Yes on Measures 115, 116, an emphatic no on the rest

Dozens of measures were proposed for the November general election ballot, but only five made the cut. We can be thankful, because three are clinkers of the first order — as misguided as 2020’s drug decriminalization experiment, which proved as disastrous as we feared when we opposed it.

The two we’re prepared to endorse are the Republican and Democratic responses to the Shemia Fagan scandal at the Secretary of State’s office, which she badly besmirched.

Measure 115: A bipartisan legislative referral initiated by the GOP, this measure would end Oregon’s status as the only state with no provision to impeach top elected state officials. Fortunately, Fagan’s Democratic colleagues, eager to quench the flames, were able to secure her resignation, but we might not be so lucky next time.

Measure 116: One incentive for Fagan to accept money from wealthy agency supplicants was taking a big pay cut from what she was pulling down from her high-profile law practice.

Oregon has the governor at $98,600, secretary of state at $77,000, attorney general at $82,220, and treasurer and labor commissioner at $77,000 — all at or near national lows. This clangs in a state where 9,899 state employees earn more than $100,000, 90 more than $200,000, and nine over $300,000.

The measure would create an independent non-partisan commission to set pay levels going forward. That would presumably mean big bumps the first year, but modest increases thereafter.

Measure 117: We find lots to like in a fair, efficient and transparent ranked choice voting system. But this one, referred by a Legislature that should know better, doesn’t come close. It’s cumbersome, confusing and convoluted — to the point where it would run great risk of diminishing rather than bolstering public confidence in democracy.

It would, initially at least, apply only to elections for federal office. But if we ever dare to dip our toe into ranked choice at the state level, the devil is in the details.

Measure 118: This is a gross receipts sales tax designed to shift wealth from the corporate elite to the common man. The idea is assessing a 3% tax on the gross receipts of corporations taking in more than $25 million a year to use the projected $6.8 billion to cut rebate checks to every Oregonian, regardless of need.

You don’t actually have to be a very big operation to get to $25 million in pass-through money, but little if any may end up sticking as income. You’d have to pay even if you were losing money, so high-volume, low-margin operators like grocery stores would suffer disproportionately.

No operator could avoid passing along the new tax burden to customers. This tax bite could recur at point after point along the supply chain, leading to an eventual retail sale, with no exemption for necessities like groceries and prescriptions.

The annual rebate, initially projected at $1,000 to $1,300, is much too small to serve as a minimum guaranteed income safety net. The vast majority of the money would be showered on middle- and upper-income residents with no such need in the first place.

It could make Oregon companies less competitive. And through workings much too complicated to explain here, it figures to cut millions from the corporate income tax flow to the state general fund. It’s a half-baked idea that could prove incredibly damaging.

Measure 119: This measure was cooked up by the United Food & Commercial Workers Union, which is trying to organize the cannabis industry. It would require cannabis businesses to submit a signed labor agreement in order to renew their licenses, serving to all but force them to unionize.

Think right to work imposed in reverse. Think big government run amok.