Recent legislative sessions have seen the introduction of controversial bills, that may need to be re-evaluated in the light of COVID-19 and how we think about public health.

Plastic Bag ban

In 2019, the Legislature passed a statewide ban on non-reusable plastic bags, HB 2509. At the time, proponents of the ban touted it as good for the environment, though the actual impact of the ban is in doubt. Opponents of the bill pointed out that among other things, reusable cloth bags can be carriers for germs, viruses and other disease carrying organisms. The heart of the bill, says simply:

A retail establishment may not provide:
(a) Single-use checkout bags to customers.
(b) Recycled paper checkout bags, reusable fabric checkout bags or reusable plastic checkout bags to customers unless the retail establishment charges not less than five cents for each recycled paper checkout bag, reusable fabric checkout bag or reusable plastic checkout bag

In light of COVID-19, single-use bags have begun to re-appear in grocery stores, and it may be time to re-consider the wisdom of the bag ban.

Cashless stores

During the 2019 Session the Legislature considered SB 716 which prohibits cashless stores, though it did not pass. Some retail establishments have found it safer, more secure, cleaner and more efficient not to take cash as a form of payment. Having employees handle cash has several drawbacks, and in a world where increasingly more and more people have the ability to make payments using a payment card, these retaillers see this as a way to operate more efficiently. Some see this as a basic freedom issue where a retail establishment should be able to do business as they wish.

Supporters of this bill see cashless stores as discriminating against those who do not have a payment card for whatever reason. Some opponents saw it as a way of protecting lawless persons -- illegal aliens, persons getting paid under the table, persons under garnishment orders, etc. -- from having to participate in normal banking acitivites, thereby making themselves more accessible to the law.

In a post COVID-19, there may need to be some rethinking of this. Currency may be considered a vector for the transmission of viruses and vulnerable people working in a retail establishment may not want to handle cash. It may also make for a safer eating establishment.

Mass transit

As a part of a massive transportation package, the 2017 legislature enacted a one tenth of one percent payroll tax dedicated to public transit. This might sound like a small amount, but it adds up to about a quarter of a billion dollars per biennium. As seen in heavily-public-transit dependent municipalities like New York City, viruses spread more quickly in denser, more urban areas, and that has to be at least in part due to mass transit.

Mass transit expansion has long been controversial, and perhaps the COVID-19 outbreak is a wakeup call that personal, physical density is not a good thing for public health. Maybe it's time to put that kind of money to work where it can be more effective -- or just return it to the taxpayers.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2020-06-17 19:02:13

Last Update: 2020-06-17 19:02:38

State Representative E. Werner Reschke (R-Klamath Falls) believes that the Governor’s call for a special legislative session, to start on June 24th, is riddled with contradiction.

Yesterday the Governor declared the Oregon State Legislature is to hold a special session starting next Wednesday, for an undetermined amount of time, to pass policy updates surrounding COVID-19 relief and Police reform.

“The fact is that Marion County remains in Phase I of Reopening. Even if the Governor were to grant Marion County Phase II status, it does not meet legislative criteria for a fair and open process to the public. The Governor says the Capitol building is to be open for legislative business, but closed to the public. Holding a legislative session while significantly limiting public access is the antithesis of the legislative process. Direct public input, transparency of process and public safety are all criteria that must be met in order for the legislature to meet and properly conduct the people’s business.”

Article IV, Section 14. of the Oregon Constitution requires legislative sessions to be open to the public. “The deliberations of each house, of committees of each house or joint committees and of committees of the whole, shall be open. Each house shall adopt rules to implement the requirement of this section and the houses jointly shall adopt rules to implement the requirements of this section in any joint activity that the two houses may undertake.”


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2020-06-17 14:47:05

Last Update: 2020-06-17 14:47:15

An election law complaint, filed against one of the most dark-money heavy political spending organizations in Oregon, may have exposed crimintal activity by the organization. The Secretary of State's office, which received the complaint on May 13 has turned the complaint over to the Justice Department, citing possible criminal activity in the complaint.

Our Oregon, an organization which has a 501(c)(4) status as a non-profit, is not registered as an Oregon Poltical Action Committee by the Secretary of State.

The complaint, filed on May 13 by the Freedom Foundation, alleges that, “During calendar year 2020 and for many years prior, Our Oregon has operated as a political committee without filing a statement of organization with the Secretary of State as required by ORS 260.035.”

The claims in question are whether or not Our Oregon made campaign contributions in a false name, which is a class C felony, punishable by up to 5 years in prison and/or a $125,000 fine.

The organization's website makes the claim that it “led the unprecedented coalition that helped pass Measures 66 & 67”, two tax increase ballot measures passed by the voters in 2010. This kind of advocacy would seem to clearly be explicit political activity.

This is not the first time Our Oregon has run afoul of the law. In November 2018, Defend Oregon, a political committee operated by Our Oregon, was cited for failing to turn in 96 valid ballots by election day. The Secretary of State's office even referred to this violation as “more severe than any other violation of election law.” Defend Oregon is still under the terms of a penalty agreement with the Elections Division.

The Justice Department investigation will be handled by Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum (D-Portland) who is up for re-election in November.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2020-06-15 13:00:05

Last Update: 2020-06-15 14:55:05

Editor’s note: Yesterday, we published a report on how members of the public employee union AFSCME were unhappy with their union leadership’s support of the recent Black Lives Matter violence. Today, a member of that union -- a 20 year employee with Corrections -- contacted the Northwest Observer and said “I feel that we have a voice that needs to be heard. AFSCME did not apologize or back off.” What follows is her response to her union leadership. It needs no further explanation, nor introduction.

From: [Name redacted]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2020 3:43 PM
To: Chamberlain Stacy ; Woolery Tim - AFSCME

I can’t find the names of all our Council 75 board members, please do forward this to anyone involved in generating the email titled, “Oregon AFSCME Board Statement”, as this is a message to them.

I have a few questions – I would like to request a copy of the minutes where this top was discussed. I would like copies of emails where your dues paying members requested you to make such a statement.

The Oregon Department of Corrections is considered a Law Enforcement agency. Police arrest people, courts sentence them and we confine them for that sentence. I find it hard to believe that you would want to hurt any of our members but that is what has happened. I’m not sure who of you, or beyond you, around you, etc. is responsible for this email but as our leadership members at different levels I can tell you it is our responsibility to fix what has been done. Did no one stop to think that we are one with our brothers and sisters in law enforcement?? You are supporting a movement that directly opposes them, which is US too!!

I pulled my dues when I found out that AFSCME was one of the largest contributors to Kate Browns election, because I felt like you guys didn’t care about us or even know us if you were giving OUR money to a politician that turned around and attacked our PERS. You paid her with our money and then had to spend our money defending all the things she has done.

Norway came along and I started to be concerned that my fellow staff members were being asked to drink coffee and paint with the people we are no longer allowed to call inmates, I was not at ease with my tax dollars going toward the payment of staff to play games with Adults in Custody; we are paid to supervise not socialize with them. How many people do you know that the tax payers pay $75 an hour to play corn hole with inmates, keep in mind inmates are criminals and teachers who have curriculum and a job description that includes games get paid far less??? So, I gave you back my money in hopes of making a difference. So far, I felt that plan had been going well. I have started communication with members, sending out information, trying to pull us together, recruiting on my own, telling people the good things the union will do for us if we stick together and let our voice be heard.

Fast forward – to the Board Statement. I am going to be radically honest with you folks . . . what were you thinking???? Did you forget BLM wants to defund law enforcement? Did you fail to realize that the BLM movement and civil rights movements of today are criminal in their actions right now against law enforcement? HOW MANY MEMBERS EXPRESSED THAT YOU WERE NOT DOING YOUR PART??? HOW MANY MEMBERS EXPRESSED THAT THIS EMAIL NEEDED TO BE SENT OUT? We work to prevent racism EVERYDAY IN PRISON!!! We are more aware of racism and do more through our work to minimize it in our setting than you can imagine!! So why would you send out such a poorly constructed email, using terms you had no business using in a letter to your members. Did we ask you to do this?? Did we tell you that you were acting racist? Did you ask your members if we had an issue that warranted an email like this?

I’m disgusted that money pays for anything that would tell our members that “We are a family, and our union will fight against acts of white supremacy whether they exist in our workplaces, in our union, or in our community. We will do more than merely add our union’s name to a list or to the statements of others - we will act and we will fight to dismantle white supremacy.” That isn’t even true!! You aren’t going to do anything about anything about white supremacy. That phrase alone is so offensive to the group of people that you sent that email to that just the nature of it made them all feel like you were talking about them. Do you not realize the pressure, scrutiny and judgment we are under as members of the law enforcement community?? That is who this movement is against, law enforcement is at the top of their list?? What are you going to do to fight systemic racism in our country??? And when did you start representing them and not us??? What are you going to do - Send out emails? No one wants to hear you preach to us about white supremacy or BLM. We want you to be preaching right now that LAW ENFORCEMENT should not be defunded, that not all members of law enforcement are bad, that we will strive to be professional members of law enforcement because ALL LIVE MATTER. Inmate Lives Matter. Correctional Officers Lives Matter. Correctional Employees and Managers Lives Matter.

Our security local has lost 33 members since June 2nd or 3rd I believe. Security plus has lost 1. We are all outraged by Mr. Floyds death. We are equally displeased by your overly zealous email. I would like to know what the follow up will be and if you all still believe this email was the right thing to do.

The issue is racism right??? What exactly do you call this . . . “We know our black members and staff are hurting and the Oregon AFSCME Black Caucus will be hosting a virtual meeting for black members and staff to come together.” First off, all that is racist!! We should not have a Black Caucus, nor a white one. We should have an Oregon AFSCME caucus that is color blind, not partial and now doing more for people based on race. WE ARE ALL HURTING RIGHT NOW. Seriously did you all think this through at all??? Reverse discrimination does not fix, cure or help racism or discrimination. I can’t tell you how many people feel betrayed by our union – at whatever level or whatever people were behind this email. I can tell you we need it fixed. If it is not fixed, we will lose more members. Like I said, I have built a great communication base. We will not tolerate our union supporting a group or movement that is anti-law enforcement right now. Did it ever occur to any of you to just do your job??? To just represent what we bring you, we all know that more than fills up your time. This was an error and I don’t want our members to continue to point it out to you through loss of membership.

I need to know now – who did this and how and when will it be fixed. If you do not reply or let me know when it will be fixed then I will assume you do not care about our concerns, feelings, safety or supporting law enforcement. I’m sorry but you guys were on the wrong side on this one and now we are paying for it.

I see you brought up George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor . . . victims of police . . . . why to a group of Correctional Professionals did you not bring up the names of the people that have been killed in the riots, the law enforcement officers beaten, ran over and murdered in the streets?? ALL LIVES MATTER.

The people YOU REPRESENT, people you work with needed a much different message than the one you sent. Let’s start with the fact that we deserve credit for being ahead of the racism movement!!!!!!! I can’t stress this enough. Why didn’t you praise us for that?? We have worked tirelessly for our entire careers to remain impartial towards the most violent and criminal group of people in the state of Oregon, to ignore race, religion, gender preference, violent tendencies, sexually predatory behavior and a list so long I can’t type it here. Did you look at our report card in that area?? We are exceeding the expectations of the entire nation. We did employ the Norway programs remember???? Did you praise anyone for how well we treat people since we do and we didn’t have to have the inmates’ riot to be treated so well??? I’m sick that this point is missed on people I work with. Our department and staff are so proactive it hurts sometimes and you want to preach to us about white supremacy??? It’s like a gut check in the worst possible way. I want you all to think about that tonight when you go to bed. In a prison that doesn’t have the systemic issues that the world is rioting about, instead of praising us for that, you told us you didn’t want to put your name on a list of something I can’t even remember. Disappointed. Disgusted. Hurt. Confused. Emotionally Triggered. You name it and you guys just stepped in it. So, let’s start by praising us for being ahead of the game!!

Secondly – we have a really low rate of excessive force. I bet we have a low rate of force in general compared to the nation. Most of us know what it’s like to be eye to eye with the most evil person you’ve ever had stare you down, he calls you ever name he can think of, threatens three generations of your family and tells you he’s going to kill you, beat you, have his way with you . . . and yet you remained calm. I bet that other officers not doing that across the nation, and doing worse, really disgust you like it does us. That was common group to build off of for our membership.

Let me end with this . . . You could have said, “We know that seeing fellow law enforcement officers murder a man in the street is probably hurting you and that the aftermath has brought negative attention to all law enforcement that has probably impacted you and your families.” On this one I struggle to refrain from using words and temperament that is unkind. Our children watch our staff leave the house every day with a badge on. Then they see on the news that those people with badges are being hated, beaten, ran over, called bad people, again a list to sad and too long. Did any of you consider what wearing a badge does to our families right now??? Or did you just want to jump on a bandwagon because it felt warm and fuzzy.

You want to represent your members and make our money worthwhile then work for us, not against us. This isn’t acceptable. OUR LIVES MATTER. Right now, some of us are afraid of wearing a badge or being associated with a career we are proud of – but hey nice job on the black lives matters email. Thanks for really looking out for what affects US and what worries and threatens us.

AFSCME Executive Director, Stacy Chamberlain sent this reply. It needs no introduction.

Dear [Name redacted],

It is evident that the wording or interpretation of the recent brief statement from the Council 75 Executive Board has troubled some of our members. While there are some within our membership that feel the letter was offensive, others feel it was not strong enough. Regardless, the purpose of the letter was to denounce racism and white supremacy when and where it exists. Furthermore, the Board statement was meant to condemn the systemic failures that have contributed to Black Americans being three times more likely to be killed by police than White or Latino Americans.

The Council 75 Executive Board decided to send that statement in order to take a righteous stand against racism and to publicly express our union’s values which are to fight for a society in which all are treated equal.

And we are not alone. Law enforcement agencies and police unions across the country have put out similar statements denouncing the murder of George Floyd.

While it may be easier to think of the killing of George Floyd as a heinous act committed by a bad cop, it is not. Mr. Floyd’s killing was only one in a long pattern of police brutality and indifference against Black people that is being seen across the country with a lack of accountability or reform in the system which is why this latest act has boiled over now. Everyone knows this is not all law enforcement, but when officers feel safe to act inhumanely, to intentionally or directly cause the death of another human while restrained, and even while knowingly on camera as happened with Mr. Floyd, there are obviously inherent and heinous problems in the system that need to be exposed and reformed. Actions like this that go unchecked, unchallenged or when perpetrators are not held accountable for their actions or worse when peers come to the defense of their illegal actions all of those things end up hurting the reputation and trust of all public safety professionals in the community.

Conversation on police reforms have already begun and as a union that represents law enforcement and corrections we know that we (our public safety members and Council 75 staff) need to be part of these conversations. It’s important we help protect legitimate due process rights and maintain safe working environments while pursuing meaningful and judicious improvements in the systems internal to policing and society to ensure all are treated with dignity and equality. Reforms are necessary not only to ensure accountability for law enforcement officers who are guilty of any form of police brutality, but to also ensure that our members, all people in the community and inmates are safe.

Some members have expressed some concerns about the Black Caucus meeting for Black members and staff only, that this is a time that we should be coming together. These meetings are much like a women’s caucus or veterans group - there is a safety in sharing one’s hopes, fears and pain with someone who has had a similar life experience, where you do not have to explain how you feel or justify it because the other person knows what it feels like. These spaces are intended for this purpose.

We want to thank you for the jobs you do every day to serve the community. We appreciate your dedicated service. I know as members who take your role as public safety officers seriously, seeing a video of a police officer disregard humanity and protocols by murdering a black man who was restrained and non-combative was horrendous. Thank you for being a part of these conversations. We need your voice.

In Solidarity,

Stacy Chamberlain
Executive Director, Oregon AFSCME


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2020-06-15 08:25:29

Last Update: 2020-06-15 22:17:20

Oregon House District 33 Oregonians have appointed a physician specializing in pulmonology, Dr. Maxine Dexter, to replace the late Mitch Greenlick, who passed away in May. Greenlick served with the Oregon legislature for nearly 18 years.

Dr. Dexter has already seen support from Ceasefire Oregon, as she has served on the Oregon Medical Association’s Firearm Injury Prevention Task Force. She has received endorsements from John Kitzhaber, the Oregon Single Payer Advocates, and NARAL, a pro-choice Oregon PAC, as well as local unions.

Oregon House Majority Leader Barbara Smith Warner (D-Portland) congratulated and welcomed Dexter to the Oregon House of Representatives and the House Democratic Caucus. “We are excited to welcome Maxine,” Majority Leader Smith Warner said. “During this time especially, her professional experience as a physician on the frontlines of the COVID-19crisisis a critical addition to the legislature. I know she will bring her passionate advocacy for health care, as well as the environment, working families and education to this new role. We all look forward to working with her in the coming months and years to build a better Oregon for all.”

In a historic first, Dexter’s addition to the Oregon House of Representatives means that female legislators will now represent 50 percent of House districts throughout Oregon. Due to COVID-19safety precautions, a private swearing-in ceremony will be held on Sunday. Oregon Supreme Court Justice Adrienne Nelson will administer the oath of office.


--Ben Fisher

Post Date: 2020-06-14 19:35:32

Last Update: 2020-06-14 19:36:02

On his way to stumbling toward a yes vote on PERS reform -- you remember SB 1049 -- State Senator James Manning, Jr. couldn't help but remind everyone that he favors fully free pre-K through college education for every Oregon Student. Never mind that he had to take a tough yes vote to pay for the over-bloated public employee pension plan. It was a good opportunity for him to remind everyone that he favors new massive spending.


While most people support free K-12 education, somebody needs to explain to Senator Manning that free college is one of the most regressive uses of public money. The idea that everyone -- including those who do not go to college -- should subsidize the education and the enhanced ability to earn money, of those who do go to college, should offend everyone.

If Manning really wants free college, he might want to look into a pay-it-forward program -- already passed in Oregon as a way for students to get a free college education.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2020-06-13 19:10:37

Last Update: 2020-08-11 19:37:51

Everyday science isn't hard. You just observe what is around you in the universe, cook up theories about it, and then test those theories. Maybe if you are dealing with sub-atomic particles, it gets a little bit harder to observe, but the basics are still the same. Observe this graph, produced by the Oregon Health Authority, under the direction of Pat Allen.

In an open letter to Oregonians written back in mid-March, Director Allen said “We need to flatten the curve of new COVID-19 infections.” One look at the chart above would seem to indicate that we have flattened the curve. With the exception of some outlying activity recently -- due to lack of hygiene at riots, maybe? -- an honest person might conclude that the curve has been flattened.

Indeed, the chart is a little bit difficult to read, mostly because the amount of data on it is so small. One can see a small, but perceptivle divergence between cases and hospitalizations, i.e. cases are stable, but hospitalizations are dwindling. This is probably due to an increase in testing. One stat that's not on the chart is deaths, which have been decreasing consistently.

Critics of Oregon Governor Kate Brown’s COVID-19 policies have noted that the cries for flattening the curve in March, only to have the goalposts moved into June and beyond, might have the effect of undermining confidence in her ability to manage the matter.

The Oregon Health Authority has been called out for being less than transparent with data about COVID-19. Additionally, many legacy media organizations have reduced their coverage to click bites. For instance, the chart above tells a great deal of the story, without emotion, yet it’s not commonly seen in coverage.

For a Governor who is facing two recall attempts, one by the Oregon Republican Party and one by a grassrooots group, it might be wise for the her to execute a little more precisely on the science.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2020-06-13 18:17:27

Last Update: 2020-06-13 18:17:34

The nation's largest trade union for public employees is seeing a wave of membership cancellations after an email was circulated amongst members expressing solidarity with the movement Black Lives Matter. The email, signed by “Oregon AFSCME Board”, read:

"Oregon AFSCME joins in mourning the murder of George Floyd, in demanding the arrest of the remaining two officers involved in his murder and an end to the rampant systemic racism that plagues our nation. We are seeing a response across this country and in protests around the world for not only the lack of action taken in response to George Floyd’s murder, but for Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and countless more who have been murdered.

Oregon AFSCME’s core vision and values are to fight for equity and justice and against oppression in all forms. In the murder of George Floyd, we saw the abject failure of all of the law enforcement officers involved to perform their fundamental function of protecting life and serving the community. We know our black members and staff are hurting and the Oregon AFSCME Black Caucus will be hosting a virtual meeting for black members and staff to come together. To begin our commitment to this work the full Oregon AFSCME Board will go through a dismantling racism training which focuses on what anti-white supremacy means, what it looks like, and how to stand against it. This training will be available to all members and staff.

We are a family, and our union will fight against acts of white supremacy whether they exist in our workplaces, in our union, or in our community. We will do more than merely add our union’s name to a list or to the statements of others - we will act and we will fight to dismantle white supremacy.

To be silent is to be complicit and we will not be complicit. Black lives matter!

In Solidarity,

Oregon AFSCME Board"

The dissatisfaction seems to come from the perspective that such a gesture is unnecessary and critics have suggested is merely partisan political pandering. Corrections officers who are members of the AFSCME have expressed that they feel betrayed that their board leadership would support such an extremist group that is already working to defund entire police departments, and are concerned of the unfairness and racial inequality present in the BLM agenda.

While still in solidarity with practically everyone in that the death of George Floyd was certainly an injustice, these members who are quitting believe that the AFSCME need not have gotten them involved by making such a statement. An apology was even issued amongst membership after the reaction, anonymously:

"I would like to apologize to any of the members of local 3940 that received this email from Oregon afscme, it is highly offensive and unacceptable. This is not the type of rhetoric we expect to receive from our own union."

Observers have noted the potential division caused by this statement from the AFSCME board, especially considering that those who work in correctional institutions can often be working closely with the police. A 2018 US Supreme Court decision determined that public employees may not be forced to join or pay dues to a union as a condition of employment. More information on how to sever ties with one’s union can be found here


--Ben Fisher

Post Date: 2020-06-13 16:48:38

Last Update: 2020-06-13 17:00:55

During the debate over PERS reform and SB 1049 during the 2019 session, Senator James Manning, Jr. (D-Eugene) shares his true feelings about corporations who complain about having their taxes raised.


Like many Democrats, Manning seems oblivious to the fact that it is the people who produce wealth -- corporations, for the most part -- are footing the bill for his welfare state. Earlier, in the same speech, Senator Manning speaks about how he supports free education through college for every student in Oregon. He doesn't propose a mechanism to pay for it.

It's no wonder that we have a hard time digging ourselves out of a massive unfunded PERS liability under the leadership of those like Senator James Manning.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2020-06-13 16:07:22

Last Update: 2020-08-11 19:38:21

Governor Kate Brown and the Super Majority in the Oregon Legislature are anxious to hold a “special session” sometime in June. I want to know how this is good for Oregon in the current pandemic? How exactly does the Legislature hold a special session without implementing Phase 3 of the Governor’s reopening guidelines?

Consider that the Oregon State Capitol is an 80 year old “incubator” for viruses now, which is one of the reasons the Legislature invested in massive building upgrades that are still underway. Anyone who’s ever worked there is very familiar with the infamous “Capitol Crud” that flies through the building every session. How could anyone even consider meeting there now? Even if only the 90 legislators met, what if they took Covid 19 back to their 90 districts? Some counties have no cases and especially no deaths.

Now let’s talk about transparency and equity. There will be no public input. It will all be electronic. “But Bill, it’s all online now!” Really? And every Oregonian has access to a computer and internet? I was not aware that that was true. If it were, then why are we having problems with “distance learning” in our schools? There will only be written testimony allowed to be submitted. That means no public testimony or questions. Regardless of the Constitutional issues, how is this fair and equitable to all Oregonians?

Let’s look at “fair” in regard to the very guidelines that ALL of Oregon must live with right now. The State Capitol is in Marion County. Marion County is not even in Phase two of the reopening right now. Even if it were, the limit on “large gathering” is 250 people. There is no way NOT to have over 250 people in the Capitol. Just 90 legislators and one staffer each is 180, plus Legislative Revenue Office staff, Legislative Fiscal Office staff, policy analysts, technicians, the clerk’s office in the House, the Secretary of the Senate’s office, mail room, janitors, State Police….that’s even disregarding the lobbyists, and most importantly, THE PUBLIC….YOU! We must consider the health and welfare of all Oregonians, which is impossible with a session at this time.

So, while Oregonians must abide by the guidelines, the Legislature is exempt? Although there is important work to be done, let us not jeopardize the health and safety of all of Oregon while conducting that work. Being a member of the Legislature I believe in equity for all Oregonians. Which is why having a special session is unfair to other Oregonians. For example: student athletes who can’t play sports. Businesses that can’t operate. Employees who are still unemployed and can’t go to work. Seniors who can’t get out nor have visitors.

Governor Brown has to decide. Either we are out of this pandemic now and can meet in large groups, opening Oregon completely or the outbreak is still too high and we must maintain the current status. Oregon’s health and safety is of the utmost importance. The science is clear, Oregon is still in a vulnerable place. We must not exacerbate that by having hundreds of people in a close fitting, older building. This can wait until October. We cannot have both.


--State Representative Bill Post

Post Date: 2020-06-13 15:49:00

Last Update: 2020-06-13 16:15:33

At the end of each daily legislative floor session, legislators are allow to give a few minute speech on anything of their choosing, called a remonstrance.

During the 2019 session, Rep. Marty Wilde gave this remonstrance, not driven by any legislation, but driven by an article that someone gave to him. This is his idea of how the party in power has a conversation about climate.


Rep. Wilde is entitled to his opinion -- even a few minutes with a captive audience on the floor of the Oregon House of Representatives -- but it's a little unbecoming to invoke science while committing just about every logical fallacy in the book.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2020-06-13 10:34:27

Last Update: 2020-08-11 19:10:37

For far too long farmers have been stereotyped as environment-trashing know-nothings. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is the favored tool of litigious-happy, urban environmental groups who attack rural America and are rewarded with court-ordered attorneys’ fees. In the Klamath Basin of southern Oregon and northernmost California, farmers and ranchers using water from a federal water project are on the bleeding edge of the onslaught.

On June 18, the Supreme Court has the chance to give these citizens a day in court and protect American values.

The Klamath Irrigation Project was approved 115 years ago under the National Reclamation Act, which promoted settlement of the West and production of food to feed a hungry world. Brave settlers accepted the challenge to work hard, repay the government’s water project construction costs as well as their own production costs, and produce food. On much of the Klamath Project, veterans of World Wars I and II were awarded homesteads as gratitude for their service, and literally built communities from the ground up.

In 2001, the remaining original homesteaders were shocked when their own country shut off all their irrigation water. The excuse? Government biologists in faraway offices decided that all the water in the farmers’ reservoir had to be either: (1) held for endangered sucker fish; or (2) sent downstream to artificially increase river flows for a fish that spends more of its time in tributaries of the Klamath River rather than the river itself. So devastating was the damage that the National Academy of Sciences was called in to review the science. The verdict? The water that was taken from farmers and used to support higher lake levels and downstream releases was not scientifically justified. The science showed that the fish did not benefit, even if society does elevate suckers above people.

This devastation was engineered in the last days of the Clinton Administration. President George W. Bush’s Administration recognized the injustice, brought in objective science, and brought about some stability. Meanwhile, the farmers rightly sought relief from courts. In the Western states, water rights for irrigation are private property rights. When that property is taken, our constitution requires that the federal government pay those citizens for that “taking.” Even if the science was not legitimate, society should pay for the property taken, if society does in fact elevate suckers above rural American’s property rights.

Enter the U.S. Department of Justice, which tied up the farmers in federal courts for 18 years. Swarms of federal lawyers leveraged urban ignorance of Western water law to shut down the farmers: damn their communities, and never mind the flawed science. The most recent decision by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit missed the mark so far that public water agencies who serve vast areas of the West have joined the call for the Supreme Court to set things straight.

Sadly, the farmers who were not completely bankrupted in 2001, and young farmers who have mustered up the courage to stay home, are getting beat up again this year. The Trump Administration inherited a brutal court injunction limiting Klamath farmers’ water, following the same government bureaucrats to take over again and run the show. This year, there was an announcement of an impossibly meager water allocation for Klamath Project farmers in early April.

Then, incredibly, after crops were planted, a decision was initially made to cut water supplies again, raising the specter of desiccated crops, and stranded private investment. This potential whack at rural America was averted after thousands of Klamath farmers and other folks participated in a 29-mile convoy, protesting the decision. Fortunately, the Trump Administration’s Department of the Interior and Bureau of Reclamation were able to adaptively manage a relatively wet May and restore to farmers the earlier April 1 supply commitment. But that is still severely less than needed, and entirely due to the ESA.

The blunders of the lower courts need to be fixed, and quickly. The Supreme Court has proven capable of grasping Western water law in the past. It needs to step in and right the wrongs.

--State Representative E. Werner Reschke

Post Date: 2020-06-12 14:06:14

Last Update: 2020-06-12 16:06:45