The Oregon Bubble

It is nearly spring, the time to buy primrose for your front porch! And for clematis to start budding and flowering, much as I might try to hack them back for blocking the view from my back porch.

It is also an even-numbered year, and following the faithful wishes of the citizens of Oregon (in this case), our state legislature is sitting. And conjuring up bills.

Senate Bill 1534, which would criminalize electronic communication between two or more people to commit a crime. Crime as defined in the annals of Oregon statutes, a very long list, but supposedly includes harm to public statues (placing a blue tarp over the elk downtown?), or occupying public roadways or transitways (Occupy Portland?).

Now I am not a fan of tarps as art, or occupying public parks. I should be able to use the park as much as any other taxpayer. But here are some activities that would be considered Class C felonies under this bill, should it become law:
* twitter alert to a group to schedule a break-in at a bank (are you ok with this one?)
* facebook post to alert a group about a gathering to protest at East Precinct over recent shoot-first-ask-questions-later by police (how about this?)
* blog post about a rally to be held on the weekend in a public square, without a permit (this?)
* invite to the Westboro Baptist church to visit the local veterans cemetery to protest continued military engagements around the world
* notice of Nazis marching in Skokie (ok that is from the Blues Brothers - but in there, they had to have a permit, and that actually happened)
* placing a tarp over the elk statue downtown
* occupying the public sidewalk to protest your favorite complaint against the government

the list goes on. Free speech is protected by the U.S. Constitution. Is it a crime to say you would like to commit a crime (this rain sucks! Kill the weather gods!), but haven't actually committed a crime? The pre-meditation aspect itself is a crime?

As I witnessed on my trip to DC and visit to the Newseum, some new forms of social media have received constitutional protection under the first amendment. Like a student complaining about her teacher on Facebook. Much more still unproven.

Do we want to restrict free speech in social media, and criminalize organically inspired action? In 48 hours, Susan G. Koman foundation, by public social media pressure, was forced to rescind their decision to defund Planned Parenthood. Social media is social action. It works.

Why would we want to restrict the rights of citizens to exercise their free speech rights? Oh! I forgot! Oregon is in a bubble. Or at least the legislature seems to be.

One Progressive Makes a Difference

One letter writer makes a difference.
In the Oregon legislature, which is winding down the session, the House takes up a bill that easily passed the Senate. The Senate voted en masse to pass SB 270 - which would set a maximum fine of $5,000 per month for failure to disclose campaign donations. Whatever the value.

Existing law sets a penalty at 10% once the violation is found.

For those anonymous rich donors like the Koch brothers, the Government of China, or even the 457 organization masking the Government of Palau masking the Republican party of Canada masking your next door neighbor who is a rabid gun toting terrorist. Or anyone.

If you believe in the sunshine - campaign contributions should be public so we-the-voters can all see who's influencing and benefiting from campaign donations.. then the punishment should fit the crime.

Along comes Dan Meek, political activist in Oregon, a Progressive Party member. Who wrote a letter to the House delegation alerting them of the dangers of the new maximum limit in SB 270.

And the House awoke collectively to its responsibility. To its visibility. While the Senate slept the House was vigilant. Thanks to Dan for writing one letter. One letter can make a difference.