MEASURE 71


ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

I am a survivor of domestic violence who was forced to defend myself against the person who was beating me.
    With that experience under my belt, I am scared to death for other battered women if voters pass Measures 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74 and 75.

    One of the things that Measure 69 says is that a defendant can NEVER be a victim, even in cases of self-defense or domestic violence. That means battered women who defend themselves will never be afforded any of the rights that this measure claims to provide.

    Measure 70 gives prosecutors the unprecedented right to demand a jury trial, and this right is granted ONLY to the prosecutor, not to the real crime victim. This means that even in cases of rape and incest ­ where the victim may not want to testify before a jury or may want to avoid a trial altogether ­ crime victims are at the mercy of the prosecutor. How is that a right for crime victims?

    It sounds to me like the police and prosecutors are using crime victims in a cynical campaign to grant themselves more power.

    Measure 71, for instance, undermines the presumption of innocence and assumes every person arrested is guilty.

    Measure 72 makes it more likely innocent people will be convicted.

    Measure 73 would let prosecutors force people into testifying against themselves, something our Bill of Rights has never allowed.

    Measure 74 ties the hands of judges, voters and the Legislature...but not prosecutors.

    Measure 75 is just an expensive boondoggle that gets rid of jurors who may have had a minor scrape with the law ­ such as traffic court.

    Crime victims aren't the ones being served here. It's the government.

    Please Vote No on Measures 69-75.

    Thank you.

    Jill Williams

(This information furnished by Jill Williams.)

(This space purchased for $300 in accordance with ORS 251.255.)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument.


ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

As Oregonians who have worked for and with victims of crime, we urge you to vote NO on Measures 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74 and 75.

    This series of measures would gut the Oregon Bill of Rights, repealing entire sections of the constitutional protections guaranteed to every Oregon citizen.

    MEASURES 69 THROUGH 75 COULD COST TAXPAYERS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

    At a recent fiscal impact hearing on these measures, a state financial analyst testified that while there would be costs to these measures, those costs are indeterminate. But instead of acknowledging the cost to taxpayers, the state has issued fiscal impact statements that say there is "No Fiscal Impact" to these measures. That's just plain wrong.

    We believe these measures will cost Oregon taxpayers millions of dollars... dollars that could be better spent on putting more police on the streets or instituting effective programs to re-train and rehabilitate criminals. We believe these dollars would be much better spent on ensuring restitution for victims of crime.

    Measures 69-75 certainly don't protect victims, but they do take constitutional protections away from you and me and our families.

    Every Oregon citizen receives protections from government intrusion and wrongful arrest granted under the Oregon Bill of Rights. These measures would remove those protections.

    Instead of truly helping victims of crimes, these measures place tremendous power in the hands of government prosecutors. These measures would even allow the state prosecutor to assume the role of victim or to choose the victim that prosecutor believes will best help his case.

    We Support True Victims' Rights Legislation. Measures 69 through 75 are not about the rights of victims. They are merely attempts to give prosecutors and the state more power over our citizens.

    PLEASE JOIN US IN VOTING NO ON MEASURES 69 THROUGH 75.
    THE RISKS ARE TOO HIGH.
    THE COSTS ARE TOO GREAT.

    Former Governor Barbara Roberts
    Multnomah County Chair Beverly Stein
    Oregon Sen. Avel Gordly
    Oregon Rep. Jo Ann Bowman

(This information furnished by State Rep. Jo Ann Bowman.)

(This space purchased for $300 in accordance with ORS 251.255.)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument.


ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

To Protect Your Rights, Vote No on Measure 71

If you are accused of a crime (other than murder or treason), the Oregon Bill of Rights guarantees you the right to bail. That right has been Oregon law for 140 years.

This proposed measure would abandon that basic right. It would allow preventive detention even if you are innocent.

An accusation does not prove guilt. Guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in a trial by jury. This measure would allow a judge to jail you for months while you wait for trial. Public anger at some crimes will demand that judges lock up a person accused of the crime, even if the charges are later dropped or the accused is acquitted.

For 140 years, Oregon has successfully prosecuted and convicted offenders under its existing Bill of Rights. Nothing new requires sacrificing the constitutional right to bail. Vote against Measure 71.

Hans Linde
Former Oregon Supreme Court Justice

Betty Roberts
Former Oregon Supreme Court Justice

Jacob Tanzer
Former Oregon Supreme Court Justice

Claudia Burton
Professor of Law

(This information furnished by Andrea R. Meyer, Crime Victims for Justice.)

(This space purchased for $300 in accordance with ORS 251.255.)
The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument.


Arguments In Favor

Measure 71 Text

November 2, 1999 Special Election Voters' Pamphlet Table of Contents