Campaigns
Employee Free Choice Act
For more information click here: http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/employee-free-choice-act/home |
||||
Fair Share Corporate Tax Reform
Like the rest of the country, Oregon is feeling the hurt of this financial crisis. Declining revenues mean the state has $4 billion less than it needs to provide basic services. Because 93% of the state’s budget goes directly to education, healthcare, and public safety, this crisis could have a major negative impact on the services that all of us depend on.
The legislature addressed this crisis through a combination of program cuts, increased efficiencies, temporary federal stimulus dollars, and targeted tax increases on corporations and the wealthy.
Now, a group of right-wing ideologues and large corporations are trying to repeal two parts of this package by gathering signatures to force a statewide election. Below are the facts on the measures and information about who they will–and won’t–impact.
• Raises marginal tax rate on income over $125,000 for individuals and $250,000 for households to 10.8 percent (until 2012, when it drops to 9.9 percent). Note: The increased rate is only on income above $125,000, not on all income
• Raises marginal tax rate on income over $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for households to 11 percent (until 2012, when it drops to 9.9 percent). Note: The increased rate is only on income above $250,000, not on all income
• Has no impact on the personal taxes of 97.5 percent of taxpayers
• Replaces outdated $10 corporate minimum (unchanged since 1931) with a sliding rate equal to one-tenth of one percent of Oregon sales. New minimum set at $150, capped at $100,000
• Raises tax on corporate profits over $250,000 to 7.9 percent (until 2011, when it drops to 7.6 percent)
For more information click here: http://defendoregon.org/
Local Banking Campaign
Are you still allowing national/multinational banks to leverage your money for their own ends? If so, moving your money to a local credit union or bank is the quickest way to decentralize and democratize our financial system and has more effect than you think! To learn more, download our local banking trifold and visit the Sustainable Business Network of Portland or our friends at www.gofireyourbank.com.
Election Reform Instant Run Off VotingDemocracy requires an active and engaged citizenry.Yet our voting system discourages active citizenry. With its first-pass-the-post elections (who ever gets the largest number of votes wins; candidate may not be the majority winner), our choices have been restricted to the ruling duopoly of the Republican and Democratic parties. These parties represent two wings of the America corporate structure.
Voting for a third party or independent candidate is seen as a wasted vote and those candidates are called spoilers.
Instant Runoff Voting, aka ranked voting or preference voting, allows voters to rank candidate for a particular office in order of preference, # 1, #2, #3 and so on. When the voting is complete, the votes are counted. If no candidate has a majority, then the votes of the candidate with the least votes are transferred to voter’s second choice and recounted. That process continues until one candidate has a majority of the votes and is declared the winner.
The benefits of IRV are that the winner always has a majority of the votes instead of just a plurality; there is less negative campaigning as each candidate must appeal to more than just there core supporters; there are no “spoiler” candidates.
If there are no “spoiler” candidates, then voters are more likely to vote for third party or independent candidates because they know that their vote can transfer to a major party candidate. Therefore, we would get a better representation of how voters see candidates and issues.
IRV has been used in Australia, England, and in increasing numbers for elections in the United States. In the past decade, increasing numbers of American cities and states have approved use of IRV in their elections. San Francisco has now used IRV to elect their city council persons for 3 elections with very favorable results. In 2008, Pearce County WA (Tacoma) used IRV. Many more cities are set to use IRV in the next election cycle.
More information on Instant Runoff Voting is available at www.fairvote.org or Alliance for Democracy – Portland Chapter at www.afd-pdx.org for status of IRV in Oregon.
If you want to help get IRV in Oregon, please contact Economic Justice Action Group member, David Delk at davidafd@msn.com or 503.232.5494. David is also the President of the Alliance for Democracy – Portland Chapter.
Campaign Finance Reform
The need for limitations on money is politics is evident at every turn, whether at the national or the state or the local level. The US Supreme Court has affirmed the right of the citizens or their representative in enact limitations on campaign contributions (legalized bribery) and expenditures. Many people doubt this; yet at the federal level, McCain Feingoldlaw was enacted, then challenged at the US supreme court level and withstood the challenge. When the US Supreme Court has struck down limitations on campaign contributions, it struck down laws which was deemed too restrictive. The trick is to write a law which is strick enough to be effective, but not so restrictive as to be struck down.
Oregon is one of only two states with no limitations. Therefore, we have among the most expensive political races and campaigns in the nation. We are also one of the states in which corporate influence is most persuasive.
The prior sentance has an error. If fact, Oregon does have limitations, having enacted them in 2006 via the initiative process. In November, 2006, there were two ballot measures, one with limitations on candidate elections and one which was a constitutional measure allowing limitations. The measure with the limitations passed; the constitutional measure did not.
The limitations would have been among the strongest in the nation. Limitations included banning all corporate and union contributions and expenditures, limiting individual contributions to $2500 per year, limiting independent expenditures.
Further, it allowed the creation of Small Donator Committees, committees which could accept contributions of no more than $50.00 per individual but could spend the money raised in whatever manner the committee worked on elections. Membership organizations like the Sierra Club or the Elks or unions were also allowed to form and contribute to small donor committees. Remember that corporations and unions cannot contribute to candidate elections; however, unions, being membership organizations, could contribute up to $50.00 per member to a small donor committee and therefore participate in elections. Corporations are not membership organizations and could form or contribute to a small donor committee.
We must amend the Oregon constitution to allow limitations on contributions and expenditures. Such an effort is currently underway. Contact David Delk, Alliance for Democracy, 503 232 5495, davidafd@msn.com, to help with the effort.