Oregon high court says 10 GOP state senators who staged long walkout can’t run for reelection
Oregon high court says 10 GOP state senators who staged long walkout can’t run for reelection
Last year’s boycott lasted six weeks — the longest in state history — and paralyzed the legislative session, stalling hundreds of bills.
Minority leader Tim Knopp said:
we are deeply disturbed by the chilling impact this decision will have to crush dissent
Give me a fucking break. As a legislator, you have no shortage of ways to dissent including access to media, the ability to speak on the floor of the legislature, and the ability to vote on legislation. What you can't do, if you want to keep your job is not show up for work every time you know you're going to lose a vote so that the legislature can't do business.
"What about a musician who wants to express a nonpartisan message that young people should participate in our democracy?"
That's DIFFERENT she needs to JUST SHUT UP
“She said she votes for human rights, so we know she votes for the wrong team.”
As an Oregon voter, tough shit. We voted with a 68% majority to amend the state constitution, with explicit penalties for legislative absenteeism.
The chilling impact they are feeling is the will of the people bitch slapping their defunct political strategy.
Refuse to do job.
Get fired.
/surprisedpikachu
Not even fired, but not rehired when their contract is up.
we are deeply disturbed by the chilling impact this decision will have to crush dissent
What they really said is: Wah! Boohoo! We don't like consequences for our actions! Wah! Wah!
Daddy, why are they fucking around and when they find out, they're being little bitches?
Because they are little bitches.
The amendment says a lawmaker is not allowed to run “for the term following the election after the member’s current term is completed.” The senators claimed the amendment meant they could seek another term, since a senator’s term ends in January while elections are held the previous November.
What a slimey disingenuous BS argument. They are knowingly trying to subvert the law specifically aimed at their behavior while pretending it's SOMEHOW the will of the voters to ignore them.
‘Crush dissent’? lol good you clown, I don’t think law makers should be crushing dissent…
Conservatives supported this rule to punish those who attempted to manipulate sessions by not showing up. When the rule applies to them, they pretend they are victims of some kind.
The entire time the walk-out was happening, they told the media the rule wouldn't apply to them and they intended to run again. It was pure arrogance as it happened. And it's pure arrogance now as they claim their rule shouldn't apply to them.
Fuck conservatives. A conservative is incapable of honesty. Every word they utter is deception or manipulation. Every word.
The GOP loves whining and not doing their job. These people are being paid to represent people, by wilfully abusing quorum to stall the process they are doing their constituents a major disservice.
Filibuster if you want to stand there and defend against change you disagree with, but using absence as a political weapon is slimy and low effort.
Isn't that literally what the nazis did? Block decision making by walking out of the Reichstag when they were in the oposition?
As an Oregonian...
Hehe. Hehehehe! Hehehahahaaahahah!!! ...*gasp*... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Huuurrr hurr hurrr.
Found out.
What a pack of morons.
Proud of my state here
Where will the GOP find 10 more shit heads to run?
The bottom of the barrel, especially with conservatives, is like the TARDIS - impossibly larger on the inside than it appears from the outside.
Womp womp.
What? There's a consequence for not doing your job? Who would have guessed?
HAHAHAHAHA
FAFO indeed.
If you missed more than 10 days of work at any job, it's likely you'll be fired, so they can just pull themselves up by the boot-straps and find another job.
Haha
The amendment says a lawmaker is not allowed to run “for the term following the election after the member’s current term is completed.” The senators claimed the amendment meant they could seek another term, since a senator’s term ends in January while elections are held the previous November.
What a slimey disingenuous BS argument.
Lol..Oregon's a mess...they'll do whatever they can to get rid of Republicans...
they'll do whatever they can to get rid of
Republicanspoliticians that refuse to do their fucking jobsFTFY
Does that go for both sides? We visited Portland a while back, some of it looked like a 3rd World Country...and we all know what party is in control...
I'd say that it's not a good path to tread to have courts deciding who can and can't be on the ballot, however, in this particular case, it was put to the voters, and these guys knew the rule when they broke it, so c'est la vie
As for their argument, I'd say go with it... Let them run, let them get elected, then bar them for the term... That's actually how the wording works out... Theyre correct that they can technically run, but it's pretty specific about being unable to seve the term.
Fuck around and let a district go unrepresented for a term because legislators wanna play the "well ackshually" game, and the voters will sort that shit right out.
No thanks. We don't want elected officials cheating their way into illegal filibusters explicitly prohibited by law.
That is not a functioning democracy. If the minority can simply refuse to participate, so no work can be done by either side.
And no, voters having the ability to wait (potentially) years to just vote them out in the next cycle does not make it a functioning democracy.
The problem with that is it denies all of the people in that district their right to representation. It's not fair to punish people just because voters were dumb enough to elect someone who can't actually serve. The reasonable thing to do is ban unqualified candidates from the ballot. Otherwise it's like electing a dead person, they are going to have to hold a special election or appoint someone or do whatever the legal process is to fill the vacancy ASAP.
it's a state law, it's not some random retaliation
I've often wondered if this should be the punishment for failing to draw up constitutionally legal district maps. If a state can't figure out how to not gerrymander the heck out of itself, deny them represention for a term while they sort it out. Arguably the people elected under such maps don't reflect the true will of the people anyways
Does nobody proofread anything anymore? This amendment, well intended, sounds like it was written and distributed by a 6th grade civics class.
What's weird is that the wording on the ballot appears clear. How did this altered wording get into the constitution? That wording wasn't voted on, so how can different wording legal?