HB 4006 Establishes Task Force on Economic Development

VOTE: NO
Died In committee
Sumary: Establishes Task Force on Economic Development.

Sunsets task force on December 31, 2017.
Declares emergency, effective on passage

Fiscal Responsibility
HB 4006  establishes a Task Force on Economic Development.  Government economic development is a welfare scheme used to redistribute public funds to private sector projects.   
 

Local Control

HB 4006  eliminates local authority and influence by establishing a state-level Task Force consisting of a 10 member board with two nonvoting members from the Senate, two nonvoting members from the House, four voting members appointed by the Oregon Business Development Department, and the Governor shall appoint two voting members representing the Regional Solutions Program.  Four of the board members appointed by the people’s representatives will not get to vote. 
 

Free Markets

HB 4006  establishes a task force whose main function is to circumvent the current acceptable tax systems and use those funds to compensate businesses that align with the government’s economic programs, while competing businesses, not in the programs, will have to make up for the difference.  It develops into a market of compensation rather than a natural market of free competition, which shifts the responsibility of risk to the taxpayers.    Without the responsibility of their actions, businesses are much more willing to gamble with public money.   The task force will foster an environment where members of the economic development committees are encouraged to attain the authority to decide which businesses will be allowed to participate and which businesses will not be allowed to participate in the artificial market of compensation.   

Limited Government
HB 4006  establishes a task force that will work to further the government’s involvement and participation in the free-market when government should be an objective arbitrator.   
 

Personal Choice and Responsibility

HB 4006  attempts to stimulate a segment of the economy through the delusional idea of controlling a portion of the market using a centralized economic plan developed by an exclusive task force.  Government “force” always erodes then eliminates personal choice, while simultaneously confusing the individual as to their legitimate responsibilities.  

  • snap_isAutoPosted: 1
  • vortex_system_likes: 0
  • vortex_system_dislikes: 0
  • snap_MYURL: 
  • snapEdIT: 1
  • snapFB: a:1:{i:0;a:9:{s:8:"postType";s:1:"A";s:10:"AttachPost";s:1:"2";s:10:"SNAPformat";s:52:"New Alert (%TITLE%) has been published on %SITENAME%";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doFB";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}
  • snapTW: a:1:{i:0;a:6:{s:10:"SNAPformat";s:22:"%TITLE% - %URL% #OROCL";s:8:"attchImg";s:1:"0";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doTW";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}

SB 1521 Excise tax on employees

VOTE:N0
Died in Committee

 

Personal Responsibility: ORS 267.385 authorizes districts to impose an excise tax on certain employers’ gross payroll by ordinance. If passed this bill would amend 267.385 to – in effect – remove an employee’s right to vote on a new tax or tax increase.

Fiscal Responsibility: The bill limits the expenditure of the taxes authorized to enhancing bus service frequency, acquisition of buses, bus service expansion or maintenance and operation of buses. For municipal transit agencies, the expenditures can be for both bus and rail.

Limited Government: As the law currently stands, a district may impose an excise tax on employers of up to .8% of the gross amount they pay their employees. That would come to $8 per thousand per year. This bill would allow districts to impose an additional tax on the gross income of employees of .185% or $1.85 per thousand per year.

Local Control: Proponents of this bill are primarily from rural parts of the state where communities have a need for transit service but not enough demand to make it profitable. The heavily populated I-5 corridor does not have that problem, but this excise tax would be a windfall for mass and municipal transit agencies – specifically TriMet – who are eager to push light rail through the Willamette Valley and into Washington.

  • snap_isAutoPosted: 1
  • vortex_system_likes: 0
  • vortex_system_dislikes: 0
  • snap_MYURL: 
  • snapEdIT: 1
  • snapFB: a:1:{i:0;a:9:{s:8:"postType";s:1:"A";s:10:"AttachPost";s:1:"2";s:10:"SNAPformat";s:52:"New Alert (%TITLE%) has been published on %SITENAME%";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doFB";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}
  • snapTW: a:1:{i:0;a:6:{s:10:"SNAPformat";s:22:"%TITLE% - %URL% #OROCL";s:8:"attchImg";s:1:"0";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doTW";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}

HB 4119 Supports School Choice

VOTE: YES – Died in Committee

Summary:  Removes sunset on provisions that allow students whose legal residence is not within school district to attend school in district as resident if student receives written consent. Removes sunset on authority of institution of higher education to sponsor public charter school. Declares emergency, effective on passage. 

This bill continues to allow parents and students to attend the public school that best meet their needs

Fiscal Responsibility:  Allows students (and the funds for their education) to go where best meets their needs

Free markets:  Opens up accessibility to public schools in districts other than students' home districts so students can attend the schools that best meet their needs

Local Control: School districts are given the option to accept these students

Personal Responsibility:  Gives parents and students the ability to seek the education best suited to their needs.

Limited Government:   Contributes to removing local school districts from determining what school a student attends

 

 

  • snap_isAutoPosted: 1
  • vortex_system_likes: 0
  • vortex_system_dislikes: 0
  • snap_MYURL: 
  • snapEdIT: 1
  • snapFB: a:1:{i:0;a:9:{s:8:"postType";s:1:"A";s:10:"AttachPost";s:1:"2";s:10:"SNAPformat";s:52:"New Alert (%TITLE%) has been published on %SITENAME%";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doFB";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}
  • snapTW: a:1:{i:0;a:6:{s:10:"SNAPformat";s:22:"%TITLE% - %URL% #OROCL";s:8:"attchImg";s:1:"0";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doTW";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}

SB 1509 Modifies public purpose charges on electric bills.

VOTE:NO
Died in Committee
 
Provides that funding for cost-effective energy efficiency measures, market transformation measures, new renewable energy resources and low-income weatherization is subject to ratemaking processes of Public Utility Commission.  Declares emergency.

 

Free Markets: The increased consumer rates authorised by this bill will be used to assist the introduction of new, more expensive renewable energy sources as viable market resources.  Since the current technoledgy for renewables is currently far to expensive to compete, this bill is intended fo force rate-payers to make them seem more cost-effective.

Fiscal Responsibility: The limitations on amounts “not less than” and “not more than” are percentages of an electric company’s “annual revenue requirement”.  The percentages are currently blanks to be filled in at a later time.

Limited Government: This bill makes huge changes to ORS 757.612 that essentially replace legislative oversight with giving the Public Utility Commission authority to increase “by rule or by order” consumer electricity rates to pay for an agenda of cost-effective energy efficiency measures, ‘market transformation’ measures, new renewable energy resources and low income weatherization.  The purpose given is to require costs of funding these measures be born equally by all ‘customer classes’ served by the electric companies.

Comments

  1. Favicon image Vivian Kirkpatrick-Pilger says:

     

    Vote NO on this bill.  Why would our government vote in favor of this bill?  Good question.  Isn’t this taxation without representation?  Isn’t this set up for an anti-trust case?

    Vote No on this bill.

     

     
  2. Favicon image Bob says:

     

    Page Two line 21 says it all, as rate payers we will be stuck with the bill. This will be Energy Trust on steroids! 

    (A) Shall require an electric company to collect moneys from the retail electricity consumers located within the electric company’s service territory for the purpose of funding the measures;

     

    • Favicon image Energy says:

      Agreed. Rate payers would essentially be taxed without recourse. It makes the electric companies a part of the beaurocracy. The majority party has introduced several bills this session that use the same tactic.

       

  • snap_isAutoPosted: 1
  • vortex_system_likes: 0
  • vortex_system_dislikes: 0
  • snap_MYURL: 
  • snapEdIT: 1
  • snapFB: a:1:{i:0;a:9:{s:8:"postType";s:1:"A";s:10:"AttachPost";s:1:"2";s:10:"SNAPformat";s:52:"New Alert (%TITLE%) has been published on %SITENAME%";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doFB";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}
  • snapTW: a:1:{i:0;a:6:{s:10:"SNAPformat";s:22:"%TITLE% - %URL% #OROCL";s:8:"attchImg";s:1:"0";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doTW";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}

HB 4126 amendments of urban growth boundaries

VOTE: YES
Passed

This bill is a housekeeping bill to create the grandfather provision to allow cities that had initiated their UGB work prior to January 1, 2016 to continue that process under the statutes and administrative rules in effect on June 30, 2013.


Fiscal Responsiblity
the cost of abiding by regulations is increased when the legislature keeps making arbitrary and confusing changes.

Limited Government
Rules and regulations should not change so often as to create confusion, or unnecessary expense to those who must abide by them.

  • snap_isAutoPosted: 1
  • vortex_system_likes: 0
  • vortex_system_dislikes: 0
  • snap_MYURL: 
  • snapEdIT: 1
  • snapFB: a:1:{i:0;a:9:{s:8:"postType";s:1:"A";s:10:"AttachPost";s:1:"2";s:10:"SNAPformat";s:52:"New Alert (%TITLE%) has been published on %SITENAME%";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doFB";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}
  • snapTW: a:1:{i:0;a:6:{s:10:"SNAPformat";s:22:"%TITLE% - %URL% #OROCL";s:8:"attchImg";s:1:"0";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doTW";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}

SJR 203 Constitutional Change to State Board of Education

VOTE: YES – Died in Committee

SUMMARY: Proposes an amendment to the Oregon Constitution providing for the establishment of the State Board of Education.

PERSONAL CHOICE:: Constitution amendment gives voters an opportunity to evaluate how successful or the lack of accountability the current Governor/Superintendent of Public Instruction system has performed. The concept of the bill is a statewide board representing all corners of the state allowing parents more voice in the decisions.

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY: Structure allows for high school students to take college level courses and unifys the transition from community colleges to public universities without loss of credits.

LIMITED GOVERNMENT: Restructuring assures more accountable for an education system that coordinates stretching from pre-kindergarten through college graduation. The education experts on the statewide board will appoint one of their members to serve as the Superintendent of Public Instruction.  In 2003 Forida made the change from a Governor/Cabinet Superintendent of Public Instruction to a similar appointed board structure with good results.

LOCAL CONTROL: Aimed at structuring a system that is more accountable to local school districts and parents. It eliminates the one-size-fits-all expectation giving more flexibility for local and parent input.

Comments

  1.  dbleiler says:

    This is a resolution for an initiative to send to the voters. It has not been schedule a vote in committee so at this point it probably won’t go anywhere.

  2.  B says:

    I thought constitutional changes took a vote of the people – ??

     

  • snap_isAutoPosted: 1
  • vortex_system_likes: 0
  • vortex_system_dislikes: 0
  • snap_MYURL: 
  • snapEdIT: 1
  • snapFB: a:1:{i:0;a:10:{s:8:"postType";s:1:"A";s:10:"AttachPost";s:1:"2";s:10:"SNAPformat";s:52:"New Alert (%TITLE%) has been published on %SITENAME%";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doFB";i:0;s:2:"do";s:1:"0";s:9:"msgFormat";s:13:"%TITLE% %IMG%";}}
  • snapTW: a:1:{i:0;a:9:{s:10:"SNAPformat";s:22:"%TITLE% - %URL% #OROCL";s:8:"attchImg";s:1:"0";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doTW";i:0;s:2:"do";s:1:"0";s:9:"msgFormat";s:50:"%TITLE% - %SURL% #OROCL #ORpol #ORleg %RAWEXCERPT%";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";}}

HB 4031: Implements Program to Decrease Rates of School Absenteeism

VOTE: NO – Died in Committee

 HB 4031: Directs Chief Education Office to design and implement $5.7 million pilot program to decrease rates of school absenteeism through " trauma-informed approach" to behavioral health services in schools.

Fiscal Responsibility: Beginning with $5.7 million for the PILOT, the state is working toward a state-wide in-school counselling system which would cost many times $5.7 million. Where funding for education is already too restricted, this will in the end come to an enormous chunk of the state education related budget.

Local Control: At the pilot stage there will be significant local control.  Judging from all these programs, as the mandate becomes state–wide it will be state controlled.

Free Markets: There are free market solutions to these problems in the private market economy.  In addition with required parity for mental health in Obamacare and Medicaid, such treatment is already available to most families.

Personal Responsibility: This program will greatly diminish parental responsibility for teaching good behavior, and it will greatly undermine the students'responsibility to be personally responsible for his or her behavior. Also the  bill claims that the science for treating trauma is “evidenced based” and cannot be called into question. Hence, a parent disagreeing with the schools approach is likely to be ignored.

Limited Government:  This represents a very big expansion of government’s responsibility for raising children and it further erodes parental and even teacher power to require good behavior

  • snap_isAutoPosted: 1
  • vortex_system_likes: 0
  • vortex_system_dislikes: 0
  • snap_MYURL: 
  • snapEdIT: 1
  • snapFB: a:1:{i:0;a:9:{s:8:"postType";s:1:"A";s:10:"AttachPost";s:1:"2";s:10:"SNAPformat";s:52:"New Alert (%TITLE%) has been published on %SITENAME%";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doFB";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}
  • snapTW: a:1:{i:0;a:6:{s:10:"SNAPformat";s:22:"%TITLE% - %URL% #OROCL";s:8:"attchImg";s:1:"0";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doTW";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}

HB 4036A Clean Electricity and Coal Transition bill

VOTE:NO
Died in Committee
 
SUMMARY: Directs PUC to develop renewable standards eliminating coal and increase renewable power to double that required by the Oregon Renewable Portfolio Standards.

PERSONAL CHOICE: Utilities can usually pass prudently incurred costs to ratepayers limiting them to a 10% profit. This bill has significant incentives to build solar and wind powered generation capacity without the prudent cost standard and removes approval of PUC allowing the pass-through of costs to their ratepayers plus their allowable profit margin.

The bill would force consumer owned utilities, like public utility districts and municipal utility districts, to pay enormous new costs in the event that they took a single ratepayer from a utility holding rate payers hostage and dooming utility districts.

It also encourages electric companies to build charging locations for vehicles, including trains and boats, and recovering the costs from ratepayers without input or recourse from the ratepayers, then donating the facilities to the owners of the properties they are located on when the facilities are fully depreciated.

FREE MARKET: Investment-owned Utilities propose this bill to counter Initiative Petition 63.

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY: Bill reverses the energy production tax credit, the most common is the federal credit of two cents per kilowatt hour. The bill allows utilities to shift the cost to ratepayers.Utilities are a monopoly with our protection from PUC. This bill removes our protection and gives free reign to the monopolies making it expensive for customers.

LIMITED GOVERNMENT: PUC indicates it eliminates their ability to maintain control of a reliability power grid that is unstable from intermittent wind and solar resources.

Fails to reduce overall greenhouse gas emission even though it serves to help meet goals. Facts show that complete depopulation of Oregon would not result in a measurable change in global greenhouse gas emissions.

The coal-fired plant in Boardman, Oregon, is already scheduled to close.

The bill also negates other decisions that PUC made through extensive public processes. This bill takes away the public’s voice.

Oregonian article: http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/02/state_utility_regulators_were.html

Comments

  1. Favicon image dbleiler says:

    Many state include hydropower as a renewable power. Oregon has not done that because it would mean Oregon would meet all the CO2 goals. There would be no need to close the coal mines or sell carbon credits.

     
  2. Favicon image dbleiler says:

    Thank you. This site only includes highly critical bills. For other bills, we invite you to search http://www.TrackTheirVote.org

     
  3. Favicon image Bob says:

    Citizens Utility Board, played a central role in opposing Coal, LNG and Fossil Fueld,, I can only ask why the CUB Chair Dan Jaynes is the Director of Meteorology at Iberdrola Renewables, one of the largest recieptant of renewable subsidies, is this not a conflict of interest and illegal as noted below.

      “A member who is employed by a utility is not eligible for appointment or election to the Citizens Utility Board of Governors, and a member of the Citizens Utility Board of Governors who obtains employment by a utility may not maintain a position on the Citizens Utility Board of Governors.”  http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/774.070

  4. Favicon image Henry Stevens says:

    I expect the Oregon PUC to include water generating power as being,the ultimate renewable, non-poluting resource.  Wind is not a reliable source of power and the sun only produces power during the day.  This means we have to rely on water flowing though a trubine turning a generator as a back-up for both wind and sun.

  • snap_isAutoPosted: 1
  • vortex_system_likes: 0
  • vortex_system_dislikes: 0
  • snap_MYURL: 
  • snapEdIT: 1
  • snapFB: a:1:{i:0;a:9:{s:8:"postType";s:1:"A";s:10:"AttachPost";s:1:"2";s:10:"SNAPformat";s:52:"New Alert (%TITLE%) has been published on %SITENAME%";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doFB";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}
  • snapTW: a:1:{i:0;a:6:{s:10:"SNAPformat";s:22:"%TITLE% - %URL% #OROCL";s:8:"attchImg";s:1:"0";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doTW";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}

SB 1536 Modifies Compensation to Non-Virtual, Public Charter Schools

VOTE: YES – Died in committee

Modifies percentage of amounts school districts must distribute from State School Fund to public charter schools that are not virtual public charter schools. 

Summary: This bill will bring the level of funding of public charter schools more in line with funding of regular public schools.  

 

Fiscal Responsibility: Funding public charter schools will be closer to although still less than funding of regular public schools.

 Local Control: Better supports public charter schools. 

Free Markets: Public charter schools introduce a limited amount of school choice to parents and their children.

 Limited Government: NA

 Personal Choice and Responsibility: Better supports school choice

  • snap_isAutoPosted: 1
  • vortex_system_likes: 0
  • vortex_system_dislikes: 0
  • snap_MYURL: 
  • snapEdIT: 1
  • snapFB: a:1:{i:0;a:9:{s:8:"postType";s:1:"A";s:10:"AttachPost";s:1:"2";s:10:"SNAPformat";s:52:"New Alert (%TITLE%) has been published on %SITENAME%";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doFB";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}
  • snapTW: a:1:{i:0;a:6:{s:10:"SNAPformat";s:22:"%TITLE% - %URL% #OROCL";s:8:"attchImg";s:1:"0";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doTW";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}

HB 4046B Increases penalties for unlawful taking or killing of wildlife

VOTE:NO
Passed

SUMMARY: Adds black bear and cougar to list of penalties for unlawful taking or killing of wildlife, increases other penalty fines, and adds Class A misdemeanor that includes “worry or disturb any wildlife” and Class C felony conviction that includes confiscation of properties.

AMENDMENT A: Adds 180 day mandatory sentence for failure to comply with a citation.

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY: The adding of black bear and cougar to the list of penalties reduces an individual’s right to protect themself and property. Cougar population has doubled in the last two decades resulting in stalking in urban areas. They are the primary cause for a 30% reduction in deer population keeping the deer and elk population from recovering. Black bear population has exploded to 30,000 and are reported as a threat to hikers and campers. Both animals are also a threat to the homeless, particularly in rural areas.

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY: Increases penalties by an additional $75,500 for the illegal taking of just one of the animals with increased fees. The penalties are stated to recover damages for the unlawful taking or killing. The large increases to $5,000 and $50,000 go beyond recovery of costs. In 2011, it was determined that penalty levels wasn’t the issue for reducing illegal taking or killing, but that courts tend to not impose full force of penalties.

LIMITED GOVERNMENT: The Class A misdemeanor conviction added is the unlawful “taking” of wildlife. Statutory definition of “taking” in ORS 498.006 is very broad to say “no person shall chase, harass, molest, worry or disturb any wildlife except while engaged in lawfully angling for, taking, hunting or trapping such wildlife.”

Class C felony conviction added not only revokes all licenses, but the court can confiscate and forfeit personal property including all guns, vehicles, electronic devices plus other implements used in committing the offense. No allowance is given for a lawful business that may affect others.

Comments

  1. Favicon image Henry Stevens says:

    In view of the deprivation of deer by couger lowering the number of deer to be harvested by licensed deer hunters I think the Oregon Wildlife Commission should pay hunters for killing cougers thus helping to protect that resource.  As for killing a bear I suggest that the penality made a misdemeanor for killing one with one exception. If a bear is killed for body parts leaving the body in the field full forfiture of licnse and hunting privlideges.  Regardless of which creature is illegally killed there should be no forfiture of property including homes and automobiles.  

  • snap_isAutoPosted: 1
  • vortex_system_likes: 0
  • vortex_system_dislikes: 0
  • snap_MYURL: 
  • snapEdIT: 1
  • snapFB: a:1:{i:0;a:9:{s:8:"postType";s:1:"A";s:10:"AttachPost";s:1:"2";s:10:"SNAPformat";s:52:"New Alert (%TITLE%) has been published on %SITENAME%";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:9:"isAutoURL";s:1:"A";s:8:"urlToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doFB";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}
  • snapTW: a:1:{i:0;a:6:{s:10:"SNAPformat";s:22:"%TITLE% - %URL% #OROCL";s:8:"attchImg";s:1:"0";s:9:"isAutoImg";s:1:"A";s:8:"imgToUse";s:0:"";s:4:"doTW";i:0;s:2:"do";i:0;}}