Author Archives: whmacken2013

by - 0 comments

Portland’s Striking Teachers and Their Union Leaders are at Escalating Risk of Losing Public Support.

 Portland, Oregon, long a bastion of anything-goes progressivism, can’t take this strike much longer. 

 Facts are stubborn things. A city still recovering from the pandemic, buffeted by economic uncertainty and battered by homelessness, proliferating graffiti, rampant drug use and crime, simply can’t afford to keep its kids home.

The union says it’s fighting for the children, but they will have missed 14 days of classes by Thanksgiving and may miss more. 

This in a district which is already struggling with high rates of student absenteeism. In the 2022-2023 school year, 36.4% of the district’s students were “chronically absent”, absent for more than 10% of the academic year. Chronic absentee rates were 52.9% for Black/African American students, 48% for Hispanic/Latino students, 66.1% for American Indian/Alaska Native students, 59.9% for Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 31.4% for white students and 22.7% for Asian students.

“The fact that absenteeism has gone up is the biggest issue right now and has been overlooked,” says the Lewis-Sebring Director of the UChicago Consortium on School Research, Elaine Allensworth. “People keep focusing on the test scores, but our research shows over and over again that student attendance is an incredibly strong predictor of pretty much every outcome you care about: High school graduation, college ready, college enrollment, college graduation. It’s vital that students actually come to school every day.”

And then there’s the performance of Portland Public Schools kids on state subject competency tests, likely already exacerbated by high absenteeism. Although mostly better than statewide results, they are still disappointing, often showing declining scores as children move through the system. 

At Portland’s elementary schools, for example, 56% of tested students met or exceeded state standards in math in the 3rd grade in 2023, while just 40% met or exceeded state standards in the 8thth grade, 55% met or exceeded English standards in the 3rd grade compared with 54% in the 8th grade and 44% met the standards in science in the 5th grade versus 38% in the 8th grade. 

At the district’s high schools, just 27% of 11th graders met or exceeded state standards in Math, 50% met or exceeded the standards in English and 39% met or exceeded the standards in science.

Of course, all this probably matters less now that the State Board of Education unanimously voted to extend the 2021 law that paused a requirement that Oregon students show proficiency in Essential Learning Skills in order to graduate.

The District’s teachers also need to confront a public perception that a massive amount of money is already being plowed into the troubled system. 

Taxpayers are already spending an astronomical amount to support Portland Public Schools, as I pointed earlier this year in The Cost of Sending Kids to Portland Public Schools is More Than You Think, a Lot More. The commonly used number for spending per student is $15,000, but that’s actually way off. All funds available to the District in the 2022-23 school year totaled $1.9 billion. Divide that by 41,470 students and per student expenditures came out to $45,533.

And that was more than the District spent per student in the 2021-22 school year, even though the number of students served declined. In the fall of 2021, the District enrolled 45,005 students in grades K-12, a decrease of 1,932 students from fall 2020. The net loss was even greater than the previous year’s loss of 1,716 students.

A recent “Portland Public Schools Enrollment Forecast” by Portland State University’s Population Research Center projected that the District’s enrollment will likely continue to fall throughout most of the forecast’s horizon, declining to a low of 39,123 in 2035-36. 

How can the union expect spending to keep increasing in the face of enrollment declines.  

Portland residents also aren’t likely to look more favorably on higher taxes or fees to help the district as the strike continues.  Portland’s income tax rate of 14.7% for earners is already second only to New York City, largely because of resident’s previous misguided willingness to support innumerable feel-good programs. Portland’s rate is even more punitive when you consider that an individual hits that high earner mark in Portland at $125,000, while a New York taxpayer would have to earn $25 million.

The Portland Metro Chamber recently noted that total taxes paid by businesses located in the City of Portland increased by about one-third, or from $781 million to $1.031 billion, just from 2019 to 2021, according to calculations by the global tax consultancy Ernst & Young.

Key changes during that three-year period, included implementation of a gross receipts tax for the Portland Clean Energy Fund, a property tax to fund city parks, a rate increase in the Multnomah County business tax, an income tax to support Preschool for All (paid in part by sole proprietors), property taxes for Multnomah County library renovations, and new business and personal taxes associated with Metro’s Supportive Housing Services measure.

The Preschool for All program, for example, is funded by a personal income tax based on the following thresholds:

  • Single taxpayers. All Oregon taxable income over $125,000 is taxed at 1.5%. All income above $250,000 is taxed at 3%. In 2026, the tax rate increases by 0.8%
  • Joint filers. All Oregon taxable income over $200,000 is taxed at 1.5%. All income above $400,000 is taxed at 3%. In 2026, the tax rate increases by 0.8%.

“Portland’s higher level of business taxation dates to the enactment of corporate income taxes levied by the City of Portland and Multnomah County in 1981,” the Chamber said. “ These local-level business income taxes are not common in other cities across the U.S.”

If the Portland Association of Teachers hopes to come out of this with continuing public support, teachers need to get back too work and kids need to get back in class. Parent and student patience is not inexhaustible. 

by - 0 comments

Civilian Deaths in Gaza Lie at Hamas’s Door

“Far too many Palestinians have been killed, far too many have suffered these past weeks,” U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Friday in New Delhi.

Do you think Hamas cares?

When Hamas terrorists launched an unprecedented and sadistic surprise attack on Israel  with cold indifference on Oct. 7, brutally butchering and massacring more than 1,200 people, injuring at least 6,900, taking more than 240 people hostage (There is still been no formal master list of hostages held, because Hamas hasn’t provided one), and launching thousands of missiles at Israel from the Gaza Strip, did they expect to overrun the country and eliminate Israelis from the river to the sea? 

Not in the least.

Their aim was to cause chaos and invite massive retaliation, hoping the retaliation could be twisted to undermine Israel’s right to exist and justify Hamas’s cause. 

Israel initially gained wide support in the face of Hamas’s savagery. 

President Biden condemned the atrocities committed by Hamas fighters, including the “slaughter” of men, women and entire families, as well as “stomach-churning reports of babies being killed.”

“The United States unequivocally condemns this appalling assault against Israel by Hamas terrorists from Gaza,” Biden said in a statement. “Israel has a right to defend itself and its people.” 

U.N. human rights chief Volker Turk said he was “shocked and appalled” by the attack. Ursula von der Leyen, head of the European Union’s executive commission, called the attack “terrorism in its most despicable form.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said, “Israel’s right to self-defense cannot be questioned.”

But as Israel has retaliated militarily in Gaza in an effort to punish Hamas, and more civilians have been caught in the crossfire, some because Hamas has demanded they stay in place, the public debate has shifted. The portrayal of Israel as the aggressor has emerged, just as Hamas surely hoped it would. 

Now the media is laser focused on the civilian casualties occurring with Israel’s response, all but eclipsing the Oct. 7 barbarities of Hamas. In achieving that shift, Hamas is turning itself into the victim.

Nowhere is that victim status more embraced now that at many American institutions of so-called higher learning. At Harvard, The Palestine Solidarity Committee issued a joint statement with more than 30 other student groups that held Israel “entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.” ” The apartheid regime is the only one to blame,” it continued.

” When antisemitism moves from the shameful fringe into the public square, it is not about Jews, It is never about Jews,” observed Bari Weiss, editor of The Free Press, in a recent speech to the Federalist Society. “It is about everyone else. It is about the surrounding society or the culture or the country. It is an early warning system—a sign that the society itself is breaking down. That it is dying.  It is a symptom of a much deeper crisis—one that explains how, in the span of a little over 20 years since Sept 11, educated people now respond to an act of savagery not with a defense of civilization, but with a defense of barbarism.”

Sarah Katz, an author with a background in Middle East Studies and counterterrorism, argues that statements such as the one from Harvard’s Palestine Solidarity Committee reflect the conflict of ideologies that has arisen between alleged racist perpetrators and racialized victims.

“When applied to Israel and Palestine, Israel as the “powerful Western oppressor” and Palestine as the “brave non-white victim” have captured the hearts and minds of many esteemed institutions,” Katz wrote recently in the Jewish Journal.  “This oppressor/victim binary tends to dismiss any reference to the culpability of any Palestinian entity in events preceding Israeli retaliation.”

As Ben Kawaller put it in a Free Press post, “What’s really righteous is to promulgate a fundamental loathing of anyone belonging to the “oppressor” class.”

It is essential to know all this when confronting the tragedy that is now Gaza. This is not to ignore or downplay the civilian deaths in Gaza, but Hamas does not get to position itself as the honorable resistance movement in Gaza because of them.

by - 0 comments

A Lesson for the Portland Association of Teachers

The Portland Association of Teachers isn’t going to get what it wants.

Voters in Salem just signalled why.

On Tuesday, Nov. 7, Salem voters smashed to smithereens a proposed payroll tax passed by the city council in July. 

A total of 82.14% of voters rejected the tax, which would have applied to anyone who worked in Salem, including people commuting into the city from elsewhere.

The fact is, voters are worried about their well-being and in no mood to bear increased government spending. Across the board, they feel that their incomes are being eroded by inflation, that their pay raises aren’t keeping up with inflation, and that their hard-earned living standards are threatened.

The teachers union says it’s on strike “for our students” and insists that the public is behind it. Before the strike, the union trumpeted the results of a poll it sponsored that found Oregonians were inclined to stand with educators and supported teacher strikes, especially in the Portland School District.

I don’t think the teachers can count on that support if it means more money out of the public’s pockets.

After all, taxpayers are already spending an astronomical amount to support Portland Public Schools. As I wrote earlier this year, The Cost of Sending Kids to Portland Public Schools is More Than You Think, a Lot More. The commonly used number for spending per student is $15,000, but that’s actually way off. All funds available to the District in the 2022-23 school year totaled $1.9 billion. Divide that by 41,470 students and per student expenditures came out to $45,533. That’s right, $45,533.

The state’s politicians, including the governor, have figured this out and have made it clear the state won’t bail out the district. And rightly so.  As OPB has noted, “It would be unusual — and scandalous in many corners of the state — for the Legislature to find a special pool of money just for Portland schools, particularly since other districts face similar issues.”

Multnomah County residents aren’t likely to look favorably on higher taxes or fees to help the district either. Multnomah County already has the highest marginal tax rates in the United States because of resident’s previous misguided willingness to support innumerable feel good programs. 

“I’m sure that when the voters in Multnomah County supported all of those different proposals and programs, they did it with good intent. But collectively, every time that we vote for an increase, particularly in marginal income tax, that definitely has a dampening impact on investment in our community,” Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler said earlier this year.

Multnomah County has already seen people vote with their feet against rising taxes. 

The county lost population in the year ended July 1, 2022, the U.S. Census Bureau said in its annual report on county-level changes. The county’s population stood at 795,083 on July 1, 2022, down 12,494 (1.3%) from 805,593 a year earlier. This followed a similar decline in 2021. 

Then, of course, the teacher’s union has to recognize that they want more money when the number of students in the system is declining. Enrollment numbers in the Portland Public School District have been dropping every year since 2019, with the biggest loss of students at the elementary school level. No business would give in to demands for higher pay if its sales were dropping like a stone. 

by - 0 comments

Lars Larson Got It Wrong On Portland Public Schools


Conservative radio host Lars Larsen missed the mark.

In an Oct. 24 column about the impending strike by Portland Public School teachers, Larson said the district “… spends 15-thousand bucks, per student, per year.” 

He’s off by a mile.

I’m not surprised, though, that he used the $15,000 figure. That number is frequently cited in news stories. It is also close to the number put out by the National Center for Education Statistics, which estimates the per pupil expenditure in Oregon’s K-12 public schools for 2019-2020 was $14,829.[1]

Earlier this year I asked the Portland Public School District if that number still holds. The district said the average of budgeted per pupil expenditures for next year (2023-2024) is actually $11,000 per student. 

“This represents standardized site services. (teachers, principals, counselors, etc,” the district explained. “It does not include services like transportation, nutrition, SpEd, ESL or other central office supports and operations. “

So, is Larson’s number too high? is $11,000 actually the answer?

Nope. 

Now stay with me. 

“Once you include services like transportation, nutrition, SpEd, English as a Second Language Programs (ESL), other central office supports and operations, from a whole system perspective the budgeted per pupil expenditure number doubles and is closer to $22k/student (this is both GenFund and Special Revenue and does not include bond dollars).,” the District told me.

This is getting confusing. Is $22,000 the final number then?

Nope, again.

It’s not so much a lie as an obfuscation, a deceit.  

A lot of things PPS spends money on are not counted in calculating spending per student. When all spending is thrown into the pot, the spending per student jumps up substantially.

Let’s look at the 2022-2023 school year.

PPS served 41,470 students that year. At $22,000 per student, that would translate to total spending of $912.3 million. But the District’s 2022-2023 budget is actually $1.883 billion.

Why the huge difference?

Put simply, the $22,000 doesn’t take into account all funds that support the District each year. The table below, provided by the District, shows all resources available to the district for the school years 2018-19 through 2022-23. 

This table shows that all funds available to the District in the 2022-23 school year actually totaled $1.9 billion. divide that by 41,470 students and per student expenditures comes out to $45,533. That’s right, $45,533.

And that was more than the District spent per student in the 2021-22 school year, even though the number of students served declined.

In the fall of 2021, the District enrolled 45,005 students in grades K-12, a decrease of 1,932 students from fall 2020. The net loss was even greater than the previous year’s loss of 1,716 students.

A recent “Portland Public Schools Enrollment Forecast” by Portland State University’s Population Research Center projected that the District’s enrollment will likely continue to fall throughout most of the forecast’s horizon, declining to a low of 39,123 in 2035-36.  

In the meantime,  Angela Bonilla, president of the Portland Association of Teachers, is arguing , “We’ve been sounding the alarm to the district for nearly a year in bargaining sessions, but Portland Public Schools management has not been willing to fund what our schools need…”

And the beat goes on.

[1] According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the $14,829 of per student expenditures comprise expenditures for the day-to-day operation of schools and school districts for public elementary and secondary education, including expenditures for staff salaries and benefits, supplies, and purchased services. General administration expenditures and school administration expenditures are also included in current expenditures. 

Expenditures associated with repaying debts and capital outlays (e.g., purchases of land, school construction, and equipment) are excluded from current expenditures. Programs outside the scope of public prekindergarten through grade 12 education, such as community services and adult education, are not included in current expenditures. Payments to private schools and payments to charter schools outside of the school district are also excluded from current expenditures. The Center says researchers generally use current expenditures instead of total expenditures when comparing education spending between states or across districts because current expenditures exclude expenditures for capital outlay, which tend to have dramatic increases and decreases from year to year. Also, many school districts support community services, adult education, private education, and other nonelementary-secondary programs, which are included in total expenditures. These programs and the extent to which they are funded by school districts vary greatly both across and within states and school districts.

by - 0 comments

Batten Down the Hatches: Portland’s New Form of Government is Going to Cost a Bundle 

In 2022, when Portland voters considered Ballot Measure 26-228 proposing transformational changes to city government, the City Budget Office estimated the cost of implementing the measure would be $910,000 to $8.7 million annually. 

“The range of the cost estimate is dependent on policy decision making outside the charter scope,” the Charter Review Commission said. 

Talk about buying a pig in a poke. To say the least, that left a lot of wiggle room.

Based on discussions to date, you can count on the final number being on the high end.

First, even the City Budget Office’s number is a ballpark estimate at best. As the Office said, “It is essential to note that the figures in this report are estimates and this report does not represent a budget document. Costs associated with council and mayor staffing levels, ranked choice voting implementation, and other election-related costs will only be known after certain operational milestones.”

Unknown’s, for example, are costs associated with the new ranked choice voting system, including voter education and outreach and changes in the Small Donor Elections program that provides candidates who have broad community support and follow program rules with up to a 9-to-1 match on the first $20 of small donations they receive from Portland residents. 

On top of that, according to Willamette Week, an emerging  sticking point is renovation of City Hall to accommodate the City Council’s expansion from a mayor and 4 commissioners to a mayor and 12 commissioners elected to represent four new geographic districts. 

From 5 to 13

Despite nearly a third of Portland’s downtown office market sitting vacant, and companies potentially reducing their footprint in more than 500,000 square feet of leased space that is set to expire market-wide during the balance of 2023, the city has budgeted up to $7.2 million to renovate City Hall to accommodate the council’s expansion. 

That renovation does not take into account the potential cost of establishing an individual office for each of the 12 commissioners within their district.

Meanwhile, Mayor Wheeler has proposed spending $893,000 – $1.4 million to relocate commissioners’ offices to another city building during the City Hall renovation.

Then there’s the need to plan for a City Administrator and that person’s staff. The Administrator will be responsible for implementing the laws approved by the City Council and manage the city’s bureaus. 

Mayor Wheeler has proposed that the City Administrator have an assistant city administrator and five deputies who would each oversee groups of the city’s bureaus. There are currently 26 bureaus, but that could change. Presumably, the City Administrator, Deputy City Administrator and the five deputies would also have administrative assistants of some sort.

Then there’s the issue of paying the mayor and the 12 city commissioners. Their initial pay has been set by an independent salary commission that was appointed in Jan. 2023. 

In June 2023, the salary commission decided to give all of Portland’s elected officials big pay raises under the new governance system.  The annual base pay for all incoming City Council members will be $133,207, $7,513 more than the current rate. The mayor’s annual base pay will be $175,463, a $26,202 raise. The salaries will go into effect in January 2025.

The salary commission was not responsible for proposing how the city should pay the new salaries. The current City Council will have to figure that out. 

Then there will be the staff of the mayor and each of the 12 commissioners. Currently, each city commissioner’s office has eight employees, including the commissioner, a chief of staff, and other aides performing a variety of duties.

Under Portland’s Adopted Budget for 2023-2024, three of the commissioners have a budget for 8 full-time positions and one (Dan Ryan) has a budget for 9 full-time positions::

  • Commissioner of Public Affairs, Rene Gonzales: $724,246
  • Commissioner of Public Safety, Mingus Mapps: $740,085
  • Commissioner of Public Utilities, Carmen Rubio: $775,038
  • Commissioner of Public Works, Dan Ryan: $761,405

In 2022, the City Budget Office assumed each of the twelve new offices would have between 3 and 4.7 full-time equivalent staff members supporting the Councilor and that each district of 3 representatives would have some level of shared staff providing communications and business operations functions. 

Mayor Wheeler has proposed that each of the 12 councilors have two aides and some shared staff. Three of the current City Council members have proposed that each of the 12 Council members have just one staff person and that there be some administrative staff to serve all the council members.

If the number lands at the total envisioned by the City Budget Office or Mayor Wheeler, be prepared to for higher costs with such an elaborate expanded city government and for calls for more staff as the 12 individual commissioners press for more power.

And get ready for more waste as time goes on.

As humorist P.J. O’Rourke put it, “It is a popular delusion that the government wastes vast amounts of money through inefficiency and sloth. Enormous effort and elaborate planning are required to waste this much money.”

by - 0 comments

Memo To The Oregon State Bar Association: Police Your Members

Are personal injury attorney J. William Savage and patent attorney Usman Mughal exceptional Portland-area lawyers? They’d like you to think so.

Both trumpet that they’ve been selected as Lawyers of Distinction based upon a rigorous review and vetting process. An advertisement in the Oct. 8, 2023 edition of the New York Times even congratulated them for being among 223 of “The Newest 2023 Lawyers of Distinction”.

Nine more Oregon attorneys were celebrated in another Lawyers of Distinction advertisement in the April 2023 edition of the National Law Journal and the August 6, 2023 edition of The New York Times: 

  • Pamela Blackwell, Portland
  • Joshua Callahan, Milwaukie
  • Alice Cuprill-Comas, Portland
  • Thomas Howe, Portland
  • Nicole Lemieux, Portland
  • Gregory Oliveros, Clackamas
  • Maryanne Pitcher, Medford
  • Phillip Williams, Eugene
  • Kali Yost, Portland 

All-in-all, Lawyers of Distinction currently has 33 Oregon lawyers listed as members on its website.

Impressed?

Don’t be. 

About all that’s required to be named a “Lawyer of Distinction” is to apply yourself or be nominated, fill out some online forms and pay a fee. 

According to the Orlando, FL-based organization’s website, a Charter Membership, for $475 a year, comes with a Customized 14″ x 11″ genuine rosewood plaque. A Featured Membership, for $575 a year, brings the plaque and inclusion in a membership roster published in USA Today, The New York Times, The American Lawyer and the National Law Journal.

Then there’s the Distinguished Membership, for $775 per year, the most expensive choice (described on the organization’s website as “Most Popular”), which brings the rosewood plaque, the membership roster ads and an 11″ tall translucent personalized crystal statue.

Lawyers of Distinction,  incorporated in 2014, is like diploma mills, outfits that claim to be higher education institutions, but only provide illegitimate academic degrees and diplomas for a fee.

The Lawyers of Distinction website describes the application review process as complex and rigorous.[1]

Don’t believe it.

 It’s just pay-for-play. It’s selling badges.  It’s paying for meaningless accolades. Apply, pay the annual membership fee and you’re in.

According to the Florida Division of Corporations, “Lawyers of Distinction Inc.” is a private for-profit company with a principal address of 4700 Millenia Boulevard, Suite 175, Orlando, FL 32839. 

Robert B. Baker, at the same address, is listed as the President in the company’s 2023 Annual Report. 

Robert Baker, President, Lawyers of Distinction

But don’t go to the office address expecting to be ushered into a space with a clean, modern aesthetic that communicates success. The address is only a virtual office. The site offers a “Platinum Plan” for $69 a month and a “Platinum Plan with live receptionist” for $194 a month. 

Robert “Robbie” Brian Baker, a member of the Florida Bar (Bar #992460), is also the founder and owner of Baker Legal Team at 2255 Glades Rd., Ste 330-W, Boca Raton, FL 33431. According to the Baker Legal Team website, he has a degree from Boston University School of Law in 1989 and a B.A. from Ithaca College.  He began his career, the website says, as a prosecutor working as an Assistant District Attorney in Kings County, New York. 

As an aside, the firm’s website has the chutzpah to highlight that it’s a member of Lawyers of Distinction. 

Lawyers of Distinction’s website says it currently has over 5000 members. If 5000 lawyers sign up for the Distinguished category at $775 this year, the organization will rake in $3.9 million. Quite a haul.

In an attempt to fend off bad publicity, Lawyers of Distinction includes on its website a section headed, “Is Lawyers of Distinction A Scam?” But it answers its own question with nothing more than brief testimonials by selected members. 

It’s unlikely that any attorneys have been duped by Lawyers of Distinction, lured into believing they’ve been selected for a rare honor based on their legal work, when all they did was send in a check. They must figure that impressing potential clients is worth the deception.

But that doesn’t leave state bar associations blameless for this decay of honest professional representation.

If the Oregon State Bar Association and its 14,000 members are honestly committed to accountability, excellence, fairness, and leadership in the legal profession, as they claim, they should insist that Oregon attorneys halt falsely advertising themselves as Lawyers of Distinction or holders of other unearned accolades.

Responsible lawyers should maintain the integrity of the legal profession. To do otherwise diminishes the law. 

Accordingly, on Oct. 9, 2023, I submitted an ethics complaint to the Oregon State Bar against all 33 Oregon attorneys listed as members of Lawyers of Distinction. My complaint is that these Oregon attorneys are acting in an unethical manner by misrepresenting to potential and current clients that their selection as “Lawyers of Distinction” is evidence of their legal skills and achievements.

11/13/2024 UPDATE: Oregon State Bar Refuses To Prohibit Deceit and Misrepresentation By Its Members

[1] “Lawyers of Distinction Members have been selected based upon a review and vetting process by our Selection Committee utilizing U.S. Provisional Patent # 62/743,254. The platform generates a numerical score of 1 to 5 for each of the 12 enumerated factors which are meant to recognize the applicant’s achievements and peer recognition. Members are then subiect to a final review for ethical violations within the past ten years before confirmation of Membership. Nomination does not guarantee membership and attorneys may not pay a fee to be nominated. Attorneys may nominate their peers whom they feel warrant consideration. The determination of whether an attorney qualifies for Membership is based upon the aforementioned proprietary analysis discussed above. Membership is not meant to infer any endorsement of Lawyers of Distinction by any of the 50 United States Bar Associations or The District of Columbia Bar Association. Any references to “excellent,” “excellence,” or “distinguished” are meant to refer to the Lawyers of Distinction organization only and not to any named member individually.”

by - 0 comments

Narcissism Run Amok: Jaiden’s Journey

We’re creating monsters.

Jaiden Rodriguez

Jaiden Rodriguez, a 12-year-old student at The Vanguard School, a K-12 charter school in Colorado Springs, CO, is enjoying a moment of media fame as he works to make a spectacle of himself .  He was recently reportedly removed from school because an administrator considered a Gadsten flag on his backpack to be associated with slavery and slave trade.

The Gadsden Flag

 The Gadsden flag was designed by independence-minded colonists in the run-up to the Revolutionary War. In the 1970’s, it was seen by some Tea Party adherents and Libertarians as a symbol of ideological enthusiasm for minimal government and the rights of individuals. Some have since associated it with the Confederate battle flag and the Ku Klux Klan. Suffice it to say, it has had multiple divergent personalities.

What has happened next in Jaiden’s case is a sign of the times. 

First, video of Jaiden being removed from class for displaying the flag went viral, thanks to Connor Boyack, president of Libertas Institute, a Utah-based libertarian think tank.

Then the usual public outrage erupted, stirred by impassioned claims Jaiden’s First Amendment rights were violated. 

And, of course, attention-seeking politicians then chimed in.

“This is a direct attack on his freedom of speech,” said Rep. Lauren Boebert, (R-CO),  a conservative firebrand .”Our education system has a deep-rooted problem with liberal bias.”

The Vanguard School’s Board of Directors subsequently allowed Jaiden to return to school with the Gadsden flag still visible on his backpack, calling the incident “an occasion for us to reaffirm our deep commitment to a classical education.”

That should have been the end of it, but Jaiden, spurred on by his attention-seeking mother, is apparently determined to maximize his moment of fame.

With the support of Libertas Institute, Jaiden has begun an online fundraising campaign to buy and ship books produced by Libertas Institute to schools across the country. The tax-deductible contributions will go to the Institute. 

“Connor and his team have some new American history books that teach the ideas of freedom and the founding fathers.,” Jaiden says in his appeal. “They’re so much better than the textbooks we have to use in school that don’t really teach history with any kind of depth.” 

The books, with titles such as “Should the collective control us?” and “Why are free markets important?”, “… empower parents like you to make sure your children have a foundation of freedom—to understand the ideas of a free society that socialists are trying too hard to undermine,” the Institute says. 

Noting that he’s grown more popular at school because of the controversy, Jaiden even has taken to some name-dropping, saying he’s talked with Ben Shapiro, a controversial conservative political pundit. 

In a podcast interview with Shapiro, Jaiden said the Gadsden flag “…was meant as a warning sign not to tread on our rights in the revolution. Which is funny because they tried to tread on my rights and then they found out they [could] not.”

Jaiden went on to tell Shapiro he expected to win a race for student council in a “landslide” due to the controversy and that he was now “Mr. Popular” at his school.

And to top it all off, now this 12-year-old 7th grader says his experience has made him want to be governor of Colorado in 18 years when he’s 30, the state’s minimum age to serve as governor.

We’re creating monsters. 

by - 0 comments

Gov. Kotek and Rep. Hoyle: Two Peas in A Pod

Earlier this year, Gov. Tina Kotek and the Democratic Party of Oregon were under pressure to return a $500,000 contribution to the party in 2022 from Nishad Singh, the 27-year-old wunderkind director of engineering at FTX, the disgraced and now bankrupt crypto company.

John Ray III, the new boss of the bankrupt crypto exchange FTX, pushed to get the money back, but the party stalled, likely hoping the passage of time would diminish any public pressure to return Singh’s donation. 

But the pressure didn’t let up. Finally, in June 2023 the party paid the piper, repaying the $500,000 to federal authorities, but not from the party’s coffers. Instead, the money came from the campaign accounts of Gov. Kotek, Sen Ron Wyden (D-OR), Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and three unnamed Democratic U.S. House members. 

Rep. Val Hoyle, (D-OR), elected to the House of Representatives in Nov. 2022 by Oregon’s 4th Congressional District, could learn something from all this. 

Don’t count on running out the clock on malfeasance.

Hoyle is trying to pull the same delaying tactics in a situation where the state’s Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) wants her to turn over her personal cellphones so the state can probe them for messages relating to state business Hoyle may have conducted outside public scrutiny when she was Labor Commissioner. In particular, BOLI is interested in any communications related to the controversial cannabis dispensary chain, La Mota.

Hoyle has resisted complying with the state’s request, insisting, instead, that she would review her personal devices and determine what was relevant to turn over to the state. 

Talk about the fox wanting to guard the henhouse.

“She’s obligated to turn over those devices so they can be properly searched,” Ginger McCall, who served as Oregon’s public records advocate during 2018-19, told Willamette Week. “I don’t think that the public should have to trust her to do her own search, because obviously there’s a conflict of interest there on her part.”

Hoyle’s intransigence makes it look like she has something to hide. She’s be wise to learn from the FTX case that stalling won’t work. We’ll shame her until she gives in.

by - 0 comments

The Joint Office of Homeless Services: A Little Shop of Horrors

If you think Portland and Multnomah County’s homeless crisis is chewing through money, you probably ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

Like the ravenous plant, Aubrey II, in the Little Shop of Horrors, its unbridled appetite for more money and more employees just keeps growing.

The Joint Office of Homeless Services, a collaboration between the city of Portland and Multnomah County, was created in 2016. In FY 2017 the Joint Office received a total allocation of $48.3 million from the city and county.

City funding for JOHS programs included $6.7 million for “Rapid Rehousing” that aims to make homelessness a short-lived experience for recently houseless individuals; $5.8 million on “Supportive Housing” to help individuals gain access to housing and preventative services; and $8.0 million on “Safety Off the Streets” to pay for shelters and services for victims of domestic violence, youth, women and families. The bureau also directed $736,825 to prevent seniors and people with disabilities from becoming homeless, divert at-risk individuals from coming into contact with the criminal justice system, and expand tenant protections. 

While the extent of homelessness was sobering, the mood was hopeful.

“A greater focus on management and results – in addition to sustained funding – will be needed to ensure that the region is making the most of its investment to help Portland’s most in need,” an early performance report said.

“…the department has a clear road map to expanding services that reduce chronic and episodic homelessness, with priority given to strategies that eliminate racial disparities, the Joint Office said in its FY2023 Adopted Budget.

Whatever that “clear roadmap” has been, it has cost a growing pile of money, up almost 550% since 2017, and a blistering July 2023 report from Multnomah County’s auditor alleges that the Joint Office is a mess.

As OPB has put it, “…a peek behind the scenes of the joint office reveals how clunky contract management, poor communication, insufficient data collection, and lack of vision have undermined the program’s effectiveness at solving one of the region’s most entrenched challenges.”

And now another scathing review from Health Management Associates of Oregon (HMA), requested by  Multnomah County Commission Chair Jessica Vega Pederson , noted:

  • a lack of alignment among elected leaders, county leaders, providers and service and housing providers regarding the appropriate components of the homelessness response system
  • a lack of a cohesive, effective governance of the Homelessness Response System
  • Uncoordinated systems provide fragmented care for shared clients, leading to returns to homelessness and poor outcomes
  • a lack of timely communication with stakeholders and sometimes finding out news through the media,
  • a lack of role clarity, decision-making and organizational structure within the JOHS

According to Multnomah County’s Press Office, ” The Joint Office contract with HMA is for two years, from May 2023 to June 2025. The total cost is $140,000. The contract involves the review today alongside work to accomplish the steps laid out in the review.” Why two simultaneous reviews are necessary, one of which cost the Joint Office money, is not clear.

Tracking the Joint Office’s budgets over the years is difficult because online reports from the office have numbers for given years that are all over the map, a sign, perhaps, of its dysfunction.

What is clear is the Joint Office’s FY 2023 Adopted Budget is $262.4 million. The budget increases over the years have been accompanied by a concomitant increase in staffing, from 13 full time equivalent positions in 2016 to 45 in FY 2021 and 96 in FY 2023.

Has the homeless count gone down with the commitment of all this money and personnel?

A 2015 Point-In-Time report said 3,800 individuals were homeless in Multnomah County on any given night.

After eight years of work and millions of dollars spent by the Joint Office of Homeless Services, the number of people considered homeless in the most recent Point-In-Time Count in Multnomah County, conducted Jan. 25-31, 2023?

6,297

A little shop of horrors, indeed.

by - 0 comments

If You Support Freedom and Ukraine, Remember These People

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy acceded to his party’s lunatic anti-Ukraine caucus and said no to a request by Ukraine’s President, Volodymyr Zelensky, to address a joint session of Congress, or to bring together House members for a meeting with Zelensky during his current visit to Washington. .

Whatever you think of President Biden, he has been steadfast in his support of Ukraine, unlike the Republican party’s leader, former President Trump, who has been an embarrassing Putin acolyte.

“When he was President, Trump rarely missed a chance to excoriate the nation’s allies and praise its adversaries and parroted Russian talking points on Ukraine,” New Yorker staff writer  Susan B. Glasser wrote this week. “After the 2022 invasion, he even went so far as to laud Putin’s strategic “genius.” Just a few days ago, Trump revelled once again in praise from Putin, who has all but endorsed the former President’s campaign to return to the White House in 2024.”

Peace at any price is a fool’s game. As President Theodore Roosevelt put it, “The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first…”

Yesterday, 28 Republican members of Congress, led by Senator J.D. Vance (R- Ohio) ignored this when sending a letter to Shalanda Young, Director, Office of Management and Budget. 

The letter asserted, “It would be an absurd abdication of congressional responsibility to grant” the Administration’s request fort additional aid to Ukraine, specifically an August 10, 2023 request for additional supplemental appropriations, in which the Administration asked Congress to provide another $24 billion in security, economic, and humanitarian assistance related to the war in Ukraine. 

The Republicans couched their opposition to additional expenditure for the war in Ukraine as opposition to “…an open-ended commitment to supporting the war in Ukraine of an indeterminate nature, based on a strategy that is unclear, to achieve a goal yet to be articulated to the public or the Congress,” but that’s a ruse. The reality is they want to undermine US support for Ukraine. 

It all reminds me of the America Firsters and their isolationist pressure against American entry into World War II.  “The doctrine that we must enter the wars of Europe in order to defend America will be fatal to our nation if we follow it,” Charles Lindbergh, a leading voice of the America First movement said in 1941.  

Lindbergh was wrong then and the 28 Republicans sending the letter to Shalanda Young are wrong now.

Remember their names:

JD Vance, United States Senator

Rand Paul, M.D. United States Senator

Mike Braun, United States Senator 

Tommy Tuberville United States Senator 

Paul A. Gosar, D.D.S. Member of Congress 

Dan Bishop, Member of Congress 

Bill Posey, Member of Congress 

Chip Roy, Member of Congress 

Mike Lee, United States Senator 

Roger Marshall, M.D. United States Senator 

Roger Williams, Member of Congress 

Clay Higgins, Member of Congress 

Harriet M. Hageman, Member of Congress 

Bob Good, Member of Congress 

Warren Davidson, Member of Congress 

Anna Paulina Luna, Member of Congress 

W. Gregory Steube, Member of Congress 

Josh Brecheen Member of Congress 

Andy Ogles, Member of Congress 

Andy Biggs, Member of Congress 

Russell Fry, Member of Congress 

Eli Crane, Member of Congress 

Jeff Duncan, Member of Congress 

Beth Van Duyne, Member of Congress 

Lance Gooden, Member of Congress 

Mary E. Miller, Member of Congress 

Byron Donalds, Member of Congress 

Michael Cloud, Member of Congress