Propositions, Amendments, Ballot Initiatives, Referendums… whatever your state calls them, it’s time to start sharing information.
We have this fourth set from commenter Weftage. If you live in a state with a number of these and you want to put something together, please let me know.
THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER.
And big thanks to everyone who has put something together this year!
OREGON
Oregon statewide ballot measures
[Since I mostly lurk, I haven’t really introduced myself. I will just say that I am white, over 70, and a widow. I have lived in Portland, Oregon since the late 1970s.]The summary:
Measure 115: Yes
Measure 116: Yes
Measure 117: (no opinion)
Measure 118: No
Measure 119: Yes
The details:
Measure 115: Constitutional amendment. Creates procedure for impeachment of statewide elected officials by Oregon Legislature for malfeasance, corrupt conduct, neglect of duty, or high crime. Removal from office would require 2/3 of the Oregon House of Representatives to impeach, and 2/3 of the Oregon Senate to convict. An impeachment trial would be presided over by the Chief Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court. The statewide officials affected would be the Governor, the Secretary of State, the State Treasurer, the Attorney General, and the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries.
This is an entirely reasonable proposition, and there is no organized opposition to it. My only concern is that for safety, the Democrats must maintain their majority in both houses. If the Republicans were to gain the majority, they would certainly abuse the process.
I will vote Yes.
Measure 116: Constitutional amendment. Establishes independent commission to determine salaries for a longish list of Oregon public officials. State employees or officers, lobbyists, and their family members are excluded from serving on the commission. The exact membership and method of selection will be determined by future legislation.
Currently, the legislators do this work, which means they effectively determine their own salaries. There is no serious opposition to the measure.
I will vote Yes.
Measure 117: Changes Oregon’s voting system to “ranked choice” (AKA “instant runoff”) from plurality.
Ranked Choice Voting enthusiasts are certain it will solve all of our voting problems. I am not convinced it’s better or worse than the current method—I hear Kenneth Arrow muttering in my ear—but I honestly am agnostic about it. If my fellow Oregonians want it, fine. If they want to keep the existing method, fine. I will be surprised if the measure passes, due to the not-inaccurate perception that the method is rather complicated, confusing, and technocratic.
I will probably abstain on this one.
Measure 118: Increases corporate minimum tax on Oregon sales in excess of $10M, distributes monies so raised to Oregon residents. If said residents lose federal benefits because of the distribution, the State will make up the difference.
Look, I’m all for soaking the rich, but this ain’t it. The official impact statement on the ballot includes
Known administrative costs are estimated to be $1.6 million General Fund and 22 permanent positions in the 2023-25 biennium and $48.2 million General Fund and 199 additional permanent positions in the 2025-27 biennium at the Oregon Department of Revenue. The measure will generate a significant workload increase processing applications for the rebate, verifying the identity and eligibility of those applying for the rebates, reviewing payments and tax refunds for fraudulent activity, handling appeals, increasing customer inquiries, increasing audit and collections activity for the new tax, and increasing technology programming. Other major expenses are unknown but could be significant for expenses such as payments for rebate checks, prepaid debit cards, mailings associated with the program, legal fees, and public information costs.
Individuals who lose federal benefits because of the rebates will be held harmless with additional payments. The costs associated with this provision are unknown……
GAHHH, RUN AWAY!!!1! This will cause many more problems than it solves.
I will vote No on this mess.
Measure 119: Cannabis retailers & processors must remain neutral regarding communications to their employees from labor organizations.
While cannabis is technically illegal at the federal level, it’s legal in Oregon if you are over 21. This measure addresses some loopholes and ambiguities stemming from federal law that have allowed Oregon cannabis retailers to thwart employee organizing.
I’ll vote Yes.
Discuss!
theturtlemoves
Yeah, 118 reminds me of 110 – a terrible way to implement an otherwise decent idea. Pretty telling that folks from all over the political spectrum here are opposing that one.
Formerly disgruntled in Oregon
I oppose 117.
I think that it makes voting too complicated to be intuitive, and would lead to outcomes that could seem arbitrary and less legitimate to many voters.
Weftage
@theturtlemoves: Quite. I am a tiny bit disconcerted to find myself on the same side as the Oregon Taxpayers’ Association (long-time tax cranks), but here we are.
A couple of cycles ago, we did pass an increase in corporate tax. The funds raised were earmarked for a variety of public goods, especially schools. I voted Yes on that one.
Dispersing the proceeds to individuals would mean we don’t get the economies of scale, the large pots that would allow us to make structural change. I’m always happy to see people who need it getting more money, but we have other, far more efficient, ways to do that.
BubbaDave
@Formerly disgruntled in Oregon: I strongly support 117 because it will allow organizations like WFP to run candidates without the risk of splitting the progressive vote and allowing conservatives to win.
Weftage
@Formerly disgruntled in Oregon: I think the measure is, at minimum, premature. Portland just voted to change to RSV. This election will be the first under that system. The City has a transition team who have been doing a fair amount of voter education. We’ll see how effective it is. Portland is the pilot project. If the experiment goes well in this and subsequent years, RSV statewide will have better chances.
Weftage
@BubbaDave: I hope you’re right.
Kenneth Arrow’s notorious “Impossibility Theorem” suggests it may not, in the sense that there’s no lock made that someone can’t pick. I will be watching Portland’s experiment with interest.
Keaton Miller
I’m voting Yes on everything but 118, where I have some direct professional expertise. I’ve published a couple of peer-reviewed empirical papers on the effects of gross receipts taxes (which is what this is). On the of the biggest issues with gross receipts taxes is “tax pyramiding” which is the idea that goods can get taxed at multiple places throughout the supply chain, increasing prices far beyond the stated rate of the tax.
A simple example with a 2-step supply chain and assuming the tax pass-through rate is 66%: think about Honey Nut Cheerios being sold at Safeway. General Mills does enough business in Oregon to have the 3% tax assessed. It passes through 2% to Safeway. Safeway does enough business in Oregon to have the 3% tax assessed. It passes through 2% to consumers. But now that 2% increase that Safeway is passing along is on top of the 2% that was passed through from General Mills, so now the cost of Honey Nut Cheerios is up 4%.
The solution that Safeway will have is to do more vertical integration — promote products with their own label that don’t have the tax pyramid. The tax will create an automatic additional margin for those products in a very low-margin industry. This hurts both General Mills and all of the small local producers of packaged food that will find it harder to get shelf space.
Exemptions for small businesses won’t matter. Who do you think provides much of the ingredients for your local restaurants? Sysco, for whom the tax will apply. Sure, agricultural cooperatives are exempt too, but who are they buying fertilizer, seeds, equipment, and gas from? Large companies that will pay the tax and pass the costs through.
Proponents have also argued that the tax is so low that large companies won’t bother to change prices at all. This is also refuted by tons of research in my field. One can do the experiment any time: go to a Home Depot in Eugene, write down the prices of lumber, then drive up I-5 to Seattle and look at the price tags. Some might be the same, but they won’t all be. In some cases tax pass-through rates are greater than 100%.
Oregon needs to collect more revenue, for K-12, for public services, for higher ed, for all kinds of things. But this isn’t the way to do it.
On 117: look, game theory was one of my specializations in grad school. I know all of the political economy critiques of RCV. But I think most of those things are edge cases. When you have a smooth distribution of preferences and relatively distinct candidates, I expect RCV to incentivize candidates to be a lot of people’s second choice, which means better alignment with the preferences of the median voter. I also think it’s a hell of a lot simpler than STAR voting, which some people in Oregon seem to have a particular love of. One of my colleagues thinks we should just ask people to vote for every potential pairwise comparison. Ooof. RCV, while imperfect, is an improvement over the current system for the kinds of elections we actually have in this state.
theturtlemoves
@Keaton Miller: Yeah, ranked choice I can get behind to some extent but that star voting they’ve been petitioning at the Eugene Saturday Market for seemingly the last two years is just kind of stupid. So, you want me to rate candidates like a Yelp review? Hard pass.
Anoniminous
@Weftage:
Neurobiologists have proven “Rational Behavior” as defined by Economists is a myth. See Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain for a dated but still good non-technical exposition.
Weftage
@Keaton Miller: So what you’re saying is 118 is not only a hot mess, it’s a cascading hot mess. OK.
Thanks for the perspective on RSV. Ballots will arrive in a few days. I’ll keep mulling 117 over.
Weftage
@Anoniminous: My reservations about RSV don’t have to do with “rational behavior*,” they have to do with what I perceive as overselling and overconfidence by RSV advocates.
With the current system, if there is a question, the vote can be audited by a tedious but mechanically simple recount. Auditing an RSV vote would take more doing. I’m not even sure how you’d go about it, and how it would be explained to the public.
*Do not get me started on that particular kettle of codswallop.
steve g
Unfortunately the experiment in Portland with ranked choice voting will also include having ludicrous numbers of candidates. There are 11 candidates for mayor, and in District 2, there are 20 candidates for 3 city councilor positions. (Similar in the other three districts). We can rank vote for up to 6 in each race. I’m sure everyone will understand it well and vote precisely as intended.
Grover Gardner
Thanks. I was hoping BJ would get to these!
Formerly disgruntled in Oregon
@Weftage:
This. There’s already a lot of mistrust in our institutions. Adding an electoral method with these transparency challenges is a bad move IMHO.
WaterGirl
Four states down, a whole bunch to go!
If you’re up for putting something together for your state, please let me know!
Tim C.
@Keaton Miller: Agree on everything. RCV has flaws, but it motivates people to be rational about comprimise far more than FTTP. Also, Republican HATE it, they think their purity and fantacisim should count more than anything else.
Timill
@Weftage: Auditing RSV is the same process as auditing FPTP, only multiple times so it takes longer. Just run a set of LPTP* elections so the candidate placing last in each step is eliminated until there’s only one left.
It’s tedious, but I’ve been part of hand counts with up to 2500 or so votes.
*Last Past The Post
Weftage
@steve g: <hollow laugh> I’m in District 2. I do not know any of those candidates. It’s been….a process, but I think I’ve winnowed them down to the ones I will vote for. My first pass was to try to spot and eliminate any bigots or book-banners. I don’t think I found any, but ya never know until it’s too late.
In the next stage, I cut out those who seemed too one-issue or too light on relevant experience. A lot of the remainder look very good, at least on paper! So then I started eliminating on arbitrary personal factors. Hmph, I don’t like the grammar you used in your Statement! Ha, I object to that endorser! Pfui, you remind me too much of [person in my family I don’t get along with!] Out, out!
So, yes, entirely rational decisions, sure. I might as well have just rolled a damned icosahedron.
artem1s
Establishes independent commission to determine salaries for a longish list of Oregon public officials.
This is not constitutional amendment material. It’s designed to make government dysfunctional and prevent civil servants from getting paid a fair wage. HR, Labor law, and Budgets determine staff salaries. Not the constitution. Do you really want to have to amend the constitution for COL pay raises? this is obscene.
This practice of making voter/citizens do the legislator’s work is completely over the top. Vote in new legislators, Make them set a budget and pay people for doing their jobs. Why would anyone vote for this level of micromanagement. Obviously punishing civil servants is more important in Oregon than passing amendments that would protect equal pay laws.
Kent
I’m not Oregonian although I was born and raised there. We now live across the river in WA.
But regarding 118. I lived for a decade in Alaska and so have long experience with the Alaska Permanent Fund which is similar to this in that it is a rebate or dividend to every resident in the state. I came to oppose the general notion because what actually ends up happening is that citizens (especially Republicans) come to believe that the sole and primary purpose of government is to funnel cash back to citizens. Schools and universities? Nope, Highways and ferries? Nope, Public health? nope. Every socially progressive idea has to die on the altar of sending cash back to people who largely don’t actually need it and are just going to spend it on vacations to Hawaii or new Snow Machines and fishing boats.
It becomes a sacred cow and a reason not to ever do anything else. And you get lots of complete dipshits like the Alaska Bush People living off the public dole rather than doing anything productive.
Rose Weiss
My local Dem party sent out a card with their recommendations. Yes on 116 and 119, neutral on the others.
I’m voting No on ranked choice because a lot of the normie people I know are confused even by the current simple choices. I think many just won’t vote if they’re confronted with having to rank candidates.
Weftage
@Timill: I was figuring they would just restart from the initial ballot results, and run the sieves again. Either way, it would take a lot longer than a recount in the current system, especially if there were some requirement to do it by hand.
cw moss
@Formerly disgruntled in Oregon: I think (literally-I don’t know!) that RCV is how Dem strongholds end up electing people like Eric Adams — a dumbshit corrupt cop — as mayor. We’ll be having RCV in the Portland City Council and mayoral election s. We’ll see how it goes.
cw moss
@Keaton Miller: thanks for your comments. Very helpful to me.
Geminid
@cw moss: I’m glad some localties and some states are trying Ranked-choice Voting before the rest of us. I want to see how well it works over a few cycles. RCV may spread to my state eventually, but at least people will be be familiar with the problems.
Weftage
@artem1s: Ordinarily, I have a tendency to vote against Constitutional measures on the ballot, precisely because they tend to be way too specific to belong in the Constitution. Those should rightfully be legislative matters.
In the case of 116, I may have been a little too brief in my description. The measure, in my view warrantedly, amends the Constitution to establish the Commission, not to mandate any specific salaries. The officials the Commissioners will set salaries for are:
Governor
Secretary of State
Treasurer
Attorney General
Commissioner of BOLI
Judges of the Supreme Court
Judges of other State courts
State Senators
State Representatives
District attorneys
None of this applies to civil servants or the general run of public employees. HR/Dept of Admin Services does that, as you mentioned. The measure would insulate the named officials, especially state legislators, from accusations of self-dealing in determining salaries.
cmorenc
Citizen-initiated ballot initiatives can be a mixed blessing in states whose constitutions allow them, both giving residents the ability to bypass and override state legislatures and governors captured by gerrymandering or special interests, but which as a corollary sometimes provide organized special interests to deceptively promote perverse measures, or give an opening to real nutcase measures (eg anti-vax or anti-fluoridation).
NEVERTHELESS, despite the openings initiatives can sometimes give to perverse interests, on balance you are far better off than in states like North Carolina, where legislative approval is constitutionally required before any ballot measure or proposed constitutional amendment can be put on the ballot for a vote by the people. For example, it will indefinitely be impossible to put restoration of women’s rights to control their body on the ballot in NC, so long as the GOP has a gerrymandered death-grip on the state legislature.
Brant Lamb
With computers, this is dead freaking easy. A programmer that can’t program this, is unworthy of the name. Period.
karen marie
@steve g: And this is how NYC got Eric Adams.
OMFG.
cain
@Formerly disgruntled in Oregon: I am inclined to vote for it simply because it’s worked pretty good in Georgia and Vermont. At least I have not heard many complaints – maybe someone from Vermont can tell.
Ranked Choice saved us on the senate seat in Georgia or not?
I can’t vote for Portland city council, but I would be really interested in someone to tell me what the hell is going on there.
cain
@Weftage:
Education funding is a shit show. Some of these school districts with low income families have become problematic. They really need to figure it out at least from a mental health perspective.
I wish we had a good plan on mental health – we keep kicking this can down the road repeatedly and every school shooting brings this up but I don’t see any bill at the state level or the federal level in regards to this.
cain
@Keaton Miller:
One thing that I find appealing is that we can have more nuanced voices here. We saw what happened to Portland with the for left of center people came in and basically feels like they screwed up the homeless situation due to inaction or just poor execution or in-fighting. It’s really difficult to figure out what exactly happened and as a voter I’m trying to figure out why the city of portland is the way it is.
We need out of the box thinking, The downtown is looking bad with so many closed shops and businesses moving to the suburbs.
Kent
@cain: Vancouver and Camas across the river are absolutely booming right now, in part (perhaps in large part) due to the dysfunction in central Portland. There is construction happening everywhere around here and downtown Vancouver is becoming a second metro area downtown it is growing so fast.
cain
@Kent:
Yes, I completely agree. I’ve grown to hate the kicker. That money needs to go into a fund drive economic growth during a downturn. Exceptions for those who are below the poverty line. They should get their kicker because we know they will spend it on the necessities. (maybe, many folks like to keep up appearances and give the illusion wealth at the expensive of basic necessities)
Kent
@cain: Not just that. Public education in OR is rather disastrous and needs a major infusion of funding and frankly new energy and urgency. Higher education is also anemic compared to many peer states.
But no, let’s get cash back.
cain
@Kent:
The Portland City Council is proof positive at times that liberals do not have all the answers. 🤡🤡🤡
Sometimes we need different kinds of people involved. I don’t mean the GOP. Even these clowns are better than the GOP. But definitely we need a different set of politicians who understand how these things work instead of arguing.
Money was provided, and these people failed the homeless, failed the city and so on based on the idea that it had to be perfect from the get go is what I recall reading.
As for the election, we still managed to elect that idiot Ted Wheeler, TWICE with our current system.
cain
@Kent: Oh no need to tell me. My wife is a assistant principal at Centennial. Lawd. The stories she can tell. I’m sure you’d be familiar with all of them.
ETA my boss moved to Camas, some gated community to get away from the taxation stuff here.
thruppence
I just filled out and dropped off my Colorado ballot. I got some help on some of the more obscure or clumsily worded ballot items by Googling, for example, Amendment XYZ, and the local public radio station had fairly clear explanations of what the measure was and who was for or against it. Seemed like a good resource, and probably exists in other states. The section that always annoys me is “Shall judge SoAndSo of some judicial district be retained?” How the hell should I know? Is there some information resource for all these judges and their rulings? I haven’t been able to find one.
Kent
@cain: I teach in the Vancouver schools (Evergreen school district in east Vancouver) which is demographically mixed. Some parts like Centennial, others more like Clackamas. But honestly the schools are fine and decently run. My current school (Heritage) is majority minority and 70% free and reduced lunch and it is frankly fine. Biggest issue is attendance. Nothing like the stories of dysfunction I hear from Oregon. Kids who egregiously misbehave are immediately bounced out to alternative school and then have to work their way back to the man campus step by step
Camas is basically Lake Oswego with a legacy papermill to give it some blue collar veneer. We live there. Lots of folks here work in OR. There are several Portland cops who live on our block and others who commute as far as Intel which seems ridiculous. But also lots who work here for Fisher Investments and other local tech companies and clinics. So it’s not just OR commuters. My wife works for Kaiser in Vancouver so we barely get over to Portland anymore. So many new good restaurants opening up here. I went to Reed and lived in central Portland for years and love it. But at this point in our lives it is more hassle than it is worth usually except for things like Powells. I’m an avid cyclist and even cycling is less hassle up here. I bike commute 13 miles each way to school and back.
battlebornecon
@WaterGirl: Here’s the one I just posted for Nevada: https://battlebornecon.wordpress.com/2024/10/14/nevada-ballot-initiatives-2024-my-voting-decisions/
Marleedog
@cain:
I do belive that the GA system is a runoff of the top two vote getters if no one is over 50 percent
Here is an explainer fo the questions in Maine.
https://mainemorningstar.com/2024/07/30/here-are-the-five-referendum-questions-that-will-be-on-the-november-ballot
Maine Morning Star is part of a consortium of independent non partisan journalism otganizations focused on state news covering all 50 states.
https://statesnewsroom.com
A good alternative to a lazy complacent MSM.
Formerly disgruntled in Oregon
@Marleedog: Thanks for clarifying this.
Geminid
@cain: In the 2020 Georgia Senate race, Libertarian Shane Hazel pulled in ~120,000 votes, just enough to hold Senator Perdue below 50% and force him into a runoff with Jon Ossoff. Then Georgia Democrats came out strong on January 5 while the Republicans faded.
cw moss
@Kent: I’m also an avid cyclist but haven’t ridden since before my Aug 8 hip replacement (10/10; definitely recommend!). I grew up in Beaverton, now live in Mill Park (David Douglas schools) and love it, but being so close to Clark Co, I’m starting to sound like a broken record going on all the time about how the ‘Couv has upped its game in the past ten years. Someone oughta plan a PDX/Clark County blog meetup after the election!
Kent
@cw moss: We moved here in 2016 when we moved back to the PNW after a decade plus in Texas (for my wife’s residency and medical career). We looked at all the logical places in the PNW from Medford to Spokane and settled on Camas. As a teacher it was easier for me to find work in WA than OR and Kaiser was growing more in Clark than the Oregon side so better options for my wife. Plus on an apples to apples comparison both the K-12 schools and colleges are better in WA. One daughter is now at UW studying biology which is a bigger and more rigorous program than any in OR. The other daughter is starting her freshman year at WSU which is at least the equal of any school in OR.
The change here in the past decade has been impressive. All kinds of great new restaurants opening and lots of interesting new development. I frankly don’t care if they never improve/replace the bridge because the harder it is to get to Portland, the more businesses will locate and develop up here. Clark County as a whole is purple. But the urban parts of Vancouver and Camas are pretty blue. It is the rural parts like Battle Ground and beyond that are red.
Cycling is a good example. Portland has superior infrastructure on paper. But the increased traffic on the roads, garbage and debris on the streets, and homeless dysfunction on the separate bike paths make a lot of urban cycling in Portland pretty white knuckle. Vancouver is more sprawling and suburban with less bike infrastructure. But there is a network of bike lanes on wide quiet streets that let me commute to work in relaxed safety compared to Portland. Most of my daily commute is on streets like this: https://maps.app.goo.gl/49h4JZKT6ANttoJr7 One can ride for miles and miles across Vancouver on streets like that. The new and expanding system of bus rapid transit up here is also impressive. You can roll your bike right on the articulated buses from the back and they have bike racks right inside the bus. Very nice. And it moves faster than the new BRT system on Division with better station design.
Formerly disgruntled in Oregon
@Geminid: This positive outcome (forcing a runoff) would likely have been prevented by using ranked choice/instant runoff. The Republicans would likely have won in a ranked choice election.
Baud
@Formerly disgruntled in Oregon:
Maybe. Can’t design a system based on anecdotal examples, however.
Another Scott
@artem1s: I agree with you in principle, but perhaps Oregon’s constitution is like Virginia’s. Namely every type of expenditure and every single tax and tax break must be specified in the state constitution.
Want to give a tax break for widows of military members killed in active duty in the military, to match the tax break for widows of those killed in action? Well, you gotta amend the state constitution.
It’s nuts.
But until the state constitution is rewritten, or there’s some giant amendment to redo those sections with a different process, then that’s what they’ve got to do.
:-/
Cheers,
Scott.
cw moss
@Kent: all good stuff for sure. A Kaiser surgeon did my hip (at Westside). Congrats to your wife in her med career.
Weftage
@Another Scott: @artem1s Oregon’s constitution isn’t quite like that, mercifully. See my response at #26.
lige
Oregon would be better off eliminating the kicker (also not going to happen) than instituting 118. We’ve made it this long without a sales tax – no need to start now! The Portland Council race is pretty overwhelming. I’m also not sure why they went with the giant districts we ended up with. I thought at large voting worked fine but if you did feel the need to chop things up I would have made them a lot more focused.
Matt McIrvin
@Weftage: Opposing voting system reform on the grounds of Arrow’s Theorem is basically making the (logically impossible) perfect the enemy of the good. Ranked choice/IRV does have a lot of potential problems but it’s much better than first-past-the-post plurality voting, in my opinion.
Now, there are reforms that various people have argued are better than IRV. One is to have a real runoff election of the top two candidates in the previous stage–either an open “jungle primary” followed by a general election with the top two, or a system that goes to a third stage if there is no majority in the second (like Georgia’s Senate races).
Villago Delenda Est
Thanks for all the opinions, folks. I’m definitely going to No 118, and 117 looks like nothing but trouble, too. The STAR people have pissed me off for the last time, a new group will do no better. KISS principle applies.
BubbaDave
@cw moss: If we’d had RCV in the 2020 mayoral election Ted Wheeler would have lost. That’s reason enough for me to be a yes on 117.
Ruckus
@Anoniminous:
Rational behavior would be more rational if rational was a normal human trait, or possibly humans learned in herds like cows, sheep and such and didn’t live as long. We don’t. Most of us learn from a number of directions and humans. And humans (most of them) have a wider range of thought than other animals seem to have. Some think that theft is a normal part of life, some think that being a complete and utter asshole is normal, some think that they are smart although math is quite difficult for them past addition/subtraction. And on and on. But in total many humans have similar thought processes and are capable of more than very simple. But it takes learning and retention. And at some point a lot of that which isn’t used a lot seems to fall by the wayside. I used to be a tutor in college for mathematics and statistics. I doubt I could do 1/3 of the math I used to do. First we have calculators that do a lot of the complicated math. Second I was in college a long time ago. Could I relearn most of it? Possibly but I am not trying or worrying about it whatsoever.
Formerly disgruntled in Oregon
@Baud: I was responding to an anecdotal example, wasn’t I?
WaterGirl
@battlebornecon: May I copy your text for a post on Balloon Juice this week?
Jacqueline Squid Onassis
I’m voting Yes on all the measures. All I need to see is the Oregon Taxpayers Association position to know I’m voting the other way. Those folks are just against anything that might be good for people. It may not be a foolproof method, but it gives me the right answer at least 99% of the time. Look at their arguments against the other measures – these people are flat out Evil with a capital E.
Ranked Choice Voting (formerly known as Instant Runoff Voting) isn’t perfect but it’s a better system than First Past the Post and it’s really simple. Yes, we all fear and loathe change and that’s basically the argument against it. It’s been used around the country for well over a decade and hasn’t made anything worse in those locales.
It’s not like 118 will come anywhere close to passing what with it being a tax on gross sales over but I do like that it makes awful groups like the OTA spend money advertising against it, so my vote keeps them scared and wasting their money on measures that were never going to pass.
“But Jackie O,” I hear you cry, “what if it does pass?” Well, just like measure 110, it’ll get repealed pretty quickly.
As to the 22 candidates in District 2, where I live… It’s easy to cut down on who to vote for – anyone who doesn’t show up at a Community Association meeting for the candidates is out. Of the 10 who showed, I could quickly eliminate the ones touting their pro-police cred, awful City Commissioner Dan Ryan, and the dude who believes that if you get people out of addiction that they’re mental illnesses magically disappear. That left me with 5 I could solidly get behind and another I’ll drop in as my 6th choice. I expect that, as usual, my first choice won’t be elected but what can you do? In any case, understanding how to vote under RCV isn’t anything your typical 3rd grader can’t be taught in 15 minutes. It’s just not that complicated.
cain
@Kent: yeah my boss works at Intel so completely believable.
cain
@Kent:
The dysfunction comes from the absolute garbage people running these school districts. Just absolutely absurd who ends up as principals and superintendents.
Literally one principal has a felony and accusations of sexual harassment!
Jacqueline Squid Onassis
@cain: 100%. And the school board hasn’t been anything close to good in decades, either. The teachers are really dedicated professionals who are being actively worked against by administrators and that just sucks.
battlebornecon
@WaterGirl: Of course! And thank you
worn
@artem1s: Way late to the party, after spreading my father’s remains atop the ridgeline atop Pine Mtn, Georgia earlier today, but will be flying back to Oregon (my home for the last 30 years) tomorrow.
My general rule for ballot measures is to vote No on all of them. There have been a few exceptions over the years, but as a general guiding principle I do not believe in legislating by plebiscite. The rule is iron clad when it comes to Constitutional amendments, ie, Hard No.
As a thought experiment I always like to envision the results of a hypothetical ballot initiative on civil rights put on the ballot in my home state circa 1962. It feels instructive regarding how to evaluate the merit of this methodology of committing laws to the books.
My 2 cents on the Oregon ballot initiative process…
HedgehogPHD
@artem1s: Agreed. These kinds of amendments are always a bad idea. And this one especially so since it creates a board that would effectively have budgetary powers.
Geminid
@Matt McIrvin: California and Washington have the jungle primary/two person runoff system you describe. This year in Washington it resulted in two same-party runoffs, one in Republican Dan Newhouse’s eastern Washington district where he faces a more conservative Republican and (I think) one in the Seattle area where two Democrats face off.
In 2022 Alaska introduced a hybrid system whereby the top four finishers in an open, jungle primary advance to a Ranked-choice runoff in November. It resulted Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski and Dempcratic Rep. Mary Peltola winning reelection. The two women campaigned together in the final weeks of the runoff.
Paul Morgan
@Keaton Miller: Thanks!
kingeider
@Formerly disgruntled in Oregon: same here, we are against it because we like PRIMARIES! A lot of different reasons. 1) it’s a great way to vet candidates on our side 2) it forces repubs to their worst statments and polices to get the nod in our closed primaries (OR repubs are really weird) and then their statements can be used against them in the general and 3) it gives us 2 opportunities to GOTV. If the turnout is not what we wish, we can target certain groups or areas to improve for the general