Ballot Measure 50... why it's proposed as a Constitutional Amendment.

Why Ballot Measure 50 is up for a Constitutional Amendment and not a mere statue (law).

Many people are wondering, but only a handful of people know the deal. Here it is for you... all nice and shiny!

Legislatures (House and Senate) can pass laws all they want. They don't need us to vote on it. But some laws are harder to pass than others. A new tax law is one of those hard laws to pass... for a reason.

In 1996 a law was passed requiring a 3/5 majority of the legislature to pass bills for raising revenue.

In order for the House to pass a bill for a new tax, they need to get a 3/5 Super Majority vote in the Legislature. Remember, we're talking about only our Legislature voting, not a ballot measure.

This 3/5 Super Majority is needed between the Oregon Citizen Legislature comprising of the House of Representatives (60 members) and the Senate (30 members).

At least three-fifths of the members of each house, the Senate and the House of Representatives, must approve a bill for raising revenue in order for it to pass. (Yes, I'm redundant, but this stuff is like making sausage, just bear with me.)

In the 30-member Oregon Senate, the number of Senators required to approve a bill, which raises taxes, is 18 (raised from 16).

In the 60-member Oregon House of Representatives, the number of Representatives required is 36 (used to be 31). Again, this would apply only if a bill has the primary purpose of raising revenue.

Now, I don’t know how many democrats and republicans are in either the House and Senate, but, the important part is that when this was presented to the entire Legislature... the Super Majority was not reached. The democrats were in favor, but the republicans did not get on board.

See, this is key! The republicans had a chance to vote this into a simple law, but they didn't. Remember... the big issue now is "Why is this up for a vote to be on the Constitution?" This is the answer... because the republican Legislature did not want it passed as a law... period!

Now… (again) this was proposed to the House and Senate as a bill to be a statute, not as a constitutional amendment. Basically, in lay man terms, the dems proposed the same damn thing to the House and Senate as a bill to be a Law and it did not pass because they did not receive a Super Majority, thanks to the republicans..

I’m sorry if this is dragging on, it’s not my intention to, but this is important... and to date, nobody on any of these blogs has properly explained exactly why it’s up for an amendment and not a mere statute. Except for me on RINO's blog.

Before we get to the problem of it being on the Constitution it would be good to ask why did it not reach a Super Majority when we had the chance.
Why did they do it? Knowing full well that the dems were left with no other option than to LEGALLY put this measure up for a vote before the people as an amendment to the Constitution where all that is needed to get something up for the public to vote on it being an amendment in the Constitution is a Simple Majority, or 51%, which we now have.

The republicans say that the tax should not be on the Constitution, unlike the gasoline tax and snowmobile tax (for some reason cigarettes are sacred). They say the Constitution should not be a place for petty taxes. They also say they are ALL IN SUPPORT OF KIDS GETTING HEALTH CARE... yet they did not sign on when this was put before them in the legislature.

If Ballot Measure 50 passes and it amends the Oregon Constitution, the republicans are more at fault than the dems for not supporting the bill when they had a chance.

Is health care an end that more than justifies the means of an amendment?

And, yes, yes, I know... the pic above is of our founding fathers for the U.S. constitution and not the Oregon Constitution but it still gets the idea across.

If Measure 50 passes, will a tax on cigarettes threaten funds for healthcare? ...

Way back in economics 200 there is a little analyses called the "Price Elasticity of Demand."

In short, Price Elasticity compares the percentage change in quantity demanded of a given product with respect to the percentage change in price. In more short terms, if you raise the price of tobacco 10% would you expect to see a decrease in consumption of 10%?

Well, it depends on the product. Cigarettes are addictive and are therefore highly Inelastic. This means that a consumer is not all that price sensitive.

Now, neocons are saying that the sky will fall, volcanoes will blow and that the healthcare is threatened by an ever shrinking tax revenue generator from cigarettes. They are wrong. You can see here and anywhere else on the magical internet (by simply typing in "Price Elasticity of Demand for Cigarettes" into Google) that people are not very responsive to an increase in price at 10% markup.

Here at this wonderful site, towards the bottom of the page you will find "As you will see, governments prefer to tax goods with a relatively inelastic demand, since there will be little decrease in demand by consumers when the good's price increases." They are referring to cigarettes and gasoline. The graph at the top of the page is in reference to their explanation to Price Elasticity.

Real quickly, see the X axis, the difference between Q1 and Q0 is the change in percentage of smokers. Notice how much smaller that is to the Y axis, the change in price, between Pp and Pc. Big change in price... little change in smokers. (psst... someone's lying and their name begins with ... republicans)

I know, I know... some of this stuff is dry enough to serve an olive with, but HEY... it's the deal, man! It's what happens to cigarettes when you tax them and neocons and republicans of all colors (hell, Libertarians as well) are literally blowing smoke out their asses when they say that Ballot Measure 50 will cause a decrease in cigarette smokers to the extent that the kid's health care is threatened.

Is this an argument to vote yes on 50? No it's not. I'm still undecided about it.

On one hand, I like healthcare for kids. I also hate cigarettes. I also love the thought of taxing cigarette smokers for kid's health care. In fact I love it. But I don't like the constitution messed with.

It comes down to, "do the ends justify the means?" and, "why did they put this as an amendment?" I'll answer both of those in our next post.

Same Bat Channel. Same Bat Time!

Voter's Guide - Weighing In At 3 Pounds of 49 Arguments.

Vote time is November 6th (not may like the pic says). Be sure that you submit your voter's registration to the post office YOURSELF and don't give it to any republicans or they just might throw them away! No kidding, it really happened in 2004. And thanks to an honest volunteer at a GOP headquarters, they had the whistle blown on them.

Well, the Oregonian did a little bit on the 49 arguments in the voters guide. Take a look-a-see.

Voter guide thick with Measure 49 arguments
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
DAVE HOGAN The Oregonian Staff

With people putting their money where their mouth is, voters are lucky that the Nov. 6 ballot has only two statewide measures.

The voters pamphlet mailed to homes next month adds up to 90-plus pages, packed with 175 paid arguments for and against the proposals.

Most of that is a record 117 arguments about Measure 49, which would revise a 2004 property-rights law. The voters pamphlet, which arrives in homes next month, will include 69 arguments for the proposal and 48 against it.

No other ballot measure racked up anywhere near that many arguments, according to records dating back to 1992. The most during that time were 83 arguments regarding 2004's Measure 37, the same property-rights initiative that would be revised by this year's ballot measure.

"Measure 49 is certainly the most arguments we've ever received on a measure," says Tami Dettwyler of the state Elections Division.

Supporters and opponents of ballot measures have to pay $500 to spell out up to 325 words of their thoughts in the voters pamphlet, so Measure 49's discussions cost more than $55,000.

Other measures that sparked large numbers of published arguments in the past included a proposed income tax surcharge in February 2004, which had 75 arguments for and against. And in 2004, Oregonians felt strongly enough to pay for 68 arguments regarding Measure 36, which specified that marriage is between a man and a woman.

The other measure on this year's ballot, Measure 50, drew 58 arguments about the proposal to raise cigarette taxes to fund children's health programs. That includes 27 for and 31 against.
That means the 175 arguments about this year's two measures is almost as many as the 196 arguments for all of the dozen measures on the November 2002 ballot.

Election officials plan to have this year's voters pamphlet delivered to Oregon homes Oct. 10-12.
Dave Hogan: 503-221-8531; davehogan@news.oregonian.com

Kitzhaber tepid over Measure 50:

The biggest complaints about Ballot Measure 50 are:

1. It's a diminishing returns flow of funds. Since the smoking population will get smaller, it's not fair to give these poor kids a lame horse... so, we better not give them any healthcare at all.
2. It's a constitutional amendment and is therefore bad!
3. It aint fair to all the poor people who smoke! Why should they carry the burden?

Ok, since we all know republicans don’t give a shit about anyone but themselves, much less poor people, much much less poor people on minimum wage (who they think are better off without an increase in wages) we know that #3 is full of horse shit.

#1 is flawed for so many reasons it’s not even funny. Ballot Measure 50 has already taken into consideration the decrease in smokers and still comes up with some massive dollar amounts for little kids. Numbers like “$386 million” which is the dollar amount that will be raised over the next four years, thanks to all the volunteers at Black Lungs Anonymous.

Last I checked that was $386 million more than what we got going towards little kids right now. But those darn republicans don’t want a penny of it going to them kids. They want their tobaccee cheap and accessible.

Now, the only legitimate issue that the righties bring up is the constitution. They’re right… the Constitution (US or State, no difference) should be sacred for big, important things like… giving blacks and women the right to vote, right to bear arms etc.

Should it be used so flippantly and casually to tax a drug? Well, no, not really. So the big question is WHY did the planners make it this way?

Could it be that they just want to make sure nobody touches it? …..mmmmm possibly. Or could it be because the only way around the rat bastard republicans is through the constitution? I don’t know and the answers are not readily available. But, I’ll find out Tuesday what the hell the reason is.

In the mean time, here’s what John Kitzhaber has to say about Ballot Measure 50. You can visit his blog here.


Why I intend to vote for Measure 50
Submitted by John Kitzhaber on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 9:06am.
Over the past few weeks I have been asked several times whether or not I am supporting Ballot Measure 50, which seeks to fund the Healthy Kids Plan. While each Archimedes Movement member in Oregon will need to decide how to vote on this issue, I am writing to clarify my own personal position.

I intend to vote for Measure 50 for one simple reason – we have Oregon children who desperately need better financial access to health services now and they cannot wait. This is one way to address a very real problem in the short term.

At the same time, I agree with many of you who argue that the financing mechanism in Measure 50 is far from perfect on a number of counts. First, I do not believe that the Oregon constitution is the appropriate place to put a tobacco tax increase. This should have been a statutory measure.

Second, I believe that financing health care for children is the responsibility of our entire society, not just those who smoke. The general fund would have been a more appropriate and a fairer financing mechanism. However, it is also not fair that so many of Oregon children lack timely access to needed medical care. We should not penalize them because this was the best the legislature could come up with.

So I intend to vote for Measure 50 and will urge others to do so as well. But we must also recognize that this is not a solution to the larger challenges facing our health care system. It is a bandaid – albeit an important one – but it does not take on the underlying structural problems which are driving up costs in our health care system.

If we do not deal honestly and effectively with these issues – which is one of the central objectives of the Archimedes Movement – the promise of access we are making to our children in the Healthy Kids Plan will be a hollow one and, in a few years, we will be dropping kids from coverage once more. We can do better.

So, even as we commit ourselves through Ballot Measure 50 to dealing with the immediate crisis in access faced by thousands of Oregon’s children, we must also recommit ourselves to the larger challenge of serious system wide reform.

John Kitzhaber
P.S. For more information on the campaign for Measure 50, see the Healthy Kids Oregon website.

HOLY SMOKE Batman! Measure 50!

by AMY J. RUIZ - Portland Mercury

"On Tuesday, the Healthy Kids Oregon campaign stumping for Measure 50—a cigarette tax earmarked for kids' health insurance—blasted R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris for spending "$4.5 million on television and radio, potentially the largest media buy in the history of the state of Oregon for a ballot measure." Courtni Dresser, an American Cancer Society spokesperson on loan to the Healthy Kids Oregon campaign, urged supporters to contact the tobacco companies whenever they see the ads—which refer to the tobacco tax as a "blank check" written by "HMOs and health insurers" for their own benefit—and ask them to "butt out of Oregon!" ... A spokesperson for the Reject 50 campaign did not return a call for comment by press time. "

======

Jeepers. $4.5 Million marketing blitz... or is it a "surge?" These guys will spend a fortune to keep the prices of cigarettes down. Big tobacco and republicans have been in bed together almost as long as big oil and republicans.

More Oregon kids have a school but not a home

Education - The number of homeless students rises as Oregon's stronger economy fails to lift poorer families Thursday, September 13, 2007
BETSY HAMMOND The Oregonian Staff (Read full story here...)
Despite a rebounding economy, Oregon schools report a continuing surge in the number of their students who are homeless.

"The latest count of 15,517 homeless children and youth, released Wednesday, is 18 percent higher than a year ago and 37 percent higher than two years ago. Educators say schools are doing a better job of identifying students who lack permanent homes and also doing a better job of helping students in those straits to overcome barriers and stay in school.

More than 200 homeless education specialists around the state work to make sure that students who become homeless get the bus rides, food baskets, utility assistance, encouragement and red-tape-busting that they and their families need to keep them in class.

But they say the rising numbers also reflect a tough reality for Oregon families with children: Housing costs continue to skyrocket while incomes for those at the bottom of the economic spectrum have not. Affordable housing is extremely scarce, they say.

"Despite the economic trends, there are more kids that are new to homelessness now than ever before," says Dona Bolt, Oregon's coordinator of homeless education. Nearly 2,500 of the homeless students lack not only a home, but also a parent or guardian.

Abandoned by parents or having run away from home or foster care, these students "couch surf," staying temporarily with a series of friends and acquaintances.....

...The definition of homeless students is broader than just those young people living in shelters or on the street. It includes any student whose family lacks a sturdy home of their own, including families who have to move in with friends or relatives for economic reasons; families who live in tents, garages or trailers without running water or electricity; and families who live in motels. ..."

Along with homelessness comes poor health as well as an influx of diseases. Health care is a primary issue for people without a home. Health care is a legitimate right for children. Many seem to think it is a privilege that children are not entitled to.

Ballot Measure 50 will provide over 100,000 uninsured children in Oregon with the health care coverage they need and deserve. It will strengthen safety net clinics, rural health care facilities and provide health care for Oregon’ lowest income families.

Ballot Measure 50 is an 84.5¢ tax on packs of cigarettes as well as other cigarette products. The Measure has already don’t the calculations to integrate a potential decrease in smokers over time. It will raise over $150 Million in the first two years and over $200,000 in the following two years.

You can read up more on Ballot Measure 50 and Senate Joint Resolution 4 as well as what it will provide at these links.

On November 6, you will have the opportunity to Vote Yes on Ballot Measure 50.

Ballot Measure 50: Tax Cigarettes To Fund Healthcare For Kids

This is well worth repeating.

Ballot Measure 50: AMENDS CONSTITUTION: DEDICATES FUNDS TO PROVIDE HEALTHCARE FOR CHILDREN, FUND TOBACCO PREVENTION, THROUGH INCREASED TOBACCO TAX OF (84.5 CENTS/PACK).

This is pretty much a no-brainer. Put an 84.5 cent tax on packs of cigarettes and the money goes to kids. Pretty much only the the tobacco industry is against this measure. You can find out more here at HealthyKids-Oregon.org.

Here is Senate Joint Resolution 4 which is the actual legalese of what Ballot Measure 50 looks like. It's extremely easy to read and very straight forward.

Here is a Legislative Argument in Support of Ballot Measure 50.

Vote yes on 50. Help kids with no healthcare finally get the help they need.