Document text
46 °F Forecast | Road Cams Sunday, February 15, 2004 Today's News | Classifieds | Autos | Homes | Jobs | Tempo | Health | Community | Home Delivery SECTIONS Home Page Local News Sports Business Obituaries Life Opinion - Politics AP News Weather Classified Archives Site Map EXTRA Newspaper in Education Personals Movie Times TV Times E The People CLASSIFIEDS Find a Car Find a Home Find a Job Find a Rental Place an ad eSouthernOregon Automotive Communities Entertainment Publications Recreation Calendar CUSTOMER SERVICE Frequent Questions Advertising Information Home Delivery Employment Contact Us Media Kit Network Affiliate Email Story to a Friend January 4, 2004 Voices of the Vote: Despite differences on Measure 30, shared values unite region By JONEL ALECCIA Mail Tribune As Oregon approaches the latest ballot battle over government services and the taxes that pay for them, local leaders on both sides of the Legislature’s $800 million tax increase concede that common ground binds us after all. Love of the land, community connections, a sense that personal involvement can still make a difference topped a list of shared values in a recent Mail Tribune survey of Southern Oregon business, political and social leaders. Equally strong was a shared commitment to a secure future for the state’s children and a demand for government that’s both responsive to vulnerable people and accountable to taxpayers. "(There’s) a strong desire to see good business practices put into effect to make sure that our dollars are well-allocated and well-spent," observed Lyn Hennion, 60, of Jacksonville, vice president with Strand, Atkinson, Williams & York in Medford. Exactly how we get there is another matter entirely, survey participants said. Advertisement The very existence of Measure 30, the referendum aimed at overturning a Legislative tax increase in a Feb. 3 special election, indicates a clash of values that has split the state. "Ballot Measure 30 is a last-ditch kind of response to overspending irresponsibly," wrote Bryan Platt, 50, of Eagle Point, owner of a Medford upholstery business and chairman of the Jackson County Republican Party. "It is the civil version of taxpayer revolt." The Legislature approved the tax plan last summer as a compromise to balance the state’s $11.5 billion budget after a stormy session rocked by a $2 billion loss in revenue. Opponents immediately set to work to overturn it. Proponents argue that the increase is vital now to avoid devastating cuts to schools, social services and public safety programs. They contend that it’s a small, widely shared increase that shifts more revenue responsibility onto corporations and avoids the financial and human costs of cuts to public services. "I think the Legislature did its best to create a budget plan that we could afford and need this biennium," wrote Bill Thorndike, 50, president of Medford Fabrication and the Oregon Community Foundation board of directors. "The tax increases are modest and spread the costs as widely as possible with our current revenue system. The effect of a decade of voter initiatives and referendums has come home to roost and we now must work through our priorities and funding choices." At best, the tax increase will provide a short-term fix while long-term solutions are considered, backers say. "Passage of the measure would provide the state with a breather, as the Legislature would still need to address the overhaul of the tax code," wrote Judy Barr, 62, a retired health care executive. In the meantime, schools would remain open, vulnerable people would receive health care and social services, courts could serve legal clients and public safety programs would be maintained. Opponents, however, argue that the short-term solution simply postpones, once again, the state’s duty to grapple with difficult fiscal issues. "The most obvious effect of the passage will be a state government that does not recognize its duty to limit spending and growth," wrote Steve Plunk, 43, owner of a Medford trucking firm. "We can expect further double-digit growth until we again find ourselves facing budget shortfalls and more tax increases. State representatives and senators will read the support as a mandate for more spending and bigger government. Failure will have little impact other than a gnashing of teeth coupled with doomsday predictions for the schools, the poor and the ill." At the heart of the debate is a fundamental disagreement over the role of government in society, wrote Hennion, who supports the measure, but with reservations. "I think the Legislature needs to examine just what responsibilities really belong to the state and which would be handled better at the federal or local levels (not that they have money, either!) or by private business or non-profits," she wrote. "This would require putting aside special interests completely, making some extremely tough calls, and a whole lot of time � so what are the chances?" Underlying the disagreement about government’s role are powerful emotions � chiefly fear, anger and resentment � that prompt voters’ personal decisions, respondents wrote. These emotions are the reason opponents of the tax increase collected nearly three times as many valid signatures as necessary, backers contend."There’s anger because the implications of Oregon’s economy failing are huge ...," Platt wrote. "Fear because most of us don’t have unlimited resources to just pay the ‘small’ additional tax that the surcharge represents � we just don’t have the money. Resentment � it is hard not to feel that the little guy is not being heard in this debate." That individual sense of powerlessness is often exploited, leading to a shared feeling that "special interests are running the state for their own, not the public interest," wrote Jeff Golden, 53, an Ashland radio pundit and former Jackson County commissioner. "I think that people would take virtually any opportunity offered to vote against ‘government’ these days, and that raw material of that resentment is harnessed by corporate- sponsored entities with a very specific and rational interest in rolling back their taxation." Nearly all respondents to the values survey expected the Feb. 3 measure to fail, either narrowly or by a large margin. Beyond the vote, most community leaders called for fundamental changes in the state’s taxation system. "The current income tax-weighted system results in all taxpayers paying too much in good times and in my opinion too little in poor times," wrote Thorndike, who called for the "fractured middle of Oregon" to realign itself. "My view is that there is a three-way split in the middle that must be overcome by better understanding of public needs to be met with tax revenue and a coalescing around solutions that a majority of Oregonians are willing to accept." Reach reporter JoNel Aleccia at 776-4465, or e-mail [email protected] Mail Tribune Home Local News | Sports | Business | Obituaries | Life Opinion - Politics | AP News | Archives | Site Map E Southern Oregon | Classified Copyright © 1997-2004 Mail Tribune. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions Website Feedback 3 WEEKS FREE! ADVERTISERS A D V E R T I S E R S RESOURCES Oregon Road Conditions & Cams SPECIAL SECTIONS Auto Finder Job Finder Home Finder Joy Magazine Homelife Magazine Tempo Readers' Choice Real Estate Showcase Since We Asked Food for Thought Wellness Connection Outdoor Journal Moving to Southern Oregon? Volunteer Opportunities Prime Times