I don't know Jessica and haven't been following the I-5 bridge boondoggle that closely, but how did "some" suddenly become a "bunch"? And what kind of entitlement attitude makes people believe if they send a letter to their representative the opinion within should be immediately acted upon?

Right on! Expecting a politician to listen to her constituents say? What nerve!

It's interesting that her email doesn't say "I heard from people on both sides." To me that indicates that most, if not all, the input she got from constituents was negative on the bridge.

Not that it matters much anymore, but no where is there mention, even on her own blog, that she is a "D". Maybe we need more "I"'s where voting the party line is forgotten and the merits of issues are considered. But that might be a dream too.

To be fair, I've worked as a constituent caseworker for a member of congress, and a member of a state (CA) legislature, and letters/emails to elected officials are almost always from people opposed to something. Constituents rarely write in to urge someone to support a piece of legislation (with the exception of hot button social issues like gay marriage), but people opposed to bills or policies write in all the time. Seriously, I'd say it's about 90-10 weighted towards those opposed to something. The problem with this is that it becomes hard to get a sense of what the public truly believes, because the politician just gets so used to hearing people saying "no" all the time.

Really? Right now if you took a vote in Pederson's district on funding the bridge, what do you think the vote would be?

Dave J., you made a good argument that having a vote on major issues, especially financial obligations for generations to come, makes sense. Why is it politicians ignore checking in with their constituents with a vote occasionally?

Our own senator, Chip Shields, ignored what I would bet is the overwhelming opposition of his constituents. Not gonna forget this come next election....no how, no way.

Really? Right now if you took a vote in Pederson's district on funding the bridge, what do you think the vote would be?

I have no idea. I do, however, believe that most of the people who voted in favor of the bridge will be re-elected.

Google corruption in modern day Oregon and see how political contributions are almost completely unregulated, despite the laws they tell you they put in place to control it. The mentality in Oregon politics is, if something's illegal, just call it something else! There's a big vacuum hose in the public treasury and there's big money keeping it there.

Seriously, I'd say it's about 90-10 weighted towards those opposed to something. The problem with this is that it becomes hard to get a sense of what the public truly believes, because the politician just gets so used to hearing people saying "no" all the time.

All the more reason politicians should vote no by default.

2013 Mar 05 Tuesday 12:33 U (12:33 PM PT)

Should read and download the "binding agent"
for most planning actions in Portland Metro Area.
Attachment 10 to Portland Hilsboro
Light Rail Full Funding Grant Agreement of 1994. See
https://sites.google.com/site/mt08jan/home/35itcwp
Items 1.2, 1.3, pictures in 1.1.

Tonight's entertainment on population
forecasts gone awry brought to you by the
LO Tigard Water Partnership.
Webcast starts at about 7:30 PM (19:30 U) at
http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/citycouncil/watch-meetings-online-and-cable-tv
Hold on to your wallets!

Charles Ormsby (Skip)
sentinelskip@gmail.com

Just another political hack that voted for a $4Billion solution to a $1/2billion problem.

Thanks
JK

According to the O, Jackie Dingfelder (D) did vote No, based on concerns from and about her constituents. Bet she'll have some 'splaining to do to the Guv and Blue Oregon. Of course, she may have figured it was a safe "no" vote.

Chances are car hater Jackie would have voted for it if it was just a bicycle and light rail bridge - as long as neither bicyclists or transit passengers had to pay for it.

"And so they follow Kotek's direction"

Anybody like Kotek who is praised so glowingly and fawned over by fellow politicians has to be trouble for the taxpayers.

Face it folks, more of the same old tired ideas.

Former Governor Vic Atiyeh said it clearly: "It's insane."
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/steve_duin/index.ssf/2013/03/steve_duin_a_third_vic_atiyeh.html

Thank you Mr. Governor.

Really about Jessica, no surprise!
I understand she had many glossy flyers out of the exact same mold of the "usual insiders." That should have been an obvious clue to the people of the area as to who was supporting this person.
I happened to see her at an event and asked her some questions of which she claimed she knew nothing. This made no sense.
Who brought her into the fold?

I will add that after that Senate vote yesterday, we really need to be paying more attention when we vote for these people.
See who is supporting them.
Is there anyone who has a list of the House and Senate votes on this CRC?
Not the final count, but how each person voted?

Probably the key point regarding HB 2800 was that it was an unfunded mandate, so politicians could say that there was no tax increase.

If the bill had clearly included the tax increase that will be required to pay the debt service on $450 million in bond sales over a 25 year period, it probably would not have even moved out of committee.

This is a cowardly way to behave, but I think we will see more of it in the future. As with PERS, it's just so tempting to push the dirty work off to future generations who are not in the room to defend themselves.

Great video of Lew Frederick explaining why it hurts his constituents and why a no is what was right. I got a links to this from left and right.
I forwarded it to Dingfelder's office.

""And so they follow Kotek's direction"
Anybody like Kotek who is praised so glowingly and fawned over by fellow politicians has to be trouble for the taxpayers.
Face it folks, more of the same old tired ideas."
---

Face it folks, Portland (therefore the state) is run by the liberal rubes who love Tina for the same reason they loved Sam. Tina is a trinket badge of honor to be paraded around with the same "First Speaker..." that Sam Adams had as "First Mayor...".

No, I'm not a whatever-phobe. And who really cares about their whatever crap? As MLK says, the content of their character. And their policies, which suck for most Oregonians. But she's a badge of honor, so the libtards stick us with her and her failed policies.

Clark County has been somewhat of a relief valve from the Portland area's ridiculous land use/transportation policies. The CRC (and light rail) is nothing more then an attempt to strong arm Clark Co. into adopting Metro/Portland's plan (yes, they have one) for them.

Too many people moving out of Portland and/or are planning to move there?
Well those ruling can't have that can they?
Waay too much to write about all the reasons why.

I'm thinking that since support for the CRC seems to be largely restricted to the political class, why not get a ballot measure together to kill the CRoCk? An anti-tolling measure would perhaps be the most expedient. The only parties that would potentially be affected beyond the CRoCk supporters would be the Port of Hood River and the Port of Cascade Locks.

By the way, how long has Jessica Vega Pederson lived in that area?
She seems to be out of touch with those constituents. Tolls will really affect the income of people there and more traffic congestion will not be good either. Jackie Dingfelder understood that enough to vote No, yet Pederson voted Yes and her district as Dingfelders would have similar negatives. Even Jefferson who used to be the representative of the area was opposed to the CRC bridge, so I find Pederson's Yes vote puzzling.