A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing: Progressive Party candidate Robert Wolfe broke state elections law and is out for revenge
By Bill Bradbury of Bandon, Oregon. Bill is a former Senate President and Secretary of State of Oregon.
There are two things that disqualify you to be Oregon’s Secretary of State – the second highest office in our state.
One of those is experience. Knute Buehler, an independently wealthy surgeon and Republican candidate for Secretary of State, doesn’t have any relevant experience that would prepare him to oversee all of Oregon’s elections. That, and his alignment with the right-wing war on voting and his baseless fears about our vote-by-mail system, make him all wrong for Oregon and he shouldn’t be given the power of the Secretary of State’s office.
Visit KnuteBuehlerFacts.com to learn more about Dr. Buehler, but for now, the topic of this post is actually the second thing that disqualifies a person from serving Oregon as our Secretary of State - and that is: breaking state elections law.
Someone who broke the law and oversaw employees who forged voter signatures to get a citizen initiative on the ballot before Oregonians should not be Oregon’s Secretary of State.
That person is Robert Wolfe, the Progressive Party candidate in this election.
Let’s be clear, Wolfe does not expect to win – he is using the Progressive Party ticket to engage in a personal vendetta against Kate Brown.
Earlier this year, as reported widely by the media, Robert Wolfe broke state elections law and the proposed fine totals $65,000, the largest fine in Oregon elections history.
As Secretary of State, the law required Kate Brown to hold him accountable. In response, Wolfe is taking revenge against Kate by running against her as the Progressive Party candidate.
Not only did Wolfe illegally compensate employees gathering signatures for a ballot measure, but the media also reported that his team forged voters’ signatures without the voters’ knowledge.
Such actions are in violation of Oregon’s Constitution – laws that were put in place by the voters of Oregon.
This is not the first time Wolfe has attacked the Secretary of State. Wolfe filed a claim against her, but a judge ruled that the claim was factually and legally inaccurate.
So to be clear: Wolfe is attacking Kate for following the law and protecting the integrity of the citizens’ initiative process – the very thing we expect our Secretary of State to do.
Voters shouldn't believe one thing Wolfe says. Because the truth is that Kate has fought fraud in the initiative process, and because of her work, Oregon received the highest ranking in the country from the non-partisan Ballot Initiative Strategy Center for transparency, fairness and integrity in the ballot initiative process.
When Kate first ran for Secretary of State, she promised Oregonians that she would crack down on fraud and abuse in the paid signature gathering process. Kate knows that when volunteers gather signature, there aren't problems – but when big money gets involved, there are and it’s her job to hold accountable those who break the law.
Kate has done exactly what she said she would – actions we expect from a Secretary of State who has integrity and cares very deeply about initiatives getting on the ballot through legal and legitimate means.
A vote for Kate Brown is a vote for preserving the integrity of our electoral system in Oregon.
|
Oct. 10, 2012
Posted in guest column. |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
1:49 a.m.
Oct 11, '12
Bill Bradbury appears to have no respect for due process of law. While the Secretary of State has accused Robert Wolfe of breaking the law and has proposed a $65,000 fine, there has been no proceeding even before an administrative law judge determining his guilt or innocence. And any determination there (which can be overriden by the Secretary of State) can be appealed to the actual courts. Robert Wofle is contesting the charges, which he says are baseless.
But Bradbury simply declares him to be "someone who broke the law" and acted "illegally," etc.
And for "his team forged voters' signatures," Wolfe was the person who detected the forgeries and reported the forgers to the Secretary of State, identifying all of their forged sheets. His role was the opposite of a forger; he was the anti-forger.
Bradbury then says that Wolfe "filed a claim aginst her" but fails to identify any such claim. What is it? The IP 24 campaign did seek judicial review of the Secretary of State's decision not to put IP 24 (marijuana legalization constitutional amendment) on the ballot. Seeking such review cannot fairly be characterized as "a claim against her."
Also, the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center is not a nonpartisan study group. It is funded by the same unions that fund Kate Brown's campaigns . . . and Bill Bradbury's as well. Citing BISC would be like Mitt Romney citing the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) for authority.
For better information, see: http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-29298-ralph_nader_blasts_kate_brown_in_new_radio_ad.html http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/10/oregon_secretary_of_state_cand_2.html http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2012/10/vote_for_knute_buehler_editori.html
4:10 a.m.
Oct 11, '12
Howdy, All:
I'm disappointed at Mr. Bradbury's sudden essay. I tried to post a column here earlier showing how Kate Brown supresses voter signatures and diminishes voter participation in Oregon -- and heard nothing back. You can read that piece on my website at http://tinyurl.com/8j3oqzj
Alas, Bradbury, a respected elder statesman of the Democratic party, has been duped by Kate Brown's press releases.
I forged no signatures, period. I have been accused of such only by Mr. Bradbury. During the I-24 signature drive, I turned in five different suspected forgers as required by law.
The problem occurred when Kate Brown included those signature sheets with the rest of our sheets, despite my request to remove them. Then, ten signatures "gathered" by the reported forger were used in the random sample -- where they were invalid, and caused real harm to our validity rate. Why does the Secretary of State use signatures from reported forgers to invalidate an entire petiton? Sheets turned in by a reported forger should be taken out of the pile. You'll need to ask Kate about that policy.
Further, Kate Brown has only proposed a fine (a massive one, $65,000) - there has been no finding of law or fact that says the accusation about "paying per signature" is true. It is false, and I am vigorously defending myself. By saying I'm guilty before due process has occurred, Bradbury and Kate Brown's advisors are demonstrating contempt of the reigning rule of American justice: We are all innnocent until proven guilty.
I have not "filed a claim against her," as Mr. Bradbury asserts. I have filed a suit to challenge her disqualification of IP 24. Not because I think she wronged me personally. It's because I contend she imposed arbitrary rules in illegal fashion, without public, judicial or legislative oversight, that caused well over 100,000 voter signatures to be trashed from petitions this year. Her policies, enacted by fiat in violation of statute, have resulted in four of the eight petitions submitted this year having far below historical low signature validity, and two more ending up on the cusp. Only two achieved high validity rates, as the result of signifiant spending - clearly showing her policies deny Oregonians reasonable access to the ballot via the initiative system, in violation of the Oregon Constitution.
Such "directives" are not in place over in Washington, where validity rates are about 60% higher than in Oregon.
That said, I'm pleased that Kate Brown and her surrogates are reacting strongly to my campaign. It means they realize the threat that a truthful examination of Kate's record poses to her chances for reelection. I welcome this debate, and am confident that I will win this debate on the behalf of all citizens of Oregon.
Robert Wolfe Progressive Party Candidate, Secretary of State www.WolfeForOregon.org
9:22 a.m.
Oct 11, '12
I will be voting for Bob Wolfe to send a message to Kate Brown and to anyone who sucks up to the Prohibitionists that they cannot count on my vote. I believe that Bob acted in good faith on I-24 and that the fines and disqualifications were politically motivated because of I-24's involvement in the AG race. Political descisions have consequenses: in this case, Kate loses my vote. And I will be making it clear to the constituency that I serve - close to 35,000 patients, caregivers and growers.
9:53 a.m.
Oct 11, '12
As someone who has voted for both Kate Brown and Bill Bradbury, I am saddened by this attack on the Progressive Party candidate. The allegations levied by Kate Brown against Robert Wolfe are merely allegations, as nothing has been proven in court.
I imagine that this tactic of attacking Mr. Wolfe with these claims will only backfire. Having such a high-profile surrogate launch such a diatribe against a progressive third-party candidate doesn't bode well for Ms. Brown's campaign, I'm afraid.
10:11 a.m.
Oct 11, '12
I have found Robert Wolfe to be an honorable man who will do a great job in the Secretary of State's office. This sad attack by one of Kate Brown's cronies is out of line. This is a scare tactic to defeat a man who has only stood for right in Oregon. If you are a progressive, you have a great candidate in Robert Wolfe!
10:29 a.m.
Oct 11, '12
The Naderites are out in full force aiming to make a name for themselves by getting a Republican elected to statewide office in Oregon. There's a reason why they took money from the GOP in 2004 to get Ralph Nader on the ballot, and there's a reason why the GOP gave them money. Politics makes strange bed-fellows and some people would rather have the satisfaction of the revenge of the loser than actually work for real progress in Oregon and America.
11:24 a.m.
Oct 11, '12
What flavor is the kool-aid you are drinking? Ralph Nader wants to get Republicans elected? C'mon man, get real. Nader has always been liberal and anti-business. Kate Brown's main fault is that she is very partisan in an office that demands non-partisanship. This is the same virus that Bradbury could never get over. Brown, like most liberals, simply doesn't like referendums. They know better than the ignorant masses.
1:36 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
Ralph Nader hates the Dem. Party and his campaign against it in 2000 was responsible for the election of GWB. He considers Bill Clinton and Barack Obama no different than George W. Bush or other GOP leaders.
1:36 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
Yeah, Bill, and the national Democratic Party takes money from the same corporations as does the GOP.
4:12 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
Bill, please document your claim that "they took money from the GOP in 2004."
4:55 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
Here's one link: http://articles.cnn.com/2004-06-30/politics/bush.nader_1_nader-supporters-nader-campaign-nader-spokesman-kevin-zeese?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS
5:20 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
Thats a big fail Bill. This article alleges some Republican groups made some phone calls to help the Nader effort. That's not the same as Nader accepting money from the Republicans. Not even close.
10:57 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
http://www.sccdp.org/sites/default/files/nader.htm Déjà vu 2000: Hoping to Elect Bush, Republicans Repeat Financially Supporting Nader 2004: Major Republican Supporters Fund Nader to Drain Votes from Democratic Candidate John Kerry. “Billionaire Richard J. Egan built his reputation in politics as a major donor and fund-raiser for the Bush campaign, steering hundreds of thousands of dollars into Republican coffers in recent years. But now it appears Egan and his relatives are bankrolling a new candidate: independent presidential contender Ralph Nader.” [“Major Bush Fund-Raiser Donates to Nader Campaign,” Boston Globe. July 1, 2004]
“[T]he Egans' sudden interest in Nader seems to reflect a more sophisticated strategy by Republicans to draw support away from Democratic challenger John F. Kerry by bolstering his third-party rival.” [“Major Bush Fund-Raiser Donates to Nader Campaign,” Boston Globe, July 1, 2004]
Republicans: Nearly 10 percent of Nader’s Big Contributors Nearly 10 percent of the Nader contributors who have given him at least $250 each have a history of supporting the Republican president, national GOP candidates or the party, according to computer-assisted review of financial records by The Dallas Morning News.” [“GOP Donors Double Dipping With Nader,” Dallas Morning News. March 26, 2004]
2000: Republicans Paid for Nader Ads in Three Pivotal States “One group, the Republican Leadership Council, has prepared a television commercial in which Mr. Nader attacks Mr. Gore and is ready to broadcast it in Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin, where the Green Party has made significant inroads among Democrats.” [“Republican Ads Use Nader in an Effort to Attack Gore,” New York Times, October 28, 2000]
Watchdog Group Files Legal Complaint: Republican Groups Broke Campaign Laws “Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington … says the Oregon Family Council and Citizens for a Sound Economy violated election laws last week by telephoning people and urging them to help Nader get on Oregon's ballot in November.” [“Watchdog Group Complains About Nader Aid,” Boston Globe, June 30, 2004]
“Both groups acknowledge trying to influence Nader's petition drive Saturday in Oregon, in hopes that getting him on the ballot would take votes away from Democrat John Kerry and help Bush win the battleground state.” [“Watchdog Group Complains About Nader Aid,” Boston Globe, June 30, 2004]
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington “filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission accusing the Oregon groups of breaking campaign laws with their efforts on Nader's behalf. The complaint also names the Bush and Nader campaigns, saying that reports of the Bush campaign using its resources to help Nader, and Nader's acceptance of the assistance, would amount to illegal campaign activity.” [“Major Bush Fund-Raiser Donates to Nader Campaign,” Boston Globe, July 1, 2004]
1:51 a.m.
Oct 12, '12
Your first paragraph refers as source to http://www.sccdp.org/sites/default/files/nader.htm, which presents a few quotes from newspaper articles. But the articles cited (from the Boston Globe and Dallas Morning News) are no longer available on the web. Can you provide them? In any event, even the selected short quotations in no way state that "[Naderites] took money from the GOP," which is your claim.
Accepting some contributions from persons who also have in the past given to Republicans (if that happened) is not "they [Naderites] took money from the GOP."
Your paragraphs 4-7 merely recite allegations that conservative groups did something on their own to help Nader. That is not "they [Naderites] took money from the GOP."
7:16 p.m.
Oct 12, '12
Also, many people and organizations which in the past have contributed to Republicans have also contributed large sums to the Obama campaigns, particularly those in the banking and finance industries. Does that make Obama illegitimate? That is all that your articles say about Nader.
11:51 a.m.
Oct 11, '12
Mr. Wolfe, Please elaborate on the assertion that you have "fears about vote-by-mail". As other states struggle with voter supression and attempts to erect roadblocks for valid voters to submit their choices, Oregon stands tall as a model for fair elections. If you oppose this system without any substantive reasons, you would never get my vote. Please explain.
12:16 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
Howdy, Richard:
I have no fears about Vote By Mail, and strongly support the program. I'm not sure where you got the idea otherwise. Two thumbs up -- WAY up -- for Vote By Mail.
Robert Wolfe Progressive Party Candidate Oregon Secretary of State www.WolfeForOregon.org
3:41 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
Thank you for your reply, Mr. Wolfe. The "idea" was gleaned from Mr. Bradbury's post above about your "baseless fears about our vote-by-mail system". I am so glad that you have set the record straight. It makes me sad when progressives fight amonst ourselves, especially through vicious attacks. Doing so gives the right wing to prevail. My fervent wish this election is to send a message that the goals of the right wing are unacceptable to the majority of Americans. Even Romney is finding this out as his campaign seems to move to the center, but then there is Paul Ryan that refutes his appearance of becoming more moderate. But that is a bit off topic.
11:57 a.m.
Oct 11, '12
I really think Kate Brown is headed for a big win. Bill Bradbury attacking Robert Wolfe though is kind of like 'crushing a butterfly with a rock.' Obviously the guy Wolfe has no chance and it is very doubtful the GOP can get the traction in any event.
I think though that the Brown critics are stiking close to a sensitive nerve and in that respect I think they are saying things that need to be said- perhaps not such a personal attack- I mean she has a lot of good qualities.
Here is Wasco County we had to form a state pac to circulate a referendum on a county ordinance. The people at the Secretary of State's office were nice enough personally but all of the requirements were a barrier for our tiny grass-roots effort- for example we were required to have a bank account to form the pac and have you tried to open a bank account lately with homeland security? This was even though we filed papers stating that we would spend less than $3000 and we were not soliciting donations and all expenses were out-of-pocket in-kind. Why should you have to open a bank account that you don't need or want? If this is the law it is uncostitutional and should be changed. It was definately a factor in slowing us down and killing our petition.
All of this scheme is trying to suppress use of the initiative because frankly their is an elitist attitude that fears the majority. I know there were abuses by the right-wing that sponsored a lot of bad petitions but honestly the scheme we have now is anti-democratic by design. Why the liberal aren't using the petition I don'y understand since our Legislature and Governor seems to only come up with a very mild agenda.
A vendeta? Oh god- I've have never heard of a grudge or vendetta in politics- It's not just Wolfe but others share similar sentiments. The liberals on this one sowed the seeds and now they get the crop.
Think I might vote Green for this race- not for President though- that vote might mean something- After Nader and that escapade I won't back the so-called Progressive Party candidates- as one writer explained it is well know that the Bush backers pushed the efforts placing Nader on the ballot- this is nothing new- during the McGovern-Nixon campaign the illegal Watergate slush funds were proven to have finaced most of the Linda Jenness Socialist Workers Party campaign attacking McGovern as a tool of capitalist lackeys.
Enough said.
5:33 p.m.
Oct 17, '12
I think the initiative process is really important, but I do not see where Kate or anyone else has created impossible hurdles. I know that I don't want 100 initiatives on the ballot, and I don't want some group to just buy their way onto the ballot like Kevin Mannix & pals did. The process has to be demanding and rigorous to prevent gaming the system.
If there are some problems that need to be fixed in our initiative process, then lets get them on the table and get the legislature to enact them. But so far, I'm not seeing anything.
12:24 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
Bradbury's attack on Bob Wolfe is offensive.
Kate Brown and others don't like the fact that the right wing uses the initiative process more than the left. Their response is to throw the baby out with the bath water and make the initiative process more and more restrictive.
I have worked with the initiative process for over thirty years. Brown and other have systematically put it out of reach for the average citizen. Now only deep pocketed interests can navigate the minefield of voter supressing rules imposed by Brown.
A few examples:
1) When I first circulated petitions, you could register a voter on the spot. As long as they were registered when signatures were verified, the signature counted. Rules were changed to not allow that. Voter supression?
2)Tens of thousands of valid registered voter's signatures are thrown out because of technical errors made by circulators. Voter supression?
3)Election officials now throw out signatures that temporary employees with no training say don't match the exemplar on file. Even if the voter later submits affadavits verifying that their signature is indeed legitimate, officials refuse to count the signature. Voter supression?
Bob Wolfe was recruited to be the chief petitioner for a Constitutional Amendment ending marijuana prohibition. He dilligently worked to follow all the rules. He used procedues and contracts we used on a 2010 initiative that was auditted repeatedly by the Elections Division. Bob actually consulted additional attorneys and tightened up the system but then with no warning Kate Brown slaps him with a $65,000 fine.
Brown spins the story as though she were stopping fraud but that is a lie. Brown and others argued that paying by the hour would stop people from forging names, but it didn't. Bob Wolfe caught several forgers and did exactly what he was supposed to and promptly turned them in to the Elections Division. But Brown didn't prosecute the forgers - which would defend the integrity of the process. Instead she went after Wolfe for supposedly paying by the signature. And then to add insult to injury, Brown includes the obviously bogus signatures in the verification sample and uses that to disqualify the petition. This is outrageous. And the result is that Oregonians now do not get to vote on a simple winnable proposal to end marijuana prohibition. Contrast the $65,000 fine with the pocket change Brown fined law enforcement officals who illegally campaigned against Measure 74 while on the job in 2010.
Brown has missed every opportunity to bring Oregon's voter registration system into the 21st century (should there really be any confusion about whether someone is registered or not?) but she has not missed an opportunity to make the initiative process impossible for the common person.
Democrats need to protect the core institutions of democracy like the initiative process. Brown has failed to do so. Bob Wolfe gets my vote.
1:22 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
This is one of the ickiest thing's I've read on BO. It is dishonest, deceptive, and desperate.
1:43 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
The whole point of the existence of the Progressive Party and the Wolfe candidacy is to leverage power by demonstrating the ability to split off enough votes from Dem candidates to get GOP candidates elected. Rather than be a competing coalition in the Dem. Party they find these politics of slash and burn more romantic and appealing. Why else would the Naderite cause seek common cause with the GOP in getting on the ballot?
4:34 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
We seek an opportunity to place progressive measures on the ballot. Before the Bradbury-Brown reign, there were 7 progressive measures on the 1998 ballot, and 6 of then passed, including vote-by-mail and medical marijuana. The 2000 and 2002 elections (before Bradbury worked his will on the process) saw 13 progressive measures on the Oregon ballot, including universal single-payer health care, banning profits on dead utility plants (referendum), public funding of candidate campaigns, background checks for purchases at gun shows, ban on body-gripping animal traps, dedicating tobacco settlement proceeds to low-income health care, and guaranteed school funding.
Over the past 6 years of elections (2008, 2010, 2012), however, there have been only 2 progressive measures on the ballot, both of them about marijuana (in addition to one union-backed measure to redirect the corporate kicker).
The policies of Bill Bradbury and Kate Brown have vastly increased the cost, complexity, and legal risk of gathering signatures for initiatives, leaving the process effectively available only to the wealthy (for tax cuts), corporations, (for casinos and more tax cuts), and the large unions. Note that the number of right-wing measures on the Oregon ballot has remained very significant, because the right-wing causes attract the big money from corporations and the wealthy necessary to pay all of the new costs.
And ask why the signature validity rate in Washington is around 80-85%, compared with the 50-60% range typical now in Oregon. Is there massive signature fraud in Washington that the Oregon system is weeding out? No. It's that the Oregon directives are disqualifying at least 20% of all valid voter signatures and probably more.
2:44 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
I too have been a Kate Brown and Bill Bradbury supporter in the past. This issue of disqualifying signatures only contributes to pushing hard working citizens away from the initiative process. Now, only the rich and big unions can have the money it takes to qualify signatures with Kate Brown at the helm. Now we see attacks from Bradbury. OMG !! This is a sorry State of Affairs.
3:22 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
I'll be voting for Kate Brown, and for Bradbury if he's ever on the ballot again. Keisling failed to enforce some election laws.
8:43 a.m.
Oct 13, '12
Me too! Yay for Kate Brown and Bill Bradbury. The last thing we need in Oregon is a Republican in charge of our elections. That's a sure road to voter suppression and rigged election counts. We need Kate Brown making sure voters can access their right to vote and have their votes counted as cast AND to make sure initiative petitions are truly supported by Oregon citizens as opposed to purchased by corporate or other special interests.
3:54 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
What I think everyone who's basing on Kate Brown fails to realize is she is abiding by the laws regarding initiatives and signatures. If you don't like the laws the way they are, get on your state representatives and senators to change it. Also, while I wish we had a successful multi-party system, we don't at the moment. Unfortunate as it sounds, a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for Buehler. If you're paying attention to what's going on around the country, a republican secretary of state will do everything they can to create voter suppression, as is happening in states around the country!
4:37 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
The policies that disqualify most of the voter signatures are not in state statutes. They are in "directives" adopted by Kate Brown.
11:00 p.m.
Oct 11, '12
Ralph Nader, the man who brought us two terms of GWB, the Bush tax cuts, Justice Alito and Roberts, and Citizen's United, the Iraq War and the Bush Tax Cuts, now wants to bring us a right wing GOP Sec. of State by making attack Ads against Kate Brown.
11:56 a.m.
Oct 12, '12
Is she doing anything illegal? If so, then why did the judge rule afainst Wolfe? If not, again, change the system if you don't like it. I really don't have an opinion one way or another re: Wolfe's role in this. I am a registered member of the progressive party, but I do NOT want Buehler to win. If we continue to fight amongst ourselves and split the vote between the two, that's what will happen. It is too important to keep a republican from winning this race. And if he does, I don't want to hear all the Wolfe supporters complaining when Buehler starts doing things to suppress the vote like other republican secretaries of state are doing.
2:35 p.m.
Oct 12, '12
I believe by running for the SoS office, Mr. Wolfe is in fact trying to do exactly as you suggest. Change the system.
8:11 a.m.
Oct 13, '12
I am with Kate100 percent!!
10:17 a.m.
Oct 13, '12
We should never elect someone to enforce election laws who has deliberately violated them (Fox/Chicken Coop). Kate Brown has bravely and faithfully executed Oregon's election laws and defended our right to vote and the vote by mail system. She deserves to be re-elected.
2:22 a.m.
Oct 14, '12
I can identify with the Progressive Party positions in the Oregon Voters Pamphlet, BUT I am quite disturbed by the mis-characterization of other Parties, especially the Dems. It lacks integrity, Mr. Wolfe. You lost my vote specifically because your party lies.
5:33 p.m.
Oct 16, '12
Every third party candidate running in this race is a cannabis reform candidate. They may not stand a chance of winning, but they sure do make marijuana law reform a major issue in the race. And it should be. Marijuana is the top cash crop in the State and according to DASC reports, 90% of the market is run by foreign Cartels. According to those same reports there were between 1-3 million plants grown in Oregon in 2009 - and police confiscated a record 262,000. That is a major drain on our economy.