Help Stop Kevin Mannix! October 4, 2008
Posted by admin in : Current News , add a commentYou can still help stop Mandatory Minimum Madness!
As you know, we are working hard to defeat Measure 61 and Election Day is fast approaching. Kevin Mannix has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from his out-of-state sugar daddy, Loren Parks. Partnership for Safety and Justice and its sister organization, Safety and Justice Action Fund, need to raise money and awareness if we are going to defeat this measure.
We have been having house parties, but not everyone can host a party in their own home. So for everyone who couldn’t host or attend a party, we are having two BIG house parties and everyone is invited!
EUGENE ACTION TEAM HOUSE PARTY
Thursday, October 9, 2008 at 6:00 pm
St. Thomas Episcopal Church
1465 Coburg Road, Eugene, Oregon
Presentation by Aba Gayle
PORTLAND ACTION TEAM HOUSE PARTY
Tuesday, October 14, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Multnomah Friends Meeting House
4312 SE Stark Street, Portland, Oregon
Presentation by Gretchen Vala
Your support could mean the difference between winning and losing this critical battle, so please bring your checkbook and let’s make this happen!
Come enjoy good food and great company while supporting the leadership role Partnership for Safety and Justice is taking to defeat Mandatory Minimum Madness.
Please RSVP to Karen by email or call her at (503) 335-8449.
Unable to attend but still want to help? Click here to make an online donation or mail your check to us at 825 NE 20th Ave, Suite 250, Portland, Oregon 97240.
Thank you!
Measure 62 may take a bite out of crime as well as school budgets October 3, 2008
Posted by admin in : Current News , add a commentOregon voters will have to choose between public safety and public schools on the November ballot.
Under Measure 62, a yes vote would set aside 15 percent of state lottery profits for district attorneys, sheriffs and state police investigations that measure co-sponsor Kevin Mannix says get short shrift by Oregon lawmakers. The 15 percent amount would be carved into the state constitution.
A no vote would allow lawmakers to continue to spend that money on schools. At stake is about $200 million every two years. Because roughly half of Oregon’s lottery money is tied up by state law or the constitution, most of the $200 million would come from schools.
For Doug Harcleroad, retiring district attorney for Lane County, the question is easy in a county that’s been hammered by low property taxes and the loss of federal timber money. The county operates only 93 of 500 jail beds, he says, and releases about a dozen people a day because of overcrowding.
“We let out sex offenders and gun violators and domestic violence offenders. We let out terrible people who shouldn’t be let out, and some of them re-offend,” Harcleroad says.
But opponents say the measure would hurt classrooms and give an unexpected windfall to counties and to specific Oregon State Police units.
The Defend Oregon Coalition, which includes unions, teachers, seniors citizens and human services groups, figures schools would lose about $185 million and economic development about $20 million.
“I’m afraid in the absence of a campaign, people’s attitude might be: 15 percent for crime? Sounds good to me. And the question is whether they know it’s at the expense of education,” says Steve Novick with Defend Oregon.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THE STORY
Measures 59, 61 take $1.4 billion in revenue October 1, 2008
Posted by admin in : Current News , add a commentThe following post is from Salem Statesman Journal, written by Ron Eachus. To go to the Statesman Journal website, simply click here.
Pundits, analysts and even the presidential candidates themselves agree that the size of any pending federal bailout of Wall Street will severely constrain the government’s ability to address other problems and priorities.
And that’s in a budgetary environment where the federal government can spend itself into deficits.
What happens when a state government that is required to have a balanced budget gets hit with a big loss in revenues or is required to spend money on new initiatives without any provision for new revenue?
Oregon is likely to find out if two ballot measures by the initiative-addicted Bill Sizemore and Kevin Mannix pass in November. According to official ballot measure financial impact statements, one, Measure 59 from Sizemore, takes away nearly $1.2 billion in revenues. The other, Measure 61 from Mannix, would require spending an additional $161 million to $247 million.
Taken together, that’s a big $1.4 billion hole in the state budget, and neither measure provides a single dollar in new revenues.
Sizemore’s initiative to provide unlimited deductions for federal income taxes of individual state returns is a retread of Measure 41 from 2006, which the voters rejected 63 percent to 37 percent.
Income taxes account for about 89 percent of the state general fund budget.There are about 1.8 million taxpayers in Oregon. But most of them, an estimated 1.3 million, won’t benefit from the measure because they already can deduct all their federal taxes under existing limits.
Only 500,000 Oregon taxpayers will benefit: the ones with higher federal income taxes. The ones in the higher income brackets who don’t depend as much as the rest of the taxpayers on the services the general fund provides. Services such as education, public safety and assistance for children, the elderly and disabled.
The expected loss of revenues from Measure 59 is estimated at nearly 9 percent reduction in general fund resources in 2009-11, growing to 13 percent in 2011-13.
Mannix’s measure also is a retread of sorts. In 1994, a Mannix initiative passed requiring increased mandatory sentences for violent and sexual offenders. As a result, Oregon began a prison building spree that doubled the Department of Corrections debt service and left Oregon spending more on corrections than it does on higher education.
This time, his measure requires increased minimum sentences for certain drug and property crimes. The state already plans two more new prisons with 3,500 beds. But Mannix’s initiative would add an estimated 4,000 to 6,000 additional inmates, requiring more new prisons and making it harder to fund the cheaper but more effective rehabilitation and treatment programs that reduce these crimes.
The effect of both measures is to restrict the ability of state government and the Legislature to take into account the big picture. Budgetary initiatives with a single issue focus ignore the overall effect on the necessity of state government and the Legislature to balance state priorities.
The Sizemore and Mannix reliance on the initiative process is designed to isolate their pet issues, and themselves, from the rest of the budget by requiring spending on certain services or by reducing revenues for all services.
There is no “pay as you go” philosophy in these initiatives. There is only constriction and restriction. The ability and the flexibility of government to put together a budget, and to be held accountable for it, is taken away.
Sizemore and Mannix have offered themselves to the electorate as general election candidates for the state’s higher offices in the past. Each time, they were rejected.
When the public was asked if they thought these two could be trusted to take a wider view into account and lead the state through the difficult task of weighing and managing compelling and often competing priorities, the majority said no.
This year, they should do the same to their initiatives.
The coalition of those urging a NO vote on Measure 61 is growing! September 5, 2008
Posted by admin in : Current News , 2 commentsA diverse group of organizations has formally come out against Measure 61 urging a “No” vote in statements placed in the 2008 State Voter Guide. Partnership for Safety and Justice is joined by groups like Stand for Children, the United Way Mid-Willamette Valley, Oregon PTA, Federation of Oregon Parole and Probation Officers, the Oregon Business Association, and AARP – to name several. The extensive list of groups opposing Mannix’s Measure 61 undercuts his rhetoric of referring to it as a “citizen sponsored” measure. Mannix doesn’t have a broad base of support, which is made incredibly obvious by the state Voter Guide. The list of organizations in favor of Measure 57 (PSJ’s position) is even longer. For a complete listing of statements by groups and individuals in the voter pamphlet about Measure 61 and other measures, use the following link to the Oregon Secretary of State’s website: http://www.oregonvotes.org/nov42008/military_vp/m61.html. Information on the other ballot measures can be found on the left side of the page.
Our progress and next steps – phone calls to voters
With the help of the PolitiCorps Fellows at the Bus Project and our own stalwart volunteers, we were able to canvass 5,440 homes this summer. Canvassing took place in North and Northeast Portland, and in Salem. Even though the movement against Measure 61 is growing, WE STILL NEED YOUR SUPPORT! Partnership for Safety and Justice is helping to defeat Measure 61 by organizing direct contact with voters. Our big push now is to call a targeted list of voters most likely to be persuaded to vote against Measure 61. The list is huge – up to 80,000 people. Though this is volunteer-intensive work, we are engaged in the fight of our lives. These phone calls are critical to mobilizing Oregonians to stop this mandatory minimum madness. We will begin to make calls practically nightly from next week until Election Day. So if you can join us 6 or 7 times over the next 60 days – or just once or twice – please contact me to let me know when you can join us to stop this measure in its tracks. We only get one shot at this, so we need to give everything we got right now!
Karen Meurer
Campaign Organizer
karen [at] safetyandjustice [dot] org
A prudent Oregon treasury cannot afford another prison expansion August 22, 2008
Posted by admin in : Current News , add a commentHERE’S A GOOD EDITORIAL FROM THE DAILY ASTORIAN.
You can’t miss with crime. Politicians know it. That’s why Congress over decades has enlarged the list of capital crimes. It’s also why Oregon voters will be asked to add a new chapter to the massive prison expansion of Measure 11.
Kevin Mannix and the Oregon Legislature have submitted competing property crimes ballot measures. The legislature’s measure costs less than Mannix’, but it’s also over $1 billion.
Crime is an easy sell. But debt isn’t. And neither of these measures carries a funding mechanism to pay for the major increase in the state Corrections budget they will incur.
These measures come along at a time when the American economy is tenuous at best. The New York Times Magazine last Sunday carried a profile of Nouriel Roubini, who’s known in economic circles as Dr. Doom. Roubini says America’s banking and credit problems have only begun.
Voters might be skeptical if they realized that either of the two property crimes measures on the November ballot will cost more than $1 billion. But then again, they might not. Crime prompts a visceral response.
These measures carry price tags that a prudent Oregon treasury really can’t afford. But the larger truth is that prison - not education - has become Oregonians’ only entitlement.
Portland Reports Low Crime Rate August 9, 2008
Posted by admin in : Current News , add a commentCrimes in Portland are at the lowest rate since the city started keeping records in the 1970’s, police said Wednesday.
KGW report on crime rate “There’s a significant drop,” said Sgt. Brian Schmautz with the Portland Police Bureau.
Shoplifting was the only crime to increase, according to the recently released report, growing by 3%. All other crimes are down 14%, the numbers showed.
The murder rate was down 13% compared to this time last year. There have been 13 murders this year in Portland.
Rape and robbery were also down 17%, the report said. Auto theft had the largest drop, at 36%.
“The last thing we want to say is that it’s solely because of cops because there are a number of factors always involved in criminal activity,” said Sgt. Schmautz.
“For the city of Portland, we would just like to assure people there is positive news in crime. It doesn’t always have to be the crime of the day or the fifteen crimes of the day and in fact Portland is enjoying a relative quiet period,” he added.
The police department also breaks down the statistics according to the different sections of town. Police were being cautiously optimistic, they said.
“We haven’t had a murder in thirty days,” said Sgt. Brian Schmautz. He added, “But the reality is, living in an urban area, with hundreds of thousands of people someone will unfortunately end up being a victim.”
Either anti-crime measure will cost over $1 billion, state says August 8, 2008
Posted by admin in : Current News , 1 comment so farThe Oregonian newspaper wrote the following story today, giving more insight about how both measures for first time convicted drug and property offenders will force cuts in state services or large tax increases.
An initiative on the November ballot to lock up first-time drug and property crime offenders would cost taxpayers $1.3 billion to $2.2 billion over the next decade, according to projections released by state officials.
A competing anti-crime measure sponsored by legislators would cost about $1.1 billion over the same period.
Neither crime measure includes a tax increase to pay for housing additional inmates, and it would be up to the Legislature to raise taxes or cut other programs to foot the bill.
Kevin Mannix, a Republican who waged two unsuccessful campaigns for governor, is pushing Measure 61, the harsher of the two ballot measures. He called the state’s numbers “a fantasy” that overestimates how many people will end up behind bars.
Still, he predicted that Oregon voters would not be put off by the steep price tag.
“The ordinary voter is going to say, ‘OK, do I want someone breaking into my car or stealing my car or stealing my identity? No, I don’t, and I want government to put these predators behind bars and pull them off the streets,’ ” he said.
Mannix’s proposal would set three-year mandatory minimum prison sentences for first-time drug dealers, burglars and identity thieves, increasing Oregon’s prison population by an estimated 4,000 to 6,000 inmates.
The state analysis shows Oregon would need to spend $8 million to $10 million on it in the first year, ramping up to as much as $274 million a year by the fifth year. The measure also would require the state to borrow $1.1 billion to $1.3 billion to build new prisons.
Measure 57, which legislators put on the ballot as an alternative to Mannix’s proposal, is cheaper at $1.1 billion but still requires the state to spend more than $143 million a year when fully operational.
Under the lawmakers’ proposal, repeat offenders would bear the sentencing brunt and more money would go toward drug treatment. But the measure would require $314 million for new prison space for an estimated 1,600 offenders.
PLEASE CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THE STORY
The Official Mandatory Minimums Ballot Measure Numbers Have Been Assigned August 5, 2008
Posted by admin in : Current News , add a commentHERE’S A VERY IMPORTANT POST FROM THE PARTNERSHIP FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE. THE POLITICAL REALITIES WILL PUT OREGONIANS IN A DIFFICULT POSITION THIS ELECTION. IT’S VITAL TO GET INFORMED, THEN SHARE THIS INFORMATION WITH FAMILY, FRIENDS, CO-WORKERS, NEIGHBORS, ETC. LET’S MAKE OUR VOTES COUNT AND OUR VOICES HEARD.
|
Measure 61
|
Measure 57
|
|
Mannix’s Mandatory Minimum Madness Measure
|
A More Balanced Alternative
Crime Measure
|
|
· Creates new mandatory minimum sentences for drug and property crimes
|
· Creates longer sentences for some drug and property crimes
|
|
· Forces judges into one-size-fits-all sentencing, including first-time offenders
|
· Judges can still take into account individual circumstances of each case during sentencing
|
|
· Oregon will need to spend an additional $400 million every two years for incarceration, not including cost for new prison construction
|
· Will cost less than half of Measure 61
|
|
· Provides no resources for drug treatment
|
· Provides significant investment in drug treatment and drug courts
|
|
· Will put up to 6,000 people in prison in the first three years
|
· Will grow prison population by substantially less than Measure 61
|
|
· Measure funded primarily by out-of-state interests
|
· Measure supported by broad coalition of Oregonians, including education advocates, health and human service providers and key labor unions
|
Two Great Ways to Get Involved with Partnership For Safety and Justice! July 30, 2008
Posted by admin in : Current News , add a commentGetting Beyond Barriers – Challenging Barriers to Re-entry after Prison
Employment, housing, education, debt – people returning home from prison face many challenges in these and other areas. Join PSJ for its monthly Community Education and Discussion night when we talk about how people are organizing to decrease the barriers people face after prison. We’ll hear from formerly incarcerated people about their experiences with re-entry about the work they are doing to decrease the barriers people face after prison.
Getting Beyond Barriers
Wednesday, August 6, 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.
Partnership for Safety and Justice, 825 NE 20th, Suite 250, Portland
Please email Caylor to let her know you’ll be there.
Take Action on Action Day – Defeat the Mandatory Minimum Measure!
PSJ and the Bus Project are headed to Salem on August 10 to talk to people about the mandatory minimum measure. If you take only one action this summer to stop Mandatory Minimum Madness, THIS IS IT! We have a chance to make a real difference in our state in one day, and we don’t want you to miss out. All training will be provided, and we will match you up with an experienced canvasser.
Action Day
August 10, Salem
If you’re in Portland, join us for a ride to Salem on the Bus Project’s bus. For all our friends and members in the Willamette Valley, we’ll send you directions to our meeting place in Salem. Just email Rachel or give her a call at 503-335-8449 and she’ll send you directions to Portland and Salem meeting places.
Please let us count on you to come out on August 10th. It’s going to be fun, it’s going to be educational, and it’s going to make a real impact for this campaign and future PSJ work. Please help us meet our goal and reach 2000 voters to defeat the Mandatory Minimum Measure!
Courts Give Measure 11 Mandatory Minimums a Second Look July 29, 2008
Posted by admin in : Current News , 1 comment so farRepresentative Chip Shields wrote a good article about the Rodriguez case and how the Oregon Supreme Court has agreed to step in. I’m posting the article here, but then it is very important to go to his website post and read all the comments. There are quite a few, but it is important to read them and ADD YOUR OWN COMMENT. Here’s an excellent place to make yourself heard!
Should juries know the likely sentence when deciding guilt?
In the run up to the primary election, you may have missed this important criminal-justice story. On May 9, the Oregon Supreme Court decided it will consider whether, in the words of James Pitkin at Willamette Week, grazing a boy’s head with your breasts should get you over six years in the slammer. The case is State v. Veronica Rodriguez. Pitkin says, "The jury voted 10-2 to convict Rodriguez for allegedly pulling the back of the boy’s head against her chest." She is facing a six year and three months sentence for Sex Abuse I under Measure 11, the 1994 voter-approved ballot measure penned by Kevin Mannix.
Judge Nancy Campbell, now retired, set aside the Measure 11 sentence and instead sentenced her to 16 months using the state’s sentencing guidelines. She stated that applying Measure 11 in this case would violate the Oregon constitution’s cruel and unusual punishment clause. The Court of Appeals overruled her and reinstated the six year-three month mandatory minimum sentence and in May the Oregon Supreme Court agreed to take up the case.
Click here and here for Willamette Week coverage of the case. The Oregonian covers it here .
What’s interesting is that in April 2000, the Oregon Court of Appeals upheld Measure 11 in an equally controversial sentence given to Justin Thorp– a 16 year old who was sentenced to six years and three months for having consensual sex with his 13 year-old girlfriend. According to news reports (not-on-line unfortunately),
Clackamas County Circuit Judge Robert Morgan determined that such a sentence was cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Oregon Constitution. Morgan based his decision in part on the fact that the girl said she initiated the sex. Thorp was three years and 10 days older than his victim. But had the difference in their ages been three years or less, it would not have qualified as second-degree rape. At most, he would have faced a misdemeanor sex offense and been sentenced to probation, prosecutors and defense attorneys agree.Morgan opted to sentence him to 35 months in prison, based on state sentencing guidelines. The state appealed, arguing that the 75-month sentence (six years-three months) did not violate the Oregon Constitution.
A 5-4 majority of the Court of Appeals agreed. The case ended there. Thorp had to do all six years and three months.
What’s also interesting is that the Thorp opinion was penned by Judge Paul DeMuniz, who was elected to the Oregon Supreme Court six months later. He is now the Oregon Supreme Court Chief Justice and a man for whom I have immeasurable respect.
Maybe Judge DeMuniz and his Supreme Court colleagues want to give Measure 11 a second look in State v. Rodriguez. But the issues in this new case are much narrower. Unlike in State v. Thorp, Rodriguez and her attorney Peter Garlan are conceding that Measure 11 is constitutional, but are claiming that it’s application against Rodriguez violates the proportionality clause of the Oregon constitution in this case only.
I trust juries, so in 2005, Sens. Carter, Gordly and I introduced HB 2986 , which gives jurors information on the likely sentence the courts will impose upon a finding of guilt. It died for lack of a hearing in the then Republican-led Oregon House.
I’ve been thinking of reintroducing that bill, so I checked in with one well-respected constitutional scholar on the issue. I haven’t gotten his okay to use his name yet, but he wrote back:
As a general proposition, I believe that all human beings should be as fully informed as possible about the consequences of all of their actions before they undertake those actions. Before you put your hand on that hot stove, you should understand that you might get burned. Before you jump into the Clackamas River at High Rocks, you should understand that you might drown in a whirlpool. Before you get on TriMet without a ticket, you should be aware of the penalty if you get caught. And before a jury decides to do X or Y or Z, its members should understand the results that could flow from that decision.
We all want as much information as possible about the consequences of our actions; why shouldn’t we give a jury as much information as possible about the consequences of theirs?
So what do you think? Should Veronica Rodriguez and Justin Thorp’s juries have known they would be sentenced to six years and three months each? Or is justice best served by keeping that information from them and having juries only decide guilt or innocence?