Eat the rich.

Dems need to focus on economic development by creating public/private partnerships and incentives for small businesses that are energy and eco-friendly. Small scale locally based energy development could be huge, such as, geothermal projects in eastern and Southern Oregon, and wind energy along the gorge and coast. Right now the emphasis on health care access needs to be a federal priority. Dems need to focus on a campaign to end the meth epidemic that is such a huge cause of crime and child neglect and abuse.

Dems will quickly become a minority party and out of power if they start talking sales tax. It should be noted that the sales tax has been more of a Republican interest because of its regressive nature.Unions have historically been adamant about opposing a sales tax. Our govt. finance picture needs to focus on ending the kicker permanently for corporate taxes and building up the rainy day fund. The ending of loopholes and dodges for the high income and corporate is a better place to look than creating new taxes.

Goodie. Finally. A conversation about women and people of ALL colours and cultures. There are plenty of good minds and people with the backgrounds to add to this if it's really going to be a serious call for purviews. My native relations are glad and grateful for this election outcome. But, they say, based on the entire process as demonstrated in America, and the coverage, it was not their election. It again had nothing hugely to do with them. It is not their way, it is foreign to their original culture, anyway.

But the largeness of their view and culture say that this is the chance for all people to open their hearts and minds now, and to do something new in America. They hope in spite of being of little interest to anyone beyond being a tool or a sentimental story.

I agree with Karol's 2nd comment but I would broaden it.

The more bipartisan a proposal, the better. The closer we can get to "everything on the table" about the state's financial system, the farther away we will be from the Minnis "the voters have spoken on Measure 30" nonsense which only polarized and didn't solve anything. (Although it might have paved the way for Minnis's party to lose majority.)

Recently I came across a printout of a slide show St. Sen. Morse once had online--someone printed it out for me because at the time my computer couldn't handle the size of the file. The conclusion page talks about a solid financial foundation for Oregon based on 4 components:

How we collect revenue How we budget How we spend How we save.

If there could be an open public discussion of that, rather than "can't have sales tax, can't touch the kicker, but we must have spending discipline" debates of the past, some intelligent new ideas might emerge.

I'd suggest the first reform be to return to the days when Ways and Means decisions were made in open committee session, not in some small room with a bunch of people around the table but the public not invited to watch.

Second, I understand there is something presession filed about creating a task force or whatever to look at all the Tax Expenditures (aka tax breaks). If need be, get some sort of legal opinion on whether eliminating tax breaks counts as "raising taxes". If it does, then make it public if there are Republicans who are willing to keep tax breaks without specifying publicly what specific budget line spending they want to cut to pay for the tax breaks. It takes 31 + 16 votes to cut spending, and all the rhetoric in the world won't change that. For all the talk of Democrats, it was Republican Sen. Jackie Winters who said some of the cuts would affect needy Oregonians and she wouldn't let them out of her subcommittee the year the Senate was 15-15.

Babies born the year Measure 5 changed so much of state budgeting were old enough to vote this year, so don't let anyone again insult our intelligence by saying "the voters have spoken on Measure 5".

Don't forget that during the 5th special session, a Ways and Means chair said the reason it was so hard to balance the budget was that "Gov. Roberts was right about Measure 5 in everything but the timing". Didn't hurt his political career to say that--we just elected him State Treasurer. Remember that candor impresses many people more than jargon and sloganeering.

Think of transparency as a general rule: for instance, OK to have closed caucus lunches, but why do there need to be caucus meetings in the middle of floor sessions? That's the kind of political game which makes ordinary folks angry.

Make this the year that management is held accountable, not just front line workers. Maybe that means more regular performance audits of the business practices of school districts. Contrary to some rhetoric, "the teachers unions" no more set those policies than front line auto workers decide which cars GM or Ford will make.

Are school district central office administrators making twice as much as teachers? More than that? Is there a way to make those salaries publicly available? What about benefits? What exactly are those administrators (HR, curriculum, etc.) doing to merit such high pay? Are school boards just going along with whatever management wants while not paying attention to the needs of frontline workers? And is administrative pay taking away money which could be used for building maintenance and other essential spending? As long as the state pays such a large amount of school funding, they should be held accountable for ALL the school district budget decisions. If someone complains that Democrats are being partisan in doing that, remind them that when Mike Huckabee was running for president, an interviewer gave him the opportunity to say teachers unions are the cause of all problems in schools. Instead, he said "When I was Gov. and we took over a failing school, first we fired the Supt. and then we told the school board their services were no longer needed". Management held responsible, what a concept!

What he said of teachers was that there was a real burnout problem--too many teachers decided to leave between their 4th and 5th year because there just wasn't enough support given them.

Finally, I disagree with Karol's #2. This is going to be a tough enough session regarding budget issues, without getting into divisive social issues.

Karol, if we are going to talk about sales taxes again, I think we should require an income/debt disclosure from each poster. It might shed light on the bloviations therein. Mine is driven by the fact that I'll barely be able to breathe again if I am stifled by a layer of sales taxes. We live without frills, have nothing but student loan debt crushing. Our footprint is not small in a conscious and defensible way yet. We continue concerned by instability in this market.

Can you honestly advocate for food stamp recipients paying sales taxes on their purchases? Really? Or the unemployed who get just enough to only have that unemployment to make all bills upon? There are many layers to this! And it has been discussed to a nubbin up here before.

I think disclosure of just how hard or not it will hit YOU personally is a good place to start before we start talking about moral obligations and willingness to tighten belts, eh? We could do like the politicians do: just a lite version of their disclosures for the sake of bloviational transparency.

Why is it that Oregon insists on focusing its job growth in only ONE area at a time? First it was silicon forest and that failed. Then we were gonna be the biotech capital of America, don't hear much about that anymore. I think the next focus was biofuel, but then we found out do so makes food too expensive. Now, "green tech" is the mantra.

I have a suggestion, why don't we work to make Oregon a great place for ALL businesses to grow and thrive.

It will be very important to gain back the ground we've lost in K-12 education since Measure 5.

Here is a semi-specific suggestion . . .

In Portland Public Schools, and perhaps in some others, 3% to 5% of the students wind up commanding 20% to 40% of the institution's time, care, and resources. They are simply more needy, they start from a different place. Some of them come with serious undiagnosed (up to then) mental illness. Some of them are recent immigrants from a region with a language that has no written form. Some have been abused beyond my will to describe it. And on and on and on.

Now, about half of these 3% to 5% can be helped in a regular public school by mainstreaming them. It's rough going for a year or two, and it takes a lot of patience on all of our parts, not the least on the part of the student, but good things eventually happen. I know many many success stories and the memory of their faces get me out of bed in the morning.

BUT . . . the other half seem to need placement in some alternative situation where they can benefit from a much more tightly structured environment than we can provide in a public school. We have some of those places in Portland, but students are lined up for placement. Too many students want to be there, not enough places for them.

If we simply made things more manageable for Special Education teachers and English Language Learner teachers, we would relieve a lot of the pressure on the entire system.

Because Multnomah County is the large urban area for Oregon and the largest place for social services, employment, international culture, health care, etc., our school system gets a disproportionate number of very needy students.

By the way, this is another reason why the Portland Public School "neighborhood choice" system makes no sense - all schools get the same ratio of students to teachers (FTE) no matter if those students are from well-to-do connected families from the West Side or from dramatically different family situations . . . kind of like staffing hospitals with the same number and kind of doctors where some hospitals treat ankle sprains and mild flu symptoms and the other hospitals treat exotic cancers and all the city's trauma victims.

But I digress.

If the Democrats could see their way clear to helping the worst off of the children in our school system by increasing their educational and treatment options, it would help everyone. If the legislative leaders would simply ask working Special Education and English Language Learning teachers (not the bureaucrats, bless 'em all), the solution would be quite cost effective, not to mention morally satisfying.

What you mean "we", white man?

Karol, part of the knee jerk reaction comes from the 1980s. Imagine the fight in the GOP between people who believe in abortion rights as a freedom issue (individuals having the right to make their own medical decisions without government interference) and those who believe abortion is morally wrong and the government should make the decision that every child conceived should be born.

And you'd have the atmosphere of the sales tax debate within the Democratic Party of the 1980s. There were certain party activists who regarded certain Democratic legislators as traitors. There were those who thought it was OK to be rude to anyone who disagreed with them. There were people who said if their views were going to be the subject of insults, then the Democratic party should realize they wouldn't send donations to a group whose activist members insulted them publicly.

On the other hand, a friend of mine who is a previous (over a decade ago) Democratic office holder says he could design a sales tax which would be a revenue solution but not hurt ordinary people.

This is why I quoted Sen. Morse. If we could get a bipartisan debate going about a package of several changes, maybe we could finally come to a solution.

A generation has grown up since those battles of the 1980s. Budget problems have only gotten worse. Yes, the kicker is in the Constitution, but so are a lot of other things which should be statute instead. Tim Knopp put that in the Constitution, but he is no longer a legislator. What is stopping the discussion of what one wit called "sticky notes on the Constitution" being somehow changed to statute or some other intelligent solution?

The question is whether we can put the polarization of the last decade plus years behind and have civil debates over serious issues.

My hope is that yes, we can.

What do Dems need to do?

1) Don't kill anyone or steal anything, or do any else that would earn a person a felony sentence.

2) If someone gets caught committing a misdemeanor, don't lie about it. Nobody really cares about petty crimes. They only care about the lies trying to cover-up petty crimes.

<hr/>

Karol

Sales tax = one form of flat tax.

All forms of flat taxes = regressive taxes that inflict greater pain on the poor and middle classes. They are inspired by various right wingers throughout history. It's one particular precept of right wing dogma we've been lucky to avoid in Oregon.

If citizens of New Mexico passed a law saying they would start doing Lent parades in Santa Fe like the Lent parades in Philippines with citizens walking down the street flaying their backs open with barbed leather whips, I can't stop them from doing that. They can copy anyone they like and start inflicting whatever pain they wish on themselves.

Doesn't mean I'm gonna start flaying my back open, though.

Frank

Don't we in fact have a de facto "flat tax" of 9% here in OR since the income threshold is so low?

MP

No. It's not. That said, the need for money in this state means there's need for tax rates to be more progressive. A higher top rate.

"We can't meaningfully influence initiatives that are hidden from view, or difficult for non-insiders to decipher. The more government work carried out in the public sphere, the more it can be appreciated, and the more it can be influenced to take better account of all stakeholders."

AMEN, Pete!

Which is why the legislature needs to turn its back on the closed door discussions of the Minnis et. al years.

If House Bill 1234 is supposed to be discussed on Tuesday at 1 pm and there are individuals in the general population coming to the capitol to testify, it is only common courtesy to make sure the hearing happens as scheduled--or else provide notification in a timely manner. If the chair is ill, can't the vice chair fill in? Too often in recent years, it seemed as if games were being played with committee hearings. And maybe it is time reconsider the protocol where legislators and lobbyists who are in the capitol every day testify before ordinary citizens, unless it is the sponsor of the bill beginning the hearing by testifying and answering questions.

Along those same lines, legislators shouldn't be leaving a hearing during the testimony of ordinary citizens just to stand out in the hallway and talk to a lobbyist. They should only leave for emergency reasons (like a staff member coming to tell them they have an important phone call, or perhaps a constituent visit).

There was a wonderful legislator from a nearby district whose wife worked in his office. I happened to be in the capitol building when I encountered some teenagers from that district. They didn't know the name of their state legislators, so I took them up to meet their state rep. When his wife met them, she was as gracious as if they were important people (in fact, future voters are important).

Some things need legal changes, rule changes, laws passed, etc. But there is also a need for attitude changes--do legislators really care what those who aren't in the building every day think of them, or not?

Decriminalize recreational marijuana. Legalize industrialized hemp production.

Legalize prostitution and regulate it, Nevada-style, in counties and municipalities where the democratic majority supports it.

The war on drugs and war on human sexuality, homo and hetero, can't be won. It's not worth fighting either. Push the black market economy into the sunlight and use its proceeds for good.

Pass a resolution to bring home all Oregon National Guard from Iraq and not send out any more deployments until U.S. Congress officially declares war.

OK Jenni, you don't want a sales tax.

How do you propose to pay for roads and improving education without debating changes to the revenue system?

If you have an alternate proposal, I'd be glad to listen.

However, I remember when Democratic legislators and others were supporting a plan to change the revenue system, and people like you said it was regressive because it had a sales tax involved and that was regressive, so those of us who supported it were "not real Democrats".

One of those "not real Democrats" was later elected to statewide office. Those of us on the State Central Comm. who had voted with the legislators basically found other uses for our time over the next few years because we had better things to do than be insulted. If we weren't "real Democrats", why were we spending our spare time being involved in party politics?

So yes, Jenni, you are proof of the "sales tax over by dead body" crowd still exists. But what is your alternative? If you don't have an alternative, then, as Kari says, Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Nov 16, 2008 2:40:39 PM

we need a broader conversation.

And speaking of broader conversation, the legislature needs to do oversight. I sent this link about an Oregonian stuck in red tape to some local legislators.

http://www.ridenbaugh.com/index.php/2008/11/15/your-papers-please/

Already there has been a response from a staffer for one of them. The response could be summed up as "not my job unless the person lives in our district". Talk about ways to turn off the public!

<i.even when="" buying="" the="" cheapest="" soaps,="" toiletries,="" etc.,="" it="" was="" not="" out="" of="" the="" ordinary="" to="" see="" $10+="" in="" sales="" tax="" in="" a="" shopping="" trip.="" do="" you="" know="" how="" much="" food="" that="" keeps="" off="" that="" family's="" table?<="" i="">

Based on my grocery bill today, not much :-)

rw wrote: "Goodie. Finally. A conversation about women and people of ALL colours and cultures."

RW, Clearly by the way you spell "color" you are not a real American. Turn off the soccer (not football) and get your citzenship papers!

The following was cut from my last post:

Even when buying the cheapest soaps, toiletries, etc., it was not out of the ordinary to see $10+ in sales tax in a shopping trip. Do you know how much food that keeps off that family's table?

"nativist": give that shit a rest, pal.

In order to maintain control Democrats need to portray a sense of humor. Sorry, your feelings were hurt rw. Perhaps some government funded sensitivity training would have stopped my hands from typing.

How can we make sure that the hundreds of thousands of Oregonians who signed up with the Barack Obama campaign turn their attention now to building a bigger, stronger, smarter, and more effective progressive movement here in Oregon?

By listening to all ideas and not dismissing them out-of-hand just because you don't agree with them. That seems to be the message Barack has sent this entire campaign. He listens to everyone. It is very easy to get the feeling that, as a moderately successful business owner, I am not welcome in this movement. If that is the case, that would be very sad as I feel I have a lot to offer, given that my POV might be different than many of yours.

"nativist": synonymous with "xenophobe", eh?

Oregon needs a more progressive income tax. Raise the top rate to 10%, but put in some lower brackets (say, 6% and 8%) with meaningful graduation, and then index the brackets to prevent bracket creep in the future. That could be a revenue-neutral way to give most Oregonians a tax cut.

For stability, impose a reasonable spending cap (not the unrealistic "inflation + population growth" cap that doesn't take real costs into account, and make sure there's no "downward ratchet") and invest the surplus in good years, providing an automatic reserve fund. Also, dump the kickers and set aside part of the surplus into a rainy day fund, and the rest into a permanent endowment fund for education.

Actually, Oregon should look at create one or more permanent endowment funds to be fed with surplus revenues or even streams of dedicated revenue such as lottery money. The beauty of a permanent trust is that the money that goes into it stays there, and the interest can support vital state functions (such as schools) through good times and bad, forever. Imagine a $20 billion endowment feeding $1 billion per year to Oregon's public schools before we even need to touch the general fund.

Forget about a general sales tax; that's both regressive and a political non-starter. On the other hand, we should look at imposing specific excise taxes, such as taxes on lodgings or restaurant meals.

As for a ballot measure to overturn measure 36: that should be a citizen's initiative. It shouldn't come from the legislature.

... also, "nativist", I've yet to see efficacious corporate-sponsored "diversity" training. Am sure you agree. It is surface, bullshit, mandated. And makes very little difference. It is mandated, and that's why it exists. Not because people are all that interested in checking themselves for dinner or for leftovers.

Karol: I've lived most of my life in sales tax states. Ponied up and shrugged b/c it was not a choice. AND b/c I was living in exciting places where you knew "pay thru the nose" was the deal.

But other than while living in SF, NYC, I did not pay outrageous percentages of my income to keep roof over head, making one third less per hour than peers of the same niche in other parts of the nation, locale notwithstanding.

Oregon pays like a lowball state. Oregon charges obscenely for board, comparatively.

Perhaps you make a good enough living it does not faze your consciousness at all. This may not be true of all others. Please try hard to be respectful of that knee-jerk you describe and use your wonderful powers of compadre to tease out the etiology of said jerk. Maybe some folks are at the edge of what they can afford. Some might have been in reaction against who's in charge of spending that dough! This could change! Ain't that exciting?

However, I concede that my reaction is probably of the kneejerk variety, and I'd somehow adjust to whatever gets dished out. I'd find a way, always have. And if I can make myself BELIEVE in what is being done with it, I'm famous for manifesting out of nothing.

Weird. The first few paragraphs of my last post simply disappeared when I posted it. I don't feel like going back and rewriting it, but it stressed the paramount importance of adequate education funding from pre-school to grad-school. The most important economic development step we can take is a first-rate education system.

As for how to keep the "hundreds of thousands of Oregonians who signed up with the Barack Obama campaign" involved in building a stronger and more effective progressive movement: social networking. And fun. Maybe parties and other fun social gatherings. Keep it friendly, keep it fun, and building in a lot of face time. Come for the politics, stay for the friends, keep the politics going. There are hundreds of ways to network socially, and people will be more responsive to requests to help out if there's a already a personal connection with the person making the request.

Ok Kari - I will bite.

To maintain and possible build a permanent majority in Oregon, progressives should remember the basics and stay focused on those priorities most important to voters.

1) Education Improve graduation rates. Make sure schools are safe. Renovate or rebuild old schools to meet the technology and learning needs of today’s students. Freeze college tuition rates. Reevaluate how we meet the needs of our special needs kids.

2) Health Care Make sure no child in Oregon is without insurance - do it now. This is perhaps the largest failure of our society that we refuse sick children health care. Then we can move onto controlling costs and preventing disease rather than just curing it.

3) Energy Independence Want to make sure your kids have a better life than you? This is the key for Oregon's urban and rural kids. It is the cornerstone for a new economy, will protect the environment, and oh yeah - probably even help out with national security.

How can we screw it up?

1) Continue to talk about taxes rather than programs. Let’s talk about what we want to do. If we convince people it’s a good idea - they will be more open to how we pay for it.

2) Underestimate the Republicans. Oregon has a libertarian streak. If the Republicans can build a new coalition that makes them less dependent on social conservatives, they will be back. Smarter and stronger than ever.

3) Live in an echo chamber. If there is one lesson that we should learn from conservatives it is that living in an echo chamber will bring certain doom. We must stay humble, open minded, and continue to listen. We must not become too beholden to our own special interests. Good ideas come from all corners - and in this economy we need all hands on deck.

My big concern is that Senate/House Dems will follow Republican Governor Ted Kulongoski, the most anti-environment governor Oregon has had in 3 decades, and enact the hardcore rightist agenda of the "Big Look Taskforce", stacked with industry stalwarts and fluffers like Bragdon.

"I'll re-ask the question that I thought was the most interesting and evocative one in my post. How can we make sure that the hundreds of thousands of Oregonians who signed up with the Barack Obama campaign turn their attention now to building a bigger, stronger, smarter, and more effective progressive movement here in Oregon?"

Simple. By signing on to:www.november5.org

OK, Ken, how do you propose to do these things:

"1) Education Improve graduation rates. Make sure schools are safe. Renovate or rebuild old schools to meet the technology and learning needs of today’s students. Freeze college tuition rates. Reevaluate how we meet the needs of our special needs kids."

We can't wave a magic wand! Many in the Salem area worked very hard to pass a bond to pay for needed major maintenance for local schools (some of them aging to the point of needing major repairs) and then after the repairs to build some new schools. The school supt. and many other people spoke to many local gatherings in homes and elsewhere to get it done.

How should the legislature tackle such an undertaking on a statewide basis without discussing changes to our financial system in this state?

And about BIG LOOK, any Democrat stupid enough to go along with it as an unquestioning supporter deserves a primary next time around. In this state we had an excellent example of public process (Public Comm. on the Legislature) and on the other end of the spectrum Big Look, which seemed to think it deserved lots of money with minimal public process. And I'm not a big Mike Thorne fan.

It is not the same legislature that named mostly local government officials to this panel, there are many different members. It should be the responsibility of Big Look to persuade members to see things their way. The legislature didn't pass all PCOL suggested legislation, why does Big Look think everyone should see things their way?

My kids schools are ONCE AGAIN going to get slammed by our irrational, unpredictable, income dependent revenue system.

Unfortunately, this irrational, unpredictable system is what the voters apparently wanted when they approved Don McIntire's 1990 proposal to eliminate local control of school funding and turn it over to the legislature to compete with other general fund programs.

If stability and predictability of school funding is a goal, there's a simple solution: Get rid of those idiotic Measure 5 limits on education spending and the arbitrary Measure 50 limits on property valuation. Let each community set their own tax limits at the ballot box by voting to fund their schools above and beyond whatever money comes in from the state. A levy-based property tax system is far more stable than a system based on either income or sales tax.

We need to fix school funding in this state, and that will require top-to-bottom tax reform. A measure to lift Measure 5 limits on school spending will not increase anyone's property taxes. It will simply allow every community to decide for themselves whether they want to adequately fund their schools or not.

I am agree with the first comment.

If we want to do something with taxes, I'd look at restructuring the state income tax to be more progressive without changing the bottom line on how much is actually collected. Guv K has some decent LITTLE tax increases that might actually fly. Bill Clinton had it right - careful incrementalism can take you a long way without risking a backlash.

OK.

How do the Dems not screw it all up?

How can we make sure that the hundreds of thousands of Oregonians turn their attention to building more effective progressive movement here in Oregon?

It is very simple: Do not become mean-sprited and obnoxious as the Conservatives were(and some still are)in thought, deed, and attitude. Do not be condescending to others simply because they either do not have money or do not have the social status that you have. And, please, do not attempt to force feed the common people any philosophical and theoretical garbage simply because you feel and belive you are automatically correct simply because you are a public offical.

It is as simple as that.

The DPO used to do a great of of letting people know what was happening in Salem, but I haven't seen that in a few years. And finding out what things are being discussed in Salem in hearings and such can be so difficult to track down that you often only know about something if some group like the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, or Bus Project send out an email on it.

I agree with Jenni. In my most recent job I had to keep track of insurance and medical related legislation for my company. Trying to find scheduled meetings and changes in posted meetings could be a nightmare. For a while they only followed the 24 hour meeting post rule, and when you're trying to come up from Medford or East of Cascades, it might be impossible to arrange getting there to have your voice heard.

Keeping the schedule posted, making notifications of at least 48 hours, and having open meetings will allow the public and activists to get in there and help get things done.

Having listened to Democracy Now this morning the interview with Naomi Klein leaves me thinking there is not going to be much of a change from Bush to Obama. If one thinks that there has been a victory listen to todays show and tell me what it is.

Establish a 20% accross the board corporate tax increase on all companies involved with international trade. If the Feds won't levy a tariff, Oregon should. And if the companies take their business somewhere else, good riddens! Let some other state deal with all the wacked-out development and boomer mentalities and lead the race to the bottom of the economic barrel for the sake of "jobs." The local economy will support a sustainable local population; Oregon doesn't need $25 multinationals continually sucking its cronically undervalued resources dry.

Being an Oregonian 101: Sales Tax & Pumping your own gas are both like the metric system: They are good ideas, but no way they will ever become part of "Oregon culture"

I actually feel stronger about not pumping my own gas than sales tax. Irrational? Yes. But as an elitist Democrat I like it that way!

I don't see much sign of this problem at Blue Oregon, but elsewhere in the blogosphere, the election was barely past before the Clinton/Obama wars started right up again. The Obama-supporters-as-cultists nonsense has been trotted out; the Bill-and-Hillary-are-hiding-their-shady-dealings nonsense has also reappeared. It's disgusting.

And by the way,

What we should be doing now is preparing to put a Democrat in Congress in the Second Congressional seat. e.g. bye bye Walden.

Carla, so it is all the candidate's responsibility? They should put their life on hold and decide to run now for 2nd District knowing how little help any Democratic organization has ever given candidates running against Walden?

Chuck Butcher writes here often. Perhaps you should have a chat with him about the 2nd Cong. primary he ran in, and how much help Democrats gave any of those primary candidates or the eventual nominee.

Your response is just further evidence of the problem some have with the title Democratic Party of Oregon. How much financial or logistical help has any Democratic organization ever given candidates living outside of Portland and the Willamette Valley?

Or is that a debate Democrats shouldn't be having under the general topic of "OK we won, what now?".

As I recall, Steve was a big Merkley supporter because Steve lives E. of the Cascades and Merkley had actually visited his area even as a legislator from Portland. Seems to me that more Portlanders should emulate that.

A gross receipts tax for businesses would go a long way toward forcing business to pay a fair share of tax. Do you have any idea how many businesses can legitimately report "ZERO" taxable income while at the same time collecting and spending millions or even tens of millions of dollars?

From my standpoint, it would be good to see the state and national governments deal with health care and economic issues ONLY for the forseeable future. In my undereducated opinion, spending time on social issues - regardless of merit or need or whatever - will squander whatever political capital the Dems have acquired and will put urgent agenda items like health care reform and economic recovery in peril.

Learn from recent history. Be inclusive of those whose philosophy differs and encourage dissent. Seek consensus through compromise. Realize we do not have all the answers. Resist the corrupting nature of power and exercise institutional restraint. Most of all respect and advance the separation of powers.

I am not quite sure if the Obama surge in Oregon was not just a one time thing. I think pragmatically we may need to be prepared to except that.

If optimistically, we are seeking to harness that surge and press forward I think we need to look hard and fast at individual leaders and indentify one who can be a face of the movement in Oregon. We have a lot of talented people in office in Oregon, but let's face it most of them are either totally boring or are victims of our outdated part-time legislature who only get to "exist" every other year.

On this line, I recommend Steve Novick for Governor.

Nothing more dangerous then a situation then in a state where one party dominates. One party states without strong competition tend to nominate weak people because any one with the right label wins. That was the case when I was young and the GOP dominated Oregon Politics.
I hope the GOP can finely start nominating mainstream people like Hatfield, McCall. Atiyeh, & Fronmeyer to compete with us Democrats. Competition produces the best results in politics.

If the existing 2nd District is too Republican to win, then we should take a good look at the redistricting map and make it more competitive.

Step 1. Make a whole new District 2 centered on the Oregon coast, and shaped like a bracket, encompassing the counties of Clatsop, Columbia, Tillamook, Lincoln, Coos, Curry, Josephine and Jackson. Probably Yamhill and Polk as well, and just enough of coastal Lane and Douglas to connect it. The coast and Ashland lean blue. If it turns out we need more blue voters, some of the Portland metro area can be added or Yamhill county taken out.

Step 2. Start the new 3rd district way out in Wallowa county at the Northeastern corner, and add all the small counties along the Washington border, heading into East Multnomah and Portland. Geographically, this will absorb Pendleton, and the Columbia gorge, which is a swing area anyhow. The 3rd will still be the bluest district around, but it will take away some Republicans.

Step 3. Redraw the 1st district so that it still has West Portland (or all of it not included in the new 2nd) and all of Washington county. Then dribble it down I-5 to take in as many purple-to-red suburbs from Clackamas/Marion as we can afford. If we have to, we can go to east Portland, but I don’t think we will. Washington county is emerging as a blue bastion in its own right.

Step 4. Redraw the 4th District to spread east from Douglas county to Klamath Falls and all of the sprawling, barely populated counties in the east, but leaving Deschutes and Jefferson counties alone. That’s a lot of territory, but very few people. To compensate for the new Republicans, keep Eugene and add all of Benton County (Corvallis)

Step 5. The new 5th is what’s left over, which is Bend and a big swath of unpopulated mountain range; the Salem area, most of Clackamas County (also bluing, but behind Washington County), and the part of South Central Portland that was taken out of the 3rd to make room for the Eastern counties.

You have now split up the 2nd district into four parts and diluted the Republican part of the state accordingly. The current incumbent is from Hood River, which would be in the new 3rd. All five districts now have a Democratic lean, but none are absolutely safe should a Republican wave year happen. I say it’s worth it to have the default be five Democratic districts, instead of four mostly safe seats and one where we can barely compete at all.

Since the Democratic Party wants to institute new programs, at least some targeted taxes/fees will need to be implemented. I am concerned that the wrong lessons were learned from the recent defeat of M50, "Healthy Kids" program. It was on its face an unfair taxation scheme: it was not the responsibility of smokers alone to pony up the dosh for health insurance for the children of Oregon, it was ALL of our responsibility; the smokers were simply a vulnerable minority on whom the cost could be dumped -- assuming that Oregonians were crass enough to go along with such an unfair and responsibility-ducking scheme. Yet all I hear is how it was only the money from the tobacco industry which defeated M50, which once again assumes only the worst of the Oregon electorate. I can only hope the crop of new Democratic state legislators have a better appreciation of the honesty and responsibility of the voters here.

AN---was that a "modest proposal" or were you serious?

What district would Salem be in?

You really want Kurt Schrader to campaign for re-election in Bend? Or for those in Salem to lose him as their member of Congress?

Or am I being too literal?

AN - If Oregon were to create a new district, it would either be centered around the Bend Area (carving an area out of the large district of Walden) or centered around the Medford area(an 'epicenter' - if you will - of the historically proposed State of Jefferson). No one would dare re-arrange what we have now with a new census coming up in 2010. Oregon is rumoured to get a new seat in the house with that census, and the above scenarios would be in play.

Besides - good things come to those who wait.

The fact is, "we" cannot afford to support an empire. "We" remain number one as "we" slide down the statistical pole in infant mortality, life expectancy and overall quality of life. As recession grows worse, "we" hear about how everyone supports "our troops."

"Recruiting a top notch candidate to run against Walden will go a long way to helping the Democratic organizations and progressive organizations throughout Oregon have a buy in"

Lest we not forget that Washington State has a simular situation with only two districts out of 9 represented by R's. No doubt the 3 Northwest R's (all. more or less, located in the Eastern swatches of both states) will possibly join forces for each other when they run again. So, instead of 1 top notch candidate to look for, the Dems need 3 for a clean sweep.

Watch out You might get what you’re after Cool babies Strange but not a stranger I’m an ordinary guy Burning down the house

Hold tight wait till the party’s over Hold tight we’re in for nasty weather There has got to be a way Burning down the house

Here’s your ticket pack your bag: time for jumpin’ overboard The transportation is here Close enough but not too far, maybe you know where you are Fightin fire with fire

All wet Hey you might need a raincoat Shakedown Dreams walking in broad daylight Three hun-dred six-ty five de-grees Burning down the house

It was once upon a place sometimes I listen to myself Gonna come in first place People on their way to work baby what did you expect Gonna burst into flame

My house ’s out of the ordinary That’s right Don’t want to hurt nobody Some things sure can sweep me off my feet Burning down the house

No visible means of support and you have not seen nuthin yet Everything’s stuck together I don’t know what you expect staring into the tv set Fighting fire with fire

Jenni, I feel your pain. Elementary and secondary education in Oregon public schools is a disaster. And it's not about the money. Oregon spends more per student than our four neighbors: California, Washington, Idaho, and Nevada. As Steve Novick likes to say, "you can look it up." http://ftp2.census.gov/govs/school/06f33pub.pdf.

And then Gov. K refuses to implement more rigorous graduation standards, because there isn't money for more counselors, tutors, and summer school teachers. What's needed is a more rigorous curiculum focused on the basics, rather than the feel-good fluff like self-esteen, multi-cultural competency, and "mandatory" volunteer service.

"And it's not about the money. Oregon spends more per student than our four neighbors: California, Washington, Idaho, and Nevada".

..and, yet, the students get almost nothing in return. This is because we pay wayyyyy too much in salary to the non-unionized administrators and principals of the schools.

What we should do is cut all the administrators and pricipals salaries in half and use that money for the kids and what is really needed. We wouldn't have to raise more money from anyone. Cutting the salaries in half would come from the schools themselves - it would be a re-distribution of the money already there.

So, I guess, it IS about the money.

It is time to unite the state, to understand the concerns and visions of the individuals in every county. Develop a way to communicate with each citizen, bypassing the information channels sowing division. It is also time to take the wind out of the sails of those who believe the government can do no right by establishing a passionate culture of quality, customer service and continuous improvement in government agencies. It is there in pockets and individuals, it needs to be pervasive, and most importantly publicized.

As a Democrat, I would like to see the opposition's false arguments defused and a lot more straight talk in campaigns by our own party - on the real issues. Some deep thought needs to go into our vision and articulating it.

At its core the D/R divide is over the the role and wisdom of individuals verses the group. The great challenge is to fuse those ideas creatively. We value the creativity of thought leaders and creatives, including in business. But everyone who benefits from the public needs to contribute back. We also need to articulate the value and cost of risk.

@Jenni:"Yea, my Spanish teacher in the 8th grade was from Chile. He talked about how insulting it was that people from the United States considered themselves Americans, but not those from Canada, Mexico, Central America, and South America."

Central America and South America are not countries. The teacher from Chile would call him/herself a Chilean wouldn't they? Residents of Canada are Canadians, Mexico are Mexicans and residents of the USA are Americans. What do you want to call us, United Staters?

Ok Kari - I will bite.

To maintain and possible build a permanent majority in Oregon, progressives should remember the basics and stay focused on those priorities most important to voters.

Remembering the basic is one of the more sensible points made above. Here is a more basic suggestion based on Management 101:

Get a mission statement. Suggestion for a starter: To make the world a better place where all people regardless of race, color, creed, gender, sexual orientation or other relatively superficial factor will have a right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and justice, including economic justice.

Write up a business plan, in this case a constitution, charter or set of conventions.

Resolve to live according to the "business plan" and not ignore it or tolerate others ignoring it when it happens to be politically expedient.

Thanks, Lee.

And here's another suggestion. Budget balancing will not be pretty this session. There's the corporate tax situation, the inability to invest in good times due to the kicker, the tax breaks, etc.

High time for everyone concerned to start questioning any Republican not contributing to the solution. If anyone is brainless enough to say "we must have spending discipline, but don't ask for details", ask for a specific proposed cut from that person, and if there is no responsive answer, mobilize friends to contact that legislator and ask the question until there is an answer.

I have noticed the term "fair" used quite often with regard to taxation. As an accountant, I am unfamiliar with that term and unable to locate any reference to it in The Code. Can someone elaborate as to what "fair" means re: taxation.

In my mind, one "fair" tax might be the tax Oregon could impose on legalized marijuana. It would help our coffers while being "fair" to all of those folks in Cuidad Juarez who are dying everyday to promote the "business model" of keeping lots of Oregonians high.

The "fair" tax would be a little different from the "sweet" tax. As in, wouldn't that be "sweet" if we could tax the soda companies to pay for that uninsured obese kid who spends more time guzzling his bladder buster than paying attention in our underfunded schools.

I am quite sure "fair" does not refer to paying one's "fair" share--especially here in Oregon. Imagine how hard it would to determine a fair share in Oregon, the home of quite possibly the cheapest citizens in the Union. I mean we are dealing with the folks who can remember with distinct clarity how they got those great used Birkenstocks back in 1997 with their foodstamps and no sales tax. I just don't understand how they pay their internet bill with food stamps. Then again maybe I am just not being fair.

Obama and CLinton both opposed (or at least criticized) NAFTA and other trade agreeements when campaigning in Ohio and other industrialized states. So, is this for real? Are we really going to really stand for labor, environmental and human rights standards in terms of trade/ foreign policy? For starters , are we going to try to remove Chapter 11 from NAFTA, a provision that allows counties to be sued when they try to stand up for trade principles? Are we going to revisit the decison a decade ago to grant China Most Favored Nationed staus, despite their repeated human rights violations? I hope so.

On energy, we need to expand our efforts to reduce our energy consumtion. I would like to see us mandate all hybrids within five years and greatly accelerate our production of wind power. I would also like to see a national bottle bill like Oregon's that includes bottled water.

Comedic. Kari requests please do not go on and on and on about taxes. And what do we do? Go on and on.

One or two people make what I believe to be really substantive global comments about the vision aspects of what needs to happen, and nobody responds. Disappointing! I want to hear collective poetry, not just one or two token poets. I want to hear a WHitmanesque chorus of more than just policy points. Just once.

Heh. Meanwhile, that son of a bitch Bush and his squad are scrambling like roaches to pass terrible, tragic rules just in time to make that sixty day mark. Making sure that nobody does to them what they did to Clinton. Bastards. I'm sick at heart.

We need to talk vision for a little bit - we need to raise the spirit levels high. Nothing else is going to best these awful, awful strategists who are doing as much damage as possible before they are sent away.

Lowering thresholds to allow toxins to be burnt; negotiating promises with Iraq to stay in at least another three years; shall I go on? Ah what can they possibly be thinking.

My son speaks this evening, "The planet is dying." And he speaks of the requisite for immediacy in action. He who is patient and engages in strategies that are long of view. This youth speaks of the act of kill going on now. The planet is dying. I look upon the final actions of this administration as that of a murdering wife beater: if I can't have you, nobody will.

And with another slice of the pen, they cut another hank of hair from The Mother, from me, from you.

What district would Salem be in?

You really want Kurt Schrader to campaign for re-election in Bend? Or for those in Salem to lose him as their member of Congress?

Salem and Bend would both be in the Fifth, as would most of Clackamas and a bit of central portland for blue votes. Everything West of Salem that is now in the 5th would be in the new 1st or 2nd.

I was planning in advance for the map to be drawn after the next census, not to try and do it right now.

And it's a 5-district map. If we get a 6th district, I'd consider an all-coast new district. Maybe. We'd have to think about whether it would be possible, by carving up logger country and the big unpopulated east, to get six Democratic districts, or whether it would be better to make one hideously right-wing district and five blue ones. Ashland, Bend and the Gorge are either keystones of a new blue inland district, or they're wasted on a district that will never be won. Let's discuss which it is.

"And it's a 5-district map. If we get a 6th district, I'd consider an all-coast new district."

AN - you have to remember that districts are centrally population based. As such, thoeretically, the center (or in some cases involving the Portland Area, the leading edge) of a district needs to have a major metro population base. Right now, those bases are : Portland, Salem, Eugene, Medford/Klamath Falls, Bend, and Pendleton. Six Bases, Six Districts. The coast would get their own district only if Newport, or Coos Bay, become as populous as Bend is now.

the center (or in some cases involving the Portland Area, the leading edge) of a district needs to have a major metro population base. Right now, those bases are : Portland, Salem, Eugene, Medford/Klamath Falls, Bend, and Pendleton. Six Bases, Six Districts. The coast would get their own district only if Newport, or Coos Bay, become as populous as Bend is now.

Except that those districts are NO WAY equal. Pendleton and Portland each count as one base? Pendleton barely has its own STATE House district, while Portland metro has about 20. Three of those "bases"--Medford, Bend and Pendleton are currently in one district.

I wish I could just draw the map...but I'll just describe it more succinctly instead of starting by drawing the borders:

District 1: West Multnomah, Washington, west Clackamas, north Marion; dribbling down I-5 toward Salem like HD25. Still Wu's. (Base: Portland, Outer Salem)

District 2 (NEW): Clatsop, Columbia, Tillamook, Lincoln, Polk, Yamhill, coastal Lane and Douglas, Coos, Curry, Josephine, Jackson. Should be 52% Dem or so. Add voters from west Douglas to make it more red, or from west Multnomah to make it more blue. (Base: Jackson County, North Bend, outer Portland metro)

District 3: Wallowa, Umatilla, Union, morrow, Gilliam, Sherman, Wasco, Hood River, East Multnomah. (Base: Portland, Pendleton)

District 4: Benton, non-coastal Lane and Douglas, Klamath, Lake, Harney, Malheur, Baker, Grant, Wheeler, Crook. (Base: Eugene, Corvallis, K-Falls)

District 5: Deschutes, Jefferson, Linn, west Marion, west Clackamas, central Portland. (Base: Portland, Salem, Bend)

OK, now say we have SIX districts, and they all must be equal in population. Here I've divided the districts so that each has the population of TEN State House districts, as they exist now (it's not perfect, since some house districts have changed population, but it can be tweaked). Note that each of the six districts is made up of more districts with Democratic state reps than districts with GOP state reps.

District 1 (east valley): HD 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 34.

District 2 (coast): HD 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 31, 32, 33

District 3 (Portland east): HD 43, 44, 45, 47, 49, 50, 52, 57, 58, half of 46 and 59

District 4 (Eugene south and east): HD 2, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 55, 56, 60

District 5 (Corvallis, Salem, Central Valley): HD 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 35, 37, 38, half of 18 and 40

District 6 (Bend, East Valley): HD 36, 39, 41, 42, 48, 51, 53, 54, half of 18, 40, 46 and 59)

Lee--"fair taxation" is defined as a tax structure such that people other than the person talking about taxes and those close to that person pay the majority of taxes.

Pathetically betrayed again? Here's what Sirota (Were Democrats Elected With a Mandate to Attack "The Left?") says:

Seems to me that House and Senate leaders have declared an all-out war on "the Left." In fact, "seems" is the wrong word. It doesn't "seem" like that. They are actually saying it explicitly.

Here's this excerpt from the Washington Post [1] (h/t FDL [2]):

Asked what it would mean if Lieberman kept his chairmanship, one Senate Democratic aide said bluntly: "The left has been foiled again. They can rant and rage but they still do not put the fear into folks to actually change their votes."

Here's the Hill newspaper today [3]:

Democratic leader says party won’t turn left

By Mike Soraghan

As the House prepares to elect its leaders, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is challenging the idea that the expanded Democratic majority and its leaders will make a hard left turn.

To show that these aren't errant, uncommon statements, make sure to read Glenn Greenwald's review [4] of how this hatred for "the Left" now reaches all the way to the top of the new Obama administration through Rahm Emanuel.

It's pretty odd that only two weeks after a landslide election that saw a huge ideological progressive mandate, Democratic congressional leaders think it's a great public message to declare jihad on progressives.

I don't know, call me crazy, but I think 67 million people voted for Democrats because they want Democrats to reject Bush's ideological conservatism and solve problems - not spend their time making paranoid, quasi-McCarthy-ist speeches deriding "the Left."

If we wanted that, wouldn't we have elected John McCain and Sarah Palin?

OK, let's shift gears here.

I'll re-ask the question that I thought was the most interesting and evocative one in my post. How can we make sure that the hundreds of thousands of Oregonians who signed up with the Barack Obama campaign turn their attention now to building a bigger, stronger, smarter, and more effective progressive movement here in Oregon?

Oh, right. How about creating focus groups whose initial task is to put volunteers to work for the various causes and concerns. Not for the party objectives, but just to help out those areas. Then, put these people in charge of the respective policy committes at the mid-terms and beyond.

I think a lot of liberals on the West Coast in particular suffer from more than a bit of unreality in their policy wishes. Their sensitivity and intelligence cannot help but be developed and stimulated seeing the situations they care about first hand. Basically the approach Ghandi took. He got off the boat in India with a throng of thousands and a real, popular mandate too. People asked what he was going to do. He said that he had to look around a bit first, and proceeded to walk across India. "Let's see", is more of a big tent approach than, "I've got a plan".

I'm getting tired of phrases like "hard left turn".

Exactly what does that mean at the end of the first decade of the 20th century? Government getting into the banking business? No, Republicans already did that.

Timeline for leaving Iraq? No, that agreement has been signed by Bush's Iraq ambassador and the Iraqi government.

See the world through eyes other than the Bushies? Not what that word once meant.

Follow the Constitution, and be aware of the needs of ordinary folk instead of just the rich types who Bush once addressed at a black tie dinner and joked they were his "base"?

This is a generational shift which some people might not be comfortable with, but I see Obama as being a modern day FDR in this sense: Communicating with the public in a variety of ways "Try this, and if it doesn't work try something else, but keep trying" Talking serious specifics rather than just ideology and PR.

All those volunteers could lobby the legislature over issues they care about.

Obviously I didn't proofread--I meant first decade of 21st century!

I'd still like to comment on Kari's original question from a few days ago: what can the Democrats do to keep things on track and how can they not screw up?

I searched the 104 posts before mine and only twice did I find a reference to rural Oregon, Ken's post from November 16th and LT's from the 17th. Clearly that's a blindspot for Democrats, but it shouldn't be. Democrats need to reach out to and understand the fine and hard-working people in our rural areas. Senator-elect Jeff Merkley has already started that. We must support that and continue it. To paraphrase Obama, we're all Oregonians.

In further response to the original question, I like Ken's response. I would switch it up a bit (I revised his comments to include my changes).

1) Health care for every child. Then we need to work on their parents, because chances are greater that mom will access health care for her kids if she is covered too. This investment in our families will bolster our education investment since our kids will be more ready to learn.

2) Get rid of the corporate kicker

3) The economy Create jobs through investment in much needed infrastructure and renewable energy projects

4) Education Improve graduation rates. Make sure schools are safe. Renovate or rebuild old schools to meet the technology and learning needs of today’s students. Freeze college tuition rates. Reevaluate how we meet the needs of our special needs kids. Support teachers, and include them in merit-based evaluation and retention efforts.

5) Be fiscally accountable and responsible. Let’s talk about what we want to do. If we convince people it’s a good idea - they will be more open to how we pay for it. Then be clear about how we're spending the money.

How can we screw it up?

1) Be fiscally unaccountable.

2) Underestimate the Republicans. Oregon has a libertarian streak. If the Republicans can build a new coalition that makes them less dependent on social conservatives, they will be back. Smarter and stronger than ever.

3) Ignore agriculture We need to make sure Oregon agriculture is productive, profitable, and protective of our natural resources

4) Live in an echo chamber. If there is one lesson that we should learn from conservatives it is that living in an echo chamber will bring certain doom. We must stay humble, open minded, and continue to listen. We must not become too beholden to our own special interests. Good ideas come from all corners - and in this economy we need all hands on deck.

Thanks, Mike!

With regard to how things could go wrong, there is a lot of truth to all of Mike's ideas. If Democrats ever became as arrogant as Minnis, Scott, et al, they'd deserve to lose.

Concern about agriculture fits in with his second paragraph.

With regard to #1 and #4, there isn't much available online. But Steve Duin did some columns in maybe 1989, there was plenty of other news coverage, and lots of people who were politically active back then could tell you stories about Dave Dix, the last Democratic House Majority Leader of the 20th century. Not quite as bad as DeLay and Congress, but close.

It was made very clear to Dix after he lost his legislative re-election that honest activists wanted nothing to do with him after his behavior cost Democrats the House. He ended up moving to Florida and working in Orlando politics (from one website I found).

This is why Democrats should do rigorous oversight of the behavior of Democratic elected officials, including legislative leadership. I'm not talking about ideological purity, but that there be no ethics or other complaints. Transparency should be as clear as glass to serve as an example Democrats are better than Republicans.

<h2>Not to left and not to right,just straight down the middle for fair balance of interests ! We have a strong team for leadership in Washington and the direction is exciting on all fronts !Energy Independence and National Securty as well as funding for education !We'll get past this economic crisis with American team spirit !</h2>