2008 Oregon Ballot Measure 61

Last updated

Measure 61
Flag of Oregon.svg
Creates mandatory minimum prison sentences for certain theft, identity theft, forgery, drug, and burglary crimes.
Results
Choice
Votes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svg Yes848,90148.90%
Light brown x.svg No887,16551.10%
Total votes1,736,066100.00%
Registered voters/turnout85.7%

Oregon 2008 Measure 61.svg
Results by county
Source: Oregon Secretary of State [1]

Oregon Ballot Measure 61 was an initiated state statute ballot measure that enacted law to create mandatory minimum prison sentences for certain theft, identity theft, forgery, drug, and burglary crimes.

Contents

The measure appeared on the November 4, 2008 general election ballot in Oregon, as did Measure 57 which dealt with similar issues, but in a different way. Measure 61 was narrowly rejected by little over 51% of Oregon voters. It was rejected by Benton, Hood River, Jackson, Lane, Lincoln, Multnomah, and Washington counties. [2]

Background

In 1994, Measure 11, another initiative proposed by Kevin Mannix, was passed, which set mandatory minimum sentences for violent crimes. It is responsible for 28% of today's prison population. Oregon uses the highest percentage of its state budget to lock up criminals and supervise parole of any state. Oregon has seen a growth in prison inmates from about 4,000 to more than 13,500.

If Ballot Measure 61, or the competitive measure proposed by the legislature, is passed, Oregon's prison population and percentage of state budget will become more pronounced. At the same time, Oregon has seen a greater drop in violent crime than the rest of the country on average since Measure 11 passed. [3]

Measure 61 versus Measure 57

In February 2008, some members of the Oregon State Legislature proposed a bill to put a legislatively referred ballot measure, Measure 57, on the November 2008 ballot that would compete with Measure 61, but which would have less stringent mandatory minimums in it. [4] In response, Mannix said that this "stinks of political manipulation". His concern is with how the competing measure's ballot title is set. If the ballot title sounds tough-on-crime, voters—many of whom will judge the measure simply based on its title—might vote for it, even though (Mannix alleges) the competing legislative measure is "wimpy". [5]

The key difference between the competing measures lies in how they treat first-time offenders. Measure 61 requires mandatory jail time for some first-time offenders; the competing measure does not.

Supporters of Measure 61 believe that the method of establishing the ballot title for Oregon ballot measures is unfair and gives the legislatively referred Measure 57 an undue advantage at the polls. For a citizen-initiated measure in Oregon, the ballot title is determined by the state's Attorney General. In the case of the measure that will compete with Measure 61, the claim has been made that the legislature plans to set the ballot title without going through those normal channels., [6] [7]

Specific provisions

Ballot Measure 61 enacted the following provisions:

Estimated fiscal impact

The state's Financial Estimate Committee prepares estimated fiscal impact statements for any ballot measures that will appear on the ballot. The estimate prepared by this committee for Measure 61 says:

The state's Criminal Justice Commission said that the Mannix measure will cost between $128–$200 million a year, whereas the competing measure, Measure 57, would cost between $65–70 million per year. [10]

Support

The chief petitioners for Measure 61 were Kevin Mannix, Duane Fletchall and Steve Beck. Kevin Mannix said that Oregon's incarceration rate is below the national average and that the costs are high because of well-compensated corrections officers. "You get what you pay for", Mannix argued, adding that state prisons are among the most drug-free in the country.

Oregon prison officials questioned the Pew Center's numbers, mentioned below, and also pointed out that the Department of Corrections funnels about 20 percent of its budget directly to counties for jails and parole. [3]

Loren Parks, the biggest political contributor in Oregon history, donated over $100,000 to the campaign for this measure. [11]

Opposition

Arguments against Measure 61

Notable arguments in opposition to the measure included:

Donors opposing Measure 61

Defend Oregon, as a committee, fought seven different ballot measures, and supported two others. As a result, it is not possible to discern how much of its campaign money was going specifically to defeat Measure 59. Altogether, the group raised over $6 million in 2008. [13]

Major donations to the Defend Oregon group as of October 8 included: [14]


Further reading

Notes

  1. Bradbury, Bill (4 November 2008). "Official Results – November 4, 2008 General Election" (Website). Elections Division. Oregon Secretary of State . Retrieved December 24, 2008.
  2. OregonLive.com: "Mannix's tough-on-crime measure will be on Oregon ballot", The Oregonian, April 11, 2008
  3. 1 2 3 "Prisons Lock in a Chunk of Budget from The Oregonian". Archived from the original on 2011-01-06. Retrieved 2008-12-25.
  4. Crime measures will fight it out come fall The Oregonian, February 23, 2008
  5. Mannix says Ore. lawmakers stacking the deck against his measure
  6. Developing hard, Democrats avoiding review process again! Ted Piccolo, February 16, 2008
  7. Salem Democrats to give Republicans the perfect issue
  8. Voters' Pamphlet includes Specific provisions of Measure 61
  9. Voters' Pamphlet includes Estimated fiscal impact statement for Oregon Measure 61
  10. Bill poses crime-fighting choice Edward Walsh, The Oregonian, February 13, 2008
  11. The Oregonian: "Loren Parks adds $100,000 to crime measures", September 4, 2008
  12. "Measure 57 Yes, Measure 61 No". Hillsboro Argus. October 7, 2008.
  13. Campaign finance history of Defend Oregon for 2008
  14. Record of donations to Defend Oregon
  15. Oregon Live, "Teachers, nurses add $2.5 million to campaigns", September 10, 2008
  16. The Oregonian, "OEA puts $4 million into ballot measure fight", October 8, 2008
  17. Oregonian, "School workers add $100,000 to campaign", August 25, 2008

Basic information

Opponents

Related Research Articles

Ballot Measure 27 of 2002 would have required the mandatory labelling of all genetically modified food sold in the U.S. state of Oregon. The measure was defeated in the November 5, 2002 general election with 371,851 votes in favor, 886,806 votes against. The measure was placed on the ballot as a result of initiative petition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1994 Oregon Ballot Measure 11</span> Citizens initiative passed in 1994

Measure 11, also known as "One Strike You're Out", was a citizens' initiative passed in 1994 in the U.S. State of Oregon. This statutory enactment established mandatory minimum sentencing for several crimes. The measure was approved in the November 8, 1994 general election with 788,695 votes in favor, and 412,816 votes against.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kevin Mannix</span> American politician (born 1949)

Kevin Leese Mannix is an American politician, business attorney, and former chairman of the Republican Party in the U.S. state of Oregon.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hardy Myers</span> American lawyer

Hardy Myers was an American lawyer and Democratic politician who served three terms as the 15th attorney general of the state of Oregon, United States. Prior to taking office in 1997, he served from 1975 to 1985 in the Oregon House of Representatives, the last four of those years as its speaker, and was also a Metro councilor and chaired the Oregon Criminal Justice Council.

Ballot Measure 40 was an Oregon ballot measure in 1996. The measure brought sweeping reforms to Oregon's justice system, generally in an effort to promote victims' rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Elections in Oregon</span> Overview of the procedure of elections in the U.S. state of Oregon

Elections in Oregon are all held using a Vote by Mail (VBM) system. This means that all registered voters receive their ballots via postal delivery and can vote from their homes. A state Voters’ Pamphlet is mailed to every household in Oregon about three weeks before each statewide election. It includes information about each measure and candidate in the upcoming election.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Oregon elections</span>

On November 4, 2008, the U.S. state of Oregon held statewide general elections for three statewide offices, both houses of the Oregon Legislative Assembly, and twelve state ballot measures. The primary elections were held on May 20, 2008. Both elections also included national races for President of the US, US Senator, and US House Representatives. Numerous local jurisdictions — cities, counties, and regional government entities — held elections for various local offices and ballot measures on these days as well.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 6</span>

California Proposition 6, also known as the Safe Neighborhoods Act and The Runner Initiative, is a statutory initiative that appeared on the November 2008 ballot in California. This proposition was rejected by voters on November 4 of that year.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">74th Oregon Legislative Assembly</span>

The Seventy-fourth Oregon Legislative Assembly was the Oregon Legislative Assembly (OLA)'s period from 2007 to 2008. There was a regular session in 2007, and a shorter special session in 2008.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Oregon Ballot Measure 64</span>

Oregon Ballot Measure 64 was an initiated state statute ballot measure on the November 4, 2008 general election ballot in Oregon.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Oregon Ballot Measure 58</span>

Oregon Ballot Measure 58 was an initiated state statute ballot measure sponsored by Bill Sizemore that appeared on the November 4, 2008 general election ballot in Oregon. It was rejected by voters.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Oregon Ballot Measure 59</span>

Oregon Ballot Measure 59 was an initiated state statute ballot measure sponsored by Bill Sizemore that appeared on the November 4, 2008 general election ballot in Oregon, United States. If it had passed, Oregon would have join Alabama, Iowa, and Louisiana as the only states to allow federal income taxes to be fully deducted on state income tax returns.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Oregon Ballot Measure 60</span>

Oregon Ballot Measure 60 was an initiated state statute ballot measure filed by Bill Sizemore and R. Russell Walker. Sizemore referred to it the "Kids First Act." The measure appeared on the November 4, 2008 general election ballot in Oregon.

Loren Ernest Parks was an American businessman from the state of Nevada. He previously lived in Oregon, from 1957 to 2002, and was the biggest political contributor in the history of that state. He financed numerous ballot measure initiative petitions and campaigns from the mid-1990s. He also contributed heavily to races for prominent offices by his attorney, Kevin Mannix, a frequent chief petitioner of ballot campaigns.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Oregon Ballot Measure 57</span>

Oregon Ballot Measure 57 (2008) or Senate Bill (SB) 1087 was a legislatively referred state statute that increased term of imprisonment for persons convicted of specified drug and property crimes under certain circumstances. The measure enacted law which prohibits courts from imposing less than a presumptive sentence for persons convicted of specified drug and property crimes under certain circumstances, and requires the Department of Corrections to provide treatment to certain offenders and to administer grant program to provide supplemental funding to local governments for certain purposes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Oregon Ballot Measure 62</span>

Oregon Ballot Measure 62 (2008) appeared on the November 4, 2008 general election ballot in Oregon. It was an initiated constitutional amendment dealing with the issue of where a percentage of profit from the Oregon State Lottery should go. The initiative, if it had passed, would have required that 15% of net lottery proceeds be deposited in a public safety fund. 50% of that fund would have been distributed to counties to fund grants for childhood programs, district attorney operations, and sheriff's investigations. The other 50% of the fund would have gone to Oregon State Police criminal investigations and forensic operations. It is expected that most of that money would have been diverted from schools. It was rejected with around 60% of the votes statewide; every county except for Josephine saw majority rejection.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Oregon Ballot Measure 63</span>

Oregon Ballot Measure 63 was an initiated state statute that appeared on the November 4, 2008 general election ballot in Oregon. It would have allowed homeowners to make improvements costing less than $35,000 to their home/real estate without first obtaining a building permit.

The U.S. state of Oregon has various policies restricting the production, sale, and use of different substances. In 2006, Oregon's per capita drug use exceeded the national average. The most used substances were marijuana, methamphetamine and illicit painkillers and stimulants.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2020 California Proposition 20</span> Rejected initiative regarding non-violent felonies

California Proposition 20 was a proposed initiated state statute on the ballot in the 2020 California elections. This initiative would have added more crimes to the list of non-violent felonies for which early parole is restricted, and would have required DNA collection for certain misdemeanors.