The fight against Sizemore needs your help this weekend.

By Steve Novick of Portland, Oregon. Steve is a long-time progressive activist and was a 2008 candidate for the U.S. Senate.

Bill Sizemore and Kevin Mannix are at it again. This year, Sizemore and Mannix (mostly Sizemore) have littered Oregon's ballot with seven measures (58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63 and 64), all of which would cause lasting harm to the state.

One of the most critical measures is Measure 64, which would limit the ability of working Oregonians to participate in the political process, but would give even more power to out-of-state corporations and millionaires, like Loren Parks. Big tobacco, oil companies, and insurance companies would have even more influence, which is why the corporate-backed FreedomWorks is trying hard to get it passed. And get this—they're insulting Oregonians by calling it "campaign finance reform." That's why it's so vital that we get out to talk to voters about the true impacts of Measure 64, and all the ballot measures.

Voters this year hold the future of Oregon's education, health care, and public safety services in our hands. And we need to talk to them before they start filling in those bubbles on their ballots. And that means now.

That's where you come in. Volunteer with the Defend Oregon Coalition to hit the phones and the streets this weekend. Let's arm Oregonians with the information they need to protect our state from Measures 58 to 64. Sign up now, and bring your friends and families. It's that important.

So get out there with us. This stuff matters. The time is now.

Specifics about these measures:

Measure 58 (VOTE NO) is a one-size-fits-all teaching mandate that pretends that every child who speaks a different language can be 100% fluent in a year or (for teenagers) two– making no exceptions for students with learning disabilities. Measure 58 would cost the state at least a half a billion dollars over the next two years.

Measure 59 (VOTE NO) would cut $2.4 billion in funding for education, public safety and health care. It creates an unlimited deduction for Federal income tax deduction on state tax forms. Most Oregonians would get no tax cut; 75% of the billions would go to those making over $200,000.

Measure 60 (VOTE NO) requires teachers' salaries to be based solely on undefined "classroom performance," which will lead to more standardized tests and fewer teachers willing to take on the most challenging assignments.

Measure 61 (VOTE NO) is a rigid, one-size-fits-all approach to crime that would cost the state $586 million per biennium to implement and would require the construction of at least three more prisons, while not addressing drug treatment. Warehousing criminals isn't the answer, which is why the majority of law enforcement supports Measure 57.

Measure 62 (VOTE NO) would take nearly $185 million away from schools, resulting in fewer teachers, larger classes, and shorter school years. It also pulls money out of job creation programs.

Measure 63 (VOTE NO) would allow property owners to build certain constructions on their property without building permits, safety inspections or adherence to any state environmental laws.

Measure 64 (VOTE NO) would silence the voices of working people by stopping public employees from using voluntary payroll deductions to donate to charities, unions and other organizations. Measure 64 limits the ability of working Oregonians to participate in the political process while giving corporations even more political power and influence. It's Sizemore's way of silencing his strongest opponents – opening the door for him to pass public-service-destroying measures in the future.

  • Molly (unverified)

    I just saw Mr Hickey speak at City Club. I had never read anything by him or heard him speak before.

    His attitude was atrocious. I could not believe how disrespectful he was to the audience! He was flippant, rude, and behaved like he'd rather be somewhere else. He seemed to think we were all stupid. I came away thinking, what a blowhard.

    I was never going to vote for M58 - but even so, I was blown away by his attitude. Totally didn't expect him to be so cavalier.

  • Carl andersen (unverified)

    Until property taxes are done away with and replaced by a consumption tax, I will have to vote to keep the taxes low. Ours are already about $400/mo. If it wasn't for Sizemore's cap on property tax growth years ago (measure 5?), I don't know where I'd be. Especially in times of economic trouble, I can't imagine fee's and taxes getting higher. Made I'll need a government job to survive it.

  • (Show?)

    His attitude was atrocious. I could not believe how disrespectful he was to the audience! He was flippant, rude, and behaved like he'd rather be somewhere else. He seemed to think we were all stupid. I came away thinking, what a blowhard.

    Just like he behaves here at BlueOregon!

  • (Show?)

    Thanks Steve, Defend Oregon does great work. Just because there's been some confusion of late (not in this post), Measure 65 is NOT one of the Sizemore measures. He has nothing to do with it. Defend Oregon made no recommendation on M65, but there's an endorsement from former Governor John Kitzhaber just published here on BlueO.

  • Kusum (unverified)

    If you have the audacity to publish your article, at least have the courage to speak the entire truth, not just a mangled half-baked version of it. I have too many objections to this piece of writing - if you can call it that. I will just address one as an example of how apalling this article is.

    Example - Measure 59 - You tax people who make less, lesser percentage of their income. OK. You tax people who make more, a HIGHER PERCENTAGE of their income. PER-CENT by definition implies you are using 100 as a standard and so if you taxed everybody an equal PERCENT, then those who earn more, would still pay more $$$ but both groups pay the same percentages. Perhaps that can be called FAIR. PERHAPS.


    BUT IF THAT WAS NOT BAD ENOUGH, you now want these RICH PEOPLE to pay taxes twice?

    Not just HIGHER TAXES on income THEY earn WHICH THEY ALREADY DO, but on INCOME THEY DON'T EARN. Income that is given away as federal taxes.

    You really want THEM to pay taxes on what they dont earn??? Why don't you just go and live in their house too, force them to buy your clothes and dinner and get you a nice car....after all, they are RICH, they OWE it to you.

    Perhaps you are right - perhaps this is fair....if somebody with your lack of insight can be a prospective candidate for the US Senate, then anything is possible...

    <h2>- A non profit volunteer who also contributes to non profits.</h2>
guest column

connect with blueoregon