Democratic leaders and seal on Monday, decided to drop their attempt to reverse the meaning of a "yes" and a "no" onto tax increases that may go to the voters next year. This means that if the two tax hikes go before the voters next January, voters would have to vote "yes" to be in favor of the tax hikes. In other words, voting "no" would mean a tax increases would be rejected.
Senate Majority Leader Richard Devlin, D-Tualatin and House Majority Leader Mary Nolan, D-Portland, both argued that reversing the meaning of a yes or a no vote on referendums would have made the issue clearer for voters. If voters want to reject the Legislature's handiwork, they said, they should have to vote yes.
It's become heartlessly controversial at this point, said Devlin, so we decided to just go with the current law.
Ballot measure experts however claim that it's easier to persuade voters to vote no on a ballot measure rather than to vote yes.
The two measures that are being proposed by the legislatures, would raise corporate and personal income taxes by $733 million within the next budget cycle. One would raise taxes for individuals with taxable income of more than $125,000 or joint filers of more than $250,000.
If no means yes... and yes means no... so if I don't want new taxes I vote yes? But if I really want something I should actually vote no? It kind of sounds like a game that kids would play called "opposite day."
In unrelated news, "Oregon paychecks lag nation, could shrink"
“Imagine a person who got laid off six months [or a year] ago,” says Paul Ashworth, senior United States economist for consultants Capital Economics. “They’re going to get more and more desperate to get a job and more and more willing to take lower wages as time goes on.”
sigh!
No comments:
Post a Comment