Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (127943)	11/10/2000 2:22:29 AM
From: ptanner	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570516

Ted, Re: Property Compensation, Measure 7 I have no idea how this one could have passed. While I didn't see a lot of advertisements on ballot measures, there was nothing on this one so people may have just read the summary and not the potential implications. I am not sure if the measure was intended to be very broad or just allowed those interpretations. It was prepared by a "professional" measure proponent (Bill Sizemore, Oregon Taxpayers United) who should be familiar with preparing coherent measures since some old ones were thrown out after passing - only to return with corrections. Here is a link to the voter's pamphlet for Measure 7 - includes the summary, explanation and arguments in support and opposed: sos.state.or.us Thanks for the CNN link for Oregon results. I had used this on election night (one of several) and for some of my stats (www.katu.com had # precincts listed and was updated well until about midnight on Tuesday and very slowly since). The current CNN numbers are a little off since I have an older and higher total for Nader from earlier from OPB (Oregon Public Broadcasting). I found stats on previous Oregon voter turnout: 2000 82% (est) 1st Presidential mail-in 1996 71.31% 1992 82.36% 1988 80.81% Highest was 86.51% in 1960 (earliest date in series) FWIW: oregonvotes.com This year was not particularly higher that previous - especially considering the ballot measures and close presidential contest. -PT

To: tejek who wrote (127943)	11/10/2000 3:34:35 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570516

Ted, It sounds vague enough that it could impact everything from the green belt around Metro Portland to a pulp company dumping its wastes into the Willamette. There are other examples as well. Suppose you have a puddle on your lot and somebody declares it protected wetland, regulated by some level of government. Under the proposition, whoever wants to enact the regulation that basically confiscates your property will have to either compensate you for the loss or to buy the property from your. You can find extreme examples on both sides of the issue. Something like this (the proposition) doesn't happen in vacuum. There must have been some gross injustice done to someone or a group of people that motivated them to put this on the ballot. Joe