I agree, your not in a "Tax Revolt". You are in a Government aligned with aloof elites revolt. Your victory owes more to your machine (you guys did mislead the public with the bill titles right?) then a public agreement with your principles.

Nice to see you play this EXACTLY as I called it yesterday:

these people are looking for any reason not to look at the repudiation of the national progressive statist agenda embodied by Brown's win (which had national implications clearly apparent to the thouands of people nationwide that gave time and $ to the Brown campaign). If the measures go down, count on media silence in the MSM and here on BO. If they pass, statists will try to inflate it nationally (though the national implications aren't nearly as clear as Mass) and use it as propoganda -- "see, the people are in favor of progressive solutions ..."

100% right on, Kari.

Oregon's vote is much more revealing of where the public stands than the MA vote.

There's no clear message from Scott Brown's win. Was it the truck, the awful D candidate, or generalized anger or something else?

Here, Oregonians were asked straight up to vote on two specific progressive measures, and they unequivocally said YES.

Ya know what is kinda peachy about this thing, Oregon has been a disappointment to me as a native returned home. My mental map was that of Oregon in the seventies and early eighties. I returned home at last to find urban strip mall sprawl, dessicated monetary structures that were decaying important institutions from within, and a desperation to lift our skirts to ANY takers just so we could somehow get out of our horizontal jobs-market paradigm. Boo. The schools were not what I firmly believed and often the smugness and lack of excellence among my public health peers shocked me.

NOW we are back to who we were in the day of the Bottle Bill. Making a statement about what has to be done, and DOING it. I'm finally feeling more proud to be who I am: native, Oregon.

My, my, what a lot of sour grapes we're seeing from the extreme right today! This almost makes up for the contemptible display of pathetic sobbing from Democratic "leaders" last week.

To all trolls except Hank: Neener-neener, we won. You lost. Get over it.

To Hank: Your state is not one of the four in America that now has a lower corporate minimum tax than ours. After measure 67, Oregon is still a better deal for you than Texas on the matters we just voted on.

And if you're in the hill country, you're right, I can't speak to the quality of life issues in that specific region in your very big state. But you might want to take a look at the very unheavenly cities of Dallas, Houston and San Antonio, not too far from you, which are bearing the burden of impotent, revenueless government at the state and local level. It's hard to see how the failure of such large metro areas could possibly not bleed over into every part of the state, not now, maybe not soon, but you'll be able to see it coming.

Of course, it could be that Texas gets away with a bit in lower state and local taxes due to the fact that (like most "red" states) it gets far more pork from the federal government than the state actually pays in federal taxes. Oregon and other "blue states" pay more than we get back. You're welcome for that, by the way, leeching off of our tax dollars. We don't mind shelling out a bit to make America overall a better place, and you may well be laughing all the way to the bank; but it does kinda take away your claim to moral high ground when you turn around and lecture us about the evils of taxes while enjoying your federal largesse.

But then, this whole discussion about business tax rates as a motivation for relocation is just cow pies, isn't it?

We both know that you're no more likely to move a mom and pop store here than "Joe the Plumber" is ever going to own a business that nets over $250,000 per year. And tax concerns have nothing to do with that.

If you have freedom of mobility, you choose to locate in a place where you like the culture and quality of life. And if you chose central Texas, you'd HATE it here, and we probably wouldn't care much for you. Nothing wrong with that; it's wonderful that this country is big enough for several diverse environments to choose from.

Oregon is about loggers, computer programming, salmon, blackberries, microbrew, Pagans, Celtic music, track & field, Ken Kesey, lush forests, cloudy skies and constant drizzle. Our daily regatta is crossing the street.

Texas is about cowboys, oil drilling, steaks, chili peppers, tequila, Evangelicals, country & western, football, Kinky Friedman, and an environment where most of the plants and animals are dangerous and the climate is like sitting in someone's mouth.

I'm not saying one of those packages is better than the other, but you're not going to find many people who would be equally happy in either of those two settings.

So have fun living in the bed you and yours have made down there. Pay us a visit if you want to come slumming, by all means, but enjoy the home you love and we'll enjoy ours. Seems to us we've made it just that much better, this week.

Tip o' the hat to Steve Novick! It's hard to remain a calm and focused and effective spokesperson when the same old lies are being thrown in your face by the other side, week after week, but he did it.

And maybe some millionaires will move out. After all, former Senator Gordon Smith moved to his estate in Maryland almost immediately after his defeat by Jeff Merkley. But I think true entrepreneurs will stay, given the opportunities in our beautiful state, and more will be attracted. But the work on reforming the tax code to be fair to middle-class families must continue.

Really? You think the rest of the nation will care? We have to be honest, here...the rest of the nation thinks we're all a bunch of crazy liberals anyway. They think we're nuts to raise taxes anywhere. Sorry to dump on the parade, and to be sure, I know we did the right and prudent thing here in Oregon...but a lot of the country is insane. I get the feeling that this won't have the nationwide effect that, say, passing a tax raise in a more stereotypically "conservative" state like Texas would have.

Seems to me, the big story is not just that the measures passed.

It's the size of the margin of victory, and especially the closeness of the vote in counties where conservative voters were expected to kick the measure's ass into the ground. If those counties had come out against it in their traditional proportions, we would have lost.

So here's a big THANK YOU to our progressive friends who have been fighting the good fight in Marion, Yamhill, Douglas, Jackson, Josephine, Curry, Deschutes, Hood River and points east. Your hard work against the current is finally beginning to bear fruit.

Whoever got out there with that early $10 minimum tax with the depression shots I think should be credited with quite a bit of the victory- it really shaped the thinking.

well done kari. You are correct

These measures impact both my business and family income. I voted "yes" on both of them, somewhat reluctantly on the income tax due to the fact that I think our income tax system in this state needs to be fixed... like a 5% - 12% range would be nice and more reflective of a truly progressive tax system.

I heard an interesting factoid on Think Out Loud this a.m.: there is a higher percentage of older Oregonians with college degrees than younger Oregonians. This is the real job killer. I hope the passage of these measures will put this state on a track to fix how we tax ourselves and educate our children.

Give it a year and let's see what the unintended consequences are. The results from these measures is that Oregon just passed a sales tax. We'll see if it helps. Time will tell. IMO

The thing I'll never understand is that people can't seem to get it through their wooden heads that it IS business including Big business that give them their jobs, pay their salaries, retirement funds and most provide health care,etc.

Being an extremely small "fish in the pond," if it weren't for the businesses I, at age 77, my husband, age 81, would still be working full time. As it is now,with the rising prices, my husband is working part time to suppliment the small income (for which we are very grateful) from business.

But still a bigger problem remains. We are still a nation divided and likely to remain so as long as some people insist on being hostile to the rest of the people without any trace of civility. We can start here at Blue Oregon by setting another example. Let's keep our comments respectful without resorting to the use of sophomoric name-calling as a substitute for a rational argument.

Try watching discussions on the likes of Bill Moyers Journal and C-Span. You'll get people who disagree with others but remain respectful while they refrain from rude and crude comments. Compare that will the likes of Fox News and Bill "Shuddup" O'Reilly. If you were raised properly you'll prefer the former.

I think rw hit the nail on the head, as far as the hedonic tone of the thing goes. I remember when Ann Richards won her first term as Governor of Texas. About 25 of us were partying and as it wound down, no one really left, and we found ourselves sitting in a big circle talking about it. Not really talking, just kind of sitting their numb. And finally someone said, "I can't believe we all voted for someone that actually won"!

That provoked a lot more thoughts about how screwed is the system when that many creative, talented people had never felt like they had their hand on the political tiller once in an average of 30 years. Of course I was reminded of that when the junior Senator was elected, and to have that lighting strike twice in such a short span of time gives one a rather heady feeling of sudden traction.

So, how about the trifecta? Make sure at least one candidate qualifies in the Council race, by Friday.

Think about it. If I had proposed, three years ago, that a BO blogger would be sitting in the Senate, we would vote to raise taxes on corps and wealthy individuals during a nasty recession and serious financial panic, and that we would have practical success with 100% public campaign financing, what kind of odds would you have given me?

"The thing I'll never understand is that people can't seem to get it through their wooden heads that it IS business including Big business that give them their jobs, pay their salaries, retirement funds and most provide health care,etc."

I think they understand this at some level depending on the individual, but what they clearly don't understand is that a tax on business is a tax on jobs and production. That in the end the consumers will pay their fair share of these taxes through price hikes and companies that can't hike prices will go under and reduce competition and jobs. There are many business that will do fine with the tax because they can raises prices for example fuel stations will just treat it as a gas tax and raise gas prices. This seems to be inelastic to an extent. Grocery stores and energy companies will do the same. But to make the tax profitable they must raise the price plus include their normal markup margin. This will stress the economy a bit. Some companies will find they cannot raise prices, they will try to lay off employees to cover the extra 100K or so. A few will move out of State if it is worth it and it might be for some. Over all, Oregonians through ignorance have raised consumer prices, fuel and food costs overnight. Good Job Guys! That was Smart!

In Massachusetts, voters rejected the nominee promoted by the state political machine and D.C. insiders - in favor of "Scott Brown from Wrentham" and his truck.

Don’t give up the day job K-man, you’re a much better webmaster than political analyst.

Brown ran on being the 41st vote against ObamaCare, on being against Wall Street bailouts, on waterboarding terrorists, and on being a voice for Mass residents who felt they weren’t being listened to in Washington.

BHO was directly repudiated in that election after flying in to save the Dem candidate. Let’s hope he understands the Libs in Mass were telling him to stop what he is doing and rethink his agenda.

If he doesn’t I have little hope for his presidency.

Kari; Just who is "We"? the only "WE" I saw pass this legislation is the usual "We"....the northwest portion of the state. Rural Oregon, you know, that group in the "tumbleweeds and mountains", said NO. Your comment of "approvals were strong - 47% in rural Umatilla, Coos, and Jackson counties" is true, but as you said it FAILED there too. The message sent to the nation...Oregon is a state strongly divided between urban and rural values.

So, next time somebody says there is no ideological gulf between urban and rural Oregon, remember this vote....that is, if anyone cares that there is more to Oregon than just the urban area.

"That divide you're looking for isn't really there." -Carla Axtman

That, Carla, is your opinion..and you are entitled to it. But it is not mine, nor many of my fellow Eastern Oregonians....and the map of counties where it passed and failed proves more of my point than yours.

""That divide you're looking for isn't really there." -Carla Axtman

That, Carla, is your opinion..and you are entitled to it. But it is not mine, nor many of my fellow Eastern Oregonians....and the map of counties where it passed and failed proves more of my point than yours."

And what were the final numbers in Umatilla County? It was amazingly close there last night--I would have expected 60% no and 40% yes.

Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.

I suspect that "rural values", as they differ from broader values, are influenced by 1) lower education levels than state average, 2) lower income, 3) less diversity of opinion in readily available media, 4) less time and inclination to search out alternative viewpoints, and lower availability of internet, satellite service, etc. I suspect that when comparing equivalent income and education levels in rural and other areas, the differences of opinion significantly narrow. It is ironic that the very people whose communities stand to benefit most from these measures voted against them.

wow, this sounds great... congrats and keep it up :)

Steve; I love your train of thought and modern debate skills! When you have no facts to debate with....personally criticize and ridicule....now that's real civility in debate! So who's the more ignorant?

Kari:

Not since the 1930s have Oregon voters approved an income tax increase.

BobT:

Come on, Kari, it's not like it was across the board. Easy targets were picked: corporations (of all sizes) and people making a lot of money. Gosh, that was hard. I think you should be concerned with the fact that these received only 54% of the vote.

Kari:

In New Jersey, voters rejected a wealthy Governor who had been the president of Goldman Sachs.

Bob T:

Nice spin. That now ex-governor was embraced by the Democrats when he ran for (bought his seat in) the US Senate and when he ran for (bought his job as) governor.

Corzine received about 47% of the vote this last time. I'm guessing that most were cast by registered Democrats, and very, very few Republicans. You make it sound as if he lost by a 90-10 margin.

By the way, regarding the remarks I made a few inches above, I never make an issue out of a candidate being super wealthy and all that. But I do like to point out that the same people who make an issue out of such a thing utter not a peep when such a person runs as a Democrat. That means that what matters are where they stand on issues. So let's see some consistency there.

You could say that Corzine's source of his wealth is tainted. Sure, I agree. That's why I'm confused about the love affair people have with George Soros. Have you ever looked into what that guy does to make as much as hundreds of millions of dollars in one day, without producing a thing of value for any of to use?

Bob Tiernan Portland

No divide? From Vancouver, BC to Tijuana, you can forget finding consistent, progressive politics, more than 100 miles inland. It's amazing how 18th-19th century lines are regarded as some kind of sacrosanct revelation.

Rise Cascadia!

Sal Peralta:

Buckman - Massachusetts voted against a person who couldn't spell Massachusetts in a campaign ad, and who thought that the Red Sox franchise player was a Yankees fan.

Bob T:

So? A little over a year ago Massachusetts voters gave a majority of their votes to a guy who thought there were 60 states, and who thought one of them was "New Pennsylvania", and who (despite being a Chicago resident) though the White Sox played in Kominsky Field. Those voters have for a long time elected people with a "D" after their names even if they were pretty dopey. There was a lot more to this one than Coakley's competence.

Bob Tiernan Portland

Pat Ryan:

Uh, yeah Bob. We do know how he makes his money. He plays by the rules that have been put in place by the priesthood and acolytes of your own "Free Market" religion.

Bob T:

Hardly. He doesn't get to define it. Why not call it an example of the rules of the so-called "mixed economy" where the many checks of market discipline are gone and replaced by many privileges?

Pat Ryan:

The main reason that the guy is much more famous than many other liberal millionaire donors, is that he is the one that has been singled out by Right Wing Talking Heads to villify.

Bob T:

Not that I know of. I first heard of him when I was getting sigs for mj initiatives, i.e. that he is a wealthy guy who puts his money into causes he believes in, however unpopular. Had "Right Wing Talking Heads" been villifying him I would have heard of him first from those sources. Apparently he was already failry well known before those guys said anything.

Pat Ryan:

He's a class traitor, just like Warren Buffet.

Bob T:

No he's not, and neither is Buffet. There's no set of political beliefs anyone is supposed to follow based on their income.

Pat Ryan:

That seems to drive Lars and Sean and Billo (and you?) crazy.

Bob T:

I could care less how they feel about Soros and Buffet. The latter two are simply two very wealthy guys who have enough money say they have enough, tho they don't exactly part with it. Buffet makes loads of money from government programs, by the way. I'm not too interested in political entrepreneurs.

How do you feel about the owner of Shilo Inns? Funny, I never see him trying to buy popularity by coming out in favor of light rail and New Urbanism (things he can make money on by partering with the city to build subsidized mixed-use structures). But he doesn't do that, yet he's trashed why other so-called "visionary" fat cats around town take the money and laugh all the way to the bank.

Do you have any consistency?

Bob Tiernan Portland

<hr/>