Newsletter by
Senator Doug Whitsett, OR
District 28 3/16/07
Dear Friends,
The state
of Oregon has reached a new level of
absurdity in creating fees. Our
office is receiving a tsunami of
complaints regarding the demand by
the Department of State Land (DSL)
for a registration fee for rocks
placed along the shoreline as rip
rap or as supports for other
structures. This torrent of
resentment exceeds even that stirred
up by the DSL requirement,
established during the interim, that
docks on private property that
access the waters of the state be
registered for a fee. The theory is
that the state owns the land between
the water and the historic high
water mark of streams and lakes. The
DSL logic appears to be that, for
the state to be fair, DSL must
charge a fee for the easement right
to cross or place rocks upon that
land owned by the state.
Our office is in the process
of determining the specific
statutory authority that DSL is
depending upon to empower the agency
to initiate, implement, and enforce
these registration requirements and
fees on “docks and rocks”. In the
event that the agency does possess
that statutory authority, we may
consider introducing legislation to
change the statute to prevent the
agency from collecting fees for
“docks and rocks”.
Rainy Day Fund
Thursday the
Senate passed HB 2707 that
establishes a state savings account.
The bill declares an emergency need
for funds allowing the legislature
to confiscate the corporate kicker
credit for this budget cycle. It
then channels that confiscated
credit to start a savings account
for the general fund. Additionally,
up to one percent of the unspent
balance of the general fund would be
transferred to the savings account
at the end of each budget cycle.
The ultimate size of the savings
account would be limited to seven
and one half percent of the general
fund.
I opposed HB 2707 for several
reasons. First, it is a $290 million
dollar tax increase on our corporate
business community. Although the
targeted corporations are often
domiciled out of state they do
employ tens of thousands of
Oregonians. A few examples would be
Intel, Hewlett Packard,
Weyerhaeuser, and Safeway.
Second, an emergency simply
does not exist when our revenue
projections for this budget cycle
exceed our essential budget level by
more than half a billion dollars.
Third, the Senate Republicans
introduced an alternative that would
have diverted existing money from
the general fund to create the
savings account. That proposal was
opposed by all 18 Democrat Senators.
As I stated in Senate debate,
prudent people do not borrow money
to create a savings account, prudent
people do not take money that
belongs to others to create a
savings account, but prudent people
do set money aside for a savings
account first on a regular basis.
Certainly it would be prudent for
this legislative assembly to do no
less with the public's tax dollars.
On the same day, HB 2031 also
passed out of the Senate. This bill
diverts about $25 million of the
confiscated corporate kicker credit
money to the General Fund to restore
the 67% corporate kicker credit to
corporations that have gross annual
sales of less than $5 million. I
voted for this bill because HB
2707, which confiscated the entire
67% corporate kicker credit, had
already passed. At least this bill
will preserve the credit for
Oregon’s smaller corporations. The
preponderance of these businesses
are privately owned and often are
family businesses.
On the Record – Bills
to Watch
Judging from
the amount of correspondence I have
received, many of you are already
aware that the issue of Civil Unions
has returned to the table this
session. Senate Bill 2 and House
Bill 2007 are essentially the text
from last sessions Senate Bill 1000
split up into two bills. SB 2
prohibits discrimination against
persons based on actual or perceived
sexual orientation while HB 2007
establishes requirements and
procedures for individuals of the
same sex to enter into a civil union
contract.
Supporters of SB 2 tout that
unlike SB 1000, this bill allows for
religious exemptions. But the fact
is that the religious exclusions
that SB 2 provides are not adequate
to protect our religious
institutions by any means. It is
true that bona fide churches and
religious institutions are protected
if they take action against someone
based on sexual orientation with
respect to housing, employment and
the use of facilities. However,
these protections that the Church
Exemption provides extend only to
church activities that are “closely
connected to the primary purpose of
the church.” The definitions of bona
fide religious beliefs and churches
and how activities are connected to
the church would be left up to court
interpretation. You can see how this
has the potential to undermine the
autonomy of religious organizations
by exposing them to judicial
intrusion. A judge should not be
authorized to decide what is or is
not the primary purpose of a
religious institution or church. I
believe this to be an unreasonable
government interference with
religious practice and beliefs. In
addition to potentially jeopardizing
the separation of Church and State,
this bill would also elevate
transgendered and bi-sexual
individuals to special minority
class status and would establish
procedures to allow for “affirmative
action to seek out underutilized
members of protected minorities” in
various areas including public
employment.
As for HB 2007, what can be
said on the issue of civil unions
that has not already been said? I
believe that the bill merely
proposes marriage by another name,
which is certainly not what Oregon
voters wanted when they passed
Measure 36. In order to support
this bill one must believe that the
voters intended for Measure 36 to be
nothing more than a semantic
statement. I outright reject that
idea.
As always, the purpose of our
office is to first and foremost
serve as a resource to you, my
constituents. My staff and I are
here to assist you in your public
policy questions and receive your
valuable ideas and input. We’ll
always maintain an open door and
open ear as we strive to ensure that
the voice of rural Oregon is heard
here in Salem.
Best regards,
Doug
For information on all the
bills that Senator Whitsett is
sponsoring, visit his
Legislative Website.
Please Contact or Visit us
in Salem
Senator Doug Whitsett
Party: R
District: 28
Capitol Phone:
503-986-1728
Capitol Address:
900 Court St NE, S-302, Salem, OR,
97301
Email:
sen.dougwhitsett@state.or.us
Website:
http://www.leg.state.or.us/whitsett
|