Dead gerrymandering architect's files

[pat]

Isn't Oregon the state founded on "no black people"?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_black_exclusion_laws

 

Tell us @TitanDuckFan what makes Oregon go.

[heyitsmeallen]

2 hours ago, TitanDuckFan said:

You have no fucking idea what makes this state go, so sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up.

And your math skills suck bong-boy.

 

You small-minded dictatorial statist pricks would just love to tell the rest of the world how to live, and would punish those who find ways to live their best life in spite of you, if you could.

Nobody doubts that young people will change this world once we are gone.

 

The question is, how much will be worth living for when you're done with your "changes?"

 

Not much I suspect.  But hey, "less is more" right Mr Orwell?

 

You want cap and trade, get it passed in your own state.

Then you can explain to the world how great it is.

Triggered

 

You can get mad all you want, and name call all you want.  But your party and your senator are the ones that threatened to kill police if they tried to make them do their jobs. These pussies should lose their seats regardless of which party they support,   btw my math doesn’t suck. You said Dems wanted the cost raised by over $600 a year.... there are 52.143 weeks in a year. That equals to 11.50 a month. Forgive me for rounding up by .50¢. I figured it was ok since you said the number was OVER $600. Btw, i’m an independent and it’s honestly sad to me looking at the current state of the GOP. I don’t think they will recover. In 20+ years the party will be dead. Without gerrymandering Trump loses by over 2.5million votes. Its the only way the GOP can win any election(even one at the local level) because the country is farrrr more liberal than you think. And btw I know exactly what runs Oregon’s economy it’s agriculture and my bongs.

[Rogue]

7 hours ago, TitanDuckFan said:

There's way more to it than that.

The dumbocrats running this state intend to be the next Kalifornia, even if it bankrupts every citizen here, with their punitive carbon tax scheme.

 

They already passed a business tax based on revenues instead of net, so companies already bailing out, and now the Dems want to increase the cost of living by over $600/household annually, and see if they can put the farmers and logging companies out of business.

 

Oh, and that gambit of leaving the capitol to prevent the necessary quorum to legally pass a bill?

Governor Kate Brown and her dumbocrat pals did that exact same thing in 2002 when they didn't like a bill.

This is nothing new, and not illegal here.

Katie just thinks she can strap on her Jack-Boots and force the Repulicans back.

 

Good luck.

Okay, so Democrats blah, blah blah...and should we remind ourselves elected Democrats....you are defending the alleged sentiment of this Boquist guy because of your elected government? 

 

 

[TitanDuckFan]

36 minutes ago, heyitsmeallen said:

Triggered

 

You can get mad all you want, and name call all you want.  But your party and your senator are the ones that threatened to kill police if they tried to make them do their jobs. These pussies should lose their seats regardless of which party they support,   btw my math doesn’t suck. You said Dems wanted the cost raised by over $600 a year.... there are 52.143 weeks in a year. That equals to 11.50 a month. Forgive me for rounding up by .50¢. I figured it was ok since you said the number was OVER $600. Btw, i’m an independent and it’s honestly sad to me looking at the current state of the GOP. I don’t think they will recover. In 20+ years the party will be dead. Without gerrymandering Trump loses by over 2.5million votes. Its the only way the GOP can win any election(even one at the local level) because the country is farrrr more liberal than you think. And btw I know exactly what runs Oregon’s economy it’s agriculture and my bongs.

Hey bong-boy, there's only 12 months in a year, take your weekly $11.50/wk and multiply it by 4.34525 to get months.

Or do it the easy way and divide 600 by 12.  $50/month.  Dumbass.

 

Now, as for MY state senator doing his job,...  He's doing it.

Republicans and independents in his district elected him to NOT vote for a state Cap & Trade law, so he is representing his constituency in the only effective way left to him.  We didn't elect him to cave to dumbocrat whims to punish businesses.  The Dems wouldn't negotiate, and they wouldn't compromise.  It was their way or the highway.  Their choice.

And the Dems want to pass it with an emergency clause.  In the State of Oregon that means it can't be repealed by popular vote.  So the dumbocrats are trying to override your precious democratic principals, believing they know better.

So he took the highway outta town, like he should have, denying them their quorum.

Dirty politics?  No dirtier than the Dems are practicing now, and have done in the past.

 

Any other dumbass ideas bong-boy?

[TitanDuckFan]

1 hour ago, patsplat said:

Isn't Oregon the state founded on "no black people"?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_black_exclusion_laws

 

Tell us @TitanDuckFan what makes Oregon go.

Racist democrats.

[TitanDuckFan]

21 minutes ago, Rogue said:

Okay, so Democrats blah, blah blah...and should we remind ourselves elected Democrats....you are defending the alleged sentiment of this Boquist guy because of your elected government?

Yes.

He doesn't represent the entire state.  He was elected to represent his state senate district.

 

You do know how state legislatures work, right?

 

[Rogue]

6 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

Yes.

He doesn't represent the entire state.  He was elected to represent his state senate district.

 

You do know how state legislatures work, right?

 

So you are okay with him killing those that might arrest him?  Let's be clear here. 

[Titans279]

16 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

Now, as for MY state senator doing his job,...  He's doing it.

Republicans and independents in his district elected him to NOT vote for a state Cap & Trade law, so he is representing his constituency in the only effective way left to him.  We didn't elect him to cave to dumbocrat whims to punish businesses.  The Dems wouldn't negotiate, and they wouldn't compromise.  It was their way or the highway.  Their choice.

 

And the Dems want to pass it with an emergency clause.  In the State of Oregon that means it can't be repealed by popular vote.  So the dumbocrats are trying to override your precious democratic principals, believing they know better.

 

 

Lol so unless a party controls 20/30 seats in Oregon the minority party should just not show up to stop the other party from passing any bills they don't like.

 

Also you apparently don't know your own state's rules.

 

Quote

“The reason for the emergency clause is to keep the public from voting on it,” Girod said.

 

Contrary to that rhetoric, the emergency clause doesn’t preempt voters from weighing in — it just makes things harder. Under state law, opponents could still seek to upend the law via an initiative petition asking voters to throw it out. That would allow opponents to craft the text of their initiative, but would require them to collect more than 35,000 additional valid signatures compared to the referendum process.

https://www.opb.org/news/article/oregon-senate-walkout-cap-trade-climate-bill/

[TitanDuckFan]

10 hours ago, Titans279 said:

 

Lol so unless a party controls 20/30 seats in Oregon the minority party should just not show up to stop the other party from passing any bills they don't like.

 

Also you apparently don't know your own state's rules.

 

https://www.opb.org/news/article/oregon-senate-walkout-cap-trade-climate-bill/

I don't know where OPB got that tidbit, but it's wrong.  A referendum to block a law can only be used on laws that did not become effective within 90 days of the end of the legislative session.

Per Article IV, Sec 1,3(a) of the Oregon constitution:

https://ballotpedia.org/Article_IV,_Oregon_Constitution

Quote

(3)(a) The people reserve to themselves the referendum power, which is to approve or reject at an election any Act, or part thereof, of the Legislative Assembly that does not become effective earlier than 90 days after the end of the session at which the Act is passed.

The emergency clause allows the Governor to sign the bill into law making it effective immediately, and precluding the 90 day window for the referendum initiative process to take place.

[Titans279]

2 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

I don't know where OPB got that tidbit, but it's wrong.  A referendum to block a law can only be used on laws that did not become effective within 90 days of the end of the legislative session.

Per Article IV, Sec 1,3(a) of the Oregon constitution:

https://ballotpedia.org/Article_IV,_Oregon_Constitution

The emergency clause allows the Governor to sign the bill into law making it effective immediately, and precluding the 90 day window for the referendum initiative process to take place.

No, it says instead of directly referring it to the ballot they can write an initiative petition to repeal the law.

 

It takes extra work of writing the petition and gathering 35,000 signatures but the law is not untouchable. If people are this angry getting those signatures shouldn’t be hard. 

[TitanDuckFan]

2 hours ago, Titans279 said:

No, it says instead of directly referring it to the ballot they can write an initiative petition to repeal the law.

 

It takes extra work of writing the petition and gathering 35,000 signatures but the law is not untouchable. If people are this angry getting those signatures shouldn’t be hard. 

Wrong.  Removing a law passed by the legislature and signed by the Gov requires a referendum in the state of Oregon.

https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Documents/stateIR.pdf

 

 

Quote

Referendum Process

A referendum petition allows voters to adopt or reject a ny nonemergency

Act or portion of a nonemergency Act passed by the legislature that becomes law through approval or nonaction of

the Governor.

 

From the Sec of State's page:

https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Pages/statelaw.aspx

 

Quote

Filing a Statewide Referendum

A prospective referendum petition may only be filed when a nonemergency bill becomes an act. A bill becomes an act when it has either been signed into law by the governor or the deadline has passed for the bill to be signed or vetoed by the governor.

The Dems know this, and that's why they're attempting to pass it with an emergency clause.

They don't want it subject to the democratic process directly.

Edited June 23, 2019 by TitanDuckFan

[Titans279]

9 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

Wrong.  Removing a law passed by the legislature and signed by the Gov requires a referendum in the state of Oregon.

https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Pages/statelaw.aspx

 

The Dems know this, and that's why they're attempting to pass it with an emergency clause.

Lol. You are wrong. You are reading the part about a referendum. They can still use an initiative petition to repeal the bill.

 

That page is about 3 separate things: IP's, referendums, and referrals.

 

What you are quoting is about referendums. That is correct. An emergency bill cannot use the referendum process.

 

While emergency bills cannot be put up for a referendum, you can still use the IP procedure (which is 100% a separate process) to put something on the ballot to repeal this bill. This does require them to write an actual initiative to repeal the bill and does require more signatures than the referendum process, but it will still result in the bill being put before voters on the ballot.

Edited June 23, 2019 by Titans279

[TitanDuckFan]

7 minutes ago, Titans279 said:

Lol. You are wrong. You are reading the part about a referendum. They can still use an initiative petition to repeal the bill.

 

That page is about 3 separate things: IP's, referendums, and referrals.

 

What you are quoting is about referendums. That is correct. An emergency bill cannot use the referendum process.

 

While emergency bills cannot be put up for a referendum, but you can still use the IP procedure (which is 100% a separate process) to put something on the ballot to repeal this bill. This does require them to write an actual initiative to repeal the bill and does require more signatures than the referendum process, but it will still result in the bill being put before voters on the ballot.

Well, I've posted the Secretary of State's page, the Oregon constitution, and the Initiative/Referendum application forms PDF, so if you can find anywhere in those 3 documents where a repeal can be accomplished by an initiative, go for it.

Post the link. 

 

 

[Titans279]

2 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

Well, I've posted the Secretary of State's page, the Oregon constitution, and the Initiative/Referendum application forms PDF, so if you can find anywhere in those 3 documents where a repeal can be accomplished by an initiative, go for it.

Post the link. 

 

 

So.

 

I Googled "oregon initiative to repeal"

 

and this was the first result: https://ballotpedia.org/Oregon_Measure_105,_Repeal_Sanctuary_State_Law_Initiative_(2018)

 

I'm guessing you voted less than a year ago for Measure 105 to repeal Oregon's Sanctuary City law, no?

[CreepingDeath]

18 hours ago, Rogue said:

So you are okay with him killing those that might arrest him?  Let's be clear here. 

Yes, @TitanDuckFan is okay with him killing those that might arrest him.  Cons love to pretend to be blind to straightforward questions that might get them in trouble with their masters or humanity.