Conservatives and Climate Change

[TDub]

Without allowing for a people’s vote? Who elected these lawmakers, anyway?

If the citizens of the state should be allowed to vote (instead voting for representatives to vote for them), you really think it would make a difference against the popular majority in the Portland metro?

We can only imagine the OuTrAGe if radical left wing militias were courting violence in petty defense of democratic lawmakers who skipped out on their state.

Look at all the discussion about what the republicans are trying to pass and/or repeal. Who elected these lawmakers anyway!

And she did, she dispatched the oregon state patrol to forcibly return the outstanding senators back to the floor. Ridiculous huh?

[ousdahl]

So you’re cool with republican lawmakers not showing up to do the jobs they were elected to do?

And what are republicans trying to pass and/or repeal?

It sounds more like republicans are resorting to bush league no-show tactics to NOT pass a law, despite its majority support.

[ousdahl]

Actually, I’m genuinely curious about the details of the law. What are they?

And are republicans opposed to the details of the law itself, or are they more so trying to avoid a representative vote just to spite the libs?

[ousdahl]

Is there precedent for lawmakers going MIA, perhaps even leaving their own state, to avoid a vote on a law?

[TDub]

I'm for politicians standing up for their constituents and not allowing bills to be modified after they have been negotiated.

As for the second question, look at the 100s of pages here about what the Republicans are doing. We all elected them, so we should be good with whatever they're doing...right? Is that your stance?

[ousdahl]

What are republicans doing? Do you have a link to the 100s of pages, or some summary of as much?

How was the bill modified?

And my stance is, yeah we elected them, so we should be good with whatever they’re doing, assuming what they’re doing is their job, and they’re showing up to do their jobs in a civil way, instead of NOT doing their jobs and going into hiding and courting rogue militias for protection...at least based on what I’ve read thus far.

[ousdahl]

Is there precedent for lawmakers seeking out, and militias offering, such “protection?”

[TDub]

This place is a daily bitchfest about our government (some rightfully so) pick a thread on the politics board I dont think I need to link them all here. I assume you wont be posting any negative thoughts about our elected officials policies since apparently that's your thought on the subject.

[TDub]

Is there precedent for lawmakers seeking out, and militias offering, such “protection?”

Is there a precedent for dispatching the state patrol to forcibly round up representatives to force a bill through that the representatives dont believe is in the interest of their constituents.

[ousdahl]

Let’s stick to the topic at hand.

I’ve seen the law would be among the strictest in the nation as far as emissions standards. Do you or do Oregon republicans oppose that in substance? Or is it more just the principle of you/republicans don’t want such liberal standards imposed?

How was the language of the bill modified?

The state police were initially called in because of threats to the capitol by radical militias, correct? Do you or other republicans condone such violence? Do you condone lawmakers going into hiding, and possibly even leaving the state they were elected to represent?

[ousdahl]

Is there precedent for lawmakers seeking out, and militias offering, such “protection?”

Is there a precedent for dispatching the state patrol to forcibly round up representatives to force a bill through that the representatives dont believe is in the interest of their constituents.

Aren’t the militias, and even the lawmakers, welcoming armed violence regarding the issue?

[TDub]

Let’s stick to the topic at hand.

I’ve seen the law would be among the strictest in the nation as far as emissions standards. Do you or do Oregon republicans oppose that in substance? Or is it more just the principle of you/republicans don’t want such liberal standards imposed?

How was the language of the bill modified?

The state police were initially called in because of threats to the capitol by radical militias, correct? Do you or other republicans condone such violence? Do you condone lawmakers going into hiding, and possibly even leaving the state they were elected to represent?

I'm not a republican. The state police were called in prior to the call for the militia, the militia was in response to the state police call. I'm against both of those actions.

The bill will impact many of the small operation agricultural operations and small logging operations. It will drive out larger industry operations that support many families in the non metro areas and it disproportionately impacts the rural areas of the state - from which these representatives are elected.

[ousdahl]

I’ve read that the state police were called in as a response to the militia, but go figure.

But if the state police were called in either way, that’s at least some civil effort to maintain law and order.

Regardless of who is reacting to whom, and even if the cops were called in first, dunno when an armed militia is ever appropriate, especially when they’re threatening and soliciting violence.

And if rural families and businesses are really so adversely affected. I feel for them. At the same time though, climate change inevitably affects everyone, whether they believe it or not, so it seems some compromise is due. Edit: and if the markets are trending toward cleaner emissions either way, let’s not feel sorry for businesses who can’t or won’t keep up.

If dems are changing the bill after the fact, that doesn’t seem like good faith. (Thus far I haven’t read anything about that except for TDub’s mention, but I wouldn’t be surprised.)

If republicans won’t even show up to hold a vote, that doesn’t seem like good faith either. Never heard of a state lawmaker leaving their state in protest

[zsn]

Is there precedent for lawmakers seeking out, and militias offering, such “protection?”

Is there a precedent for dispatching the state patrol to forcibly round up representatives to force a bill through that the representatives dont believe is in the interest of their constituents.

Maybe not in Oregon, but didn't Texas resort to something like this to pass a forced-birthing law about a decade ago? In fact didn't they go into Oklahoma (outside jurisdiction) to round-up the opposition? My memory is a little light on the details, but I think I got the overall situation mostly correct

[Shirley]

Wis. February 17, 2011 Democrats Flee To Prevent Vote On Union Bill

[zsn]

Thanks, Feral!

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/05/ ... gislature/

Looks like this happened several times that my memory is a composite of the occurences. I had forgotten about the Wisconsin situation....and the Texas one was about redistricting, and I can't believe it was 16 years ago.

In any event, it looks like GOP is now dealing with the shoe being on the other foot!

[ousdahl]

Oh so there is precedent for leaving the state. Interesting! Thanks for the research folks.

Is there precedent for militias offering protection, and lawmakers accepting it?

[TDub]

Pass it without a quorum and sign it into law. They have to come back in to mount a legal challenge. When they come back in arrest them and pass it with quorum! Win-win situation

Would you have said the same thing about the Wisconsin situation?

[zsn]

Pass it without a quorum and sign it into law. They have to come back in to mount a legal challenge. When they come back in arrest them and pass it with quorum! Win-win situation

Would you have said the same thing about the Wisconsin situation?

To be honest, I don't know, but likely yes. Besides, from a practical standpoint how long do these people plan on staying out of state (also applies to Texas and Wisconsin)? Certainly they cannot stay past the next election, one way or another!

Parts of the "bad law" will/have been eventually overturned by voters or courts. Not sure if it was that Texas gerrymandering law which got tossed out by the courts but there are legal and electoral remedies as well as public pressure. Take for instance the "bathroom bill" in NC: the Dems were basically SOL in the legislature, but public pressure essentially killed the bill. Something similar happened to Mike Pence's overreach in Indiana.

If this bill is truly egregious then I'm sure the Gas Oil Pollution lobbyists can mount a similarly effective pushback, what with all their deep pockets! As ousie pointed out, people of Oregon elected the current makeup of the legislature. If they don't like the output they will surely change back.

[Leawood]

I think Kansas Democrats did that years ago.