
Sign up here to enjoy the
full benefits of this site.
Click here to log in.
Forgot your username
or password?
|
||
![]() Sign up here to enjoy the full benefits of this site. Click here to log in. Forgot your username or password? Vote today...Reach out to Oregon progressives--
advertise on this site. Please note: Ads in this area for candidates or ballot measures are not representative of an endorsement by Democracy for Oregon or DFO Action.
User login |
Hearing the facts on Measures 49 and 50
Submitted by Jenni on October 7, 2007 - 11:09am.
We're working our way through the last day at the Summit. Right now we're sitting in a beakout session on armchair activism, which includes blogs, Youtube, MySpace, Facebook etc. This morning we heard from state legislators on Measures 49 and 50. Later today we'll hear from candidates for the U.S. Senate Steve Novick and Jeff Merkley. Representative Greg Macpherson began the talk on the ballot measures, going over some of the claims that are already in the works, and the truth behind the lies that opponents have been pushing in advertising, literature, etc. In his discussion on the claims, he compared M37 to Little Red Riding Hood. Oh what big eyes you have. Oh what big teeth you have... There are over 7,500 claims in Oregon, from billboards to strip malls, to mines, to huge subdivisions. In Klamath County, which already has water shortage problems, there are three claims for a total of 24,000 homes. In Cannon Beach there is a claim for a hotel that would block public access to the beach. In Washington County, the claims would double the size of the county's urbanized areas. Several lies have been pushed by the measure's opponents, which Macpherson debunked. They include: No public hearings - they actually had nine hearings in the Fairness Committee, in which they heard 369 testimonials from the public. The process was done in secret without any ability for changes - it actually went through three rounds of amendments Macpherson said if this measure fails, changes to M37 will be closed down for at least a decade.
He said this measure has been an opportunity for Democrats to be able to build a coalition with farm communities. After all, conflicting use in agricultural areas is not good. There have long been stories about informal and formal conflicts where agricultural use meets residential use. Examples include irrigation being turned off at night because of it being too loud. Clem gave a personal story about a neighbor complaining because his tractor was too loud and was kicking up too much dust. He said that Marion County is especially affected by agriculture meeting M37. There is already areas with severe water shortages in the county. A claim that was approved for 40 homes has already run neighboring wells dry after only two houses being built. In the upper Hood river valley, there are already claims on about half the orchard land in the area. This is a big issue, because not only would condos and homes in the middle of orchard land cause huge conflicts, but it also heavily affects the growers co-op the famers all participate in. These claims being approved would mean the failure of the remaining farms because the co-op would no longer be large enough to survive. M49 is supported by farmers and farm organizations, as evidenced by the "Yes on 49" signs along the way to the Summit that were often found in agricultural fields. The Farm Bureau, for instance, was neutral on M37, but voted 15-2 to support M49.
He said that cigarettes are the most deadly drug out there. Illicit drugs kill 19,000 people per year. Alcohol kills 80,000 people. Tobacco, however, kills 400,000. Every pack of cigarettes sold costs society more than $11 per pack, according to the CDC. $5.50 of that is in lost wages and productivity. More than $5.50 is in direct medical costs. If M50 passes, the taxes on a pack of cigarettes will be a little over $2, which means taxpayers still subsidize smokers by $3+ a pack. The biggest claim that opponents bring up about the measure is that 70% of the money doesn't go to kids. Technically, this is true the first year, said Westlund. Ten percent of the money goes to tobacco use reduction. Some funds are used to bring approximately 15,000 of the 70,000+ adults kicked off the Oregon Health Plan because of a lack of funds. The remaining money not immediately spent on kids is placed into a savings account. This is because it will take approximately a year to get all the kids on the system. In the meantime, the funds will be in a savings account. As to the stability of the income, Westlund said that the tobacco tax is one of the most stable revenue sources in the entire state. It's like the Rock of Gibraltar, he said. It's critical we pass this measure, he said, and it's not just because of the money. One of the biggest blocks to kids starting to smoke is the cost of the cigarettes. The more expensive they get, the fewer kids will ever start smoking. Bookmark/Search this post with: »
|
Post your events!Does your campaign, political group, organization, etc. have upcoming events? Post them on our site. Countdown...Recent comments
Upcoming eventsTake Action EverydaySearch |
Amend constitution?
It's true
Measure 50
It was the way to get it on
i like measure 50 because it
M50
I'm facing a difficult decision here...
I've been reading up on both of these measures extensively, and it's hard for me to decide. The last time I was health insured was almost 4 years ago (I'm turning 20).
My immediate family has had personal experience with the shortfalls of the current Oregon Health Plan and other social programs. Amending our state constitution in order to add a tax on a single product, which a minority consumes, who are generally sub-working to lower middle class doesn't seem entirely pragmatic.
It's not that I don't advocate smoking prevention programs or the health and welfare of Oregon's children, it's the ultimate sustainability of the revenue garnered from the product that concerns me.
Higher prices will deter many underage teens from smoking, but it also has the potential to drive legal consumers to purchase their tobacco elsewhere, such as the internet, or neighboring Idaho and California. Also, if the goals of this measure are achieved, won't the base of it's revenue slowly dwindle?
At any rate, the social and health care programs in this state are in dire need of mending, and it would be efficacious to have a larger, more predictable tax base. I would love to hear some input if any are willing.
Sincerely,
Dan, SOU student
re=-dan
Measure 50 another lie!
50
I intend to vote yes because of this blog