My Flag.
Today, I did something that I have been waiting to do for eight long years.
I removed My Flag from it’s mount and replaced it with my new one.
I have watched My Flag slowly decay since I first moved it to half mast (or an approximation on my small post) on December 12, 2000, the day the Supreme Court installed the Pretender to the Throne. I vowed that day to not move it to it’s proper place at full mast until the United States had an Honest Occupant in the White House, elected by the People, not selected by Elites.
And, as I marched helplessly against the Iraq war, then the occupation, the Stars slowly faded, year after year. I wrote letters to my Senators, my congressman, to newspapers; I became more and more involved; I donated time and money to depose the Boy-King; I didn’t do enough, as the stripes came undone, as My Government spied on Us and denied Some the Right of Habeas Corpus. My Flag became more tattered and torn, even as I found My Government tortured in My Name.
My Flag frayed, in its state of perpetual mourning, as my Rights were sold to the highest bidder, as my Honor was being sullied on the world stage. My Flag faded as New Orleans drowned and Baghdad burned.
My Flag diminished in the foul winds of weakness, fear and greed that those we chose to lead us chose to ride.
And then Something Happened.
Not something small, like my placing my Flag at half mast. Not a little thing, like the miniscule part I played in this history.
A Great Thing Happened.
My country, traumatized by the truancy of it’s leaders, abused by an Imperial Ideology, turned it’s back on fear.
My Nation chose to change, decided to turn to the future, to repair the past.
But, My Flag remained, weathering the storms of one last winter. It wasn’t time yet.
And, so today, I did something I’ve waited eight long years to do. During the Invocation, I removed My Flag and replaced it with My Flag. As I stood back and looked at the bright, new colors, in the stillness of this crystal clear day, I thought “yeah, I like the looks of this”.
I’ve folded my old flag and brought it inside. I don’t know yet whether I will burn it with the respect it’s due, or keep it as a reminder of the damage done and the work still to do.
The Great Flood Of 2009
I’m just a guy, not a Great Climatologist, but I remember this (full story here).
And, I also know this: The Pacific Northwest likes to be warm. And wet.
Right now, we have a lot of snow on the ground and it’s been freezing for a week and a half. On my little 2.65 acres of heaven, there’s well over 2 feet of snow. About half way up my driveway, there’s a snow line. Well below that is Earth Mama’s car. Stuck. At the bottom of our driveway, there’s my truck. Stuck. About a third of the way down Dutch Canyon there’s another snowline. The snow is only about 2 feet deep there. Down in Beautiful Downtown Scappoose, the snow is only about a foot and a half.
And it’s all gonna melt. Fast. And the ground’s gonna be frozen. Hard.
So, as much as I want this damn snow to just go away, I don’t want it to go away too fast.
Not as fast as it’s going to…
Erroneous Assumptions
[Editors note: Let me introduce Earth Momma's kid (my Stepson). After many years (I met him when he was 4 or 5) of noogies, indian rubs, red bellies, dragging him around by his leg and holding him down and smearing peanutbutter on his face so my dogs could lick it off, I think I've finally whipped him into shape!
Ah, the memories!
He's in college now and he sent me this essay. I like it so much, I'm posting it (with his permission) under his new screen name "justducky". I hope he'll become a regular contributor to the site. Justducky also sent me a list of works cited for this article-I'm not going to post that, but if you want it just email me and I'll get back to ya!
liberte]
Sen. John Sidney McCain, in his address to the Council on Foreign Relations, tells many stories of how he grew up in a war torn family, and the hardships it has brought upon him. In his speech, McCain attemps to justify and gives reasons to prolong the war in Iraq. He gives examples of why it is necessary now for the United States and why it is necessary at other times. He uses many facets of logical fallacies and doublespeak in his address. McCain’s assumptions and predictions of the outcome of an early withdrawal are some of the most erroneous and false claims I have ever heard. With the many slippery slope fallacies he uses, his speech seems erratic and insincere.
McCain begins his speech with vivid stories of his and his family’s war torn past. He shows the audience how war has taken its toll upon his family in a reference to his grandfather, “who commanded the fast carrier task force under Admiral Halsey”, and died the day after returning home, “from the burdens he had borne” (McCain 1). As he tells his audience of his detestation for war, he begins to give examples of why, at times, it is completely necessary and sometimes improbable. His descriptions of the enemies we have in this current generation are flamboyant and graphic: “We have enemies for whom no attack is too cruel, and no innocent life safe, and who would, if they could, strike us with the world’s most terrible weapons” (2). This quote is convincing, yet harbors many questions of how these enemies would observe a timely withdrawal.
McCain expresses how a withdrawal from Iraq would cause “horrendous violence, ethnic cleansing, and possibly genocide” (3). This is an example of the slippery slope logical fallacy. There is no possible way for McCain to be able to predict the outcome of military extraction from Iraq. He is simply using scare tactics by presuming the worst possible outcome, forcing his audience to become nervous and frightened by a “premature withdrawal” (3). Other forms of fallacies are used as well. When McCain states that “Iran will also view our premature withdrawal as a victory” (3), he is using a red herring technique. Bringing up Iran is a way to distract the listener from the facts of pulling out of Iraq, throwing the big bully into the conversation in order to deceive his audience.
Deception is used numerous times throughout McCain’s address. False dilemma is used when McCain says, “We have incurred a moral responsibility in Iraq” (3). Indeed we have incurred responsibility, but we have not taken the responsibility of the entire nation, and will not be abandoning our accountability and rendering the Iraqi people into genocide. McCain calls an extraction “reckless, irresponsible, and premature” (3) and says withdrawal by the United States would be a dreadful defeat to our security interests (3). Has President Bush not already claimed victory in Iraq? Should extraction not follow victory in a military occupation? McCain’s claims in his address do not seem defensible, and must be called into question.
Webster’s dictionary defines idealist as, “a perfectionist who rejects practical considerations” (Webster’s). When McCain exclaims, “I am, from hard experience and the judgement it informs, a realistic idealist” (2), he is doing no benefit to his address. Many young people whom I have spoken with do not view idealism as a sustainable quality. And, how is “realistic” an improvement upon an idealist? Idealist does, however, paint a wonderful portrait of McCain, as his address does, by showing how stubborn and tenacious he is. Idealism is not something the United States needs in this conflict. Evidence is shown by the optimism of our initial invasion. Perfection was our goal, and we have not come close to it. McCain puts the definition of doublespeak to good use when referring to himself as an idealist.
Doublespeak is used in many other forms throughout McCain’s speech. When describing the Middle East’s “animating hatred for the West” (2), the Senator uses words such as “placated” (2), describing how our enemies will not accommodate our requests for peace. How can we know about their willingness to cooperate if we will not hold open talks with them? He also talks of the better “angels” of their nature (2). This example of doublespeak is put to good use by McCain in his address, throwing the audience off track and distorting his message.
McCain also speaks of the transatlantic relationships we have with allied European nations. Have we not already severed many ties that we have with most European Union countries by prematurely and hastily invading Iraq? He claims we need to develop common energy policies, despite the views of his party, and he talks of the dangers we face with a revanchist Russia. These appeals he is pleading for do not follow the trail he has laid and therefore are completely unbelievable and vague. He discusses the support of NATO, while his record shows otherwise, ignoring the organization and its requests mulitiple times in the original invasion of Iraq. So if he is putting so many questionable pleas forth in his address to the audience, how can he be trusted with anything else he says?
As an afterthought, I believe that Sen. McCain not only expresses his interests and beliefs in this address, but gives his audience an overall picture of what his policies would be if elected President in 2008. If the United States is truly outraged at the past administration, voting for McCain as President would only allow a comrade of the past eight years to come in and fill the our country with fallacies and erroneous assumptions.
Shout Out To Get Out The Vote!
With less than two weeks to go until The Most Important Election Of Our Lifetime, the Democratic Party of Columbia County needs your help!
The person running the joint Obama/Columbia County Democrats office broke her foot and seems to be out for the count. That means that we have not only lost a lousy canvasser (that would be me), among others (that would be good canvassers) that are covering her shifts, but that we have gained a lousy office boy (that would also be me)!
So this is what we need:
- Canvassers-Door to Door GOTV
- Phone bankers-Hey, you can pick up a list and call from home or work at our office!
- Poll watchers-Just make sure everything is A-OK!
These would be when you want ‘em shifts, we’ll set you up and off you go!
So if you can spare a few hours in the next few weeks-Democracy needs your help!
You can get more information at the Columbia County Democrats site , call our office at (503) 543-3250 or email me at liberte at columbiablues dot com!
Thanks!
liberte
Justice Is, What Justice Does!
[Editor's note: Tammy submitted this as a comment to my post "Trouble With Tammy", but at this moment, my blog software allows only logged in, registered users to read comments. I promised her that if I could not fix this that I would post it-So go read "trouble With Tammy and then read this-her rebuttal]
Robert,
As my e-mail to the Compliance Specialist clearly answers my questions, the Id #’s 3567238 and 357239, which I have listed, were indeed late, they were not filed in the appropriate time frame is a violation of Oregon Election law, Elections have confirmed that these dates are in deed late and in violation, As you know the closer you get to the election, the time frame drops to a 7-day reporting period. But these Id #’s fall under the 30-day regulation. I agree that there are certain items that are allowed to be amended, such as mis- spelled names or wrong addresses, but other transactions are not allowed to be amended. And these Id#’s are not allowed, If they are late they are late period end of story.
The issue is that the campaign did not follow the set rules and get the transactions in on time, and that is against the rules, set forth by the State of Oregon. The elections may decide not to give a penalty but still considers the late filing a violation.
Judge Grant should be aware of this, if a person comes into her courtroom with a traffic violation she may reduce the fine or impose no fine as she sees fit. But that does not dismiss the violation. She may dismiss the fine but the violation will still be on record and will still stand.
>> As Jennifer Hertel states in her email response to Tammy Maygra, if
>> a transaction is filed late or if there are insufficiencies with a
>> transaction a civil penalty MAY be accessed. Additionally, it is
>> the practice of this office that if a civil penalty is calculated
>> $50.00 or under this office will not collect the penalty.
Read the last line “Quote” this office will not collect the penalty” end Quote”
Even if the office does not collect the penalty they have admitted that there WAS a penalty, to have a penalty some one must have failed to do something, (penalty = fine, punishment, price, consequence) so therefore Grants campaign failed to follow the regulations no if’s ands or buts, if the campaign had followed the regulations there would not be a “penalty accessed or may be assessed. Even if the penalty is not collected on, because the amount is small costing more to collect than imposed, it does not avert to the FACT that there was a regulation that was violated.
You also said that because her campaign treasure or secretary were volunteers that any mistakes were basically forgiven that is not the case, and because the Ore Star system was new that the state was going to forgive candidates and campaigns I believe this not to be true either as so states in my e-mail.
My “attacks” as you call them on Judge grant are not baseless, it is a simple writing of record and fact, as I was told by Ore Star election personal, I feel that a person who is a siting judge or running for a judges seat, should know and follow all rules of law, if not, how can they actually sit before their peers and pass judgment, a judge cares not if you do not know a law, and that you may have violated it accidentally, as they say“ ignorance of the law is no excuse”. I expect my circuit court judge to follow the law not break the law.
As far as my questions being general questions, Robert all campaigns must follow all the same rules and regulations.
If I was wrong, I would admit it, but the fact is Grants campaign violated election law, you can’t break the law just a little bit, you either do or you don’t. Regardless whether the state actually imposes a fine is irreverent, the fact is her campaign is still in violation.
Robert you are pretty good at spinning things but the facts are
Violations is violations is violations, it is not the amount of the violation but the fact that it is a violation
See you at the next dem function Robert and yes I still love ya . No matter who’s candidate wins!
Trouble With Tammy
First, I want to make sure everybody knows this: I am a supporter of Judge Jenefer Grant and, as a volunteer, I wrote and maintain her website retainjudgegrant.com.That said, I speak here as a private citizen, not as a representative of the Judge Grant campaign.
O.K., with that out of the way, let’s get on to my post.
Reading through the letters section of the sthelensupdate I saw this:
From Tammy Maygra 10/2/08
I support David Herr for Circuit Court Judge Position 3. David is an individual who is diligent in carrying out the rule of law. David is efficient, hard working, honest, and a man of his word. His many years of experience in different aspects of the judicial system is a critical part in carrying out the responsibilities required of a Circuit Court Judge.
Unlike Judge Grant who at this time has broken election laws by not adhering to the standards set by the State of Oregon, Grant has been negligent, in reporting several of her campaign transactions. Grant will be fined by the State Elections for these violations, If Grant can not abide by these simple laws, how can she make appropriate decisions regarding other individuals who may have broken the law? How can Grant preside over cases efficiently with her slipshod handling of simple paper work?
In my opinion it would be in the best interest of Columbia County citizens to have a Circuit Court Judge who follows the law and is able to carry out the laws set forth by the State with competence and with out prejudice. Please help me elect David Herr to the position of Circuit Court Judge Position 3.
Wow. That’s pretty harsh. I mean Judge Grant was “negligent” and that disqualifies her from making “appropriate decisions”. According to Tammy, Judge Grant should be removed from office on Vague Accusations Of Massive Misdeeds and the Promise Of Severe Punishment . The problem is that this letter doesn’t explain exactly what Judge grant did.
So, my interest piqued, I tried to find out what was going on. This what I came up with (after doing a little due diligence). I present it to you here in the form of a letter I wrote to the Update.
I support Judge Jenefer Grant-in fact, I wrote her campaign website, www.retainjudgegrant.com (kinda proud of that-I think it’s pretty nice) and I want to make sure that the claims that Tammy Maygra made about Judge Grant do not go unchallenged.
Tammy claims that “…Grant has been negligent, in reporting several of her campaign transactions. Grant will be fined by the State Elections for these violations,…”, but gives no link, so I went looking. This is Judge grants ORESTAR page. As you can see, there is nothing to indicate that Judge Grant has done anything wrong. But, still, Tammy is pretty good at ORESTAR, so I asked the campaign about it and this is what they forwarded to me from the Secretary of State:
“I have review all the examinations concerning transactions for Jenefer Grant. In every instance that an insufficiency was found the an amendment was filed within the time line stated on the exam.
If you have any questions please let me know.”I did have questions, so I called the SOS office and was told that, while there was one problem, it was a “miscommunication with the treasurer” (who, like me, is a volunteer, not a professional), that it was cleared up quickly and that there will be no fines. In addition, I was told that any mistakes made were minor and made by many people when they first run for office and are not familiar with the system.
So, it looks as though Judge Grant is no scofflaw and that claims that she is are baseless.
Jenefer Grant is a talented, experienced judge who has proven herself to be more than qualified to hold the position of Circuit Court Judge Position 3 and it’s a shame that David Herr’s supporters feel it necessary to smear her in such a way.
Please join me in voting for Judge Jenefer Grant for Circuit Court position 3.
Robert La Liberte
Now, this a long story, I know, but I’ll try to make this part short. A few days after I wrote my letter, Bill Eagle, the proprietor of the Update, wrote me back, explaining that he would have written sooner, but that he had been out of town (cool), did I want my letter posted at the Update (yes) and that Tammy had asked that her letter be amended, which he did (huh?).
So, I went back to the Update and looked at the letter again. This is what I saw:
From Tammy Maygra 10/2/08
I support David Herr for Circuit Court Judge Position 3. David is an individual who is diligent in carrying out the rule of law. David is efficient, hard working, honest, and a man of his word. His many years of experience in different aspects of the judicial system is a critical part in carrying out the responsibilities required of a Circuit Court Judge.
Please help me elect David Herr to the position of Circuit Court Judge Position 3.
This letter is a little bit different than the one I first saw. In fact, it was about a quarter of the of the letter I first saw.
Now, I want to be clear on this. I like the Update. It’s fun, informative and snarky. In fact, if you look to your right, you’ll see that I link to it. And that’s why I was reading the letters in the first place. ‘Cause I like the Update.
But I also believe in the sin of omission.
Tammy did not try to correct the record by saying something like “hey, I may have been a little harsh on Judge Grant-the issues were more minor than I first thought”. Or even “oops, it looks like Judge Grant may not be fined”. No. She tried to Scrub the Record. Eliminate it from the Ether. Take it out of the Tubes.
Not cool. I mean, I don’t know how many people visit the Update, but I imagine that it’s quite a few by Columbia County standards and they are most likely local people interested in local races. And how many people saw the first iteration of that letter and never saw the second (since by this time it was three pages back in the letter section) and they certainly did not see any kind of correction or retraction.
So I wrote to Bill that I thought “omission is not a retraction, it’s Orwellian”. I’ll amend that statement here. “This act of omission is neither a retraction nor a clarification. It is Orwellian.” Bill was kind enough to post my letter on the Update as well as Tammy’s response.
Here is that response:
Bill,
Please print this on the update!
Regarding my letter posted on the update concerning
Jennifer Grant, FIRST: I was correct in my research, correct in the fact
that Jennifer Grant’s campaign was late on several transactions, ID. #
357238 date 5-5-08 not filed until 07-22-08 and ID.# 357239 6-9-08 not filed
until 7-22-08. That was the information that I found and the State of
Elections confirmed with me, before I wrote the letter. I called and talked
to the state elections twice before drafting my letter, I WAS told that
there would be fines on about 5 Id. transactions but it would not happen for
about two years because the state was so far behind. In fact they are
working on 2004 as we speak, Then after I wrote the letter I was called by
Vernonia’s newspaper and was questioned about my letter, so I called the
state again and was told that they had made a mistake on 3 id.#’s
Transactions. But there was still 2 that was going to be fined, then I was
told that the amount was small, only a few dollars on each transaction.I then talked to the Vernonia paper again because there was a mention of an
amendment and I wanted to make sure what that was, so I once again called
the state elections and got a different person. this was 4 different people
that I had talked to in the course of gathering research and writing the
letter. and calling them back, this lady told me that yes. there was 2 late
transactions the amount was only a few dollars, and that the state may not
give out fines, this was all new to me because if you read the elections
rule book and regulations they talk about fines, the other ladies also said
there would be fines given at a later date,I decide to remove the letter because the fines were so small, and thought
that it would be nick picking for such a small amount and not worth
mentioning, a few dollars on each ID. #. my information was FACTUCAL, I will
not make a retraction. Grants campaign submitted late transactions, clearly
outlined by the Ore Star manual, they did not follow the rules and
regulations, the facts are, Jennifer Grants campaign did not follow the
regulations and they did break the state elections law by not getting their
transactions in on time.I just called the state elections one more time and I talked to a lady named
Candy, I ask Candy if late transactions were going to be excused she said no
she had not heard that, I ask her if the late transactions could be amended
she said no if they are late they are late, I ask her if it violated
election rules and regulations she said yes, I ask her if because the Ore
Star was new if that excused the campaigns from the rules she said no. I ask
her if the treasure or secretary of a campaign was a volunteer if the were
excused from the rules and regulations she said no
Please send this on to Bob, I stand by my research and my letter, BOB
please put my respond on to your web site as well.TAMMY
Tammy-consider your letter posted. But I want to point to the origin of this whole kerfluffle.
Item #357238 is a miscellaneous cash contribution for $100.
Item #357239 is an in-kind contribution from Judge Grant’s husband, Charles, for $92.
$192.
Not quite the Scandal Of Massive Misdeeds I had been expecting.
I am by no means an expert on ORESTAR, but it seems pretty straight forward. It’s simply a searchable database, where you can look at the organizational and financial records of a campaign or candidate. On the financial side, each contribution or expenditure has a number. In the case of Judge Grant, there are 2 pages of transactions, with what looks to be 50 transactions on each page. Each transaction has an ID number, the transaction date, who it was for (in this case, The Committee to Retain Judge Grant), the contributor or payee (any contributions less than $100 can be submitted as “miscellaneous”) and the amount. To actually see any real information about the transaction, you have to click on the ID number and go to it’s “page”. That is where you would see any information about a transaction being late. Now maybe there is an easier way to do this, and I’m sure I’ll hear about it if there is, but it looks like someone would have to go through every one of the 100 transactions one by one to find the late ones.
That seems like a LOT of work.
For $192.
Now, I’m not saying that the Committee To Retain Judge Grant did not make mistakes in submitting these transactions late-it obviously did-but I am saying that Judge Grant did not break the law and will not get fined.
And I am saying that when Tammy realized that she screwed up, she did not try to correct the record, she tried to expunge it.
And I am saying that it looks to me that a supporter of David Herr did a lot of work try to smear Judge Grant and that, in my opinion, that does not reflect well on David Herr.
I realize that this is already too long (am I starting a pattern here?), but since I started on this post, events have conspired to, um, make it longer. I received this from Tammy (note that Tammy’s questions are on the bottom the SOS’s answers are on top):
Tammy,
Thank you for contacting our office via email with your questions regarding
campaign finance regulations. The answers are below:1. All late or insufficient transactions (filed on or after July 1, 2007)
will be examined by the Elections Division to determine if they are indeed
late or insufficient, which may result in a civil penalty being issued.2. See answer to number 1 above.
3. No, a treasurer and candidate both attest to their understanding of
liability for any penalties imposed under ORS Chapter 260 when they sign or
electronically file the statement of organization; it makes no difference if
the person is a volunteer.4. See the answer to question 4 above.
5. The Elections Division under state law and the 2008 Campaign Finance
Manual (CFM), adopted by administrative rule, is required to propose civil
penalties for late and insufficient transactions. The CFM (pages 70 - 73)
discusses Enforcement Actions; there are mitigating circumstances which the
Elections Division can consider in reducing or waiving a penalty for a late
or insufficient transaction - see pg 72 of the CFM.6. Yes, failure to file a timely transaction or to fix an insufficient
transaction by the deadline stipulated in an exam letter is considered a
violation of Oregon Election law.>>> “Tammy Maygra” ……. 10/13/2008 5:12:04 PM >>>
Hi,
I would appreciate some information concerning Ore Star and election rules,
regulations, and laws.1. Is the State Elections Division going to forgive campaigns or candidates
that have been late in reporting campaign transactions?2. On transactions that fall under regulations that if late warrant fines,
will the elections dept. not impose the fines at all?3. Does the State of Election’s give leeway to campaigns that use volunteers
in treasure or secretary roles, in other words excuse mistakes by the
volunteers in their reporting to the state elections dept. other than the
regular items/issues that fall under the amendment category?4. If the volunteer sends the transactions in late will the state let it go
because the person is a volunteer and not familiar with the Ore Star system?5. Is the elections dept going to forgive all the candidates and their
campaigns mistakes this year because they are not familiar with the Ore Star
system?6. If a candidate or campaign fails to follow the rules and regulations set
forth by the state elections do you consider this a violation of election
laws?Best Regards,
Tammy Maygra
Tammy- these are very general questions but we’re talking about a very specific issue. Here is what you get from the SOS office when you ask more specific questions:
Good Afternoon,
After reading the history of this series of emails, I would like to reaffirm that the Committee to Retain Judge Grant has amended any insufficiency identified within the exam letters sent to the committee in regard to the transactions the committee has filed.
As Jennifer Hertel states in her email response to Tammy Maygra, if a transaction is filed late or if there are insufficiencies with a transaction a civil penalty MAY be accessed. Additionally, it is the practice of this office that if a civil penalty is calculated $50.00 or under this office will not collect the penalty.
It is not uncommon for committee to receive insufficient exam notices. The committee is given a set amount of time to amend the insufficiency and if the requested information is filed by the amendment dealine and is deemed sufficient, the transaction is considered sufficient and there is not penalty.
If there is any additional information I can provide please let me know.
Thanks,
Jan
Sigh.
Measure 5-191; Drivin’ Me Crazy Edition
In my last post dealing with measures 5-190/191, I never even got to 5-191 because there are so many things wrong with 5-190 that I fried my brain pointing out some of them (just some-if you have others, post a comment and let me know. I’m sure I’ve only scratched the surface!). It also ran pretty long, because I added my scans of both measures plus the applicable Oregon state law. I won’t put you through that again-you can see those scans (and read the post) here. I’m so done with 5-190. For now.
Let’s look at 5-191.
Remember, both of these measures apply to Columbia County only.
Measure 5-191 would require construction companies to post a sign at their site proclaiming “Legal Workers Only” and…well, let’s just take a look at the text.
- That a “punitive charge” of $10,000 would be added to the cost of a construction permit if any undocumented workers were found to have worked on the site.
- That a “stop work order” would go into effect until:
1. The punitive charge was paid; and
2. All undocumented workers were removed from the site.- The telephone numbers of the Building Department, Sheriff’s Office, and new 800 number of the Social Security verification pilot project would also be part of the sign.
- Specifications of the sign would be 4 foot by 8 foot three quarter-inch plywood with words in minimum four inch high bold print.
Now, I don’t think that the Building Department can do much about what might very well be an anonymous phone call complaining about the skin color of some of the workers. It’s not their job. So the call has to be directed to the Sheriff’s Office. And I’ve talked about how it would be illegal for the Sheriff’s Office to get involved because of ORS 181-850, so let’s talk about this:
the new 800 number of the Social Security verification pilot project would also be part of the sign
Now, the closest thing that I could find in all my googling is the Basic Pilot Program, also known as the Basic Pilot/Employment Eligibility Verification Program. It is now known as the E-Verify program, run by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) using Social Security Administration (SSA) information and overseen by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
So, I’m going to go out on a limb here, since nobody seems to be able to tell me exactly what the measure refers to, and assume that E-Verify is what they’re talking about.
This is the first of several problems; The law doesn’t seem to have the correct name of the program-if that’s the program they’re referring to. That means that after the election (should it pass), the first thing that would have to be done is that the law will have to be changed (how would this happen? Could the Columbia County council do it, or would we need a new election? Most likely a judge will require the law to be changed-or scrapped). I’m saying this because there are going to be lawsuits the moment the law gets passed. Which the county will have to defend (probably from general funds). At least that’s what I would do: Sue the County’s ass off the moment they told me I had to put this stupid sign up. Then I’d make ‘em pay my legal bills.
Problem number 2; E-Verify is voluntary. Not every company uses it. In fact, according to Willamette Week, Gordon Smith’s company, Smith’s Frozen Foods, doesn’t even use it. Why? Well, it turns out that they didn’t like the Program very much. Again, why? Well, that brings us to …
Problem number 3; The Social Security database is notoriously inaccurate. According to it’s own Inspector General, the;
SSA’s Office of Inspector General that found that there are 17.8 million discrepancies in the SSA’s records relating to lawful American workers. The report also found that 70 percent or 12.7 million of those inconsistencies belong to native-born (as opposed to naturalized) U.S. citizens.
Wow. That’s a lot of “discrepencies” for “lawful American workers”. And most of them seem to be related to “natural-born U.S. citizens” . According to the SSA IG (15 page report, but really cool if your a dork like I am) there are 435 million SS numbers in the database (the DHS has it at 444 million and the USCIS has it at 425 million. They can’t even agree on the number of people, or numidents as they’re called, that they’re tracking). So, lets use the IG’s numbers. They translate into a 4.1% error rate overall and 2.9% for a guy like me-born in The Good Ole, Good Ole with a funny French name. A 3% chance that you won’t get hired because of a bureaucratic mistake? I’ll leave that to your imagination. The IG even warned against making the law mandatory because;
As Congress considers legislation requiring mandatory verification of all U.S. workers’ employment eligibility through a system such as the Basic Pilot, we believe it should also consider the significant workload that may result from the millions of numberholders whose Numident records may need to be corrected. Our review showed that the Numident records for these individuals have discrepancies in the numberholders’ names, dates of birth, citizenship status and/or death indications that would result in inaccurate feedback from the Basic Pilot.
Of course, all this is really a moot point because the E-Verify law stipulates that it can only be used to vet new employees, not existing workers.
That’s Federal, folks. And although I only had a public education, not private or homeschooling, I think I remember something about Federal law trumping County law. If so, that makes the whole imperfect plan illegal.
One more thing about E-Verify: By definition, it’s internet only. I couldn’t find the 800 number. I did find a bunch of other cool 800 numbers, but they cost $1.99 a minute and I learned that lesson in the seventh grade…
In doing the research on these two measures, I’ve come across a lot of information that I haven’t even touched upon. Look for my next post on the cost of all this for other municipalities and what it might cost Columbia County, as well as the Arizona law which 5-190, at least, seems to be cut and pasted from. I’m also starting to get a grasp on Immigration law (Federal, not, County). It’s something I’ve never really paid attention to, but it’s becoming too important to ignore. These local laws, as insidious and divisive as they may be, would not be an issue if the Feds would get their shit together. And that means everything from immigration reform to border control to foreign policy to trade policy (let’s talk NAFTA, CAFTA and WTO).
One last thing. In my last post on these measures, I didn’t give props to some people that are really fighting the Good Fight-That’s the Columbia County Citizens for Human Dignity.
Go over and check out their site…
Retain Judge Grant!
Well, we did it! WuHu! (get it? David Wu? HaHa…heh…heh..meh…oh well…). Circuit Court Judge Jenefer Grant now has a Fancy Dancy web site up, Designed by yours truly! It’s retainjudgegrant.com -you can follow this link or the one under Columbia County Sites and check it out. I think it looks pretty good.
And be sure to check out the Donate page and show her some love!
Judge grant is a strong progressive voice on the Circuit Court and one we need on the bench. I have more time than money (but I did throw some money her way, mostly in the form of buying the software to write the website), so I did this instead. She’s up against a ‘good ole boy’ conservative (you know, like Antonin Scalia, John Roberts or Clarence Thomas) that does NOT have your interests at heart! If you want to help Judge Grant out you can donate or volunteer (there’s a contact button on her website) or just give her some props.
In any event, check out her website.
And vote.
Ballot Measures 5-190 and 5-191
First, let me apologize for being away for so long. I’ve been working on a local (nonpartisan) campaign’s website-Hooboy! I didn’t know what I was getting into there! But hey, in the last month I’ve learned html, xhtml and css. Programming languages. It was like learning Latin and Greek, then realizing that you really needed to know French. I now know enough about all three to insult the locals while trying ask for directions to a restaurant LOL! The website will be live in a few days-I’ll keep you informed.
Now-on to my post:
So Wayne Mayo’s got his two anti-immigrant measures on the November ballot, by turning in the required number of signatures.
There are so many things wrong with these measures, on so many levels, that I’ve had a hard time even starting to write about it.
I’m Serious, Damn It!
The reasons extend to Hazelton, Pennsylvania and Riverside, New Jersey, to Arizona and south of the border; Mexico, South and Central America. The reasons extend to the federal government and the courts and it looks like the Supremes will have the final say on issues like this. The reasons also extend to Oregon state law.
Let’s start there, shall we? I’ll expand on the other issues in later posts. It’s the only way I can keep it all straight.
And please bear with me-I want you to see the scans of the documents that I picked up from the Columbia County clerk. The first 2 pages are Ballot Measure 5-190 (the Ballot Title was changed). The third page is Ballot Measure 5-191. These are what will be on the ballot in November. The last page is the applicable state law. You can skip down to the bottom for my (layman) analysis (or you can read them all, but that makes you as big a dork as I am).
Sigh. So where the hell do I start with this?
I guess I’ll start with this; from Ballot Measure 5-190:
The “county attorney” would investigate complaints as directed by the measure.
Just what the hell is the “county attorney”? Again, I’m just a guy, but for the life of me, I can’t find a “county attorney”! There’s a District Attorney and I’m sure there’s plenty of lawyers that advise the county on the legalities of what they want to do or not do, but what’s the “county attorney”? I guess nobody else knows either, since they actually had to “qualify” the term with “quotation marks”. Color me confused.
And then there’s the very next sentence:
Any action brought against any employer will require notifying the federal government and local law enforcement.
O.K., so that’s a little more clear. Our mythical county attorney notifies-um-ICE? Or the FBI? How about FEMA, because this IS a disaster waiting to happen. The “county Stazi Guy attorney” also has to notify “local law enforcement”.
Ouch. It seems that at this point measure 5-190 runs smack-dab into ORS 181.850:
(1) No law enforcement agency of the State of Oregon or of any political subdivision of the state shall use agency moneys, equipment or personnel for the purpose of detecting or apprehending persons whose only violation of law is that they are persons of foreign citizenship present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws.
So, what’s a local law enforcer to do? My guess is absolutely nothing. Oregon law is pretty clear on this. The cops can’t go after somebody simply because they’re here illegally. They have to break another law first (anything-from spittin’ on the sidewalk to murder-but a law has to be broken).
To put it another way, a cop has to have a reason to pull you over, even if he has to make it up (this has happened to me; I was followed by one of Our Finest and finally pulled over because my license plate was “registered to a Ford pickup”. When I objected (I bought my truck new and had just reregistered), I was told to “stay calm” and, after checking my license, registration and insurance, I was left to go on my merry way, with an apology. I think they were actually looking for drunk drivers-I was coming home from the late shift and it was 2am.The point is this: if I had been drunk, I’m sure I would have gotten a dui, even though the reason for pulling me over was bullshit! But I digress. Let’s get back to our analysis, shall we?)
By the way, if the “county attorney” is the District Attorney, then he’s “law enforcement”. And if it’s just our local Stazi Guy being payed out of the funds that normally pay for your roads, water, sewer, schools, etc because;
This program would funded by the county’s general fund
I’d still have to say this is law enforcement. Only, it’s coming out of other vital services, so, which service do you want to cut to hunt down those waskuwy iweegal awiens? Wayne seems to be trying to weasel around ORS 181.850, but I’m just not seeing it.
Then there’s this:
The county commission would be required to hold hearings on violations.
Huh? Is the county commission a court? Will they mete out punishment? If not, then what’s the sense of having them hold hearings?
Wayne, Wayne, Wayne! Don’t you believe in efficient government? ’cause this ain’t the way to get there. This is a dozen lawsuits waiting to happen.
I mean, let’s back track to the first sentence of 5-190’s Statement and look at this:
This measure would make it illegal for any employer to knowingly or intentionally hire unauthorized aliens
“Any employer”. Part of Wayne’s spiel is that these ballot measures apply only to construction sites. Maybe 5-191 does, but this is what ballot measure 5-190 says. “Any employer”.
That means any of our local nurseries. That means any of our other local businesses. That means that if I am not satisfied with a meal at any one of our fine dining establishments and I notice what I think is an “illegal” in the kitchen, I can turn them in! And the restaurant have to prove that the “illegal” is really “legal” and that they did not “knowingly or intentionally hire unauthorized aliens”-that is, unless they sue the county for breaking Oregon State law! Me, I’d sue the county’s ass off and I’d win. It also means that if I’m pissed off at a certain construction company, because they are more efficient and professional than I am, I can make an anonymous phone call and shut them down because;
The measure sets out a system of penalties. These include fines of up to $10,000, suspension of licenses and suspensions of building permits.
So, if you’re a business, and you get “the call” informing you that someone has complained about you having brown people working, whacha gonna do? Me, I’d sue the county’s ass off. And I’d win.
One last thing. I’ve talked to several business people and they’ve all mentioned the same thing-that federal law is very clear: you can’t give out an employee’s information without a court order (a warrant?). So that means our “County Stazi Guy Attorney” has to go to court and get a warrant for the employee’s info based on the fact that someone doesn’t like the look of him (or her). Would a judge grant this? I don’t know. But I’d sue the county’s ass off. And I’d win.
I intended to write about measure 5-191, but I’ll do that in my next post. This is too long already (and I’ve only scratched the surface). I haven’t even gotten to what’s happening in Arizona, or how much this kind of law has cost Hazelton, Pa and Riverside, New Jersey, in both business and budget…or…or..damn, there’s just so much. Let me work on it.