However, if we wanted to ask a question that was more to the point, just exactly why is it so bad to be a Muslim? The evidence is pretty clear that Obama, like a great number of Americans, is a Christian who goes to church on special occasions and when they feel the need. That is the same as a lot of people in this country, and it’s not necessarily bad. Likewise, why is it any better or worse to be a Christian or a Muslim or a follower of some other faith?

My question, one that no one in the media seems to be able to address right now, is just what is so wrong about being a Muslim? Some people are Christians, some are Muslim, some are Buddhists, some are Sikhs or Pagans or Jews or followers of any one of a number of other spiritual systems. The question: Since when did it become an insult to call someone a Muslim? Until we address that, we are just arguing over mindless accusations that detractors of the president seem to want to make to .

Until we can accept one another for who we are, without “hating” someone else merely because of their race or religion, then we are fairly well doomed as a society. And until we can speak of one another (as individuals in a country) without the racial or religious labels, we are truly showing our ignorance. I look at the media reports and see misinformation on both sides of this issue.

Some of these folks are seeing Christians and Muslims as an “either/or” situation. I may offend a few with this description, but not deliberately. Let me explain:

• Both Christians and Muslims believe that one God/Creator made the Earth.
• Both believe that one should worship the Creator on a regular basis.
• Both believe that regular prayer is a benefit to one’s life.
• Both believe in the words of a holy book, that in each case was written by wise men inspired by God, and at a basic level tell similar stories.
• Both holy books tell us how the world was created, how to worship and please God, and how to lead good and ethical lives.
• Both books are full of wisdom to live by.
• Both books have certain passages that could have very bad meanings, depending upon how they are interpreted.  In other words, if taken strictly and literally, and out of context, they both in places direct us to do things that are inappropriate by today’s standards.
• Both books, while for the most part directing us to do good and not to hurt others, have sections that say we might need to fight or kill people to preserve ourselves and our respective religions. In both cases, only those who already have a mind toward violence actually interpret those sections as a call to violence.
• Both religions have regular religious practice, a yearn for peace, a call to be charitable toward others, a call to be charitable toward their church, and a call to take care of ones self and others as their main focus.
• Both have lists of rules one would follow to lead a good and wholesome life.

There are a number of ways that the religions differ, of course. But if you look at those things, you will find that they are in the realm of “method of practice” than in actual dogma. Christianity is different from Islam, but not much more than the way that different sects of Christianity (Catholics, Mormons, Baptists, Protestants, and so on) are different from one another.

I find that many Christians, despite claiming to love their neighbors and claiming to be tolerant toward others, will badmouth the Muslims as bad people.  On the other hand, I have found that a great many Christians will go out of their way to badmouth the practices of their fellow Christians who happen to practice in a different way in a different church.

Yes, this does oversimplify things somewhat. But in the end, in the things that matter, most of the world’s religions are truly not that different from one another. So, why are we demonizing the other religious people so much?  Aren’t we really only arguing over the method of religious practice and some minor doctrinal details, rather than in some really evil difference in what we believe?

Unless we really believe that anyone who doesn’t sit next to us on Sunday morning is the bad guy.

Anyone want to help me out on this?

As we look around today, there are numerous remembrances, both public and private, going on around us.  Whether the commemoration is at the local veterans’ cemetery to remember all of those who served in long-past wars, or whether it is a family gathering to honor a recently-departed loved one, all of those who have died in service deserve our thanks.

This honor should go to our military men and women, whether or not the conflict was “politically correct” at the time.  These people did their duty for our country without questioning the politics of the situation.  We called, and they came.  Then they died.

In most of the past conflicts that our country has been involved in, there has usually been a clear threat to our country.  When the threat had passed, we took steps to withdraw and let our service members get back to a normal life.  In the Revolution, they stood up for us until the threat was over, then we stood them down.  In the World Wars, they came forward to help when there was a clear threat to ourselves and our neighbors.  When the threat was over, we brought them home.

We are currently fighting in two overseas wars.  In one case, in Afghanistan, we are told that we are fighting to keep an enemy from reaching our shores, though I think most Americans would be hard pressed to tell you just how that might happen.  In another case, in Iraq, it has been pretty much shown that we were enticed there on false pretexts, and that our continued involvement there will result in little further gain or protection for the people of our country or for others.  In fact, the military of most other countries have already seen the folly of the situation and have left.

In prior wars that our country has fought, when the job was done, we brought them home to get them out of the path of danger.  If we truly want to honor the brave souls that are fighting for us and who have given our lives for us, we should bring them home and get them out of harm’s way.  Unless our government is not telling us something, our job is done in Iraq.  The highest honor we could give our soldiers would be to bring them home now, so that we don’t have to be mourning their deaths in the future.

We wonder here about Rossi’s motivation for running for the US Senate.  While it appears that he could provide a formidable challenge, it also appears that in Washington State today, it is unlikely that there is enough groundswell against Senator Murray to see that many people voting against her. Senator Murray has served the citizens of Washington admirably for 18 years, and there are no impediments to her continuing to serve well.

However, there is a perceived nationwide trend toward some people thinking the Republicans have a chance to rebound in the November elections.  Despite the fact that the Democratic Party has done a lot of good work toward improving the economy, toward providing affordable healthcare for all, and a number of other matters; some uninformed people will try to blame all of the country’s ills on the Obama Administration.  This, despite the continuing efforts of the Republicans to impede the government, whether or not it makes sense for Americans.

Rossi is clearly not the best candidate for the people of Washington.  Rossi is clearly not even the best Republican for the people of Washington.  However, Rossi the opportunist is looking to take advantage of the possibility that he could be elected simply because he is a Republican.   I suppose I can’t really hold that against the man.  Being a US Senator would be a big prize.  But I would be more tempted to elect the candidate who is willing to work for us.

One motivation that Rossi has to run is not the “Rossi wants to win” angle, but the desire to make reelection difficult for Senator Murray.  Actually, I believe that it is healthy to have an exchange of views during an election.  This, however, presumes that Dino Rossi will actually present some views during the election.

Here is what I will be looking for in this Senate race.  I will look for Patty Murray to present some ideas for what she can accomplish if reelected.  If we are going to have a real debate of the issues, I would expect Rossi to rebut Senator Murray’s ideas, and also to present some ideas of his own for how to govern.  Sadly, I don’t actually expect Rossi to do any of that.

I expect that Dino Rossi will serve up one version after another of “Bad Murray” in the same way that Republicans around the nation have been crying “Bad Obama” without really explaining adequately just what he might be doing wrong.  The Republicans have been lowered to trying to falsely repeat over and over how bad their opponents are, simply hoping that by repeating the mantra enough times, that it will somehow make that true.  This, while at the same time being the major impediment to the Democrats getting things done.

I will be watching Dino Rossi closely.  I will be watching for any sign that he has an original idea for how he will help Americans in general and Washingtonians in particular.  Sadly, my guess is that he will not do this.  He will not have any reasonable ideas.  He will try for an opportunity to slip by and win an election.  He will not bother trying to make America a better place for us to live.

I challenge Dino Rossi to prove me wrong.  I will not be holding my breath waiting.

In Oregon, your Vote-By-Mail ballot must be returned to your County Elections Office by 8:00 PM on Election Day. You may put it in the mail, but it must actually reach the Elections Office by Tuesday the 18th to count. If you are waiting until the weekend or later to cast your vote, you may want to make sure you drop it off in person to make sure your vote counts. Nothing is worse than wanting to vote and not having the ballot get there on time.

Most counties have drop sites where you can deposit your ballot until 8:00PM. You will want to make sure you are actually dropping your ballot at an authorized location. A list of ballot locations can be found here.

In contrast to the November 2009 election, there is no vote for president, nor is there the national hoopla that accompanied that event. Nevertheless, it is important to actually get your vote cast. There is one US Senate seat, all of the US House of Representatives seats, the Oregon Governor, and state legislative races to be decided. Sure, the big election will be in November, but this is your opportunity to choose who will represent you in government in the future. No matter your political leanings, please let your voice be heard.

There are also a couple of ballot measures and a variety of local measures on the ballot throughout the state. It is important that you make your desires heard on these issues, too. While they do not get a lot of statewide press, it is important in the community where you live.

It is very important to take that final step and to actually vote. No one will vote for you. Your vote will count, and many recent local elections have been decided by rather small margins. Do your part. Follow through and vote.

Thank you.

I was a fan of Bradbury, stemming from the work he had done as Oregon’s Secretary of State from 1999 to 2009. He had innovative ideas about running elections in the state, having developed our current vote-by-mail system. This system included as many citizens as possible in the election process. This and other election reforms he introduced were an improvement to the Oregon elections system. Yet, the one thing that impressed me the most is that as he did his work, he did it with an eye toward fairness to all, regardless to their party. When necessary, he could set aside his own needs and create an environment that was fair to all of us. This, coupled with his commitment to education and the physical environment, made him a very attractive candidate. I knew that he would choose to run for governor someday, and that I could support him when he did.

This, however, was my preference until John Kitzhaber entered the race. Kitzhaber has, of course, served as Oregon governor from 1995 to 2003. He did a great job in office, his work in creating the Oregon Health Plan is legendary. He has also shown that he is equally committed to business, education, and the environment. He can benefit from his past experience as governor, yet he brings new ideas to the table for the present.

There are those who will question whether he was at his best as governor to the very end of his last term. In fact, there were signs toward the end that his opposition was getting the better of him. During the time since he has been governor, he has been working with many groups with the goal of bringing better health and better health care to all of us. With that experience, and a continued commitment to the needs of the citizens of Oregon, I believe that John Kitzhaber is well equipped to serve the needs of Oregonians during another term as governor. The new and refreshed John Kitzhaber

The fact is that I could support either one of these candidates to serve as the next governor of Oregon. I suppose that it is great that we have two wonderfully qualified candidates from which to choose. But when we put the two of them side-by-side, I believe the balance leans slightly toward Dr Kitzhaber. Please join me in voting for John Kitzhaber in the upcoming Democratic Primary Election.

The first of these is Ballot Measure 68.  Measure 68 would add a new article to the Oregon Constitution, permitting the state to raise matching money through general obligation bonds for local school district projects, much as it does now for community college and university construction.   Currently, the state helps to pay for major projects in the local school districts, but must do so out of general funds.  This measure will allow them to issue bonds to finance these projects.  This will result in a less expensive interest rate for the state, and save us all money in the long run.  It would only be used if the voters in a local school district have also approved a bond measure for building, remodeling, maintaining, or repairing the school or its grounds.

Bonds are generally used for the financing of building construction, but all other expenses come out of the school’s operating budget.  With Measure 68, districts will be able to use bond money to buy equipment such as desks and book shelves, pave parking lots, and do other maintenance which they now finance with operating money.  This should free up more of that money for paying for teachers and books and day-to-day education costs.

The measure also creates a matching fund, where the state puts money into a fund for these expenditures until it is needed by the local schools.  This will allow the state to save money over the years for a time when a school needs to be built or repaired.  It helps to keep schools operating, even in times like today when we can’t really afford to be spending too much money.

This measure doesn’t really change a lot about how we pay for schools in Oregon.  It does not add new taxes to what we have to pay.  It simply opens up new, less expensive options for paying for these school expenses.  This measure does not cost us any money, but it will modernize the law to allow us to save money.

Join me in voting YES on Oregon Ballot Measure 68.

First is the actual text of the law that was passed:     Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010 Text

I would comment, as someone who sometimes gets to read the actual text of Federal laws as part of their job, that doing so can be really dry reading.  It can also be pretty difficult to do, given the legalese in the text and the format of the document.  Nevertheless, if you are so inclined, happy reading.  If anyone has any questions about anything in it, feel free to send me a note and I’ll try to translate.  I’ll even do it in a non-partisan way.  That way, we can both learn something.

For those just looking for the highlights of what the Health Care Act has in it, the following summary was prepared on 23 March 2010 by the House Committees on Ways & Means, Energy & Commerce, and Education & Labor.  A summary of the Act:    Summary

Finally, courtesy of the blog Health Reform Watch, is a list of useful documents that attempt to describe and summarize the provisions of the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010.  Most were written by the House committees that actually wrote and edited the bill, so they should be an accurate reflection of what is in the Act.

Summary Documents:

• 3 Page Summary»
• Summary of the Manager’s Amendment»
• Section by Section of the Reconciliation Bill»
• Reconciliation Bill Makes Key Improvements To Senate-passed Bill»
• Regular Procedure to Pass Health Insurance Reform»
• Health Care By the Numbers: Open & Transparent Process»
• Immediate Benefits»
• Cost of Inaction»
• Health Care By The Numbers: Why We Need Reform»
• Fact Sheet»
• District By District Impact»

Provisions At A Glance:

• Timeline for Implementation»
• Helping Small Businesses»
• Consumer Protections & Insurance Market Reform»
• Preventing Waste, Fraud & Abuse»
• Making Coverage Affordable»
• Employers and Health Reform»
• Prevention & Wellness»
• Strengthening Medicare»
• Medicare Part D»
• Medicare Advantage»
• Shared Responsibility»
• The Health Insurance Exchange»
• Innovative Delivery System Reform»
• Strengthening The Nation’s Health Workforce»
• Guaranteed Benefits»
• Summary of Revenue Provisions»
• Cost Containment»
• Addressing Health and Health Care Disparities»
• Rural America & Reform»

We have a progressive tax system.  This means that those with a greater means to pay the tax will pay more, and those who need every dime of their income to survive will pay the least, as a percentage of their respective incomes.  Is this fair?  Let me quote one source:

¹As he looked up, Jesus saw the rich putting their gifts into the temple treasury. ²He also saw a poor widow put in two very small copper coins. ³“I tell you the truth,” he said, “this poor widow has put in more than all the others. ⁴All these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on.”
– Luke 21:1-4

Even Jesus understood that a couple of pennies might have meant the difference between eating or not to the very poor, while the rich would be expected to contribute a greater percentage of their income to the community.  In our world, of course, most of us live somewhere in between.  However, I generally do not see it as a particular problem that those with greater means contribute more than those with less to live on.

The amount of tax that we are talking about, while they are certainly a material amount, are really not an incredible sum, either.  This is true, especially if we consider the public services that we will continue to benefit from if we support them.

Please vote YES on Oregon Ballot Measure 66.

These arguments make it look like any tax increase would require the business to directly offset their tax expenses by cutting labor expenses.  Perhaps the company could consider cutting other expenses.  Perhaps they could find a way to sell additional product to recoup these small costs.  One way or another, the only way anyone will lost their jobs is if a vengeful company owner chooses to do it just to be vindictive.  Measure 67 will not cause anyone to lost their jobs.

On the other hand, if Oregon Ballot Measures 66 & 67 do pass, the direct result will be that it will save jobs at our company.  I will give you the specific effects of what will happen to myself and the people who work with me in a moment.  First, I will tell you what happens if these ballot measures do not pass.

A vote against these measures will cut funding to the services that receive funding through Oregon’s General Fund.  The vast majority of this money goes to pay for education, for public safety, and for human services.  For education, this means that we will be cutting funding and services for everything from our young children who deserve the best possible education, to colleges that will be training many of us for the jobs that we will take as the recession fades.  For public safety, this means that our overworked police, courts, and prisons will have less to work with to keep us safe.  For human services, this means that the poor and the disabled, the most vulnerable of our citizens, will have even fewer services available to them.

Since my company deals in something that would suffer if the human services part of the budget is cut, I will start there.  Certainly, similar arguments can be made in education and public safety.  But we will start here:

If the human services budget is cut, funding will be cut for healthcare for those who cannot afford it.  Those who are so disabled that they cannot function in society will suffer.  Programs that help the elderly continue to live independently so we don’t incur higher costs by institutionalizing them, will be left by the wayside.  This will mean that some number of the caregivers and other workers who keep these programs going will lose their jobs.  If Measures 66 & 67 fail to get a YES vote, these care-providing people will lose their jobs.

This is not a theoretical exercise where a $30 million corporation threatens to fire a worker because they had to pay $30,000 in state taxes this year, simply because they are not willing to admit right now that there are other ways to deal with it.  This is about the many people who will lose their jobs if these businesses do not pay their fair share in taxes.  Let me give you a specific example — my company.

At the moment, I am involved in a business that provides transportation services, and the majority of that business is something we call medical transportation.  Specifically, we transport people with disabilities to medical appointments, social service programs, and other places that they need to go.  A typical passenger, due to either age or disability, does not have the ability to get themselves where they need to go, and do not have the ability to use public transportation by themselves.

We do have many customers who pay for transportation themselves, occasionally their fee is paid by an insurance company or a charitable organization.  However, our largest customer is the State of Oregon.  Through Medicare/the Oregon Health Plan, the poor, the elderly, and the disabled have a way to get to the places that they otherwise cannot get to.

These trips are taken for a variety of reasons.  One of those is trips to the hospital, to a doctor appointment, or regular trips for things like chemotherapy or kidney dialysis.  Another is for trips to work or to training programs, so they can remain part of the community and continue to work.  Finally, for some selected people, the state provides assistance for trips to the grocery store or to outings that will help them to remain active in the community.  In this small way, keeping people independent keeps them from being more of a burden on the system that would otherwise have to provide a higher level of care.

If these ballot measures do not pass, one of the smaller budget items that will be cut is all of the non-medical trips under the Medical Transportation Program.  From the standpoint of the disabled person, they would now be essentially home-bound.  They would place needs on other parts of the system.  But if we think of this from the standpoint of the service provider, namely us, we will certainly have fewer drivers working for us.  If the state pays for fewer trips, there will be less work.  Either everyone’s income will be cut significantly, or there will be fewer drivers working at our company.

The number of positions lost will not be evident until the situation works itself out.  But I can promise you that if Measures 66 & 67 do not pass, there will be fewer people working at our company.  This is not a threat, rather, it is economics.

This is not only about myself or the medical transportation drivers.  It is about nurses and other caregivers.  It is about teachers and school employees.  It is about the police and corrections officers and court workers who keep us safe.  It is about many working Oregonians.

Please vote YES on Oregon Ballot Measure 66.

Please vote YES on Oregon Ballot Measure 67.

In these times of recession, this is what we can do to save jobs for Oregonians.

The following is a summary of the new tax structure:

Under current law, corporations conducting business in Oregon pay $10 minimum income tax; tax has not changed since 1931. Some corporations pay a profits tax of 6.6%. All other businesses pay no minimum or profits tax. Beginning in tax year 2009, the Measure increase $10 minimum corporate tax to $150; some corporations with over $500,000 in Oregon revenues will pay minimum tax of approximately 0.1% of Oregon revenues. Limits tax to $150 for S corprations and partnerships. Sole proprietors are not impacted by this measure. Raises tax rates some corporations pay on profits by 1.3 percentage points until 2011; increase then drops to 1 percentage point and as of 2013, applies only to profits over $10 million. Corporations pay minimum tax or profits tax, not both. Increases filing fees by $50 for Oregon businesses, by $225 for out of the state business. Raises estimated $255 million to provide funds currently budgeted for education, health care, public safety, other services. Because some state money brings in federal matching funds, Oregon will likely receive more federal money if measure passes than if the Measure fails. Other provisions.

Currently, the majority of corporations in Oregon pay the minimum corporate tax of $10.  Yes, they pay ten dollars a year to the state.  This proposal, that minimum tax would go up to just $150.  To put this tax into perspective, $10 probably is not enough to pay the clerk at the Department of Revenue to open the envelope that the tax return comes in and enter it into the DOR computer.  $10 might have been a lot of money in 1931 when the rate was last set, but it is a pittance now.

An additional tax is proposed for businesses with over $500,000 in Oregon gross sales.  That tax would amount to only 0.1% of sales.  Washington State has had a similar tax (the Business & Occupation Tax) which is quite similar.  Washington’s version has a rate about 10-times as much, and applies to all businesses, not just those with over $500,000 in sales.  In all, Oregon’s tax seems quite reasonable, considering the good that it will do for the state’s economy.

Many businesses have claimed in arguments against this measure that the tax will be so burdensome that they will have to lay-off employees.  Those are harsh and attention-getting words at a time when the unemployment rate is so high.  However, for the relative amounts that are under consideration for each business, it seems that there would be other places where these amounts could be made up.

This tax will not be a burden at all for any real business in Oregon.  For the difference that this will make for the majority of us, the residents of Oregon, the benefit will more than make up for the small amounts of taxes involved.

I really don’t consider this a significant increase in taxes.  For the vast majority of Oregon corporations, this is simply an effort to bring the nominal fees up to something that is not so low as to be silly.  This measure will bring needed money into the state treasury to support the services that we need, while being an inconvenience to nearly none of us.  I urge you to vote YES on Oregon Ballot Measure 67.