Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 31, 2014, 06:22:31 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections (Moderator: Joe Republic)
| | |-+  Oregon political trends thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print
Author Topic: Oregon political trends thread  (Read 9533 times)
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: January 22, 2012, 04:24:02 am »
Ignore

No new developments on the county funding issue really, just more specific numbers.

http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2012/01/loss_of_federal_forest_payment.html

Quote
The situation traces primarily to the management of Oregon's national and Bureau of Land Management forests, which make up 60 percent of the state's timberland -- including more than14 million acres of national forests.

Because federal land isn't subject to property taxes, rural counties and school districts since 1908 have received a share of timber sale revenue. The states dictate how the money is distributed; Oregon law directs 75 percent of national forest harvest revenue to county road funds and 25 percent to school districts. Timber receipts from BLM land can be used for county general funds, but the amount is much smaller.

Revenue going to the counties dropped sharply as logging on federal land declined over the past 20 years, however. To ease the blow, Congress in 2000 approved the federal payments.

The payments went to more than 700 counties in 41 states, including 33 of Oregon's 36 counties. Funding was extended twice, ramped down, and the last checks delivered this fiscal year.





That second graphic could really be more informative if they included the % of the county budget funded by the payments Tongue
« Last Edit: January 22, 2012, 04:34:36 am by greenforest32 »Logged
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13750
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #26 on: January 22, 2012, 05:15:07 am »
Ignore

Quote
The dissolution of an Oregon county hasn't happened before. It may not be legally possible. Questions outnumber answers.

What about Umpqua County?

I wonder how Washington state is dealing with this or do they not have any counties with circumstances this bad?

We got about $39 million in 2009 according to this link. So yeah, we get a lot less than Oregon, especially when you consider our state is almost twice as populous. Glancing over the county numbers, I imagine Ferry, Pend Oreille, Okanogan, and maybe some others could be hit pretty hard by it... Skamania County looks like it gets a lot and would be in a bad position, which this link seems to confirm.
Logged

greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: January 22, 2012, 05:34:46 am »
Ignore

Quote
The dissolution of an Oregon county hasn't happened before. It may not be legally possible. Questions outnumber answers.

What about Umpqua County?

I think they were referring to a dissolution without a split/merge (no replacement).

I wonder how Washington state is dealing with this or do they not have any counties with circumstances this bad?

We got about $39 million in 2009 according to this link. So yeah, we get a lot less than Oregon, especially when you consider our state is almost twice as populous. Glancing over the county numbers, I imagine Ferry, Pend Oreille, Okanogan, and maybe some others could be hit pretty hard by it... Skamania County looks like it gets a lot and would be in a bad position, which this link seems to confirm.

Looks like Oregon gets the most of any state in absolute dollars and we're #2 (after PA) in dollars per acre of federal land Tongue: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5251340.pdf

http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/pts/securepayments
« Last Edit: January 22, 2012, 05:37:47 am by greenforest32 »Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #28 on: February 01, 2012, 11:27:31 am »
Ignore

Not a surprise but still disappointing: http://news.opb.org/article/poll-shows-oregonians-still-support-capital-punishment/

Relevant snippets:

Quote
Governor John Kitzhaber raised the issue of Oregon's death penalty this winter, when he placed a moratorium on executions for the rest of his tenure. He urged Oregonians to "find a better solution."

But now, a new poll by OPB and DHM Research shows that most Oregonians favor the death penalty. The poll found that 57 percent favor the death penalty for some crimes; 39 percent oppose it. Four percent say the don't know.

Su Midghall, lead pollster for DHM Research, says those numbers haven't moved in a while. "Historically, Oregonians haven't changed a lot in their support for the death penalty. It was high 10 years ago, meaning over a majority then, it's still over a majority today."

Quote
In an interview that will run on OPB's Think Out Loud Wednesday Kitzhaber reacted to the OPB DHM poll that shows a majority of Oregonians support capital punishment.

The governor explained his actions, "I didn't abolish the death penalty. I didn't commute the sentences of everyone on death row to life in prison, which I could have done. I simply stayed the execution of Mr. Haugen and made it clear that I'm not going to carry out that sentence during my term in office. With the hope of fostering a discussion about the death penalty. A, whether we still want it. And B, if we do want it, whether the way the death penalty is set up in Oregon is really what people thought they were voting for back in 1984."

That's when Oregonians reinstated capital punishment.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2012, 08:49:54 pm by greenforest32 »Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: March 15, 2012, 03:58:14 pm »
Ignore

Some more interesting articles and data.

http://news.opb.org/article/will-presidents-approval-numbers-help-democrats-down-ticket/

Quote
How Are Oregon's Democrats Feeling About Obama?

"President Obama remains quite strong within his own party here in Oregon with over 80 percent approval rating among Democrats. Now that's the opposite for Republicans where over 80 percent disapprove of the President right now. What's interesting is that Independents are split right down the middle. You'll find about 50 say that they approve of the President. 50 percent disapprove. Obama has to move Independents to do well in Oregon and nationally," Midgehall says.

The poll she's talking about was commissioned by OPB and it was conducted in Oregon a few months ago -- in January. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percent.

http://news.opb.org/article/how-health-oregons-gop/

Quote
How Is The Health Of Oregon's GOP?

On Wednesday we checked in on the state of Oregon's Democratic party. Today, we take a look at the GOP.  Oregon hasn't had a Republican in statewide office since Gordon Smith lost his hold on a US Senate seat, almost four years ago. For two major races this year – Attorney General and State Treasurer – the Republicans didn't field a candidate.

One of the GOP's problems is simple math.

Republicans have less than 33 percent of registered voters in Oregon's first congressional district and in the state as a whole. Democrats in the district, and statewide, claim 42 percent of the electorate. The result statewide for Republicans has been the same again and again, as it was in the recent first congressional district race. Tim Hibbitts is with polling firm DHM Research.

Quote
"They're not a particular strong force in the state of Oregon, politically. They have lost 26 of the last 29 partisan statewide races – those are races for president, senate, governor, and the second-tier statewide offices, like Secretary of State, State Treasurer, and Attorney General," says Hibbits.

Republicans have narrowed the registration gap with Democrats by more than 50,000 voters over the last four years. But Democrats still outnumber them by more than 180,000, according to the Secretary of State's official numbers.

"The reality is, this is a Blue State. Republicans can win here, but it's very difficult for them to win. You need, basically, to find candidates who can appeal to swing voters in the middle, who have been voting for Democrats in most of these statewide races over the last two decades," says Hibbits.

Some of those are non-affiliated and minor party voters – a block that has grown by four-percent in the last four years. That's while registration numbers for both Republicans and Democrats have fallen.



« Last Edit: July 24, 2012, 09:00:21 pm by greenforest32 »Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #30 on: March 15, 2012, 04:09:53 pm »
Ignore

Then there is self-identification data for political ideology. Oregon usually has about a little over a quarter of its population self-identify as liberal (which is apparently in the top 10), a third self-identify as conservative and the rest self-identify as moderate

2011 numbers are out and it doesn't look like there is much of a change from 2009 and 2010:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/152459/mississippi-conservative-state-liberal.aspx





Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #31 on: March 15, 2012, 04:39:53 pm »
Ignore

It is pretty likely Democrats will hold the state senate and get a majority in the state house again in 2012. Turnout is always lower in non-presidential midterms and Republicans currently hold like 4-5 state house seats that are D+1-4.

2010 was basically Republican's greatest opportunity and the best they could do was tie the house (compare that to before 2006 where they won outright majorities). Demographics are swinging our way as well in Salem and Bend.

2010 redistricting basically just maintained our existing maps for another 10 years. We may get a 6th seat in Congress next time depending on population growth.

I am disappointed they tied the chamber though. They held up some good legislation last session.

Also, it actually turns out to be 8, not 4-5: http://dpo.org/news/pr/2012-03-06/strong-candidates-across-map-oregon-democrats-are-poised-win-big-2012-legislative

Quote
There are eight current Republican-held seats in which Democrats have a voter registration advantage, versus zero in the reverse.

http://www.oregonvotes.org/doc/voterresources/registration/feb12.pdf
Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #32 on: April 13, 2012, 11:21:18 am »
Ignore

I don't know if we'll ever reach parity. The states have a lot in common but if you go into the details they are different (just as an example, Eastern Oregon is more Republican/conservative than Eastern Washington).

Thought this was interesting:

http://oregoneconomicanalysis.wordpress.com/2012/03/13/oregons-regional-employment/





http://oregoneconomicanalysis.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/portland-seattle-and-the-rest/



Quote
A couple of notes about the graph. One, February 2008 is chosen as the beginning point since Oregon’s total nonfarm employment peaked that month, while Washington’s peaked in March 2008, just one month later. Two, Portland is defined here as the five county MSA (Clackamas, Columbia, Multnomah, Washington and Yamhill), while Seattle is defined here the three county MSA (King, Pierce and Snohomish). Interesting to note that both of the major metropolitan areas have experienced nearly identical employment cycles over the past four years (even if the exact composition of the changes is somewhat different).

These regions are also responsible for the vast majority of the employment gains the past two years. Non-major MSAs and rural areas of both states have yet to fully share in the recovery to date, if at all. Non-Seattle Washington is doing better that Non-Portland Oregon both during the recession and so far in recovery. There are a number of reasons for this, including Hanford, Housing and Agriculture, to name three.

Quote
Tri-Cities, Washington (Benton and Franklin counties) is home to the Hanford Site which received approximately $2 billion in additional funding from ARRA, which greatly benefited the local economy by boosting employment and income. The region actually added nearly 10,000 jobs through mid-2011 (+10%), however as the additional funds have more or less been spent at this point, the region is losing jobs today to the tune of 2,400 in the past six months.

Two other contributing factors worth noting are housing and agriculture. While many regions experienced a housing bubble and bust, Medford and Bend were particularly bad and devastated their local economies. Conversely, mid-sized MSAs in Washington like Spokane and Tri-Cities did not experience housing bubbles of similar magnitude.

Finally, while commodity prices have generally been high in recent years – supportive of agriculture – it appears based on what crops are grown in which regions that the composition of agriculture is also at play. The regions more reliant on grains, grass and trees have fared worse than those dominated by fruits (apples in particular). The grass seed farms and nurseries in the Willamette Valley have been hit hard by the recession while Washington enjoyed a record apple crop in 2010 and 2009 and 2011 were good years as well.

« Last Edit: July 24, 2012, 09:13:42 pm by greenforest32 »Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: May 16, 2012, 09:24:56 pm »
Ignore

I expect we'll be over 50% support for gay marriage by June 2012 (1 year after PPP showed us at 48%) and only going up from there, but I thought this was an interesting article.

http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-19211-the_10_year_engagement.html

"The 10-Year Engagement: President Obama has “evolved” to support gay marriage. Oregon isn’t there yet."

Quote
National polls show more than 50 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage.

But in Oregon, only voters can change the state constitution. Voters passed the ban, Measure 36, by 57 to 43 percent in 2004. Voters are often reluctant to change their mind on ballot measures—even ones that aren’t so controversial. Plus, civil-rights advances are rarely made at the ballot box.

Polling numbers haven’t shown the kind of sea change same-sex marriage advocates had hoped for.

“Ultimately, we have to win a pretty challenging political fight,” says Jeana Frazzini, executive director of Basic Rights Oregon, the state’s largest gay-rights organization. “We are looking to move mountains in this state.”

Last November, Basic Rights Oregon announced that it would not pursue a ballot initiative this year to overturn the state’s same-sex marriage ban. The decision by the state’s largest gay-rights organization came after a three-year, six-figure media campaign.

Quote
Frazzini says Basic Rights Oregon’s polling showed support for same-sex marriage spiked by 10 percentage points from March 2010 to November 2011.

That same polling showed it wasn’t enough.

Basic Rights Oregon won’t release the results of its polling last fall, but three sources tell WW that the poll, conducted by Grove Insight, showed support for same-sex marriage statewide was between 46 and 49 percent.

“It would have been a toss-up,” says Frazzini, who declined to confirm the actual numbers.

The close margin didn’t provide same-sex marriage advocates the kind of cushion they thought they needed.

Basic Rights Oregon and its 31-member advisory group, including Bean, decided not to put same-sex marriage on the ballot after conducting 15 town-hall meetings in downstate cities from Tillamook to Pendleton.

“Our community was very clear at every town hall: ‘We want to do this once, and we want to be done with it,’” Frazzini says. “The memory of what it felt like the day after Measure 36 passed is visceral.”

Good old theocrats:

Quote
And opponents of same-sex marriage will be waiting.

“We don’t know if they will put it on the ballot in 2014,” says Teresa Harke, a spokeswoman for the Oregon Family Council, which founded the Defense of Marriage Coalition in 2004 to pass Measure 36. “We’re not sure if they even know. If they do, we will fight it, and we will fight it hard.”

http://oregonfamilycouncil.org/issues
« Last Edit: May 16, 2012, 09:38:00 pm by greenforest32 »Logged
hopper
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1424


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: May 17, 2012, 09:42:53 am »
Ignore

We may not get that 6th house seat in 2020

http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2011/12/oregons_population_growth_slow.html

Quote
The state's population growth over the past five years has slowed to a relative trickle, which seems evident given the economy. But newly-certified figures released by Portland State University's Population Research Center show the recession's lingering effect.

Quote
Natural increase -- births outnumbering deaths -- accounted for two-thirds of the state's population growth in the year that ended June 30, 2011. That's a reversal of how we grew from the 1990s through 2008, when natural increase typically made up only a quarter or third of annual growth. The rest came from net migration -- people moving in minus people moving out.

Quote
Oregon has added an average of 41,000 people per year from 2000-2010. That's akin to adding a new Albany every year. But the population growth of the past year was slightly below 20,000 -- like adding a new Milwaukie.

Quote
Another expert, University of Utah professor Arthur C. Nelson, said the national economy may be "much improved" by 2013. That may lead to a population growth rebound in Oregon as people regain mobility.
Where do you think that 6th House Seat will be drawn if you guys do get an another seat in the 2020 Census? What section of the state? Your from there obviously so would probably have a hunch I figure on that.


« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 09:50:40 am by hopper »Logged
hopper
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1424


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: May 17, 2012, 09:49:31 am »
Ignore

I thought the Portland ex-urbs were growing the most but I guess the middle of the state county wise is where all the population growth is now looking at that map above.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 10:01:31 am by hopper »Logged
fezzyfestoon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8287
United States


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: May 17, 2012, 10:02:29 am »
Ignore

Wow, the Tri-Cities area took the crisis on amazingly well for an area with so much new growth. This thread is fantastic, by the way. I'm definitely going to read up a lot more in this thread. Very interesting.
Logged
hopper
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1424


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: May 17, 2012, 10:12:28 am »
Ignore

Honestly... I think politics in Oregon can be split right down the Cascade Mountain range. If you're on the east side, chances are pretty high your republican, if youre on the west chances are your a democrat. I still shake my head at the last governor election. All counties went red cept for 6 or 7 tiny itty bitty (tho dense with population) and the republicans STILL cant win. (I know its counted by popular vote but still funny) Just shows ya one certain city holds all the cards in the state.

Well you know people vote, not land. I've heard of some Oregon Republicans argue for a statewide electoral college for the Governor election. No thanks.

Though your charts were pretty interesting. And is our black population really that low?? o_o

Yeah I was surprised by that too. Washington has a similar Hispanic proportion, but twice the % for Asians and Blacks.

EDIT: I totally grew up in the state of Jefferson xD In fact a few years ago they found like one of the biggest marijuana patches in our states history.

Maybe we can spread the patches statewide in 2012: http://www.cannabistaxact.org/

Though I wonder how it will fare considering the dispensary initiative failed last year.

When will we finally free the weed? Sad
I don't think an electoral college for a Governor's race would make a difference. The Dems rely on the city of Portland and the ex-urbs around Portland to pull out tight races right? Thats where most of the population is right now in the state: in Portland and the ex-urbs surrounding Portland.
Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #38 on: May 17, 2012, 05:05:54 pm »
Ignore

Where do you think that 6th House Seat will be drawn if you guys do get an another seat in the 2020 Census? What section of the state? Your from there obviously so would probably have a hunch I figure on that.

I thought the Portland ex-urbs were growing the most but I guess the middle of the state county wise is where all the population growth is now looking at that map above.

That middle area doesn't really have that many people on its own. If you add up the populations of Deschutes, Crook, and Jefferson counties it's only about ~201k and while they were growing faster off of a smaller base, I don't think the growth will be that high for that area in the coming decades considering higher gas prices (Poor Bend, the proposed PNW high-speed rail line and its connection to California don't even touch it D:) and a good part of the growth was from the real estate boom which has fizzled in Bend but we'll see.

The Portland metro area (including Vancouver) is projected to gain an additional 1 million residents by 2030 (http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/05/portlandarea_growth_blurs_rura.html) and I expect this is probably where a 6th house seat would be placed by shifting the 4th district down further and rearranging the existing 1st, 3rd, and 5th districts. Most likely we'll have 5 districts in Western Oregon and one in Eastern Oregon that crosses over a bit in the North/Central/Southern areas.



I don't think an electoral college for a Governor's race would make a difference. The Dems rely on the city of Portland and the ex-urbs around Portland to pull out tight races right? Thats where most of the population is right now in the state: in Portland and the ex-urbs surrounding Portland.

Yeah it really wouldn't help much considering the EC vote would probably be weighted by population. I guess they just feel like counties = people and if majority of the land mass votes against you, you should lose. I always think of rural Illinois for this
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 05:09:58 pm by greenforest32 »Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #39 on: May 17, 2012, 05:08:07 pm »
Ignore

Josephine county update:

the county commissioners have even said they might have to declare bankruptcy or merge with some other counties if the federal "timber payments" expire and the upcoming property tax measure fails

http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2012/05/because_of_tax_levy_defeat_jos.html

Quote
May 16, 2012
Without federal money, Josephine was left to make do with the state's lowest county tax rate, 58 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value.

The commissioners asked voters to approve a four-year levy that increased the tax rate to $1.99 per $1,000 -- still nearly a dollar below the state average of $2.81. The board adopted a 2012-13 budget that outlined where the cuts would fall.

By a vote of 57 percent to 43 percent, voters said bring it on no. Turnout was 51 percent.
Logged
JohnnyLongtorso
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6850


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: May 17, 2012, 05:13:44 pm »
Ignore

58 cents per $1,000?! In the rural counties in Virginia, it's usually around 58 cents per $100.
Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #41 on: May 17, 2012, 06:01:18 pm »
Ignore

58 cents per $1,000?! In the rural counties in Virginia, it's usually around 58 cents per $100.

Is that for just local? Those above figures were for just local I believe and most rates listed here are in per $1,000.

I haven't been able to find a state-by-state property tax rate comparison. Closest I could find was this and I'm not sure what the rate listed refers to (% of property value?) or if it's state or state+local: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/business/11leonhardt-avgproptaxrates.html
Logged
JohnnyLongtorso
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6850


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: May 17, 2012, 06:42:29 pm »
Ignore

Virginia's is only assessed locally. Does Oregon have a state-level real estate tax?
Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #43 on: May 17, 2012, 07:06:20 pm »
Ignore

Virginia's is only assessed locally. Does Oregon have a state-level real estate tax?

Oh wow, I guess we don't. Looks like it's done by the local governments: http://www.oregon.gov/dor/ptd/property.shtml

Quote
Introduction
The property tax system is one of the most important sources of revenue for more than 1,200 local taxing districts in Oregon. Unlike income taxes, that are calculated by the taxpayer, property taxes rely on county assessment and taxation offices to value the property, calculate the tax, collect the tax and distribute the money to taxing districts. The (state) Department of Revenue has general oversight of the property tax system in Oregon. We provide support and oversight to the counties to ensure uniformity and equity of property tax administration.

Quote
Tax Rates
Each year in late September or early October, the county assessor places the taxes certified by the taxing districts on the tax roll. Property taxes are placed on the tax roll in the form of a rate per $1,000 of assessed value. In most cases, the taxes for operations are the permanent rate limits certified by the districts. When a district certifies a dollar amount tax levy, such as a local option tax or bond tax, the assessor must calculate a tax rate. To compute the tax rate, the tax levy amount is divided by the taxable assessed value of the district. For example: Green City certifies a local option tax in the amount of $225,000. The taxable assessed value of the city is $39,487,000. The rate for the local option tax is calculated as follows:
 
tax levy amount / taxable assessed value = tax rate
$225,000 / $39,487,000 = .0056980 or = $5.6980 per $1,000 of assessed value

Quote
Tax Limitation (Compression)
The Oregon Constitution also sets limits on the amount of property taxes that can be collected from each property tax account. These limits are often called the "Measure 5 limits." To figure these limits, taxes are divided into categories described in the constitution. The categories are: education and general government. Some taxes, usually for general obligation bonds, are not subject to limitation. The limits are $5 per $1,000 of real market value (RMV) for education taxes and $10 per $1,000 of RMV for general government taxes.
 
If taxes in either category exceed the limit for that property, the taxes are reduced or "compressed" until the limit is reached. Local option taxes are compressed first. If the local option tax is compressed to zero, and the limit still hasn't been reached, the other taxes in the category are proportionally reduced.
 
Please note that these limits are based on the RMV of the property, not the taxable assessed value.
Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #44 on: May 17, 2012, 07:12:18 pm »
Ignore

We don't have a statewide real estate transfer tax either (I think one of our 36 counties assesses a small one) and this year the realtors are ponying up cash to constitutionally ban any new state or local real estate transfer taxes: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Oregon_Real_Estate_Transfer_Tax_Amendment_%282012%29

Quote
Amends Constitution: Prohibits real estate transfer taxes, fees, other assessments, except those operative on December 31, 2009.
Logged
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4448
Thailand


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: May 17, 2012, 08:38:37 pm »
Ignore

Wow, the Tri-Cities area took the crisis on amazingly well for an area with so much new growth. This thread is fantastic, by the way. I'm definitely going to read up a lot more in this thread. Very interesting.
Public spending goes a long way, too bad the locals don't understand it. Maybe if the Hanford workers were unionized, local politics would be a lot more interesting. Or maybe they are unionized but really dumb?
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 08:41:29 pm by Senator Seatown »Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #46 on: May 18, 2012, 03:41:51 pm »
Ignore

Ethnic demographics from the Census are always interesting to see as well

Little more on this:

http://censusscope.org/2010Census/states.php?state=OR&name=Oregon



http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/05/oregons_minority_births_on_ris.html

Quote
May 17, 2012
In Oregon, racial and ethnic minorities accounted for 38.7 percent of the children under age 1 in 2011. Although the state has not yet reached the social “tipping point” at which minority births outnumber whites, it is trending that way, said Risa Proehl, a Portland State University population researcher.

Oregon’s 2010 figure was 37.2 percent, she said.

Nationally, 50.4 percent of children under age 1 in 2011 were racial or ethnic minorities. Proehl called that a “historical marker for the country.”
Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2579


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #47 on: July 21, 2012, 01:52:30 pm »
Ignore

Interesting poll about Oregon's ban on pumping your own gas: http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/news/2012/07/20/survey-oregon-drivers-happy-with.html

Quote
July 20, 2012
A study by Seattle-based insurer PEMCO Insurance found that two out of three Oregon drivers — 63 percent — support the state’s ban on self-service gas stations.

In Washington, where drivers can choose between both full- and self-service pumps, only one-third of drivers prefer mandated full-service gas, with 60 percent opposed to gas-pumping laws.

Quote
But Washington residents surveyed by PEMCO weren’t convinced of the economic benefits. Asked whether they would approve a 5 cent per gallon cost increase to support new jobs, nearly two-thirds opposed costlier gasoline.

Nearly half of the Oregonians surveyed, 49 percent, would consider a change if lifting the self-service ban made gas cheaper by five cents a gallon.

In other related data, seven of 10 women supported full-service gas, while only half of the men agreed. Men and women in Washington both opposed full-service stations.

There was a ballot measure back in November 1982 (Measure 4) that would have repealed the ban and it got ~42.5% of the vote: http://bluebook.state.or.us/state/elections/elections20.htm

I was thinking maybe the support for repealing it had increased since that time because the ban was probably in more states back then but I guess not. Current figures are hard to come by but a 2003 article (http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Self-serve-gas-in-Oregon-Not-likely-1114712.php) says there were about 7,600 people working statewide in that position. I'm not sure if that's over-counting it by including employees who would be employed at the stations even without the ban.

The specific law (ORS 480.315) lists 17 reasons for the ban and it's a bit fun to read: https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/480.315

Between us and New Jersey I wonder who will get rid of it first? And I wonder how it will play out with stations focused solely on electric vehicles? Tongue
« Last Edit: July 21, 2012, 02:00:43 pm by greenforest32 »Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8815
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #48 on: July 24, 2012, 03:43:32 pm »
Ignore

I don't live in either New Jersey or Oregon, but I still don't know why self-serve gas would be illegal in those states, except possibly to prevent theft (at least back in the day.)
Logged

Quote from: Dwight D. Eisenhower
There is nothing wrong with America that the faith, love of freedom, intelligence, and energy of her citizens cannot cure.
When I voted for the first time a few weeks ago, I announced "damnit, I voted for Pat Buchanan!" Nobody got it.
CultureKing
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3218
United States


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: July 24, 2012, 04:37:21 pm »
Ignore

I think when it comes to mandating people to pump gas for you the focus should be on the quality of the jobs rather than quantity. We don't need thousands of jobs that keep you hovering around the poverty line, that really doesn't help the economy.
Logged

Econ: -6.50, Social: -5.23
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines