election

The importance of the Electoral College

Oregon Governor Signs Bill Granting State’s Electoral Votes to National Popular Vote Winner, D.C. Clothesline, June 20, 2019:

Fifteen states in total have jumped on the bandwagon to grant their state’s electoral college votes to  the winner of the national popular vote, in an attempt to try and elect a candidate from their own party.  Oregon Governor Kate Brown has now made her state the fifteenth to join the National Popular State Compact....

The Electoral College is established by Article II of the United States Constitution. It is important to understand why Democrats want to abolish the electoral college, as discussed below.

From the article Abolish the electoral college? Dream on, Democrats, The Washington Post, November 16, 2016:

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), as she has before, introduced a bill this week to get rid of the electoral college. In the below post from the wee hours of the day after Election Day, we discuss why it's not happening.... For the second time in 16 years, Democrats appear to have won more votes than Republicans, but lost the presidency. And while it was close in 2000, it may be a chasm in 2016....

So you can bet that are a whole bunch of Democrats right now that would like to put an end to this whole electoral college thing.

The bad news: They have virtually no power to make that happen -- and even they did have any power, it'd be immensely difficult.

The electoral college, after all, is enshrined in our Constitution, which means getting rid of it requires a constitutional amendment. That's a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate and the ratification of three-fourths (38) of the 50 states....

Back in 1934, a vote to abolish the electoral college failed in the Senate by just two votes. At the time, then-Sen. Alben Barkley (D-Ky.), who would later become vice president, labeled the system "useless." "The American people are qualified to elect their president by a direct vote, and I hope to see the day when they will," he said.

By 1966, Sen. Birch Bayh (D-Ind.) led hearings on the prospect of repealing the electoral college. He was a passionate advocate for the change for years. In 1979, the Senate debated a direct-election alternative, but it failed 51-48 -- shy of the two-thirds it needed.

More recent efforts have focused on workarounds, rather than repeal.

The National Popular Vote interstate compact has been assembling states who pledge to award all of their electoral votes to the winner of the national vote if and when they all combine for a majority of electoral votes (270). The effort has gained support from 11 states combining for 165 electoral votes, but so far only blue states have jumped on-board -- suggesting the red and swing state problems described above apply here too....

The Electoral College is an integral component of America's election process. From History Central: Why the Electoral College:

The Electoral College was created for two reasons. The first purpose was to create a buffer between population and the selection of a President. The second as part of the structure of the government that gave extra power to the smaller states.

The first reason that the founders created the Electoral College is hard to understand today. The founding fathers were afraid of direct election to the Presidency. They feared a tyrant could manipulate public opinion and come to power. Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers:

It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations. It was also peculiarly desirable to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder. This evil was not least to be dreaded in the election of a magistrate, who was to have so important an agency in the administration of the government as the President of the United States. But the precautions which have been so happily concerted in the system under consideration, promise an effectual security against this mischief....

Hamilton and the other founders believed that the electors would be able to insure that only a qualified person becomes President. They believed that with the Electoral College no one would be able to manipulate the citizenry. It would act as check on an electorate that might be duped. Hamilton and the other founders did not trust the population to make the right choice. The founders also believed that the Electoral College had the advantage of being a group that met only once and thus could not be manipulated over time by foreign governments or others....

One aspect of the electoral system that is not mandated in the constitution is the fact that the winner takes all the votes in the state. Therefore it makes no difference if you win a state by 50.1% or by 80% of the vote you receive the same number of electoral votes. This can be a recipe for one individual to win some states by large pluralities and lose others by small number of votes, and thus this is an easy scenario for one candidate winning the popular vote while another winning the electoral vote. This winner take all methods used in picking electors has been decided by the states themselves. This trend took place over the course of the 19th century....

In the January 8, 2019 article, The Electoral College Must Remain, Elad Hakim states:

Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., recently introduced a proposed constitutional amendment that would eliminate the Electoral College. This was obviously done in response to the fact that Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election despite winning nearly 3 million more votes than President Trump....

Cohen's position is clearly partisan, will almost certainly fail, and will face stiff resistance from many smaller states.

According to HistoryCentral, "[t]he Electoral College was created for two reasons. The first purpose was to create a buffer between population and the selection of a President. The second as part of the structure of the government that gave extra power to the smaller states." The first reason revolved around the possibility that a candidate could manipulate public opinion to such a great extent that it would lead him to secure the presidency. In other words, the Founders did not believe that the citizens could make the right decision on their own. Therefore, the electorate served as a system of checks and balances. This does not appear to be as much of a concern today.

The second reason, however, is still relevant. Generally speaking, the number of electorates in a given state directly correlates to the number of congressional representatives in the state. The minimum number of electorates for a given state is three. Therefore, the "value" of a vote in a smaller state with a lower population would "count" more than it would in a state with a higher population. For example, if a state had 90,000 votes and had three electorates, each electorate would represent 30,000 votes. On the other hand, a large state with 10,000,000 votes and 54 electorates would mean that each electorate would represent approximately 185,000 votes. Therefore, this system was initially used to appease the smaller states....

While the Electoral College is not perfect, it is the most legitimate system.  It is in line with the intent of our forefathers, protects the smaller states, and helps to protect against the possibility that several very densely populated cities will decide the presidential election for the entire nation.

Hakim's conclusion bears repeating: The Electoral College as established in Article II of the U.S. Constitution is the most legitimate system. It protects against the likelihood that densely populated cities - that tend to vote Democrat - could decide the presidential election for the entire country.

 


Related

2016 U.S. Presidential Electoral votes by county:

2016 electoral votes by county

 

 

Update: The Mob Is Right Outside the Constitution’s Wall, Breitbart, May 24, 2019:

On Tuesday, Nevada became the 15th state, along with the District of Columbia, to pass a measure that would grant its electoral college votes to the candidate that won the nationwide popular vote....

This movement is being led by an organization called National Popular Vote. The 501(c)(4) was co-founded by election law expert and attorney Barry Fadem and John Kaza (co-inventor of the scratch off lottery ticket).

The objective is to have a group of states that in total control 270 electoral votes (the number needed to win the presidency) form a compact wherein each of them will agree to cast those votes based on the nationwide popular vote, regardless of how their own state’s citizens voted....

Our Founding Fathers had the debate at the beginning of our nation as to how our system of election and governance would be structured. Democracy was rejected because of the well understood tendency of a majority to act as a tyrant. While much of what was created by our Founders was original, this concept wasn’t.

The critique of democracy dates back to Plato and the Republic. The demos, as they were called in Greek, couldn’t be trusted; they would just vote to satiate their voracious appetites at the expense of others or the nation at large....

In Madison’s mind, the structure of government and the process for electing the chief executive were designed to try to fragment the power of majority.

When you read Federalist 9> (Hamilton), Federalist10, and Federalist 51 (Madison), three key elements they felt existed to help give the new United States a chance for success were its population size, geographic size, and the differing interests of the independent states. Back in the late 1700’s, these factors would all make it more difficult for minority factions to attain the sort of critical mass required to do real damage....

We need these controls to prevent the very kind of efficiency in voting that can lead to majority dominance. The electoral college is one of those most fundamental controls. If we effectively neuter it through state collusion, then we move one step closer to a world our Founders feared, and that Plato described.

For those who are wondering, Plato’s next stage was total tyranny....

The Electoral College is still right for America, by Rob Natelson, Complete Colorado, January 29, 2019:

... it is not true, as some claim, that the Founders acted only out of distrust of democracy. Rather, the system was a brilliant response to...

Having created a unique office, the Founders needed an adequate process for choosing its occupant. They set forth several criteria:

  • The electoral process had to produce presidents competent to discharge their extensive responsibilities. Not only must the president be qualified for the job, but he must be able to exercise judgment independent of Congress and of the states. Thus, those directly choosing among the candidates should either know them personally or have reliable knowledge of their character and qualifications.
  • The process should give great weight to popular preferences, while minimizing dangers of “stampeding” and other mob-like behavior.
  • It should reduce the risks of foreign and other secret influence.
  • It should balance state and national interests.
  • It should produce presidents of national stature. A purely regional executive could tear the country apart, either by his election or by policies favoring some parts of the country at the expense of others.
  • The process should discourage states from trying to increase their influence by artificially inflating their vote levels....

Did the Electoral College worked as intended in 2016? Yes and no.

It worked insofar as it denied election to Hillary Clinton, who, although the popular vote choice, was largely a regional candidate. But it failed to work insofar as state statutes prevented electors from voting for any candidates other than two widely seen as unacceptable. Those statutes also discouraged qualified people from seeking the office of presidential elector.

An end-run around the Electoral College, by Peter Skurkissm, American Thinker, February 28, 2019.

Prelude to a Revolution, National Popular Voting, by Don Mellon, Canada Free Press, March 16, 2019.

Don’t let Colorado be an Electoral College dropout, by Mike Rosen, Complete Colorado, February 5, 2019.

The One-Two Punch to Knock Out Electoral Democracy, by Michael S. Kochin, American Greatness, June 16, 2019.

Colorado Moves To Bypass Electoral College: Will Assign Electoral Votes To Popular Vote Winner, by Marc Slavo, Freedom Outpost, February 28, 2019.

Colorado Gov. Polis signs national popular vote bill into law, March 16, 2019.

Democrats Want To Kill The Electoral College Because They Fear The Constitution - The Left is increasingly comfortable attacking foundational ideas of American governance, by David Harsanyi, the Federalist, March 20, 2019.

See the 270 To Win website for an interactive electoral college map (included below) and electoral college maps of Historical Presidential Elections.


Interactive 2020 electoral college map - 270 to win

 

 

Books:

 

Moving Closer to Mob Rule: No Choice, No Voice, by Ray DiLorenzo, Canada Free Press, May 25, 2019:


Half of the U.S. population lives in these counties

 

Oregon Department of Corrections: Foreign National Homicide Report September 2018

Information obtained from the Oregon Department of Corrections (DOC) indicated on September 1, 2018 that 133 of the 920 foreign nationals (criminal aliens) in the state’s prison system were incarcerated for homicidal crimes (various degrees of murder and manslaughter) —14.46 percent of the criminal alien prison population

(Note: The number of criminal aliens incarcerated for homicidal crimes in DOC prisons does not necessarily equal the number of Oregon residents killed by alien homicidal violence).

Using DOC U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) immigration detainer numbers, the following table reveals the total number criminal alien inmates along with the number and percentage of those alien inmates incarcerated on September 1st in the state’s prisons for homicidal crimes.
 

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Month/Day/Year

DOC Total Inmates W/ICE Detainers

DOC Number of Inmates W/ICE Detainers for Homicidal Crimes

DOC Percent of Inmates W/ICE Detainers for Homicidal Crimes

September 1, 2018

920

133

14.46%

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 September 18.

Criminal aliens incarcerated in DOC prisons committed at least one crime of homicidal violence in 22 of 36 Oregon counties — 66.11 percent of the counties in the state.

Seven Oregon counties, Multnomah (36 alien inmates convicted of homicidal crimes), Marion (23 alien inmates convicted of homicidal crimes), Washington (21 alien inmates convicted of homicidal crimes), Umatilla (9 alien inmates convicted of homicidal crimes), Clackamas (7 alien inmates convicted of homicidal crimes), Lane (6 alien inmates convicted of homicidal crimes) and Jackson (5 alien inmates convicted of homicidal crimes) had 107of 133 criminal alien inmates incarcerated in DOC prisons for homicidal violence — 80.45 percent of the alien inmates in the state’s prisons for homicidal crimes.

Using DOC ICE immigration detainer numbers, the following table reveals the number and percentage of criminal alien inmates incarcerated on September 1st that were sent to prison from the state’s 36 counties for homicidal crimes.
 

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

County

DOC Number of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers by County Incarcerated for Homicidal Crimes

DOC Percent of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers by County Incarcerated for Homicidal Crimes

Multnomah

36

27.07%

Marion

23

17.29%

Washington

21

15.79%

Umatilla

9

6.77%

Clackamas

7

5.26%

Lane

6

4.51%

Jackson

5

3.76%

Linn

3

2.26%

Klamath

3

2.26%

Yamhill

3

2.26%

Benton

2

1.50%

Josephine

2

1.50%

Lincoln

2

1.50%

Polk

2

1.50%

Clatsop

1

0.75%

Deschutes

1

0.75%

Douglas

1

0.75%

Gilliam

1

0.75%

Hood River

1

0.75%

Jefferson

1

0.75%

Malheur

1

0.75%

OOS (Not a County)

1

0.75%

Tillamook

1

0.75%

Baker

0

0.00%

Columbia

0

0.00%

Coos

0

0.00%

Crook

0

0.00%

Curry

0

0.00%

Grant

0

0.00%

Harney

0

0.00%

Lake

0

0.00%

Morrow

0

0.00%

Sherman

0

0.00%

Union

0

0.00%

Wallowa

0

0.00%

Wasco

0

0.00%

Wheeler

0

0.00%

Total

133

100.00%

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 September 18.

Criminal aliens from 19 different countries have committed homicidal violence against Oregon residents.

Foreign nationals who declared their country or origin as being Mexico were 103 of 133 criminal aliens convicted of homicidal crimes incarcerated in the DOC prison system — 77.44 percent of the alien inmates in the state’s prisons for homicidal crimes.

Using DOC ICE immigration detainer numbers, the following table reveals the self-declared countries of origin of the 133 criminal alien inmates by number and percentage incarcerated on September 1st in the state’s prisons for homicidal crimes.
 

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Country

DOC Number of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers by Country Incarcerated for Homicidal Crimes

DOC Percent of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers by Country Incarcerated for Homicidal Crimes

 

Mexico

103

77.44%

 

Cuba

4

3.01%

 

Canada

3

2.26%

 

Vietnam

3

2.26%

 

Cambodia

2

1.50%

 

El Salvador

2

1.50%

 

Guatemala

2

1.50%

 

Laos

2

1.50%

 

South Korea

2

1.50%

 

Costa Rica

1

0.75%

 

Honduras

1

0.75%

 

Japan

1

0.75%

 

Mariana Islands

1

0.75%

 

Marshall Islands

1

0.75%

 

Nicaragua

1

0.75%

 

Nigeria

1

0.75%

 

Peru

1

0.75%

 

South Africa

1

0.75%

 

Turkey

1

0.75%

 

Total

133

100.00%

 

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 September 18.

David Olen Cross of Salem, Oregon writes on immigration issues and foreign national crime. The preceding report is a service to Oregon state, county and city governmental officials to help them assess the impact of foreign national crime in the state. He can be reached at docfnc@yahoo.com. His past crime reports can be found at http://docfnc.wordpress.com/.

Governor and Legislative candidates support Measure 105

Alert date: 
2018-09-29
Alert body: 

OFIR has posted a list of Governor and Legislative candidates who support Measure 105.  You can view the list here

The list is based primarily on the Comparison Chart on Immigration from the 2018 Abigail Adams Voter Education Survey questionnaire.  We have added some information from other sources.

Good news: numerous candidates are known to support Measure 105.  There are probably additional supportive candidates.  We’ll be glad to add them to the list if they identify themselves to Oregonians for Immigration Reform at ofir@oregonir.org.

Oregon's sanctuary state law faces repeal vote in November

SALEM, Ore. (AP) — A man suspected of being in the United States illegally ran a red light while drunk on a street in Oregon's state capital and crashed into a motorcycle carrying a man and woman, killing them both, authorities said.

A judge set bail for Eduardo de la Lima Vargas at $500,000 on Wednesday, saying he's a threat to society and a flight risk....

Of the 14,916 inmates in Oregon Department of Corrections prisons, 943 were foreign nationals as of July 1, according to David Olen Cross, who voluntarily compiles data and shares his information with lawmakers, law enforcement, media and others....

ICE spokeswoman Carissa Cutrell said her agency "only lodges detainers on individuals who are subject to removal, meaning these individuals violated the terms of their lawful status or are in the country illegally."

The biggest share of foreign national prisoners — 229 — resided in Marion County, Cross said....

Cases such as the one involving de la Lima Vargas are fueling a debate ahead of the November election, when voters will decide whether Oregon should repeal its sanctuary state law, the nation's oldest....

De la Lima Vargas was intoxicated on Aug. 19 when he drove a pickup truck pulling a loaded horse trailer through a red light in Salem and struck a motorcycle that Logan and Jessica Wilson were riding on, killing the Salem couple, prosecutors said.

De la Lima Vargas is charged with two counts of manslaughter, driving under the influence, reckless driving and recklessly endangering another person...

Court-appointed defense attorney Manuel Perez said de la Lima Vargas came to the United States 18 years ago, and had gone back to Jalisco, Mexico, for six of those years. He was self-employed, working construction with a friend, Perez said.

De la Lima Vargas was barely audible when agreed to waive his right to a speedy trial.

On Aug. 23, ICE lodged an immigration detainer on de la Lima Vargas, saying he is illegally residing in the United States. But the jail won't accept ICE detainers without a criminal warrant issued by a magistrate judge, ICE officials say.

"Sanctuary policies not only provide a refuge for illegal aliens, but they also shield criminal aliens who prey on people in their own and other communities," ICE said in a statement.

Advocates of Oregon's 1987 sanctuary law accuse its detractors of seizing upon criminals in the country illegally to push their case for supporting a repeal of the sanctuary state law. Most immigrants are law-abiding, fill jobs that U.S. citizens often don't want, and contribute to society, they say.

Those who support the 1987 law say if it is repealed, Latinos and others would be subjected to racial profiling by law enforcement, and that people in the country illegally would be reluctant to report crimes, fearing deportation.

Those who support repeal, including 16 of Oregon's 36 sheriffs, say respect for the law is paramount.

Marion County Sheriff Jason Myers was among the majority of sheriff's who did not sign an open letter supporting repeal.

GREAT News - the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reaffirms our stunning victory on Measure 88

Alert date: 
2018-09-05
Alert body: 

We just learned from our attorneys that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied the lawsuit against our victory in 2014 to overturn driver cards for illegal aliens - Measure 88.
 

Five self-identified, alleged illegal aliens filed a federal lawsuit against the state of Oregon for allowing the will of Oregon voters to overturn the bill giving an official Oregon driver card to illegal aliens. The bill that Measure 88 overturned was Senate Bill 833 which had passed both chambers of the State Legislature and was signed by Governor Kitzhaber with great fanfare on the steps of the Capitol before a large crowd on May Day, May 1. 2013.
 
The vast majority of voters understood the implications of giving an official state-issued, photo ID, in the form of a driver card to individuals who could not prove they are legally in the country, and they DEFEATED Measure 88, expressing their disapproval of Senate Bill 833.
 
For the record, Measure 88 was defeated by 66 percent of Oregon voters. Close to one million Oregonians voted against driver cards. Thirty-five of Oregon’s 36 counties voted it down. Eighteen counties voted by over 80 percent against it. Measure 88 lost in all five of Oregon’s congressional districts. A majority of Oregon Democrats, Republicans and independents voted against issuing driver cards to illegal aliens.
 
Our opponents outspent us roughly ten to one. One Hollywood TV star, gave a $50,000 donation to the pro driver card measure, almost as much money as our campaign had in total.
 
Measure 88 was debated in public forums, in newspapers, on the radio, in the voter’s pamphlet, and on TV. Voters had a clear understanding of the issue.  It’s not often we praise the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals - but, this time they deserve iit!
 
Measure 88 was a Referendum calling for a no vote to rid citizens of a bad bill that had passed the Legislature but had not yet been put into effect. 

Measure 105 is an Initiative which must have a YES vote to REPEAL a bad law that’s been on the books for years.
 
Let’s make it two victories in a row.  Let’s overturn Oregon’s sanctuary law - Vote YES on Measure 105.  Talk to your friends, neighbors, relatives and fellow citizens - ask them to Vote YES on Measure 105, too!
 
YES on Measure 105 Lawn and field signs will be available this weekend - go to
and order YOUR signs today!

The Oregon State Fair opens Friday, August 24th!

Alert date: 
2018-08-21
Alert body: 

The Oregon State Fair opens Friday, August 24th for its eleven day run of fun ending Sept. 3rd - Labor Day.  The Stop Oregon Sanctuaries campaign will be hosting a booth in the Jackman Long building (aka Shoppers Expo) - space #235.

While you're enjoying the fair, please stop by and say hello!  You can order your lawn or field sign while you're at the fair, too!  Or, order your signs online.

If you would like to help with the campaign in other ways, please visit our website.

If you are able and want to help - a donation would be greatly appreciated to use for our campaign. 

Thank you!  We'll se you at the FAIR!
 

Information on candidates' immigration positions available now

Alert date: 
2018-08-11
Alert body: 

For several years now, in election seasons, OFIR has provided information on Oregon candidates’ positions on immigration issues.  See the Elections section in Immigration Topics.

For 2018, OFIR has posted an Overview of the General Election which includes pertinent information.

Collection of information on candidates’ immigration positions is becoming easier now since the Oregon Abigail Adams Voter Education Survey has begun including several good questions on immigration policy in its compilations of candidate positions on a variety of current issues. 

NumbersUSA also collects information on Congressional candidates’ positions, and with its large database of incumbents’ voting records on immigration issues, NumbersUSA is a valuable source for voters to know about.  Their current listing for Oregon can be viewed here.

With immigration so much in the news today, it’s advisable to check the views of candidates in one’s voting district.  If you don’t find any public information on their views, that’s useful to know also, because candidates should be well-versed on immigration issues to serve their constituents adequately now.  A reluctance to state their positions publicly is a red caution flag for voters.

“Immigration has risen to the top of the list when Americans are asked to name the most important problem facing the nation …”, according to a new Gallup poll.  

Voters can email their candidates and ask them, please, to reply to the Oregon Abigail Adams Voter Education Survey questions on immigration which are posted here.  Email addresses for candidates are usually on the candidates’ websites, and the OAAVEP survey includes link to candidate websites in most cases.  If you have a problem contacting candidates in your voting districts, you can email OFIR and we’ll send you contact information.

If you wish, you can cite these references to your candidates:

1.  FAIR has issued a good report specifically about what states and local governments can do to help immigration enforcement; see it here.  The full report is a pdf document:  https://fairus.org/sites/default/files/2017-08/2016_State_and_Local_Agenda.pdf

2.  A CIS analyst presented testimony to Congress summing up current needs very well; view her report, “Restoring enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws,” here.  

3.  Informative discussions of what constitutes good immigration policy are available on the websites of NumbersUSAFederation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), Center for Immigration Studies

Celebrate Your Success - Sat. August 4th at 2:00pm

Alert date: 
2018-07-25
Alert body: 
Please invite a friend and plan to join us!
 
Initiative Petition #22 - to REPEAL Oregon's Sanctuary Law, has qualified for the 2018 General Election ballot.  Thanks to all who collected signatures and contributed in so many wonderful ways on behalf of IP 22.  We are now waiting to find out what our official ballot measure number will be in the November election.  We will let you know as soon as the number is assigned.

Join us as we celebrate your hard work and success at the next OFIR meeting Saturday, August 4th at 2:00 pm at the Best Western Mill Creek Inn in Salem. 

Brainstorming about the upcoming initiative campaign will be one of our main topics. 

Representative Sal Esquivel, one of the three chief petitioners on IP 22, will be the featured speaker.  He has been a great friend to OFIR and we are sad to see him go as he will be retiring this year.  We want to give him the best possible send off.

Driving directions to Best Western Mill Creek Inn

Across the street from Costco

Best Western Mill Creek Inn
3125 Ryan Dr. SE.
Salem 97301

From I-5, take exit 253, which is the intersection of I-5 and State roads 22 and Business 99E. Go West on 22 (Mission St.) a short distance to Hawthorne Ave. Turn R on Hawthorne Ave. to the first left, which is Ryan Drive. Turn left on Ryan Drive, by Denny’s Restaurant, and proceed to Mill Creek Inn just beyond.

 

Repeal Oregon's sanctuary-law committee earns place on 2018 ballot

Today, after more than a week of required signature review by the Oregon Secretary of State's Elections officials, the committee learned that the initiative has earned a place on the Nov. 2018 Geneal Election ballot.

Over a week ago, the Repeal Oregon's Sanctuary Law Committee announced it had submitted to the Oregon Secretary of State enough signatures to potentially qualify Initiative Petition 22 as a measure on the November 2018 statewide ballot.

"Today was another hurdle to clear in the culmination of a year-long, volunteer effort. Across the state, hundreds of grassroots Oregonians worked to gather the signatures of tens of thousands of voters.  All are eager to end Oregon's sanctuary policy and see their state do its part to combat, not promote, illegal immigration by freeing our police and sheriffs to cooperate fully with Federal immigration authorities to enforce U.S. immigration law," said Cynthia Kendoll, authorized agent of the repeal committee and president of Oregonians for Immigration Reform, which spearheaded the signature-gathering effort.

Oregonians for Immigration Reform, founded in 2000, engages representatives at all levels of government for policies that would end illegal immigration and return legal immigration to our traditional levels of 230,000 per year. In 2014, the group spearheaded a Citizen's Veto Referendum - Measure 88 and, with a 66% NO vote, overturned the state law that would have given state issued photo ID in the form of driver cards to illegal aliens in Oregon.

Read more at Stop Oregon Sanctuaries.

A lesson not learned - try again

The majority party in the Oregon Legislature is failing to heed the clear will of the people in regards to Measure 88. 

Will the party in charge fail to listen yet again?  The results of the upcoming primary election are critical if Oregon is to remain the beautiful, livable state it once was.  What can be done to stop Oregon's decline?

Go to www.StopOregonSanctuaries.org and sign the petition.  Share the website with your friends, family and on social media.
 

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - election