More financial foibles for Linda Flores

Carla Axtman

In a Tony Marino-style mea culpa, State Rep. Linda Flores (R-Clackamas) has issued a mailer to constituents in an effort to preempt criticism for her personal financial problems. Flores is running in House District 51 against Democrat Brent Barton--who totally deserves your support.

The Clackamas Review takes note:

State Rep. Linda Flores took the unusual step of sending a letter to her constituents last week that discussed her personal financial woes.

The letter, sent to voters in Flores’ House District 51, stated that Flores’ husband, Armando Flores, ran into troubles with his lawn care company when a business partner left, and has “had trouble keeping up with certain bills which were turned over to a collection agency.” The letter further states that while Linda Flores is not “an officer or shareholder” in the business, she shares a joint checking account with her husband, so her wages have been garnisheed.

Linda Flores had prior financial issues she said were related to her husband’s business problems. She had her legislative wages garnisheed twice in the past six years. In 2002, Ford Motor Credit Company repossessed her car when she couldn’t make payments. Court documents from 2007 show that a collection agency had a claim against the Flores for unpaid medical bills. That collection agency, Asset Systems, Inc., garnisheed her wages from Nov. 2007 until Feb. 2008 to the tune of $3,900.

You'd think someone with this kind of financial history might be a little more sympathetic to those Oregonians who also suffer from money troubles. Not so much, it seems.

Here's Flores' mea culpa mailer:

Here is where Flores tells us that people are skeptical about government--and if only we could hold everyone accountable and listen. Except that apparently this accountability doesn't extend to her personal financial stuff--hence the collection agency.

And while we're talking accountability, Flores isn't exactly a representative for people who are up against it financially. Her voting record is an homage against those who struggle financially.

Flores 2007 no votes on consumer protections:

HB 2202 - Prohibits certain persons from conducting check-cashing business without a license to prevent price gouging and limits check cashing fees to $5 or two percent (whichever is greater) of face value of government checks, three percent of face value of payroll checks and 10% of other checks.

HB 2203 – Extends the payday loan and title loan restrictions to out of state lenders (those using the internet, mail and telephone who reach Oregon residents), creates a database to track these loans and prohibits debt collection by these lenders unless licensed by the state.

HB 2204 – Limits maximum rate on title loans to 36% per annum and limits the origination fee to $10 for each $100 increment loaned.

HB 2871 - Sets maximum finance charge or interest rate so that it cannot exceed 36 percent per annum or 30 percentage points in excess of discount rate on 90-day commercial paper in effect at Federal Reserve Bank for all consumer finance, payday and title loans of $50,000 or less.

SB 118 – Allows state Attorney General to have expanded authority to regulate price gouging under declared emergencies.

2008:

HB 3063: Relating to prepayment penalties and disclosures of mortgage consultants (passed by House only in 2008 session).

HB 3631 – DANGEROUS TOY PROTECTION ACT
Nearly 30 million children’s toys have been recalled this year, many of them because they contain dangerous amounts of lead. A loophole in federal and state law allowed retailers to continue to sell these dangerous products. Oregon’s Attorney General will now have the power to force retailers to remove
these products from their shelves.

And don't even get me started on Flores when it comes to her wretched votes on health care. An individual with consistent and ongoing personal financial problems who votes so badly on this issue is a lousy representative--for themselves and their constituents.

Flores financial problems have plagued her since at least 2002, if not longer. That's a big stretch of time for an "accountability" person to have to cop to. So why would Flores continue to work against basic consumer protections and health care?

Maybe it has to do with some of those sweet campaign contributions from lenders, corporations and big business?

By Carla Axtman Oct. 15, 2008