, the more power they tend to gain, and thus, well, the more the opportunities present themselves for them to become corrupted.<BR/><BR/>As for Measure 47:<BR/><BR/>The former chief petitioner for this measure has now come out against it, saying that there is only about a 50/50 chance that parts of it will stand up in court. Apparently, if parts of it are struck down but some parts allowed to remain, the resulting situation might be *worse* than it is today, that is, it would be easier for large contributors like Loren Parks to contribute, and harder for little guys like you and me to do so:<BR/><BR/>http://loadedorygun.blogspot.com/2006/10/former-4647-petitioner-speaks-vote-no.html<BR/><BR/>So, I'm not revoking my endorsement of either of these measures just yet, but I do want to shed full light on all of the issues. I think it's better to try and get these measures passed now... with reservations. And if the courts decide to toss some of them out, let's cross that bridge when we come to it. May be that we'll have to draft some follow-up measures for '08 to fix the problems caused by these, but hey, that's initiative democracy for ya.<BR/><BR/>BTW, my ballot has already been submitted, and I voted YES on all three (45-47).<BR/><BR/>cheers,<BR/>~GarlynnGarlynn Woodsonghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17400252855809671287noreply@blogger.com