Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in June 2015

First take

The train isn't here yet, but you can hear it chugging down the track. Oregon Representative Earl Blumenauer's amendment to specifically give states authority to legalize marijuana - to end federal prohibition where states adopt an alternate regime - failed Wednesday on the House floor. But it failed by a narrow vote of 206-222. Four years ago, the margin would have been much greater; a few years from now it likely will pass easily. While the vote in Oregon was a partisan split (the four Democrats were in favor, Republican Greg Walden against), and split on party lines in Washington as well, a significant number of Republicans did support the measure, alongside most Democrats. (If half of the Democrats who voted against switched their votes, the amendment would have passed.) Among the most interesting of the Republicans, from the Northwest viewpoint: Raul Labrador of Idaho (though not fellow Idahoan Mike Simpson). But while that general amendment failed, another measure aimed at specifically allowing medical pot where states permit it passed by a strong 246-186 margin. Can you hear it down the track? (photo/Carlos Cracia)

Good article in Foreign Policy asking the question: Why has not the tremendous advance in technology over the last couple of decades delivered more democracy around the world? (I would suggest, though the article doesn't highlight it, this country.) Seven reasons are offered, including persistent negative on-ground conditions, the ability of authoritarians to use technology for their ends as well, and some evidence of advances more on the local than on the national level. One sentence: "Technology does not drive anything. It creates new possibilities for collecting and analyzing data, mashing ideas and reaching people, but people still need to be moved to engage and find practical pathways to act. Where the fear of being beaten or the habits of self-censorship inhibit agency, technology, however versatile, [it] is a feeble match." - rs

Damned elected scoff laws

raineylogo1

Most of us were raised to believe the basic glue of democracy is the rule of law. You can refer to our Constitution, the Bill of Rights, federal and state laws, local county or municipal ordinances or that large stack of regulations some spend a lifetime complaining about. They’re rules. Our rules. All of ‘em.

We’ve learned to live with them. Or change them. Amend them when time or other conditions require - void them when courts decide they’re invalid or unnecessary. Rules, we’ve always believed, have separated us from the uncivilized or the lesser nations that live without them or under “rules” made by some dictator.

More than just having rules, we expect those in public leadership to know the applicable ones and to live by them. Be guided in the conduct of public business and in the conduct of their own lives. Which is why we get angry when they don’t. Like a Dennis Hastert. Or a Newt Gingrich. Or a Bill Clinton. Or a Bob Packwood. Or - well you get the idea.

More troubling to me than these and other public figures who befoul their own nests are the other ones - those in the current crop of “leaders” who know the law, but won’t uphold it, or have vowed to take actions that will directly break one or more laws.

Here are some examples. In Nebraska, the multi-millionaire governor knowingly, secretly and illegally purchased chemicals with which to enforce the state’s death penalty law. He bought them from a foreign country - action which U.S. laws expressly forbid. The Nebraska legislature subsequently passed a bill to eliminate the death penalty which the governor vetoed. Legislature overrode. Now, the governor says he doesn’t give a damn and will proceed with both the illegal poison purchase and what will now be illegal executions. Damn the legislature. Damn the laws he swore to uphold.

Take that goofy teapartier governor of Maine. Please! He’s been flouting numerous laws of his state for the first two years of his term. And now, with the legislature refusing to pass his irresponsible tax reduction bill that would severely damage Maine’s economy, that same nutball has promised to kill any legislative-passed bill that hits his desk - no matter the subject and no matter the consequences - if that bill was originated by Democrats. Damn the laws he swore to uphold.

Then, there’s that little bitty governor of Louisiana who wants to be somebody. Anybody. Even his own party leaders have publically said he should not be president. Well, Bobby has set out to prove his fellow Bayou State GOP brothers and sisters correct. Now, he’s promised to ignore the upcoming decision from the U.S. Supreme Court if said decision upholds the Affordable Care Act, as is expected. The dreaded Obamacare. Bobby says he’ll never let his state be a participant despite SCOTUS. Damn the laws he swore to uphold. Damn the Supreme Court of the land.

Rick Santorum. Removed from the U.S. Senate by voters in Pennsylvania and twice since rejected in bids for public pay. Now, he’s one of the more unqualified among the totally unqualified running for his party’s presidential nomination. He sides with that l’il Louisiana fella against the power - much less the wisdom - of SCOTUS. In his case, the issue is gay rights. Ricky says “SCOTUS is not the final judgement” on the subject, calling the court “a set of liberal judges.”

Rickie scores a Palin award on that one - twice wrong on a single issue. SCOTUS is not full of “liberal judges” and SCOTUS IS the final voice in our system when it comes to the constitutionality of our laws.

There are far too many ignorant scoff laws in our public life. Rather than master a system which has served this country’s legal needs for centuries, they’d sooner play to small constituencies for their own purposes. Rather than conduct themselves in accordance with laws, their personal and professional lives often run counter to them. Is it any wonder so many Americans are “turned off” to politics - that so many won’t participate even as voters - that ignorance and self-service have given us political office holders with little regard for the work to be done while doing and saying anything to preserve their places at the public trough?

These “damn the laws” and “win by saying anything” attitudes are also creating another very real problem for our nation. Good people, who might be outstanding leaders, look at this bunch of political heretics and decide against public service. People with intellectual, academic and personal skills that could restore common sense and civility to our badly abused system of government won’t put themselves forward because they don’t want the abuse. Because they see other good people walking away in frustration. Because they see the public’s disdain for politicians and politics in general. Because they don’t want to risk their futures and their family’s futures in a public service career held in lower esteem than hookers.

Election to public office is the voter’s extension of a contract to the winners. Conduct of those offices is governed by law. If the elected flout those laws - break those laws - or promise such conduct regarding those laws - they should be removed. Quickly.

Our body politic has been badly damaged by the cancers of ignorance, self-service, intemperance, malfeasance and personal greed. Those in public life who renounce the laws by which we are governed are unfit to serve. There’s just too damned much at stake.

First take

The Senate passage Tuesday of the "Freedom Act" (and I'm going to continue putting quote marks around pieces of legislation that try to aggrandize themselves, and distort, the way this one does) was marked down as a major defeat for Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, and a big win for the National Security Agency. I look at it a little differently. The new law is a little more protective of privacy than the old one, and that's something of a plus whatever the NSA may think of it. (And the fact that the NSA likes or doesn't like a piece of legislation doesn't really affect whether I should.)

Paul's major ally in the "Patriot Act" fight was Oregon Senator Ron Wyden (photo/BLM), who has been critical for many year of over-surveillance, and his statement on Tuesday said, "It is not an exaggeration to say the passage of the USA Freedom Act is the most significant victory for Americans’ privacy rights in more than a decade, and stands as a true endorsement of the principle that Americans do not need to sacrifice their liberty to have security. This program to collect the phone records of millions and millions of U.S. citizens was hatched in secret, depending on a secret interpretation of the law that Americans were not allowed to see. I have spent nearly a decade fighting mass surveillance, first working to bring this secret dragnet to light and then working to bring it to an end. The fight to protect Americans’ constitutional rights against government overreach is not over. I’m committed to plugging the backdoor search loophole that the government uses to review Americans’ communications without a warrant, to beat back efforts to build security weaknesses into our electronic devices and to require the government to get a warrant before tracking Americans’ movements electronically."

So, some progress, which is not an awful thing, and something that might not have happened without Paul's (and Wyden's) stand. And by the way: Shouldn't the news lead have more to do with whether the outcome was good for the country, than with whether it was a win or loss for Paul?

File this under an odd view of morality. From the New York Daily News: "The conservative pastor who claimed God can forgive Josh Duggar amid his molestation scandal says Caitlyn Jenner is defying the way God made her during a fire-and-brimstone Sunday Sermon." - rs

Heard . . .

harrislogo1

Political ambition over good policy?

How did the Knute Buehler bill allowing pharmacists to prescribe hormonal contraceptives (patch or pill) rather than requiring a doctors visit suddenly get unstuck? And why was it stuck in the first place?

After all Knute’s “free the pill” proposal making contraceptives more readily available to all women seems like a Democratic rockstar of a bill. Now we’ve heard that the price for moving the bill was a promise by Buehler to Val Hoyle that he wasn’t planning on running for Secretary of State.

If he hadn’t made that promise, it appears Oregon Women would be waiting another two years for increased availability and affordability.

Dan not so Meek:

Because of our State constitution Oregon is one of four state with no campaign contribution and spending limits. Yet Campaign finance reform is widely popular. Particularly among the Democratic progressive base.

Pre session then SoS Kate Brown drafted Senate Joint Resolution 5 (SJR5), which would refer Oregonians a State constitutional amendment allowing political contribution limits (Oregon is one of 4 States that have no legal limits on what you can give to a political candidate). But it’s stuck in the Senate largely because of the opposition of a single State Senator.

Though it’s well known that powerful Democratic financiers also oppose any limits on contributions and spending. But now its possible that should SJR5 die, a broad progressive coalition could be ready to file a petition asking Oregon voters to amend the Oregon Constitution allowing laws limiting both contributions and expenditures. A State “Move to Amend” initiative?

First take

The Huckleberries (Spokesman Review) blog polled its readers over the last couple of days, prompted by Nebraska's decision to abolish the death penalty there - the first "red" state to do tht. The question was, should Idaho do likewise? There's a growing conservative argument, developed by a number of national conservative columnists, for doing exactly that. The polled, presumably mostly northern Idahoans, were almost exactly split on the question; the pro-abolish side got just three more votes (out of 241) than the pro-death penalty side did. Maybe there's some shifting going on about this in Idaho.

In the Seattle and San Francisco areas yesterday - and evidently somewhat into today - Internet services from Comcast were widely knocked out, and scattered areas all around the west coast. Columnist Chris Carlson, who lives in a very rural stretch of northern Idaho but relies on Comcast, had his service knocked out. (TV cable apparently was unaffected.) At 11 last night Comcast sent out a tweet saying, "engineers have restored service; everything shld be working. We're sorry for inconvenience. Let us know if you need help." It's an oddity; at least one report referred to a sliced cable as being at fault, though why that would affect such widely scattered areas, or leave TV service unaffected, seems murky. No outage here at RP. Fingers crossed.

Chicago on the Willamette?

jorgensenlogo1

The aftermath of former Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber’s resignation in February was surprisingly quiet, and it has been business as usual at the state capitol in Salem ever since. It was almost as if that whole bizarre series of events had never transpired in the first place.

For his part, Kitzhaber had largely dropped out of the public eye, and understandably so. Kitzhaber sightings have become increasingly rare, though he was spotted at a Starbucks in Northwest Portland in early May and had his picture snapped. Aside from the photographer, all indications are that nobody else even recognized him.

Here’s the ultimate public figure, a longtime chief executive of the entire enormous state government apparatus, and now he’s just some random guy in a coffeeshop, wearing sweats and glasses and going over a pile of papers. In his case, it’s almost tempting to wonder what kind of papers they would be—legal documents of some sort or another, perhaps?

Kitzhaber wasn’t out of the spotlight just yet, however, as a series of recent articles has come as a reminder that the swirl of scandals that forced his resignation and tarnished his legacy and reputation are nowhere near finished playing themselves out yet.

One week after the relatively innocuous story about his trip to Starbucks, the Washington Times published a particularly damning story reminding a national audience why and how Kitzhaber got himself into so much trouble. Perhaps a reminder was necessary, as the screaming headlines about federal investigations had largely stopped when he resigned in disgrace weeks after being sworn in for an historic fourth term as governor.

These revelations had nothing to do with former so-called “first lady” Cylvia Hayes, her apparently sordid past or the allegations that she used that position to further her own private business interests. Rather, they were about the colossal $300 million blunder that was the state’s failed health care exchange website.

Kitzhaber, his staff and his party had been quick to point the finger at software developer Oracle for the catastrophe. But the article points out that the website could have been working in early 2014 with some additional training and testing. Instead, the decision was made to pull the plug on it and move over to the federal exchange. This turned out to be a decision made entirely for the sake of political expediency, and by staffers on his re-election campaign.

None of this went unnoticed by the members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. A letter was sent to Kitzhaber the same day he resigned stating that Congress was, indeed, investigating the misspending of federal funds on the exchange. The use of campaign staff to coach a witness who testified before the committee also didn’t go over too well, and neither did his administration’s attempt to delete emails from state servers days before he left office.

The former first couple did get some semblance of good news towards the end of May, as a judge ruled that Hayes could hold on to some of her e-mails. She had claimed, through her attorneys, that their release would violate her Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination, and the judge agreed. Of course, none of this is a great overall defense for anyone claiming to be innocent, but it was enough to serve the intended purpose of keeping their contents from the public.

A couple of days later, there were more bombshells. These took the form of A Willamette Week article by Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Nigel Jaquiss about the state official who leaked Kitzhaber’s emails to him instead of deleting them. He was rewarded for his efforts by a “perp walk” out of his office and the threat of 6,000 charges of official misconduct unless he resigned his position.

In stark contrast, the Kitzhaber crony who threw the whistleblower under the bus gets to start a new $185,000 position with the City of Portland on June 1, despite being among the many state officials subpoenaed as part of the ongoing investigations.

It became obvious a couple of days later why officials were so eager to threaten the whistleblower with so many criminal charges. It turned out to be a case of literal nepotism, as Willamette Week disclosed that Kitzhaber's nephew was and is working for the same district attorney’s office that had made those threats.

All of this may come as somewhat of a surprise to many Oregonians. We have long prided ourselves as being better than this. For decades, we’ve sought to hold our state up as an example of transparent, ethical, corruption-free government. We would see scandals take place in other states and thank the heavens that such things could never, ever happen here.

Thanks to the actions of John Kitzhaber, Cylvia Hayes and their friends and allies who are still very much in power, that myth has been completely shattered. The ultimate consequence is that this will change the way we think about ourselves and the state that we love so much.

Perhaps, in the annuls of history, 2015 will be known as the year that Oregon truly lost its innocence. Prior to now, it would have been unthinkable to many that our beloved state could be associated with such blatant and high-level corruption in our public institutions. But it turned out that we were only kidding ourselves.

We thought we were clean, innocent, pure Oregon. The truth was much more painful, as decades of one-party rule in our executive branch seem to have turned this beautiful, majestic place in Chicago on the Willamette.

The people of this state deserve so much better than this, and I hope they never stop hoping for a future in which a similar set of circumstances could never possibly repeat themselves. In the meantime, though, I get the feeling there will be plenty of stories and revelations that have yet to come out that will show us exactly how bad and widespread this corruption actually has been.

None of this should stop Oregonians from demanding more from their institutions and leaders. If anything, it should have the opposite effect, and perhaps we can someday reclaim the innocence that we once had. And maybe we’ll be smart enough to guard it with a newfound sense of vigilance to ensure that nothing like this will ever happen again.

First take

Every rule has some exceptions: Just maybe, this is one of those buyout deals that provides some broad benefit. The agreement concerns Intel Corporation, which is buying the chip company Altera. This isn't a case of cornering the market, since Altera is a relatively small player (revenues of under $2 billion last year, compared with $56 billion for Intel). Rather, it sounds as if Altera is producing certain types of programmable chips, especially several varieties that may have emerging use in the "Internet of things," that Intel doesn't have, but which could mesh neatly into its batch of products. This could actually be a case of that vaunted, but not often seen, synergy that yields more than the sum of the parts. (picture by Coolcaesar)

This was an interesting headline in The Daily Beast (email version, something similar online): "Rand Paul is now GOP enemy number one." There are a lot of hawks in the Republican Party, and they aren't happy with Paul's key role in blocking as-is renewal of the Patriot Act. How will this play in Idaho, where Representative Raul Labrador has just joined the Paul campaign?