Regarding the Special Session and the Bills presented: I testified on Thursday in opposition to the proposals being put before the legislature in a Special Session on Monday September 30th. I want to tell you some of my reasons for opposing this package, and the special session process so far. First, this is a terrible way to govern. Considering legislation with far-reaching effects, effects that will be difficult or impossible to reverse, in this procedural environment brings out the worst in us. Brokered legislation “packages” encourage, no demand, that we avoid exploring the merits of individual pieces. It all becomes part of a game. And the rules are, in this case, “winner take all.” Treating this process like an adolescent game is in many ways the governance problem of our time. It is certainly the economic problem our time. When it comes to power or riches, somebody has to stand up and ask, “How much is enough?” Because the unspoken answer is, “All. Because there is never enough.” I, and my constituents, wind up cynical about a process that barely meets the letter of procedural requirements, in which details are settled out of sight, and public vetting appears to be a show. Again, it’s a bad way to govern, one that suggests a clumsy game of checkers, not a deliberative process. In order, as I currently understand the proposals: 1. PERS cost of living adjustments This proposal reduces cost of living adjustments for all PERS retirees below the latest consumer price index figure for the Portland area. Even with the convoluted addition of “supplementary payments,” retirees, especially those whose pensions are relatively small, would lose purchasing power at an accelerated rate, and those supplementary payments would disappear after five years. And, frankly, we will have wasted a lot of time on this if the Oregon Supreme Court strikes down SB 822 passed in the regular session. The real issue is this: These people earned their retirement by working. The shift of wealth from those who work to those who speculate and manipulate is bringing this country down. We can talk all day about numbers, but these are people, human beings who invested their life’s work in public service, and now we want to renege on the deal. It’s beyond cynical to say that this is for kids or for schools or for teachers. Many of these human beings who would be touched by this proposal are retired educators. This is part of an ongoing theme of discounting and devaluing the teaching profession and the individuals who spend their lives getting good at it. 2. PERS policies This proposal has several parts. Some of them are good policy ideas that should be deliberated, refined and passed via a normal legislative process. One provision changes the retirement options for new legislators, but the proposal is very confusing; what I read in the legislative concept doesn’t seem to match what I’ve been told. This is one of the problems with a rushed process. I don’t support sending any public pension dollars into a plan that is dependent on Wall Street. I am, frankly, not really sure whether that’s what this does. I’d like to be sure. 3. Revenue and tax breaks This proposal continues some taxes that are set to sunset, provides some laudable tax breaks to low income earners, and apparently provides a substantial tax break for Oregon corporations that export goods. I have only seen an outline of this proposal. Again, it’s a complex proposal that we simply cannot appropriately vet in a one-day special session. I am concerned that the long term tax breaks may offset short term revenue gained from this package. 4. Budget appropriation You know me, I’m all for the appropriations identified in the package. But I can’t get past the impression that this is the “marketing” component of the package. The real goal is to ram through the tax breaks and retiree cuts and put public pension dollars at risk, and do it in an environment of rushed urgency. Again, no way to govern. 5. HB633, County pre-emption for regulating seed products. I don’t even know where to start. This is dangerous from a governance standpoint, an economic standpoint and a scientific standpoint. This bill is inspired not by a need to coordinate regulation, as it’s being sold, but by a desire to eliminate regulation. This bill was drafted and promoted by a national organization that promotes corporate control at the expense of local democracy. We should remember that the incident in Jackson County that spurred action there involved a farmer’s crops being ruined by illegal action, for which he had no recourse. Some of the science is still out regarding GMO crops. But some of it isn’t. We know that cross pollination with existing crops happens, and that there are already places in the world where certain plants without genetically engineered genes have been wiped out by cross-pollination. That can’t be reversed, and it’s a massive experiment. The argument that it’s “just like selective breeding” is both wrong and insulting; the expectation is that none of us in the Legislature knows anything about genetic engineering. But I have genetically engineered an organism in a lab, and I know something about what’s involved. But SB 633 applied to a lot more than GMO crops. The language was broad enough to pre-empt regulation of a lot of other plant products. The economic devastation wrought worldwide by the intricacies of patent protection of genetically engineered seed can’t be overstated, but the potential for our own heritage seed and organic produce industries to be ruined is even more immediate. This bill simply has no place in this procedural environment, if it has a place anywhere. To recap. I think this is a lousy way to govern. I also suspect that the package is not a compromise, but is more of a “heads we win, tails you lose” maneuver by those who view governing as a game, one in which the winner takes all. If these are good ideas, they should withstand the scrutiny of a regular deliberative process. If they can’t they shouldn’t be passed.
Posted on: Sat, 28 Sep 2013 01:37:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015