Remember the Republicans tried this same tactic against Kulongoski last year. Ron Saxton spent close to $6 million on televison commercials attacking the Governor on his tax record, we all know what happened to him. This race is going to turn on the same question as the Governor's race. Who do Oregonian's want to represent them? Someone with a moral center who will stand up for what they believe or just another politician who will do what ever it takes to get elected.

Let's be real folks. The Democratic controlled legislature ramped up spending by a huge amount. That didn't happen without big tax and fee increases. Trying to cloud the issue with these token and targetted tax breaks is typical Democratic deception. Merkley like every single other Democratic politician in the state support every tax increase ever dreamed up. As well as joining efforts to undermine the initiative system in order to obstruct the public's ability to stop them.

Jim, you're essentially correct, but these typical attacks will still come our way ("tax and spend," "weak on crime," etc.) Like the swift boat attacks, we still need to step up with a credible defense. It would be nice if the new Democratic majorities in Congress and the Legislature could do what the Republicans didn't, namely reign in obvious cases of waste.

Oregon's Democraticly controlled legislature is too busy dreaming up new and exciting ways to reach farther down into the pockets of Oregon taxpayers to be concerned with obvious cases of wasteful spending.

Yeah Rose, let's be real....the great bulk of spending increase came about due to increased revenue within the existing tax system. I'd like to know if you can cite the "...big tax and fee increases..." with amounts and relative percentages. My guess is that you cannot.

regards

Let's be real Rose...

Republican tax "cuts" and tax "breaks" caused the bridge collapse on Minneapolis. A Republican governor vetoed emergency spending that would have repaired this bridge and other roads. This typical Republican philosophy that the government has no place in safe guarding the public health beyond using our military to conquer innocent people is bullshit.

It is YOUR philosophy that is responsible for this Rose. YOURS.

The majority of people in Oregon want quality government services. Quality K-12 education, quality colleges, quality protection for the young and vulnerable, quality law enforcement, etc. The Dems prudently did their best to align govt. revenues with the cost of popular and necessary govt. programs. That is good government, not bad government. The Dems should be proud of their accomplishments, not trying to hide from Repub anti-tax zealots.

If Dems fall into the trap of arguing semantics with Repubs (was it a tax increase, or only a reversal of a sunset provision, etc. etc.), the Dems are going to look silly.

We are Dems. Dems believe in quality government services. Quality costs money. Live with it!

Kari, for the most part it's the latter fear (expectation, really) that now the Democrats are in (nominal) control (on the federal and state levels), every questionable expenditure will be blown out of proportion with the tired old line "tax and spend..." In fact, we're already seeing such in this thread. (I had no idea so many Republicans lurk around BlueOregon.) This forum obviously doesn't need a tit for tat for every stinking rose who shows up here, but (as opposed to Kerry's swift boat sinking) where a response is needed, it's got to beat the Republicans at their own game.

"Borrow and Spend Republicans!"

The whole tax issue is not going to have traction with some segment of the population -- as others have said, many people have higher priorities than taxes.

However, for those who do care about this issue (and they aren't all "anti-tax zealots" by a long shot), this list of targeted tax breaks hardly begins to offset the general tax increases that the Speaker has apparently (if the list at Oregon Catalyst is accurate) supported.

If you're going to try to counter the "he loves to raise your taxes" claim, you're going to have to come up with something a WHOLE lot more substantial than this.

BlueNote: Of course the majority of people want quality services. That does not mean that the majority of people want to pay for those quality services. Yes, it's stupid to expect something for nothing. But the wisdom of the electorate ain't always on the mark, you know? Doubtless we could each cite a series of ballot measures to prove that point... ;-)

If the residents of Oregon paid $40 billion in taxes last biennium, and are scheduled to pay $48 billion this biennium, that is an INCREASE, granted, not a dem deal exclusively. So to ADD earmark taxes, cig tax, whatever, is total and complete BS, since a lot more money is available. All you folks talk about is revenue, and there is PLENTY without any new taxes. That pidly list above is a total embarrassment if I am claiming I reduced taxes. Please, you have got to be kidding, but the really sad thing is that you actually believe yourselves. As far as the majority of people in Oregon wanting quality services, horsecrap. If you explained to them that your revenue is actually up close to 20%, they would ALL tell you to make do. Please just tell us HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH??? With revenue tied as a percentage, the available money increases WITHOUT a proven need, and then you have the balls to say that is not enough? How do you look at yourselves in the mirror in the mornings? With an increase of near 20% (four billion a year) we should reduce the 9% take to 7% for state income tax. You are all smoking the crackpipe of revenue and cannot get off it. It is like the PERS crackpipe. We are dems, quality costs money? Use your own freaking money dude.

This claim of huge tax increases is bogus. The first five items on this list are all the same bill. Here are the details on how that temporary surcharge would have, uh, bankrupted Oregon's families to the tune of $8.17/mo for a couple making $50-70k before being completely offset by reductions in federal taxes.

Also, they disabled the comments over there. Right after someone actually commented "Merkley is so scary!"

I so wanted to respond.

"The Dems should be proud of their accomplishments, not trying to hide from Repub anti-tax zealots."

Absolutely! I believe most people have had enough of Repugnican government that does nothing but cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations while education, health care, infrastructure and every other public service goes to hell.

"Government is like driving. When you want to go backward, put it in R. When you want to go forward, put it in D."

I have to agree with some others here that arguing against the Taxpayers Association talking points by highlighting a handful of tax breaks is a losing argument. Merkley (and Dems in general) need to make the same case on spending increases for education, health care, public safety, infrastructure, etc., that Republicans make for spending increases on defense: "The increase is necessary in order to do X."

Can you imagine a Republican saying that we need to fight the terrorists wherever they are to keep the homeland safe, and we're going to do it by eliminating all the waste in the Pentagon budget? No, they ask for billions of dollars to do something that they argue is essential for the country. Why do Democrats run from this argument? Isn't it essential to provide a good public education to the 70-80% of all American kids who attend public school? Isn't it essential to provide health care to those without, not only because it's the only moral thing to do but because it will also reduce the "uninsured tax" that each of us pay in our insurance premiums every month?

Please, stop trying to look like a Republican by highlighting a handful of tax breaks, and start looking like a Democrat by standing up for what you believe in. A safe bet is for Merkley to ask WWND: What Would Novick Do?

I'm always amused when I read right-wing propaganda or listen to it on the radio. It's been several years since I was into it, and it's still the same ol' same ol'. Nothing new at all. Meanwhile, the Democrats seem to be actually thinking. Not that I always agree with the Democrats, but until the Republicans start using their brains, why bother listening to them?

Becky, I have read your posts for some time here on BO. It is clear to me that the same personality characteristic that compelled you to be Bill Sizemore's girl for so many years - the sycophantic tendency you have to tell whomever you want to ingratiate yourself to that they are the smartest person in the room - has not changed.

Now, you suck up to the Blue Oregon types. Same gal. Never had much to add, in either place.

I know parrots that have more nuanced views on government revenue than the average Republican.

Yes, but parrots can't pronounce the letter "T" so their "Tax and Spend" speech tends to sound like "Polly wants a cracker".

Speaking of Crackers, they all seem to be out today.

"Please just tell us HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH???"-ddave

Yes, Dave. How much is enough? How much more of our nations infrastructure has to collapse at the feet if a failed Conservative ideology that "government is the problem" before you get it through your thick uneducated head that infrustructure doesn't pay for itself.

If you do not want to build a bridge, perhaps you should just jump off of one?

The Republican anti-tax ranting hasn't changed in 20 years. What's interesting is they held power for a lot of that time and they still use the same rant. They're much better at complaining than actually doing anything.

And now they're desperate. They know 2008 is going to be a terrible year for Republicans unless they can change how voters view them. Rather than becoming more mainstream, they're banking on making everyone more afraid of Democrats than they are of Republicans.

Fortunately, the middle doesn't believe them any more. They squandered their credibility on Bush.

FOOD FIGHT!

I have not read every comment on here. I am sure I would agree with most of them. But..what I did...was go over to "their site" http://www.oregoncatalyst.com and start a food fight there.

I mean...I love you folks but it is sooooo much more interesting to blog with people who really disagree with you. (Well we will see). Maybe see some of you over there or some of you over here. Let the debate begin.

Oregonrain

Can someone explain to me at what point the politics of personal attack became the weapon of choice for GOP operatives?

1980 when Lee Atwater was a Repub consultant for Floyd Spence's congressional campaign. For example, he engaged in push polling, something to the effect of the Democratic nominee having ties to the NAACP (oh the horror).

When did this happen Sal? When Lee Atwater was in buisiness.

And let's all remember what became of Lee Atwater...

When did this happen Sal? When Lee Atwater was in buisiness.

And let's all remember what became of Lee Atwater...

Atwater actually had a manner of deathbed conversion and tried to make amends before he died, a la some sort 12-step republican recovery process.

Shirl, I'm long since past caring what people like you think of me. Nice try, though.

This post got off track.

The issue is Jeff Merkley's record on tax increases over his career in the Oregon legislature.

There is a consistent Pattern: Voting for tax increases.

Merkley was not alone, most Democrats voted the same way.

This should be an interesting race in the general election because Merkley's candidacy will stand as a referendum on Democratic tax policy in Oregon the last decade or so.

JE, you're almost right. The post got off track, but the original topic was the loony anti-tax folks and their intentional distortion. You provide a nice exhibit to drive the point home.

I honestly hope you keep up the same sort of attacks. They are transparent lies and out of the mainstream -- two great things to run against.

If the Republicans really want to make a comeback, they're going to have to change their positions. At this point, America has seen where conservatism leads and we don't like it.

To Bert Lowry and lestatdelc: I wouldn't expect any other kind of rejoinder. But the record is there.

I agree on bridges and road repair, but in Portland the money has been spent on lightrail and trams. Portland with a 400 million Dollar backlog and all on street maintainence. The Sellwood Bridge...who has controlled Multnomah County Commission the last 20 years? Liberal Democrats.

State troopers? 20% budget increase over last bienium, but more money to state troopers only if a tax increase is agreed to?

Funny, but the people of Oregon rejected the last couple of tax increases they voted on.

Limited government and therefore limited taxes is out: I guess that means unlimited government and unlimited taxes are in. Hope Merkley campaigns on that, but I doubt it.

Lowry, you're a bit premature, but keep going that direction...to the left...far left...and over the cliff.

To torridjoe and lestatdelc: I'm happy to stand corrected on the state troopers issue, I'm glad Democrats at the end of the day did the right thing.

As far as street maintainence is concerned, political will is what counts, and Portlanders have seen little from the Democrats who have controlled Portland the whole time the 400 million Dollar backlog built up.

It's what is asked for by the local politicians from the Feds, and that has been for light rail.

Of course, lestatdelc makes his own strawman. What most Republicans expect (and myself included) is that tax Dollars go to priorities like street maintainence and expanding road infrastructure. But the "progressives" show nothing but distain for the personal mobility that cars represent.

Remember over 95% of commuters use cars.

lestatdelc, your last two paragraphs spell it out "tax our way to prosperity."

My position: Prioritize, get more "bang for the buck", and limit spending so what is a government role can be done well, without a knee-jerk reaction of raising taxes.

When will taxes be high enough for this crowd?

<hr/>