Measure 64

Argument in Opposition

Don't let 64 interfere with
the Firefighter-MDA partnership

Fires aren't the only thing firefighters take on every day. We also partner with the Muscular Dystrophy Association to combat neuromuscular diseases that affect millions of Americans.

We work hard for our money. And it feels good to know that our voluntary contributions help families dealing with muscular dystrophy. But Measure 64 could end our partnership with MDA.

Through our paychecks every month, we make contributions that pay for things like research, physical therapy, support groups for families and even summer camp for kids. This partnership has been going strong since 1954.

Measure 64 would bar us from making our monthly contributions to MDA. Why? Because like many non-profits, MDA works to pass legislation that would help its members. MDA has voiced support or concern about proposed legislation including efforts crucial to helping improve not only the lives of the people they serve but all people with disorders and disabilities. Measure 64 could stifle the MDA's ability to advocate for the people who need it most.

It takes choices away from firefighters.

It takes money away from people who need it.

Please vote "no" on Measure 64.


Oregon State Fire Fighters Council

Gavin Johnson
Regional Director
Muscular Dystrophy Association

(This information furnished by Graham Trainor, Don't Silence Our Voice Committee.)

Argument in Opposition




Oregon have said "no" to this measure three times already. We recommend a "no" vote for the same reasons we did in the past:

It's still unnecessary, and it's still unfair.
Please vote "no" on 64.


(This information furnished by Graham Trainor, Don't Silence Our Voice Committee.)

Argument in Opposition


United Way of the Columbia-Willamette is one of Oregon's largest human services fundraising organizations. Funding that we raise through workplace campaigns helps children, families, seniors, people with disabilities and many other Oregonians in need of social services. Because many of the non-profit agencies that receive funding from us advocate on issues that affect the people we serve, our work and theirs is considered "political" and in the measure's broad and unclear definition would be seriously restricted by Measure 64.

Measure 64 would specifically prohibit public employees from making voluntary payroll donations to United Way in the same way they have for years. Payroll deduction programs are a mainstay for United Way fundraising. As a result, the restriction imposed on public employees imposed by this measure will result in significant funding reductions to a wide range of community-based programs serving Oregon's neediest and most vulnerable citizens.

Due to the elimination of the payroll deduction option and the high cost of complying with Measure 64, United Way will have less funding to support the community's neediest and most vulnerable citizens. The additional loss of funding from other organizations that raise money from public employees through workplace campaigns could result in the loss of millions of dollars in critically needed social services.

Please vote "no" on 64 and keep the path open for charitable workplace giving.


United Way of the Columbia-Willamette

Serving Clackamas, Washington and, Multnomah Counties

(This information furnished by Howard Klink, Vice President of Community Impact, United Way of the Columbia-Willamette.)

Argument in Opposition


As Oregon's nursing professionals, we are deeply concerned about what happens to our patients and the care they receive.

When legislation comes up that affects our patients' care and rights, we use the small political contributions voluntarily deducted from our paychecks as a resource to ensure that patient's rights and the quality of the care they receive will win out over the interests of pharmaceutical companies, HMOs, and tobacco companies.

M64 silences nurses' voices for quality care.

Measure 64 would restrict our ability to have voluntary political contributions deducted from our paychecks. That would make it very difficult for our professional association, the Oregon Nurses Association, to have a voice in the policies that shape healthcare for all Oregonians.

Measure 64 does not address the real problem.

Pharmaceutical companies, HMOs, and tobacco companies will not be affected by these measures. They will still have the right to spend millions of dollars to influence our legislators. In fact, by silencing the voice of nurses, the corporate interests of healthcare will have more influence on the quality of care you receive.

Measure 64 is unfair and unnecessary.

Nurses have been voluntarily making contributions through our paychecks for years. This money is used to protect nurses' rights, patients' rights, and to support charitable organizations like the Mid-Valley Women's Crisis Service. Any member of the Oregon Nurses Association can choose not to participate. Please vote no Measure 64 to safeguard our freedom to participate.

The Oregon Nurses Association Wants The Voice of Nurses to Be Heard. Please vote No on 64.

(This information furnished by Jack Dempsey, Oregon Nurses Association.)

Argument in Opposition

Support Oregon Teachers

Vote "No" on Measure 64

Measure 64 would waste precious taxpayer dollars. Voters have already rejected this measure numerous times in the past. And, a similar measure was ruled "unconstitutional" in other states. Legal experts say this will end up being overturned in court. Oregon's schools have other, more important priorities than spending money on an expensive court battle.

Measure 64 is Unnecessary. Education professionals and other public employees already have a long-standing, Supreme Court approved right to opt out of giving their money to political efforts. Measure 64 will prohibit them from choosing to opt in. That's unfair.

Measure 64 is Unclear and Goes Too Far. Measure 64 is so broad and poorly written, it has far-reaching impacts on the rights of educators. Measure 64 would punish them for speaking out for Oregon's schools, community colleges, and universities.

Measure 64 is Unfair. Measure 64 unfairly targets one group of people by taking away this basic right. All Oregonians should have the freedom to make their own decisions about payroll deductions and where their money goes.

Measure 64 is Filled with Unintended Consequences. Oregon's education professionals care deeply about issues that face our schools, community colleges, and universities, and we regularly advocate for improvements through the political process, like fighting for smaller class sizes, adequate funding, and affordable tuitions. Measure 64 would limit our ability to advocate for these issues, and that would hurt all of us.

Please join with the 11,000 members of the
American Federation of Teachers-Oregon In Voting
NO on Ballot Measure 64.

(This information furnished by Mark Schwebke- President, American Federation of Teachers- Oregon.)

Argument in Opposition

Oregon Public School Teachers and School Employees
Ask You To
Vote "No" on Measure 64

Measure 64 is unfair to teachers and school employees. Teachers, firefighters, police officers, and other public servants should have the freedom to make their own decisions about their personal payroll deductions. This measure unfairly targets tens of thousands of working Oregonians and limits our rights.

Oregon does not need Measure 64. As educators, we make the choice – voluntarily – whether to make a political contribution to our union. We value the "opt in" choice because so many of the decisions that are made about Oregon's public schools come through the Oregon legislature. Measure 64 would take away our right to pool our resources for a political voice.

Measure 64 is part of the Bush Administration's agenda. George W. Bush has made it no secret that he's trying to tip the scales for big business. The Bush Administration continues to promote banning payroll deductions because he's trying to unfairly single out labor unions while at the same time giving the advantage to government contractors like Halliburton, the banking industry, and big corporations like Enron.

Measure 64 is being pushed by racketeer Bill Sizemore. Bill Sizemore is clearly no friend of public education and teachers. In fact, he's made it his mission to silence our voice by breaking the law and using fraud, forgery, and racketeering. He exploits the initiative system by getting money from wealthy, out-of-state donors to propose initiative after initiative that would gut funding for schools and other basic services. Don't let Bill Sizemore silence the voice of Oregonians.

Please Vote No on Measure 64.

Leslie Lindberg-Harper,
Special Education Para-Educator
Walker Middle School, Salem

Benjamin Cota,
Language Arts/History/Economics Teacher
Woodburn Schools

(This information furnished by Larry Wolf, President, Oregon Education Association.)

Argument in Opposition

Measure 64 Would Silence Important Voices for Care

My name is Mary Wood and I'm a homecare worker in Lincoln City. I'm part of a stable and trained workforce serving thousands of Oregon families. We are an important part of a community-based care system that helps seniors stay in their homes, and has become one of the nation's best ONLY because caregivers have participated in the political process.

Frontline caregivers advance not only our own interests, but also those of our clients and communities. We promote a system that gives the elderly and individuals with disabilities a greater sense of dignity and independence, better access to family and friends, and the peace of mind that comes with attentive and affordable care in safe, familiar environments at a lower cost to taxpayers than most institutional alternatives.

Measure 64 would drastically reduce our ability to continue working on behalf of our clients and their families. That would leave the playing field to powerful special interests and insurers who are primarily concerned with their own profitability and growth.

We know we're no match for the professional peddlers. But the pennies a day we set aside from our paychecks do give us a voice. This has allowed us to pass a statewide initiative that provided Oregon seniors with prescription drug relief, campaign for more training to protect patients as well as more accountability and transparency by healthcare providers, and improve staff-to-patient ratios for better care.

I urge you to reject this misguided attempt to silence a group that needs to be heard. Please vote "NO on 64".

Mary Wood,
Homecare Worker
Lincoln City

(This information furnished by Arthur Towers, Political Director, SEIU Local 503.)

Argument in Opposition

Oregon's Senior Groups Ask You to
Vote No on Measure 64

Measure 64 hurts the charities and non-profits that seniors and people with disabilities depend on most, and makes it harder for them to advocate for us.

With the threat of budget cuts and reduced services for the elderly, we need strong voices in the legislature that place a priority on programs like the Oregon Health Plan and Oregon Project Independence, which allow us to live in our homes.

Measure 64 will silence the voices that speak for Oregon's seniors and people with disabilities. This measure also silences the voices of frontline workers, like caregivers and nurses, who should be able to advocate for issues like improved nursing home conditions and elder abuse.

Measure 64 is unclear. This measure is so vague and poorly written that its' full impacts on us are unclear. Measure 64 will certainly wind up in court, tying up state resources for years. We need to focus on Oregon's real priorities.

We've already said no—three separate times. This is the fourth time Bill Sizemore has put this measure on the ballot, and it's lost every time before. How many times do we have to say No to the same measure?

Tell Bill Sizemore that this is still a bad idea.

Join us in voting NO on Measure 64.

Oregon State Council for Retired Citizens
United Seniors of Oregon
Save Oregon Seniors
Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People with Disabilities

(This information furnished by Jim Davis, Oregon Consumer League.)

Argument in Opposition

Racketeer Bill Sizemore Is At It Again

Here we go again. Bill Sizemore has run some version of Ballot Measure 64 three times already. Three times Oregon voters have said "No." Nevertheless, Sizemore has trotted it out again in 2008. Does Sizemore think his measure will pass this time? Apparently not — he's already filed the paperwork for an identical measure in 2010!

You see, Bill Sizemore doesn't hang his hat any longer on actually trying to pass a ballot measure — he makes his money simply getting them on the ballot. Sizemore exploits Oregon's initiative system by getting wealthy, out-of-state, ultraconservative donors to pay him to file dozens of initiatives … over and over again. Measure 64 was funded entirely by one man — who doesn't even live in Oregon!

Worse, Sizemore doesn't even play by the rules. A jury has found that his organizations used racketeering, fraud, and forgery to get on the ballot, and his employees have even been caught on tape committing fraud. And once again, Sizemore's initiatives are under investigation by the Secretary of State for signature fraud.

Now, Sizemore is trying — for the fourth time — to silence the voice of working Oregonians. Should it ever pass, it would head straight to court for several years, and you — Oregon taxpayers — would foot the bill defending it. The state has much more pressing priorities than defending Sizemore's flawed, poorly written measure.

Please, read the other statements here in the Voter's Pamphlet that outline just how this measure is unclear, unfair and unnecessary in great detail. Then join us, Oregon AFSCME Council 75 (American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees), in saying "No!" once again to Bill Sizemore.

Vote NO! on Ballot Measure 64.

(This information furnished by Don Loving, Oregon AFSCME Council 75.)

Argument in Opposition

Measure 64 Restricts Our Right to
Use Payroll Deductions To Give to Nonprofit
Organizations of Our Choice

Measure 64 is unfair to us as workers and citizens. This measure unfairly restricts our right to use payroll deductions to support the organizations of our choice.

Measure 64 goes against Oregon values of treating everyone equally. Why are the voluntary contributions of workers singled out, but not those of corporations and lobbyists? That's unfair and undemocratic.

Average workers don't have the power and influence that big corporations do so we pool our resources through payroll deductions to make our voices heard on issues that affect our lives.

We use payroll deductions to support our unions and to make contributions to charities. But Measure 64 would put workers at a disadvantage by unfairly restricting the right of these organizations to continue to represent our interests on important issues like healthcare and jobs.

Measure 64 is so restrictive that each of us and our co-workers would have to sign separate permission slips before our union could write a letter to a legislator or even urge our own members to support or oppose a piece of legislation that affects workers!

It is unfair to single out working people and attempt to limit our right to participate in the political process by restricting our use of payroll deductions.

But Measure 64 is not only unfair; it's completely unnecessary. We already have the right to opt out of paying for political expenditures with which we disagree—and many of us do.

Don't Silence the Voice of Oregon Workers.

Vote "No" on Measure 64.

Kevin Card, NALC Local 82

Bob Tackett, USW Local 330

Kevin Gray, IAFF Local 1395

Jaimie Sorenson, Chair of Political Action Committee, AFSCME Local 328

Tom Chamberlain, Oregon AFL-CIO

(This information furnished by Kathryn Grover, Oregon AFL-CIO.)

Argument in Opposition



Why would Measure 64 affect us? All PTAs (Parent Teacher Associations) collect dues or raise funds in our schools. Part of these funds go toward our child advocacy efforts. If Measure 64 passes, we would be strictly forbidden from using "public resources" like our school buildings where we educate our members on critically important issues affecting students. We would not be allowed to advocate on school grounds for our children's education needs.

Oregon PTA works hard each legislative session to ensure that the state budget provides adequate funds to schools, to child health care, and to services for children with special needs. Measure 64 would unfairly bar us from doing our work because we are based in public schools. It is a direct attack on your neighborhood PTA. However, Measure 64 would do nothing to address the political influence of corporations.

For more than 100 years, PTA has been instrumental in:

If Measure 64 passes, Oregon's children will lose one of the strongest voices they have: The voice of PTAs across this state, representing more than 20,000 concerned parents, grandparents, community members, teachers, and all children.



The Oregon PTA

(This information furnished by Anita Olsen, Oregon PTA.)

Argument in Opposition

Don't Silence Our Voice
Vote No on Measure 64 and Bill Sizemore's attack on working Oregonians

This Flawed Measure Comes To You From Racketeer Bill Sizemore. The author of this measure, Bill Sizemore, makes a profit by exploiting and abusing Oregon's initiative system, funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars from wealthy, out-of-state, ultra-conservative donors to file dozens of initiatives every cycle.

That's right—these attacks on working Oregonians are being paid for by people who don't even live in Oregon.

Sizemore has a long history of using fraud to get on the ballot—and currently, all of his initiatives are under investigation for signature fraud. A jury has found that Sizemore's organizations used racketeering, fraud, and forgery to get on the ballot, and his signature gatherers have admitted to fraudulently obtaining signatures. They've even been caught on tape forging names!

And now Bill Sizemore wants to silence the voices of working Oregonians!

Measure 64 is unfair. Measure 64 singles out working Oregonians and denies them their voice in the political process by prohibiting voluntary payroll deductions. That is an unfair attack on the people who work hard every single day to provide the services all Oregonians depend on. Why should these workers be given less of a voice than anyone else?

Measure 64 will give more power to out-of-state special interests and corporations. Should it come as a surprise that Sizemore wants to take power away from average Oregonians and give more to wealthy, out-of-state donors and corporations?

What part of NO does Sizemore not understand? This is the fourth time Bill Sizemore has put this measure on the ballot. We've already said no to this unfair, unclear, and unnecessary proposal three times.

Vote NO on Measure 64

Bob Shiprack, Oregon State Building and Construction Trades Council

(This information furnished by Bob Shiprack, Oregon State Building and Construction Trades Council.)

Argument in Opposition

Governor Kulongoski Urges You to
Vote NO on Measure 64

I've had the privilege of serving as your governor for the past six years. It's been my duty and honor to uphold the laws of this state. Oregon has laws on the books to protect workers and to protect their right to engage in political speech—or not, if they choose to opt out. These rights are fair and they're protected by the Constitution.

Measure 64 goes too far by unfairly targeting working Oregonians and silencing their voice.

This measure singles out one group of people—working Oregonians, like police officers, nurses, teachers, and firefighters—and limits their right to make their own decisions about where their payroll deductions go. Prohibiting workers from making voluntary contributions violates even the most basic principles of fairness and equal protection under the law.

Measure 64 has too many unintended consequences. This measure is so broad and poorly written that it could have significant impacts on the ability of every Oregonian to exercise their right to free speech. Public buildings, like convention centers, could now be off-limits to anything resembling political speech. And it could even include parks and open spaces.

Measure 64 will hurt Oregon charities. Many Oregon charities and non-profit groups, like the United Way, are dependent on voluntary payroll deductions to fund the good, necessary work they do. Measure 64 will take away their right to advocate for the people who need their voice the most, including senior citizens, children, and the disabled.

Measure 64 is still a bad idea. This is the fourth time this same idea has been on the ballot. It's still bad for Oregon.

Please vote NO on Measure 64.


Ted Kulongoski

(This information furnished by Governor Ted Kulongoski.)

Argument in Opposition

Oregon Labor Commissioners
Urge You to Vote "No" on Ballot Measure 64

Measure 64 unfairly targets public employees like nurses, firefighters, teachers and police officers – it silences their voice in the political process. As your current and former Oregon Labor Commissioners, we are concerned.

Many of these frontline workers use convenient payroll deductions to pay bills, make political contributions and give to charity. But Measure 64 will change that by preventing public employees from making their own decisions about payroll deductions.

Don't let this unnecessary measure take away their voice. Public employees who belong to a union currently can choose whether to make political contributions from their paycheck. It's their decision, it's federal law, and it's fair.

Measure 64 is an underhanded proposal that is meant to weaken the voice of public employees. It has appeared on the ballot three times before and Oregonians rejected it every time. It was bad policy then and it's bad policy now.

Measure 64 won't protect working Oregonians

Join us in voting "no" on Measure 64

Brad Avakian, Labor Commissioner
Dan Gardner, Former Oregon Labor Commissioner

(This information furnished by Dan Gardner.)

Argument in Opposition

A Message from Your Public School Employees

Vote No on Ballot Measure 64

Measure 64 is unfair to public school employees. Measure 64 prohibits payroll deductions for public employees that give us a voice in political matters that we care about – like school funding.

At the same time as it silences our voices, Measure 64 does nothing to limit the power of special interests. While Measure 64 will shut down small money donations from public employees like us, it would do nothing to regulate the influence of deep-pocketed corporations. Measure 64 would shut out the voices of working Oregonians who have to pool their resources to be heard above big money special interests.

Measure 64 limits our ability to advocate for our schools. Public school employees care about what's best for schools, and frequently advocate for policies that would protect Oregon's schools. Measure 64 would limit our ability to fight for safe, healthy schools.

Measure 64 is a bad idea. Voters have decided three times before that similar versions of Measure 64 were seriously flawed – they rejected it each time. Yet Racketeer Bill Sizemore keeps bringing back the same idea, abusing the initiative system in the process. In fact, he has already filed a similar measure for the 2010 election.

Measure 64 is unfair and unnecessary.

Please Vote "NO" on 64.

The more than 21,000 hardworking education professionals who make up the Oregon School Employees Association

(This information furnished by Merlene Martin, President, Oregon School Employees Association.)

Argument in Opposition


Big corporations want to use Measure 64 to silence the voice of Oregon workers while blocking REAL reforms.

Measure 64 denies workers the ability to make their own decisions about the money they work hard for, but leaves large loopholes for lobbyists and does nothing to limit the political contributions of big corporations like Enron or Big Oil.

Right now, big corporations can write $50,000 checks to any campaign or political cause they want, while most working people can only contribute a little at a time. Payroll deduction helps workers pool funds in order to have any shot at participating in the political process.

Think about it: If this measure passes, big corporations and special interests will have even more power – and it will take away the right of workers to make their voice heard on everything from living wages, to health care to the right to form a union. If Enron, banking scandals and skyrocketing gas prices have taught us anything, it's that corporations already have too much power.

Bill Sizemore is pushing this measure – for a fourth time – to strengthen the ability of his corporate backers to control politicians and the political process, and to shut out working people. Any way you look at it, this measure is unfair. This isn't about worker protection, it's about corporate power.

Fair-minded Oregonians have seen through racketeer Bill Sizemore's tactics and lies before. He has already tried to pass this measure three times and each time Oregonians have said, "No!"

The real aim of this measure is to silence working Oregonians – and give all the power to big corporations and special interests.

Please, don't silence the voice of Oregon's Working Families. Please, Vote No on Measure 64.

Tom Chamberlain, President, Oregon AFL-CIO

(This information furnished by Kathryn Grover, Oregon AFL-CIO.)

Argument in Opposition

Measure 64 is about shutting people out of democracy.
Oregon Action is about inspiring people to
take back control of it.
We urge you to vote NO on 64.

Bill Sizemore wants Oregonians to think this is about campaign finance reform. OA has worked on campaign finance reform long enough to know that Measure 64 is phony reform.

Measure 64 is flawed. This measure takes away the individual rights of tens of thousands of Oregonians by denying them the ability to make their own decisions about payroll deductions. Measure 64 unfairly limits the free speech rights of working Oregonians such as fire fighters, nurses, teachers, and police officers.

Measure 64 shuts out small donors, but doesn't do anything about big money. This poorly written measure prevents workers from making small contributions from their paychecks to political campaigns or charities, but does nothing to regulate big money corporations.

Measure 64 endangers the chance for real reform. Real campaign finance reform would encourage citizen participation. Measure 64 would discourage it. This proposal is undemocratic. It's unfair. It's wrong. It's phony. And it's designed to derail real reform.

Vote NO on Measure 64.

Oregon Action is online at

(This information furnished by Jo Ann Bowman, Oregon Action.)

Argument in Opposition

Human Service Advocates Oppose Measure 64

Measure 64 Will Limit Our Advocacy
For Oregon's Vulnerable

The Human Services Coalition of Oregon (HSCO) is a group of organizations and individuals who are dedicated to giving a voice to the people in Oregon who need us most. Our purpose is to educate and advocate for the needs of Oregon's vulnerable populations, and to make sure that all the basic needs of Oregonians' are met.

Measure 64 would keep us from speaking out for seniors, children, people with disabilities, low-income residents, and all Oregonians.

Measure 64 would severely limit our ability to:

Measure 64 would have sweeping unintended consequences that Oregon's vulnerable populations can't afford. And that would hurt all of us.

Please vote No on 64, and let us continue advocating for those who most need a voice.

Human Services Coalition of Oregon (HSCO)

(This information furnished by John Mullin, Co-Chair, Human Services Coalition of Oregon.)

Argument in Opposition



Charities like United Way, the American Cancer Society, and others who receive voluntary contributions from public employees run the real risk of inadvertently violating Measure 64 and as a result could face mandatory fines. That's because Measure 64 prohibits charities from using any portion of a public employee's payroll deduction donation for "political purposes." But "political purposes" is so broad it includes comments by a charity on any proposed ballot measure – even one relating directly to a charity's mission!


Public employees already have the right to decide whether their payroll deductions may be used for political purposes by filling out a simple form. That's part of the constitutional right of free speech and association that all Americans have. Measure 64 would prohibit public employees from making those decisions, effectively limiting the free speech rights of a specific group. That's not just unfair but may even be unconstitutional.


Measure 64 is so broad and poorly written that if a non-profit member organization belonging to United Way violates Measure 64, United Way could be barred in the future from participating in all Oregon public agency workplace giving programs. At a minimum, Measure 64 would require special bookkeeping and tracking of gifts received through payroll deductions that would divert money from charitable work.


Oregonians have already defeated measures almost identical to Measure 64 three times. Let's tell Bill Sizemore one last time not to restrict Oregonians' freedom of speech.


Dave Fidanque, Executive Director
ACLU of Oregon

(This information furnished by David Fidanque, Executive Director, ACLU of Oregon.)

Argument in Opposition

University Presidents Say

Measure 64 is so poorly written and far-reaching that it will certainly wind up in court and overturned, wasting taxpayer money for months or years. Our state, including our schools and universities, have too many more important priorities than to waste time and money dealing with this unclear measure.

Measure 64 is unnecessary. All public employees—including professors, assistants, and school faculty—have the right to keep their payroll deductions from going to political purposes they don't believe in. This measure doesn't solve any existing problem, but it takes away the right of thousands of workers to make their own decisions about where their money goes.

Measure 64 has too many unintended consequences. Oregon's universities provide a great opportunity for students to get involved in causes they care about. Lifelong commitments to causes from every end of the political spectrum are often forged during college years. Measure 64 is so broad that it could limit the rights of students to take part in the political process.

Measure 64 is unfair. This measure singles out one group of people and limits their rights to use commonplace payroll deductions to make contributions of their choosing. This violates the basic fairness that we strive to instill in Oregon's university students.

Please join us in voting "NO"
on this poorly drafted, unnecessary measure.

Edward J. Ray
President, Oregon State University*

Wim Wiewel
President, Portland State University*

*Titles used for identification purposes only and do not constitute an endorsement of or opposition to the measure by the Oregon State Board of Higher Education or Institutions of the Oregon University System.

(This information furnished by Graham Trainor, No on Measure 64.)

Argument in Opposition

Don't Shut Workers Out.

The solution to Oregon's problems is more participation, not less.

Oregon's rural communities are facing a long list of challenges, and the Rural Organizing Project believes the most successful way to meet those challenges is through grassroots organizing and political participation at every level.

Don't Silence the Voice of Rural Communities. We will find the solutions to the problems facing our state and our nation only when all people exercise their right to be involved. Measure 64 does just the opposite by shutting working Oregonians out of the process.

Measure 64 denies public employees their right to participate in the political process. Communities and individuals should be empowered to influence the political systems that affect their lives. Measure 64 does just the opposite by blocking public workers around the state from engaging in politics.

Don't hand the legislature over to corporate special interests. Measure 64 shuts average workers out of the process but leaves a giant loophole for corporate lobbyists and special interests.

Democracy only works when EVERYONE can participate.

Vote NO on Measure 64.

Rural Organizing Project

(This information furnished by Amy Dudley, Rural Organizing Project.)

Argument in Opposition

Oregon League of Conservation Voters

This is what you'll get by voting "NO" on 64:

Vote "NO" on 64!


Oregon League of Conservation Voters

(This information furnished by Evan Manvel, Oregon League of Conservation Voters.)

Argument in Opposition

Oregon Humane Society Asks You to
Vote No on Measure 64

Measure 64 is filled with unintended consequences that threaten to seriously damage charities' ability to raise money and speak out on important issues.

Oregon Humane Society started its own workplace campaign efforts in 1994. Employees have responded very positively to this efficient charitable opportunity. Each year more employees participate.

Last year, workplace campaigns that Measure 64 would hinder raised nearly $40,000 for Oregon Humane Society. These funds are used to shelter homeless pets, assist pet owners in need, investigate animal cruelty, save the lives of thousands of pets each year and advocate for animals throughout Oregon. There are many other humane societies across Oregon; all rely on the charity of the community and struggle to keep their doors open. None are funded adequately. Measure 64 is so broad and unclear that it could result in even less money for these lifesaving services.

These voluntary workplace campaigns are a very efficient fundraising strategy. There is very little expense. This meshes well with the public's desire for charities to spend less on fundraising and more on programs.

Hardworking charities like Oregon Humane Society can't afford this unclear and unfair measure.

Without workplace campaigns, all humane societies in Oregon and the pets they care for will suffer.

We encourage all pet-loving Oregonians to Vote NO on 64.

(This information furnished by George Okulitch, Oregon Humane Society.)

Argument in Opposition

Community Alliance of Tenants Says NO to Measure 64

Measure 64 will impact nonprofit, grassroots organizations like ours, and limit our ability to protect renters and advocate for safe and affordable housing. Oregon is facing an affordable housing crisis.

Along with other rising household costs, skyrocketing rents are squeezing low-income and middle-class families, while the number of affordable housing units across the state is dwindling.

Now more than ever, our work at the Community Alliance of Tenants is vital to protecting renters and ensuring that there are safe, affordable housing options for all Oregonians.

But Measure 64 is so broadly and poorly written, it would harm our ability to do our work, just when it's needed the most.

By limiting how contributions can be made, this measure would have serious negative impacts on many organizations like ours, which are dedicated to improving the lives of Oregonians. It won't solve any problems, but it will have lasting impacts on Oregon families.

Measure 64 does nothing to help average Oregonians. The state is facing many real problems right now, like the fact that one in four Oregonians spends a full half of their income on rent alone. Measure 64 does nothing to address our real problems, like the financial strain that families are under. In fact, because it is so poorly written, Measure 64 will end up in court – costing us all money and wasting valuable resources that could otherwise be used to solve our pressing problems.

Putting Oregon renters and families at risk is just one of Measure 64's many unintended consequences.

Vote NO on Measure 64, and let's keep fighting for safe and fair housing for all.

Community Alliance of Tenants

(This information furnished by Ian Slingerland, Community Alliance of Tenants.)

Argument in Opposition

Working America Says:
Vote NO on 64

Measure 64: Unfair. Unnecessary. Un-American.

Working America, the community affiliate of the AFL-CIO, is a powerful force for working people who don't have the opportunity to join a workplace union. Our 110,000 members in Oregon have joined together to fight for what really matters – good jobs, affordable health care, world class education, secure retirements, real homeland security and more.

Measure 64 unfairly singles out hardworking Oregonians.

At Working America, we work against wrong-headed priorities that favor the rich and corporate special interests over Oregon's well-being. Measure 64 does just that—it takes away power from workers to join together through voluntary payroll deductions, but it does nothing to rein in the power of rich, corporate special interests who could care less about average working families.

Measure 64 allows the government to interfere with employees' political and charitable contributions. Payroll deductions are a convenient and popular benefit for Oregonians that should remain an option for employees.

Measure 64 has unintended consequences.

Measure 64 will harm the ability of organizations, like the Oregon Humane Society and the Oregon Food Bank, who receive charitable contributions via payroll deductions from speaking out about ballot initiatives and referendums on issues that affect their constituents.

Oregonians have already rejected this unfair, unnecessary measure—and its racketeer sponsor Bill Sizemore—three times. How many more times do we have to say no?

While working people are struggling to make ends meet, racketeer Bill Sizemore and his wealthy, corporate cronies from out-of-state have already cost Oregonians millions of dollars in fighting unfair, unnecessary, un-American measures.

It's time to put working people before corporate special interests. It's time to fight back against those who try to silence the voice of Working Americans.

Vote No on Measure 64.

(This information furnished by Sarah Flynn, Oregon Director, Working America, Community Affiliate of the AFL-CIO.)

Argument in Opposition

Measure 64 Would Silence Oregonians
at the Worst Possible Time

My name is Elden Eichler. Friends call me "Buck." I'm a construction inspector in Jackson County and a resident of Medford.

Many of Oregon's rural counties are facing a financial crisis and loss of funding for basic services in every area from roads and public safety to schools and libraries. Public workers are impacted twice over by this crisis—our families and communities are likely to experience severe cuts and/or significant tax increases, and we may lose our jobs if there is no revenue to pay for the services we provide.

In the face of this crisis, we have had one place to turn for access to the democratic process: Our union. The pennies an hour that we voluntarily contribute for political action through dues deduction have enabled us to speak effectively at a time when our livelihoods and our way of life are on the line.

Measure 64 would take that right away from us. However, it would not prevent powerful special interests from spending millions of dollars in Oregon in order to get their way.

How fair or logical is it that public employees and individuals whose employers get state funding are targeted by Measure 64? These are road maintenance workers, teachers, forest workers, police, librarians, nurses and social service workers. This measure is unfair!

I ask all my friends and neighbors to speak with one decisive voice and say "NO TO 64" and yes to free and fair speech and political access for all.


Buck Eichler
Jackson County

(This information furnished by Arthur Towers, Political Director, SEIU Local 503.)

Argument in Opposition

Law Enforcement Officials Agree: No on 64

As law enforcement officials, keeping Oregonians safe is our number one priority. To ensure public safety concerns are met by our legislature, we use small, voluntary, political contributions conveniently deducted from our paychecks as a resource. Measure 64 would eliminate that resource.

Measure 64 is unfair. It takes away our ability to make voluntary contributions through payroll deduction– the fairest way to make our voices heard in our fight against methamphetamine abuse, identify theft and drunk driving. The Oregon State Police Officers' Association has worked to make sure that the public is served by the number of troopers necessary to ensure public safety. It would be counter-productive to the safety of all Oregonians to silence the group that has made police presence the priority that Oregon deserves.

Measure 64 is unnecessary. Like other public employees, we already have the right to "opt out" of payroll deduction. We have been making contributions through our paychecks for years. But with Measure 64 we'll lose the ability to make our own decisions about payroll deduction, and public safety interests will suffer.

Measure 64 will hurt charities. Charities in Oregon will lose out, too. That's because payroll deduction allows police officers to contribute money to charities that provide services like helping victims of domestic violence or rehabilitation for drunk drivers. If Measure 64 passes, we won't be able to use payroll deduction to support these local charities.

Measure 64 is unbalanced. Measure 64 is a mean-spirited attempt to single out public employees like us and take away our voice in the political process.

Join the Oregon State Police Officers' Association and
the Oregon Council of Police Associations
in voting NO on Measure 64.

Jeff Leighty, President,
Oregon State Police Officers' Association

Bob Miller, President,
Oregon Council of Police Associations

(This information furnished by Bob Miller, Oregon Council of Police Associations.)

Argument in Opposition

Measure 64 is an Attack on Oregon Fire Fighters

Don't Silence Our Voice.

Every day, the men and women in fire departments across the state put our lives and safety on the line in order to keep Oregonians' homes and neighborhoods safe. It's an honor and a great obligation that we wouldn't trade for anything.

Measure 64 Limits Our Ability to Fight for Your Safety.

Unfortunately, the proponent of Measure 64, Bill Sizemore, wants to take away our ability to fight for our own safety on the job, and our ability to speak out on policies that keep you and your families safe.

Measure 64 would end our ability to have small, voluntary contributions deducted from our paychecks that go toward advocating for policies that keep us safe on the job and you safe in your homes. It's an unfair attack on working Oregonians, and it will have lasting impacts on quality of life around the state.

Measure 64 Limits Our Work with Deserving Charities.

We're honored to work with numerous charities, like the Muscular Dystrophy Association, helping them raise money and awareness on important issues that affect their members. Measure 64 would put an end to these collaborations.

Measure 64 is Unnecessary.

Payroll contributions are already 100 percent voluntary. Fire fighters can opt out of political and charitable contributions by filling out a simple form. Measure 64 takes away our right to make our own decisions about where our money goes.

Help us keep fighting for the safety of all Oregonians.

Vote NO on Measure 64

Oregon State Fire Fighters Council

(This information furnished by Kelly Bach, Oregon State Fire Fighters Council.)

Argument in Opposition

Oregon Food Bank Opposes Measure 64

"I can't afford fruits and vegetables anymore."
"Without this food bank we would go weeks without
food. Often, we do anyway."

These are some of the voices we hear from Oregonians struggling, every day, to make ends meet. Last year, more than 200,000 people ate from an emergency food box distributed through the Oregon Food Bank Network every month. More than 72,000 of these recipients were children. Oregon Food Bank relies on the food and cash donations of caring Oregonians to support these efforts.

Measure 64 will hurt families and children.
Measure 64 uses loose and flawed definitions which would inhibit our ability to serve families and children who are hungry. Oregon Food Bank works hard to educate our elected officials about the root causes of hunger and to advocate for programs to help the most vulnerable. This advocacy work is critical in ensuring the voices of all Oregonians are heard. Because of our participation in these efforts, we are considered to have a "political purpose" under the loose definition used in Measure 64.

Measure 64 has unintended consequences that hurt many of Oregon's most respected charities.
Measure 64 prohibits Oregon Food Bank and many other organizations from collecting funds from public resources or on public property. This means Oregon Food Bank would be prohibited from (and possibly fined for) conducting food drives and fundraisers on public property, which includes schools and libraries.

Food drives at public places like schools and libraries have historically moved more than 750,000 pounds of food through our distribution programs. This food and financial support is critical in helping feed our communities.

Many of Oregon's most respected charities will be unintentionally punished if Measure 64 passes. Ultimately, low-income Oregonians and children will suffer the consequences.

Protect the right to give to charities and join us
in voting NO on measure 64.

Phil Kalberer, Board Chair
Oregon Food Bank Board of Directors

(This information furnished by Philip A. Kalberer, Chair, Oregon Food Bank Board of Directors.)

Argument in Opposition

Oppose Measure 64

As community advocates, charities, and labor organizations
dedicated to protecting the voices of all Oregonians, we
oppose Measure 64.

Please join us. Vote No on Measure 64.

United Way of the Columbia-Willamette
United Way Mid-Willamette Valley
Oregon State Fire Fighters Council
Oregon PTA
Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People with Disabilities
Community Health Charities of Oregon
Carpenters Local 247
Oregon State Council for Retired Citizens
National Association of Letter Carriers Local 82
Oregon League of Conservation Voters
Multnomah County Democrats
League of Women Voters of Oregon
Oregon AFL-CIO
Working America, Community Affiliate of the AFL-CIO
Northwest Oregon Labor Council, AFL-CIO
Oregon Alliance for Retired Americans
Community Providers Association of Oregon
Tax Fairness Oregon • Oregon Consumer League
Northwest Workers' Justice Project
Oregon State Building & Construction Trades Council
Community Action Partnership of Oregon
Oregon Natural Resources Council ACTION
Basic Rights Oregon • Oregon Action
Governor Ted Kulongoski
Brad Avakian, Labor Commissioner
Dan Gardner, Former Labor Commissioner
The Oregon Education Association
Oregon Council of Police Associations
Parkinson's Resources of Oregon
Oregon Nurses Association
Rural Organizing Project • Recycling Advocates
Oregon Association for the Education of Young Children
Oregon State Police Officers Association
Eugene-Springfield Solidarity Network/Jobs With Justice
PSU Chapter-American Association of University Professors
AFSCME Council 75
Muscular Dystrophy Association
Black United Fund of Oregon, Inc.
United Seniors of Oregon • Save Oregon Seniors
Oregon School Employees Association
Working Families Party of Oregon
NARAL Pro-Choice Oregon
SEIU Oregon State Council
SEIU Local 49 • SEIU Local 503
Community Alliance of Tenants • Oregon Humane Society
Federation of Oregon Parole and Probation Officers
Pacific Green Party
ACLU of Oregon
American Federation of Teachers-Oregon
Association of Oregon Corrections Employees
Portland Jobs with Justice • PCUN
ONE Voice for Child Care • Elders in Action Commission
Human Services Coalition of Oregon

(This information furnished by Graham Trainor, No on Measure 64.)