Oregon Democrats to Voters: ‘Let Them Eat Cake”

For all its screw-ups, Oregon is damn good at one thing, raising taxes and fees. 

One of the newest gambits, SB 687, would actually remove voters from the decision-making process.  Sponsored by State Senator Sen. Khanh Pham, D-Portland, and State Representatives Mark Gamba, D- Milwaukie and Zach Hudson, D – Troutdale, Wood Village, Fairview and North Gresham, the bill would allow a city or county to enact a fuel tax without going to voters first, eliminating a current requirement that local voters must approve city or county gas tax increases.

I guess in the sponsors’ view, voters just get in the way of sound policymaking.  

In a classic political gaffe, Gamba has already insulted voters, going so far as to tell OPB that voters too often act like “petulant children” standing in the way of taxes that are necessary to replace vital infrastructure like roads, sewage plants and libraries. “Someone needs to be the responsible adult in the room,” he told OPB. 

Oregon‘s tax system already ranks in the bottom half of states, coming in 30th overall on the 2025 State Tax Competitiveness Index and Portland enjoys the distinction of having the highest combined local income tax rate in the nation (4 percent), adding an extra layer of tax burden for residents of the state’s largest city.

You may be thankful Oregon forgoes a sales tax, but the Competitiveness Index points out it doubles down on other forms of taxation. The state has a complex and progressive individual income tax system with four tax brackets, a top marginal rate of 9.9 percent, and a personal exemption structured as a tax credit. Additionally, the tax brackets are not adjusted for inflation. 

The absence of a sales tax in Oregon is offset, the Index says, by an overly complex corporate tax system, which includes a 7.6 percent corporate income tax, a 0.57 percent gross receipts tax (the Corporate Activity Tax), and additional corporate taxes at the local level, particularly in the Portland area. Although gross receipts taxes typically do not allow any deductions from gross sales, the CAT provides a 35 percent deduction for either labor costs or the cost of goods sold. However, this does not significantly improve Oregon’s competitiveness in attracting businesses, as the state’s corporate tax system ranks among the worst in the nation, comparable to Delaware, the only other state to combine corporate income and gross receipts taxes.

Oregon’s property tax system is moderately competitive, the Index acknowledges, though the property tax burden relative to personal income is higher than in California and Washington. Additionally, the state imposes an estate tax with a maximum rate of 16 percent and the lowest estate tax exemption among states that levy the tax ($1 million), which further reduces the state’s competitiveness for high-net-worth individuals.

But what do the Democrats in the Legislature care? They have a supermajority in both  the Oregon House and Senate, so they’ll be able to increase taxes and fees without a single Republican vote. The hell with ordinary voters, I guess. 

Think Eco-Extremism Is Dead? Not In Oregon.

Oregon Democratic State Senator Jeff Golden of Ashland is confused.

Golden is the chief sponsor of a bill, SB 681, that would prohibit the State Treasurer from renewing investments in or making new investments in a private market fund if the managers of the fund have stated an intention to invest in fossil fuels. Joining him as regular sponsors of the bill are seven other Democrats: Senators Lew Frederick, Khanh Pham, Kathleen Taylor; House members Zach Hudson, Lisa Fragala, Mark Gamba, Travis Nelson.

The bill simply makes no sense. 

In relying on environmental criteria, investing is driven by a political agenda, not the best interests of investors.

In addition, the State Treasurer invests in securities that trade in secondary markets. As the Hewlett Foundation’s Kelly Born and Stanford Law professor emeritus Paul Brest have argued, it is virtually impossible for a socially motivated investor to increase the beneficial outputs of a publicly traded corporation by purchasing, or not purchasing, its stock.

Golden’s bill also undermines logic right off the bat when it justifies itself by citing everything but the kitchen sink as justification for the restrictive policy: 

“Whereas in Oregon, more intense forest fires threaten rural communities and disrupt outdoor recreational opportunities and the tourism industry; smoke from these fires threatens our workforce, our elders and our children; severe droughts constrain our important agricultural and nursery industries and imperil our salmon runs; and businesses are forced to spend millions to mitigate the most pressing climate effects rather than investing in future innovation and opportunities.”

Good grief. 

Then, while it prohibits fossil fuel investments on the one hand; on the other hand it cites the requirement that the State Treasurer is required to manage investment portfolios “so as to maximize investment returns and minimize the risk of loss.” You can’t do both at the same time. 

It also ignores the responsibility of the State Treasurer not to do anything that abrogates the treasurer’s fiduciary responsibilities to make available funds “as productive as possible” and “to diversify the investments of the investment funds”.

The Democrats’ bill is just leftist activism parading as socially responsible investing.

Stop it in its tracks.