Steve would be great in a federal job like that!

So.... when will gov taxandgougeme actually SIGN the darn bills raising taxes? Will anyone on BO call him on thihs obvious stalling tactic designed to limit the right of the voters to mount a campaign against these taxes?

Regarding Novick's potential EPA appointment - I say that could be a great thing for Novick, Oregon and the EPA.

Wow, this is exciting. What kind of time frame are we looking at to replace her? When should the Lane County Commissioners be presented with candidates?

I hope he would run for the US Senate, Oregon needs to have two Democratic Senators.

carla, would you have the same outlook if he stalled signing your Metolius bill?

How about a bill that you wanted to take to the voters to overturn?

Just because he can; doesn't make it ethical or right.

I thought y'all were all about change we could believe in? Apparently its the same old song; just a different meaning now that the republicans are gone (with apologies to Lamont Dozier and The Four Tops)

One problem with procrastinating is that if something should occur at the deadline, and Gov. K is unable to sign the bill, this would be a pocket veto, right?

Certainly we can take the Gov at his word that he is signing the bills in the order he receives them, right?

Mike, it sounds to me like the Gov. (and Govs. before him) have the bills go through a staff evaluation process--which may have been why there was some doubt about whether he would sign SB 326, a bill carried by the Maj. Leader on the Sen. floor.

Kurt, I am thrilled that the Gov. signed SB 326 which overturns that stupid law about people who vote in major party primaries and whether they can sign petitions for 3rd party candidates. If it offends you that he signed that bill before the tax bills, not my problem.

Long before there were blogs, or American taxes, or any other modern conveniences, there were Aesop's Fables. These convey what might be called "wisdom of the ages"---life lessons for any situation.

The Wind and the Sun is the appropriate fable here.

http://www.bartleby.com/17/1/60.html

is one of many links to it.

The basic point is that there is more than one way to accomplish a goal--what nowadays are called soft skills and hard skills.

Yes, sometimes absolute force can achieve an objective, but other times just causes resistance to build up. On the other hand, persuasion can be a very effective tool for those who know how to use it.

Bob Tiernan was a state legislator for how many sessions? Building coalitions (rather than telling people what to think ) was never one of his strong suits.

But had he really thought it was a priority, he was a member of the majority party and he could have passed a bill giving the Gov. a week or less to sign any tax bill where a signature gathering campaign had been announced before Sine Die. Given the composition of the legislature Tiernan served in, it probably would have passed easily.

But it is not the fault of those of us who always considered him a bully that he now complains the Gov. signs other bills before the ones Tiernan wants signed. Bob, remember that old saying, "Don't try to talk yourself out of a situation you behaved yourself into."

Russ Walker thinks he is big stuff because of Measure 30. But when I saw him one day and asked him for some data on the documented results of Measure 30, he yelled back at me that I owed him a study to disprove a study his group did, and if I didn't know of one on the spot like that, he didn't need to talk to me!

So, I am supposed to sympathize with people who are rude?

Minnis was Speaker and Republicans had House majority when the Measure 30 election took place. Minnis spent the next session yelling THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN ON MEASURE 30 whenever anyone talked about tax reform.

In the next candidate election after that session, the voters deprived Minnis and the Republicans of their House majority. Maybe she and her fellow Republicans misjudged the will of the voters?

Personally, I see no reason for the Gov. to grant the anti-taxers any favors given how rude many of them are to anyone who asks tough questions like how they would have balanced the budget and who on Ways and Means they told of their ideas.

As those who know me will tell you, if someone strikes me as mean / nasty / bullying, I don't care who they are. I am not required to have any sympathy for such people. It is not partisan---I was one of those who worked on the bipartisan effort to deprive Les AuCoin of the Forestry Board nomination. That was one of Ted K's stupider nominations. AuCoin ran a 1992 primary campaign that was Swift Boat nasty, and I will never support him for anything unless he apologizes for that. If anyone tells you "negative campaigns work", tell them such campaigns can also backfire bigtime!

I love it when conventional wisdom is overthrown ("impossible candidate " wins or comes close, the "fix" really isn't in after all, etc.).

It always struck me as a stretch that even if the Gov. had signed the tax bills within 72 hours that it was a slam dunk that enough valid signatures would be collected. All those folks who voted for Dem. legislators were going to sign those petitions? All those new younger voters who registered to vote after the Measure 30 election were going to go along with Russ Walker et al and put the measures on the ballot? How much more regulated is signature gathering now than it was when Measure 30 qualified for the ballot? If Dick Armey came to Oregon to help collect signatures like he did for Measure 30, would that help or hinder the effort?

The conventional wisdom across the board is "... the expected challenge to the corporate tax measures passed by the Legislature this year".

Suppose there are people who are tired of AOI being a big lobbying giant, wanting to know what Russ Walker did for a living before Freedomworks came along and whether he would be able to find work without that group, who are personal friends with any member of Ways and Means (incl. freshmen of both parties who were on the subcommittees who did the real work on the budget) who are tired of the "all hail the ballot measure people, the true voice of Oregonians" and want the legislature made up of elected officials to have more power than the ballot measure types.
Were they going to make it a point to sign the petitions because Russ Walker has pushed so hard and AOI has all those volunteers and all that money behind their effort?

The role of ballot measures vs. elected officials was discussed by the Public Comm. on the Legislature.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/pcol/final_report/lc_1585_initiatives.pdf

was one of the proposed bills.

So, if the Gov. signs the bills in a few days and the volunteers and paid petitioners hit the streets and work night and day seeking signatures but don't get enough valid signatures, will we hear "it is all the Governor's fault we didn't get on the ballot"?

What I think will be interesting is the role of legislators this summer on this issue. Is St. Rep. Kim Thatcher (who rode Measure 30 into office) going to carry petitions? How many Republicans (esp. those who served on Ways and Means or Revenue) going to be out there carrying petitions, actively opposing, sending out emails explaining their position?

Carla, since that part of my reply was intended as snarky; I apologize and admit my error.

I'll admit that any sitting governor can sit on a bill for up to 30 days before signing. Just because they can, doesn't make it right. In the unlikely event a republican ever got into Mahonia Hall I would expect you to point out similar tactics as being within their purview; that's all! Have a great day.

Kurt, in the unlikely event a Republican were elected Gov.(Frank Morse, Max Williams, I can't imagine anyone else from the current GOP winning over independent voters who don't buy into GOP orthodoxy), I would expect them to abide by the law. The law as written at the time they were in office. What a concept--abiding by law!

Current law says 30 days. Republicans controlled the House from the 1990 election until the 2006 election. The fact they didn't change the law to say that tax bills go to the top of the pile, have only a 10 day window, or whatever is not the fault of people in public office in 2009.

Instead of THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN ON MEASURE 30!, or trying to blackmail a Democratic freshman by saying that if he voted for a certain level of education spending, Minnis and Scott would make sure his local airport funding proposal would never see the light of day (of course it did anyway--great columns about that here on BO), if Republicans had really wanted the law to say tax bills are acted upon first, why didn't they pass a law like that when they had control?

Because, as one column in today's Oregonian says, the GOP has become the party of shallow soundbites rather than serious consideration of issues?

For those who are angry that the Gov. is not doing your bidding, "Quit trying to talk your way out of something you behaved yourselves into".

After all those years of Republican control if there was never a bill passed to say the Gov. is ordered to sign tax bills within a certain small number of days, why is that the fault of a Democratic Governor?

Because Republicans aren't responsible for their own actions but Democrats are responsible for things Republicans neglected to do?

As a Bradbury supporter I'm hoping Steve gets that EPA appointment. And that Kitzhaber and DeFazio don't run.

Nice that we have a good list of potential candidates! (but vote for Bill)

Kitz and the Faz are definitely the top tier for guv.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/6/25/114510/382

Eric, what are Bill B's views on tax reform? Is he at all involved in the whole issue of whether the tax measures are referred to the voters?

"He's ____, you should vote for him" is just not going to be enough in 2010, no matter how many true believers there are.

I think Steve would be great at the EPA, but if he ran for Gov. and said "This was my work in the summer of 2009 to educate people on the issue of the taxes the legisalture passed, and here are my ideas for tax reform..." and Bradbury supporters said "vote for Bill", Novick would deserve more support than Bradbury.

That's too bad. I think it cannot out of my mind.

LT, I can not contradict anything that you wrote. I fully understand and appreciate the meaning of the 30 day period. However, the REAL intent of the 30 days was in allowing a sitting governor the ability to issue a pocket veto of passed legislation.

I understand and even appreciate what the governor is doing. He is using a legal ploy to delay signature gathering by anyone opposed enough to the two tax bills to try and get them onto the ballot by November. I'm just calling it what it is; political opportunism. as long as both sides get to play by the same rules I guess there should be no problem. Again, in the unlikly event a republican or non-democrat gets into Mahonia and uses a similar tactic, BO would remain on the sideline......?

Kurt, thank you for your thoughts.

But as the grandchild of a lawyer, prosecutor, Michigan AG and St. Supreme Court Justice (who dropped out of that job to run for Gov--sound like anyone you can think of?--Grandpa lost the primary), I wonder if there isn't another reason for the 30 day period.

Should all the passed bills just be put in a stack on the Gov 's desk and he either signs or vetoes them without anyone reading the final version?

Or might it be a good idea for the Gov. to have staff read all the bills and make sure no last minute changes raise legal questions? I ask this because there are a lot of bills passed at the end of the session--can any one person keep track of every line of every single bill?

I also ask this because when we first lived here, a bill got passed with a clause in it (no more than a few words) which had unintended consequences. The result was a special session to change that clause---imagine all the money and resources that took.

My points are: a) I see no fault in an orderly process b) the fact remains that Bob Tiernan was once not only a legislator but also a committee chair, as I recall--why didn't he pass a bill to mandate what you want?

Tiernan and Sizemore put together a measure (passed, later thrown out by court action) which basically had citizens making decisions on public employee pay packages.

What if Tiernan had spent that amount of time, energy, and resources passing a bill which said, "When a bill to raise taxes has an announced petition drive prior to Sine Die, the Gov. shall sign that bill within the first week after Sine Die"? After all, wasn't Tiernan in the legislature about the time the requirement for supermajorities for raising taxes was passed?

But then, she said cynically, then you folks wouldn't have had a reason to criticize the current Gov.

I have been one of those who has been highly critical of a Gov. I voted for (partly because I thought he'd be like St. Sen. Kulongoski and actually fight for good things, partly because I have known Kevin Mannix for a very long time and his campaign obviously didn't want my vote because I ask too many questions of politicians).

I also happen to be skeptical that even if the tax bills had been signed within 72 hours of Sine Die, it would have been a slam dunk to get all the needed signatures during July and August so that any collected in Sept. would be "gravy"--just a pad in case of some signatures being thrown out. I believe the political climate has changed since the days of Measure 30, or there wouldn't have been all those new young legislators elected recently.

I once worked on a campaign which succeeded in collecting signatures in all 36 counties, including quite a few in Deschutes County. I wonder if all the AOI money will be enough to send paid petitioners anywhere outside of the 1st, 3rd, and 5th Congressional districts. And how receptive ordinary citizens will be to the petitioners.

There is a guest opinion in the print SJ today (just wrote a complaint email to them because they promised it would be on their website and it isn't yet) from one of the bloggers on the SJ site. I looked up the author's biography---a native Oregonian and what some people call a "double Duck"--earned 2 degrees from U of O. Retired gentleman.

The guest opinion is about the legislature's accomplishments. Yes, there are those who think the legislature did the right thing. Are they going to sign petitions "just to get it on the ballot" because what this state really needs is a ballot measure election? Or are they fed up with ballot measure elections?

Are the signature gathering rules tougher than they were for Measure 30? How many folks have registered to vote since Measure 30? Anyone know the level of diverse opinion on this topic among those newer voters?

I understand the level of passion. But I also know there is more to life than Novick and the "good guys" vs. the anti-taxers. The next Gov. should (and probably will) realize that if all the folks who strongly support Novick were grouped in one place and all those who can't wait to circulate petitions to refer the tax measures were grouped in another place, there would be a lot of people left over who don't know much about either Novick or the anti-taxers. These folks (I know folks like this) may be just too busy with their own lives (working parents of small children, adult children caring for aging parents, people working multiple jobs or maybe 50 hours at one job) to follow politics. Or they may be burned out former activists, people involved in many activities who don't enjoy political discussions except right before elections.

Those folks are the ones who decide which petitioners get enough signatures to get on the ballot, and if something qualifies, whether it passes or not. That is a basic fact of political life which would not have changed if the Gov. had signed the tax bills within 72 hours of Sine Die.

Thanks for your useful info.