Phil Barnhart
State Representative
Central Lane and Linn Counties
If you oppose Ballot Measure 30 even though you understand Oregon’s fiscal situation, and you honestly believe we cannot afford the basic programs that will go away if voters reject Measure 30, then you and I have no bones to pick. We simply have an honest difference of opinion. On the other hand, if you think we can avoid those cuts even if we kill the Measure, please read on.
In a recent Oregonian commentary, the leading opponent of Measure 30 said, “. . . between 1989 and 2003 Oregon’s general fund budget increased an astonishing 151 percent, faster than any other state.” The truth lies in what he didn’t say. During that same 14-year period, Oregon’s voters reduced school property taxes substantially by passing Measure 5 and Measure 47, sending most of the tax savings to property-rich businesses.
Consequently, the state had no choice but to pay for schools with general fund money, which accounts for virtually all the increase. The whole truth looks a lot different than the misleading partial truth.
In the same opinion piece, this prominent opponent said: “The proposed tax increases would permanently cement wasteful indulgences into Oregon’s budget . . .”
Again, the truth lies in what he did not say.
Right-wing Republican legislators have controlled the state budget for a decade. They have had plenty of time to find the “wasteful indulgences.” I can assure you that all legislatorsDemocrats and
Republicans alike have turned over every rock in state government, looking for waste, fraud and abuse. If such “wasteful indulgences” existed, every legislator I know would eagerly root them out and spend the savings on things voters care about: schools and the other important programs that the budget crisis has forced us to cut.
A prime argument that opponents of Measure 30 toss out over and over is, “You must not raise taxes during a recession.” During the recession of the early 1980’s, however, Republican Governor Vic Atiyeh raised taxes, and the economy improved dramatically.
Measure 30 takes the recession into consideration for each individual taxpayer. If you make less, you pay less in taxeswhich minimizes the burden for those least able to pay. Most economists say maintaining critical public programs is much better for a hurting economy than crippling those programs with budget cuts. Many leading business people support Measure 30 because they understand how much the economy will suffer if it goes down. A defeat would deprive our economy of half a billion dollars in economic stimulus to Oregon’s local communitiessalaries for teachers, police, public service workers and private-sector service providers. Instead of enjoying the stimulus of the jobs and the economic activity that this money would provide, we would endure more layoffs of teachers and public employees.
Ask any executive or business owner who faces the challenge of attracting investors and workers to Oregon-based companies: people are wary of any state that shortens the school year, increases class sizes and cuts important academic programs. Public education is absolutely critical to economic growth, because public schools bear the lion’s share of the burden in preparing the workforce that businesses need to expand and prosper. If public schools falter, the economy falters.
Business also casts a wary eye on states that neglect low-income seniors, the unemployed, the disabled and the working poor. No business owner or executive wants to invest in dreary communities where people huddle in misery and hopelessness, where crime runs rampant because the voters have cut police budgets.
Think about these important realities as you cast your vote on Ballot Measure 30..
—
Rep. Phil Barnhart, PO Box 71188 Eugene, OR 97401, [email protected]
541-484-5119.
See http://www.philbarnhart.com for links to more information about the budget and
Measure 30.