Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in March 2026

Aimlessness

March 17, 2026

"Where there's a will, there's a way"

Just seven words.  Seven one-syllable words.  Words we've heard time and time again in many circumstances.  "Where there's a will, there's a way."

For a decade or more, this country has seemed to be "off-course," drifting aimlessly without direction.  Maybe the absence of contemporary "will" has contributed to a national loss of "way."

Think about it.

In 1941, faced with war on two sides of our circular world, this nation was called to arms by Franklin Roosevelt.  He defined a need for national unity and all-out commitment to win two wars.  Following that call to arms, we found the "will" and the "way" to win both in less than 48 months.  Because the whole nation was focused in a definable undertaking.

In 1961, faced with Soviet successes in space, John Kennedy, following Roosevelt's path, defined a need for the country, saying this nation would send a man to the moon in the next decade.  We found the "will."  And the "way." Again, national focus.

We did.  We found the national "will" to accomplish the seemingly Herculean tasks that had been defined.  We got to the moon.  And beyond.

When the need was set, the "will" and the "way" followed.  Successfully.  Orderly.  Quickly.

Forget, for a moment, all the national divisions that surround us.  Ignore, temporarily, the political battles that have weakened our society.  Just consider the American family.  However it's constituted in your world.

The pressures of keeping a family together have never been greater.  More than half of American families have both parents working.  Trying to keep up with the prices of groceries, health care, gas, school needs and dozens of unplanned expenses we all face.  Plus, just parenting.

Many of today's families are in single-parent households.  There, those pressures are even greater as one parent tries to take the place of two while dealing with all those demands.  Full time.  Then some.

Nearly all of us - parents or not - have our heads down, "pedaling" as fast as we can to keep up with ever increasing demands on our time, our treasure and our talents..

At the national level, the picture seems much the same.  Most of those in charge seem to have their "heads down," trying to do everything in these demanding times to "keep up" as a nation.

Except Congress.  Congress - such as it is - is hopelessly divided, producing little in ways to make our lives better.  That must change.

The President sits atop a government that seems aimless as we lurch from one crisis to another.  Whether it's rampant inflation to a pandemic to national health emergencies to international calamities to gun massacres to gas prices.  Trying to clean up the national mess and the ever-present, day-to-day multiplying of national demands.  There's no time for leading - for setting a national course - for defining a new national goal.

"National will," if you will.

And, that's what seems to be missing.  Some sort of national undertaking that involves us all, that unifies us working for a common goal, a goal that defines the "will" so we can be bound together finding the "way."

Nations that lead - that prosper - almost always have some sort of national direction working at a common undertaking.  It's the sort of inspirational "glue" that binds all in a well-defined task.  Like winning a war or two.  Like setting goals for space achievement.

At the moment, we seem divided - one from another - in nearly all things.  Our eyes are down - not lifted to the horizon of common understanding.  We seem to lack the purpose of common "will."

We need something large and defining to bring us all together in single purpose.  Something like ending homelessness in the next decade.  It could be done.  Undertaking serious work on global warming before it gets completely out-of-hand.  It can still be done.

There are other huge challenges we face.  Challenges we can overcome IF we can end the current divisions wasting precious time.  Challenges sapping our strength and our resources.

"Where there's a will there's a way."

Old words.  Words from a previous time.  Long ago.  But, at least in my opinion, words we badly need to listen to.  Today.

 

A diversion of attention and resources

March 16, 2026

Setting aside the fact that Donald Trump’s war against Iran is illegal under both U.S. and international law, there is no rational explanation for his actions. The claim that Iran was about to attack the United States is delusional, if he actually believed it, or simply another big lie. Either way, the war is extremely harmful to America’s security.

After giving any number of reasons for going to war, Trump made the claim that: “It was my opinion that they were going to attack first. They were going to attack if we didn’t do it.” Pentagon briefers told Congress in a March 1 classified briefing that there was no intelligence suggesting that Iran planned to attack American forces. Trump was either delusional or dishonest in using this explanation for his snap decision to start the war.

In fact, shortly before Trump gave the attack order, the mediator handling the U.S.-Iran negotiations stated that the parties had made “significant progress” toward a resolution.

A more likely explanation for Trump’s decision to declare war is that he finally gave in to the continual urging of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to launch an attack. Netanyahu was likely unsettled by the possibility of a peaceful settlement and determined to foreclose that possibility. Trump obviously agreed.

Trump has little knowledge of history, particularly of the proven historic proverb that “it is easier to start a war than to stop one.” That is abundantly clear from his vow that there will be “no deal” with Iran except “unconditional surrender.” He seems to be oblivious to the untidy outcomes of the nation’s wars in the last 80 years–Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. The outcomes of modern wars are seemingly unending slogs that have drained our military forces, as well as our national treasury.

It might be well, also, for Trump to consider the history of Iran’s last great war. It was attacked by Saddam Hussien in 1980 and suffered through a vicious, grinding war for eight years that ended up with a virtual draw. The military deaths suffered by Iran in that ugly war likely exceeded 200,000, with almost twice that number of wounded. The country can absorb massive casualties and still maintain its repressive government structure. It will not be a pushover today.

We can bomb the daylights out of Iran all day, every day, but cannot force its surrender. Iraq is a good case in point. Without a massive commitment of ground forces, which would entail many dead and wounded American troops, there is no possibility of coming close to an unconditional surrender. To believe otherwise is delusional.

The absolute worst thing about Trump’s war is that it diverts attention and forces from existential security concerns facing the United States. The war in Ukraine is at the very top of the list. Trump has largely disconnected from the genocidal war being waged by Russia against Ukraine. Iran is simply a wild goose chase that diverts attention and resources from that threat. U.S. security depends on the NATO alliance which has kept the peace in Europe ever since the end of World War II. If we allow Ukraine to fall to Russian aggression, it will be a hammer blow to NATO and our nation’s security.

Here are the problems being exacerbated by Trump’s Iran fixation. The U.S. and its Gulf allies are exhausting their inventories of sophisticated anti-missile defense systems. Replenishing the supplies will take years, leaving Ukraine essentially defenseless, while Russia is relentlessly pounding Ukraine with missiles and drones.

Trump has removed some oil sanctions against Russia that will increase its income and prolong its war against Ukraine. At the same time, Russia has been providing intelligence to Iran to target U.S. forces. It makes absolutely no sense to ignore the great security threat that Russia poses to America, while expending so much of our military resources going after a country that poses no substantial threat to America.

One of Trump’s gripes against Iran is that its repressive government has killed somewhere between 7,000 and 30,000 of its own citizens. That is certainly a source of concern but it does not justify a declaration of war when there is no direct threat to America. If there is a bloodcurdling statistic that, combined with a threat to American security, would merit a strong response, it is the devastation that Russia has imposed on our Ukrainian allies. Russia has killed about 16,000 Ukrainian civilians. Ukraine’s military has sustained 250,000-300,000 dead and wounded. About 20,000 Ukrainian children have been kidnapped by Russian forces. That should be our focus.

There is not much that individual citizens can do to change Trump’s warmongering, but we can put the heat on our Congressional representatives to take action. The gutless members of Idaho’s delegation are all behind Trump’s military adventurism, completely heedless to the fact that the U.S. Constitution places the war power directly in the hands of Congress. We can all demand that they stop cowering in their offices and take action to stop this pointless war. Those who decline should be replaced at the ballot box.

 

Making the red flag fly

Making the red flag fly

March 15, 2026

Another legislative session is over and new laws are about to go into effect that will change things, some things, in Oregon. Right?

What people around government know and everyone else should, is that passing a law is one thing and getting it to work as intended is a whole different matter.

Consider legislation from nine years ago and working only in part: the red flag law.

A decade ago, many Second Amendment advocates argued that the problem with persistent shooting deaths was not so much the broad availability of guns as the ability of specific dangerous people to get hold of them. A response to that emerged around the country in the form of red flag laws, which provide for removal of weapons (mostly but not exclusively firearms) from people who seemed at high risk of harming themselves or others.

Oregon’s track record on shootings tends to follow national rates, by population. It does have a below-average number of shootings of one person by another, but also has an especially high rate of suicide by firearm.

So far, 22 states including Oregon have enacted red flag-type laws. (Those without are mainly Republican-led states, and one, Oklahoma, has a law generally barring them.) Some of these laws refer to Extreme Risk Protection Orders (that’s the proper name in Oregon), and others refer to Risk Warrants, Gun Violence Restraining Orders or Extreme Risk Firearm Protection orders. The operating idea is similar.

The process for using it starts with someone either in law enforcement or in the family or household of the person thought to be a hazard applying to a court for an order. If the order is approved, notice is served on the person. Any readily available firearms must be turned over either to law enforcement or a third party, who could be a friend or relative.

A judge considering an order has to consider risk factors specified in state law, including reports of threats of suicide or violence (or past history of those things), lawbreaking involving violence or drug abuse or other indicators.

In August 2023, the Secretary of State’s Office reviewed the results so far of the 2017 Oregon red flag law, which took effect in 2018. The resulting report sounded ambiguous: The red flag concept had potential which was so far unfulfilled, the report suggested.

“In the first 4 and a half years that Oregon’s ERPO [Extreme Risk Protection Orders] law was in effect a total of 564 petitions were filed, with the vast majority requested by local law enforcement,” the report said. “Respondents only requested a hearing to challenge an order in about a third of these cases, with the orders being upheld about half of the time. ERPO use has varied widely among counties, with seven counties not having any since the law was implemented.”

As national use has varied — states such as Indiana and Florida use it more than Oregon — so do Oregon’s 36 counties vary not only widely but unexpectedly. You might guess heavier use of it in Multnomah County than elsewhere, but the numbers of red flag orders issued was higher in raw totals (and much higher per capita) in Washington and Deschutes counties and much higher per capita.

The highest number of orders in any county in Oregon per capita was — brace yourself — in Lake County (with 99 orders per 100,000 people). The second-highest per capita rate was in another haven for the Second Amendment, Josephine County.

Why the disparity? When Portland City Councilor Steve Novick recently reviewed the state red flag report, he was puzzled by the low Portland rate.

In a March 3 email, Novick said “After doing some reconnoitering, I concluded that a major likely reason for that is that the Portland Police Bureau never prioritized training officers on the existence and use of the law, which was passed in Oregon in 2017. The PPB Behavioral Health Unit is trained in the law, and actually files the paperwork to initiate what are called “Extreme Risk Protective Orders,” or ERPOs — but they are largely dependent on patrol officers to identify and inform them of situations where ERPOs might be appropriate.”

Novick convened a group to review this, and invited a police officer from Bend who talked about how the red flag law was used more there. Since, Novick said he received a note from Sergeant Josh Silverman of the Behavioral Health Unit, who said, “BHU officers and I are starting next month to teach a one-hour, in-person ERPO class at in-service to every sworn member of the bureau. It will take until December to get everyone trained up, as we’re running about one session a week for groups of 20–40 officers.”

That may have some practical effect. The lower use of red flag capabilities probably isn’t due either to an inability or unwillingness to use it, but to a failure to build it into a standing part of police procedure. Once it’s there, it may be used more often.

And a considerable number of lives may be saved, through a law put into effect as it was, so many years ago, originally intended.

This column originally appeared in the Oregon Capital Chronicle.

 

The bottom of the ballot

The bottom of the ballot

March 13, 2026

Candidate filing happened a couple of weeks ago for public offices large - federal and statewide - and more local. But hardly any attention goes to the offices for which by far the most candidates sought election: Precinct committeeman (or -woman).

These humble offices don’t get the attention they deserve. We should give them a little.

Especially since in this primary the top level offices, for congress and statewide office, have not a serious contest among them, even though (maybe not coincidentally) an unusually large number of people have filed for them. Above the state legislative level you can expect incumbents to win practically everything, easily. And there aren’t looking to be a large number of really hot legislative primary contests either, though a few are scattered here and there.

Precinct offices up for election are far more numerous than any other kind of office. Idaho has more than 900 precincts (that exact number changes from time to time), and every party can elect people to represent them in those places. All but four candidates for them (Constitution Party contenders in Ada and Canyon counties and Libertarians in Bannock and Bonneville) is either Republican or Democratic.

Their mere presence on the ballot or in office can be an excellent indicator of sheer political strength: Parties strong in an area tend to be full up with precinct officers, and sometimes see actual competition for the spots. (We’ll shortly get to the very practical reasons for such competition.)

And you can see some of this in the new filings. Republican candidates for precinct office totaled 1,202; some are in competitive primary contests, but a large majority of Idaho precincts will have a Republican Party officer in place, and that’s a real benefit when time comes to organize. Democrats by contrast drew 475 contenders, fewer than half as many; their statewide organizational deficit is real just on that basis. (Remember the exact numbers may shift a little.)

Still, Democrats have been growing their rosters of precinct candidates (and, post-primary election, officers); the numbers are better than they often have been. Most Ada County precincts have Democratic contenders, and several other counties (notably Bannock, Blaine, Bonneville, Canyon, Gem, Kootenai, Latah, Nez Perce, Shoshone and Twin Falls) are respectively represented. A number of smaller counties with only a few precincts (Bear Lake, Bingham, Butte, Camas, Clark, Custer, Valley, Washington) have a few filings each, reasonable for their size.  Republicans, by contrast, fill almost all of these offices.

For Democrats, these positions can be an often untapped political source. For Republicans, they’re that too, but also something more.

The state Republican Party, whose governing structure (as with the Democrats) is built atop those elected precinct officers, has been increasingly active in recent years getting directly involved in legislation and insisting on what legislators of that party may or may not do or say, lest they be labeled RINOs or ostracized from party support. The battle for control is most essentially conducted at county central committee meetings (and those of the legislative district central committees), and who gets to participate in those meetings derives from who is elected as a precinct officer. Change enough precinct officers, and you can change the course of the Idaho Republican Party.

A good example how this plays out is Kootenai County, where 152 people have filed for the seats in 74 precincts, translating to contests all over the place - largely between the more extreme group which has been running the central committee for years, and others (many of them long-time Republicans) who have felt shut out. The practical implications of the elections are real; there’s a straight line, for example, between the central committee’s involvement in local community college board contests and the college’s recent near-death experience.

These precinct contests, and those in some other places like Ada, Bonneville and Twin Falls counties especially, are likely to be hard fought in the coming weeks. Of all the primary contests upcoming on Idaho’s ballots, none may be more worth tending to.

 

Stink

Stink

March 12, 2026

What should you do when your neighbor’s garbage stinks?

She hasn’t taken it out for a month now and I can smell it.

She’s a nice lady. Should I yell at her? Or just take it to the curb myself? Tomorrow is garbage day.

This is the crux of the modern dilemma. We build systems to foster prosperity and some folks just don’t get it.

We have free public schools. Some don’t graduate. Some become homeless and criminals. Didn’t we provide them an opportunity?

We have roads to drive on and good water to drink. The taxes we pay on our gas and the municipal fees support this. But still, some folks don’t buy into the opportunity.

Is this the Elegy for Hillbillies? Read J.D. Vance. But please, don’t pay for it. It’s at the library. A free resource you should relish.

So some don’t. Some don’t dump their garbage. The truck comes by in the morning and all you have to do is roll the stink to the curb. But they don’t.

We could all be hillbillies here.

Hillbillies lived in the hills. They dug their outhouse holes and moved them when the urge called. The folks on the stream below dealt with it. Or died of cholera or typhoid.

But we nowadays are civilized.

Maybe civilized means woke. I don’t know. I’m not on Facebook or Twitter or Reddit. But I don’t support folks downstream dying when I pollute their water.

I do have to empty my bowels.

And my neighbor should dispose of her garbage. It stinks.

She should take care of it. And she hasn’t.

So what’s a good citizen to do?

Handgun?

Molotov?

Just what is the right response to a negligent citizen these days?

Maybe we vote. Maybe we vote for the guy who will bring down the hammer. Then we don’t need to. He’s the authority. He has the power. Let our elected official be the bad guy.

I’m sorry. I just see that as the coward’s way out.

We need to be holding our fellow citizens to account. Dump your damn garbage.

We need to be our own National Guard. We don’t need troops from neighboring states to police our streets.

Just go talk to the lady.

But I didn’t.

She wasn’t home and I was down there, and it was stinking, so I trundled her garbage to the curb.

As I did this small thing I wondered if I was promoting her irresponsible behavior. Was I fostering her negligence? Us liberals should worry about this more.

And we should feel fine expecting more from those around us.

That doesn’t mean we should be expecting people to think like us. Or act in the way we think people should.

But there is something to say for taking out your garbage. That is a reasonable expectation.

Once, back when I was a doctor and talking to a patient about their pain, they reacted strongly. “It sounds like you are saying this is all my fault!”

I tried to assure them that was not my intent. Pain and stink are here to teach us something. We should learn from them.

Prescribing the narcotic for pain and taking the neighbors garbage out for them is a stretch, I’ll admit.

But it’s really about accepting our own responsibility for our personal situations.

Liberals need to understand this. We have some agency for our conditions.

So I rolled the garbage to the curb. They picked it up like they were supposed to. She came home. The next day I rolled her bin back to its spot.

But she rolled it out this week.

 

Washingtater

Washingtater

March 11, 2026

You can take a teacher out of the classroom, but you can’t take the classroom out of the teacher. Case in point: Idaho State Treasurer Julie Ellsworth, a former public school teacher.

Her life has gone in different directions since her teaching days. She has been the state treasurer since 2019 and served 12 years as a state representative from Boise. Ellsworth’s job includes making sure Idaho maintains a spit-shine credit rating and ensuring that the state receives a healthy return on investments.

There are no rumblings about her job performance. Ellsworth says proudly that her “conservative investment strategy” has returned more than $566 million in interest-earnings to Idaho taxpayers. And that’s just in the current fiscal year.

The “teacher” in her is on full display with the planning of an America250 Idaho celebration that will culminate on July 4. Her classroom “students” are the hundreds, if not thousands, of volunteers throughout the Gem State who are working to make this the biggest celebration since … well, maybe ever.

Ellsworth has been spending her “off time” from her official job making Spuddy Buddy dolls to emulate figures from the Revolutionary War era. So, we’re seeing the likes of George Washingtater, James Madispud, Spudjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamiltater.

I’ve seen teachers doing creative things in my time, but none that holds a French fry to this.

America250 Idaho has more moving parts than the Declaration of Independence. One of my favorites is the 250,000-hour service challenge, where everyday people can document simple acts of kindness. There have been more than 45,000 postings so far, and Idahoans are just getting warmed up.

“This is where Martha Washington comes in,” Ellsworth says (yes, teacher). “Martha Washington won the Revolutionary War – she and Abigail Adams (make that Abby-tot Adams). They provided aid and lifted the spirits of the troops.”

Ellsworth has tabbed the “Spuddy” version of Martha – or Marth-tot Washingtater – as the mascot for the service challenge.

The challenge has provided hours of interesting reading for Ellsworth. She sees a story about a woman who took her niece for a day to give her ill sister a needed break. There’s one about presenting quilts to veterans from the Eastern Idaho Quilts of Honor. There’s one about a Parma woman and her daughter making dinner for a friend who had surgery.

“I’m having some of the best reading of my life,” Ellsworth says. “If I want to feel good, I just look at this string of stories. We may have created the template for this, but I’m getting out of the way and letting it happen.”

The goal is to collect 250,000 of these stories, but don’t be surprised if that number is significantly higher. My friends with the Idaho Community Foundation are “all in” with the project. The foundation sees the opening for encouraging Idahoans to volunteer, shining a light on nonprofits statewide and supporting America250 Idaho community projects through private donations.

“America250 Idaho is exactly the kind of moment collective giving was designed for,” said Steve Burns, president and CEO of ICF. “It brings people together around shared values, and our role is to provide the trusted stewardship that turns generosity into lasting community impact.”

Participation in the service challenge is easy. Any act of service qualifies, and folks can post by hopping onto IdahoKindness.com or Facebook. Ellsworth offers another solution for those who are not online.

“Write it on a piece of paper and bring it into my office. It will get posted,” she says.

It’s possible that those papers will be graded, but don’t worry because Mrs. Ellsworth is a “nice” teacher. Everybody involved with America250 gets an “A” in this classroom.

Chuck Malloy, an Idaho native and long-time journalist and columnist, is a volunteer writer with the Idaho Community Foundation’s Nonprofit Center. He may be reached at ctmalloy@outlook.com.

 

Lincoln would be disgusted

March 9, 2026

Imagine the shock, dismay and disgust Abraham Lincoln would feel about the state and national leadership of his beloved Republican Party, if he were to return to life today. He would find a leadership of the Grand Old Party dedicated to white nationalism, nativism and moral decay. He would undoubtedly feel that GOP leaders had wrongfully seized the GOP label and attached it to a group that opposed almost everything he stood for.

Throughout his political life, Lincoln strongly supported immigrants and immigration. In his stirring Gettysburg Address on November 19,1863, the Great Emancipator proclaimed that America “was dedicated to the proposition that all men were created equal.” In his annual address to Congress a month later, he called for passage of an immigration bill to promote immigration and welcome immigrants to the country as “a source of national wealth and strength.”

His Republican successors carried the message of inclusion, equality and decency for a century following his assassination. I had the high privilege of working for Idaho’s distinguished GOP Senator Len Jordan in the early 1970s. He was fiscally conservative, but a champion of human rights and dignity.

Like many of his Republican counterparts, Jordan voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. He opposed two southern segregationists—Harold Carswell and Clement Haynsworth—who President Nixon tried to appoint to the U.S. Supreme Court. Jordan would be repulsed by the current leadership of his beloved party, both at the federal and Idaho level.

Much of the moral decline of the GOP resulted from Nixon’s “southern strategy” that resulted in turning southern-state segregationist Democrats into southern-state Republican segregationists. Most remain so to this very day, although their numbers are being slowly whittled away by a new breed of Democrats who are actually standard bearers for Abe Lincoln’s legacy.

Unfortunately, Idaho’s top GOP elected officials—the Governor and members of our Congressional delegation— have bought into the crumbling anti-civil rights and anti-immigrant playbook of the segregationists. They have betrayed the legacy of Lincoln and Jordan, mainly out of abject fear of displeasing King Trump. The truth is that most Idahoans, including many in the GOP, are better than this. The apostates will be weeded out in future elections.

To add insult to injury, our top GOP office holders attend Lincoln Day events on or near Lincoln’s birthday in February of each year, pretending that they are honoring that fabled leader. Actually, they dishonor Lincoln by espousing policies and beliefs diametrically opposed to those of Lincoln. Imagine Lincoln’s revulsion if he were to learn that former Congressman Matt Gaetz was keynote speaker at the Kootenai County Lincoln Day dinner on February 28.

Senator Jim Risch, Rep. Russ Fulcher and Attorney General Raul Labrador were all slated to share the limelight with this bonafide sleazeball. Congressional investigators found Gaetz regularly paid women for sex, had sex with a 17-year-old girl (statutory rape in Florida) and frequently used illegal drugs. Idaho’s two Congressmen, Fulcher and Simpson, had voted in December of 2024 to block the release of the Gaetz report, but it came out anyway. Idaho’s Attorney General has claimed to be a protector of girls, but seems to have overlooked Gaetz’ deplorable misconduct.

Donald Trump had wanted Gaetz to be his Attorney General, but it was not to be. It must have been a real downer for Trump because the two have so much in common when it comes to sexual mistreatment of the female gender. Since the 1970s, at least 28 women accused Trump of sexual misconduct. Trump was found liable for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll in May of 2023.

The details of Trump’s longtime friendship with serial abuser Jeffrey Epstein are just coming out, despite his administration’s dogged efforts to keep them under wraps. Our Congressional delegation fought against release of the Epstein files until a few GOP members of the House forced a vote, but there is still significant pushback against releasing what are likely the most incriminating files.

This moral degeneration of the top leaders of our state and federal government is nauseating. The fact that it degrades the moral fiber of our people down to the grass roots is heartbreaking. The fact that our top elected leaders have abandoned the high moral principles of our founding fathers, principles that Abe Lincoln tried to perfect with his new political party, is horrific. The worst thing, however, is that the new GOP defames the Great Emancipator by attaching his name to a dinner event and a political party that repudiates practically everything he stood for. The nativist, white nationalist, morally-bankrupt officials who sully Lincoln’s name are Republicans in name only (RINOs).

 

Raiders of the lost dedicated funds

Raiders of the lost dedicated funds

March 8, 2026

Pull a dollar bill out of your wallet and you can trust that dollar will spend like any other.

And if you think the story ends there, you’re obviously not a government accountant.

Many critics of government point to a specific need — say, a ripped-up street — and angrily proclaim: “We seem to have plenty of money for (fill in the blank with some presumably less critical need). Why can’t we just use that to (do something more important, such as fix the street)?”

The short answer is, if the government did that, it probably wouldn’t be legal. The slightly longer answer is, it would be unwise — and could uproot already-shaky broad trust in government.

That’s a consideration we’ll circle around to, in a moment, in the case of the state’s immediate and critical need for transportation funding.

Money, from taxes, fees and other sources, often comes to governments with strings attached: This money is being provided under certain conditions, often limiting how it can be spent. While some revenues (mostly, the state income tax for example) can be sent to a state general fund — which ordinarily can be spent as the legislature or other governing body sees fit — many other revenue streams have to be accounted for in other ways.

This is more than commonplace in governments at all levels. You’ve seen this if you’ve ever served on or watched a local government budget committee. Cities and counties receive money from room taxes, urban development funds, state or federal funding for infrastructure and other sources that allow for their use for one thing and nothing else, and they have to be maintained in separate specific accounts. The state and federal governments do much the same thing.

Dedication is not always, forever, though, and the appearance of a revenue stream which doesn’t seem to be too heavily encumbered whets the appetite of non-recipients.

When the Oregon Lottery was launched by Ballot Measure 4 in 1984, the state’s profits went mostly to economic development with a small piece to help with curbing problem gambling. In 1995 public education got a slice, and natural resource programs were added to the mix in 1998; veterans programs got a portion after Measure 96 in 2016. None of these were very controversial, but all marked a real change from the original intent.

One heated dedicated-fund controversy in this session concerns use of lodging or transient tax revenues, started in 2003 and intended mainly to help promote tourism. Local governments can impose the tax, and use of the revenue from it is tightly restricted. There’s also a state tax, revenue from which also has been focused on tourism, and this session the legislature has been wrangling over it.

House Bill 4134 would increase the lodging tax from 1.5% to 2.75%, with the increase going toward a collection of wildlife-related programs (from the Recovering Oregon’s Wildlife Fund to a state police poaching program to a range of others).

The plan, which passed both chambers and awaits Gov. Tina Kotek’s signature, has drawn sharp reactions.

Environmental advocates have weighed in strongly; Water Watch, for example, said the relatively small tax increase would “help protect Oregon’s iconic fish and wildlife and their habitats. Providing dedicated funding to protect Oregon’s fish, wildlife and habitat will help to conserve over 300 species and their habitats.”

Travel industry groups are strongly opposed. The Oregon Restaurant & Lodging Association said the bill “would harm local hospitality and tourism businesses as well as create an additional $11 million tax on Oregonians.”

All of this is likely to be only a small sideshow in this year’s dedicated fund-raiding picture. For the big picture, look to the big-money budget sectors, like transportation.

In flush revenue years, agencies usually wouldn’t have a lot of interest in raiding funds they haven’t traditionally tapped. This is not such a year for Oregon government. The revenue picture does look better now than it did a few months ago, partly because of legislative responses to federal tax changes and partly because of an improved economic picture. But parts of the state budget, notably transportation, remain stressed.

Transportation in Oregon traditionally has been funded in large part by dedicated funds, from gas taxes, vehicle fees and more. To keep up with rising transportation costs at a time when those sources are under-producing, the 2025 legislature passed a collection of tax and fee increases, but that effort has been short-circuited through voter referendum rules and other efforts. The upshot may be personnel cuts and reductions, slowdowns or elimination of a number of transportation projects.

There is another option: Raiding dedicated funds from peripheral areas to fill some of the gaps.

Legislators should be wary about that, though, and they would be wise to move cautiously. Dedicated funds often get on the books owing to specific voter approvals, and those approvals might become hard to get if Oregonians get the idea that their original intent isn’t being adhered to.

 

Lots of Democrats, again

Lots of Democrats, again

March 6, 2026

Two years ago, something remarkable happened in Idaho when the filing deadline had arrived for securing ballot status: Democrats turned out to run for the legislature in numbers not seen in decades.

I wrote then, “In contrast to the typical 50 or so candidates Democrats have been fielding (some of those competing against each other in the primary), this year 99 have filed for legislative seats. Some of those are in fact running against each other in the Democratic primaries. But: When the filing deadline closed, at least one D had filed in all 35 legislative districts. How many years has it been since that last happened? I’m not sure, but I’d guess you have to go back a few decades.”

And this cycle, the filing period for which ended February 27?

The Secretary of State’s database last week listed one more, an even 100. The exact numbers could change over time (in all parties) with withdrawals and people who file as write-ins for empty ballot spots. Still, Democrats are beginning to set a pattern of challenging widely and running candidates in places that don’t hear much from Democrats.

Democrats have filed for all but one of the 35 Senate seats, seven more than last cycle - and the same number of seats Republicans are contesting. (The Democrats didn’t file in District 1, in the panhandle, and Republicans didn’t in District 18 in southeast Boise). This hasn’t happened in a very long time..

They didn’t do badly in the House either. There, where Democrats now hold 11 of 70 seats, D candidates have filed for 58 seats (compared to 55 in 2024).

There are a few primary contests among them, but they’ve spread out their candidacies well. To the extent these Democrats actually develop serious campaigns, they could make some long-range difference on the ground.

That’s the kind of thought Kaylee Peterson, one of the two Democrats running for the first district U.S. House race, made after her filing this year, after being trounced in the last two cycles: It takes time.

It may be worth noting here as well that Democrats are contesting all three congressional seats up for election with multiple candidates (three for U.S. Senate and two for each of the House seats). As well as four for governor and one each for lieutenant governor, secretary of state, controller, treasurer, attorney general and superintendent of public instruction - a complete slate among major offices. That was a rarity even back in the days when the two parties were much more genuinely competitive.

What does all this translate to, when the general election is done and over?

Could be that it’s not a lot. For all the larger number of Democratic legislative candidates in 2024, when the party fell from seven to six Democratic senators, and from 11 to nine representatives in the House. Filling ballot slots doesn’t automatically mean election to office, and Idaho remains heavily Republican.

And these Democratic candidates have far from equal candidacies. Most of the incumbent Democrats in Boise are likely to win re-election in landslides, but many of the large group are in effect placeholders - holding down the ballot slot (either permanently or until a more energetic replacement appears) but unlikely to do much to advance their candidacy.

Of course, if 2026 really does turn into a national wave year for Democrats (which right now looks like a real possibility), and if some of that reaches down into Idaho, the larger number of candidates on the ballot could matter a great deal. In Idaho and elsewhere, placeholders have been known to unexpectedly win office under those conditions.

There’s impact though beyond the raw numbers of eventual winners and losers. In many parts of Idaho, and in some of the fastest-growing places, Democrats have been so invisible that they seem exotic at best or, at worst, the embodiment of whatever trash their adversaries throw on them. To the extent they become visible and speak up for themselves, they become harder to dismiss as an unthinkable option.

(image)