JUST SAY NO:

NONE OF OREGON'S INITIATIVES DESERVE SUPPORT

It's hard to miss the pattern in The Register-Guard's editorial
recommendations on state ballot measures: We opposed them all. Six
measures reached the ballot by initiative, and not one of them was
found to deserve support.

We haven't always been straight-ticket naysayers.

Two years ago, The Register-Guard supported three of seven
initiatives. In 2000, it was four of 18. Of the 10 initiatives on the
1998 ballot, The Register-Guard urged a yes vote on four.

This year's crop is unusual in its consistency - all of the initiative
proposals are poor public policy.

Several are undiluted, industrial-strength, Olympic-sized bad
ideas.

Measure 33 is an attempt to broaden the medical marijuana law that
Oregonians approved in 1998. It has the support of many
well-intentioned people who want to make it easier for cancer patients
and others to gain access to a drug that is widely reported to have
palliative effects.

It's also supported by people seeking to legalize marijuana. The
Register-Guard supported the 1998 initiative, but we oppose Measure 33
- - federal drug enforcement authorities could be expected to respond by
shutting down Oregon's limited but effective medical marijuana program.

Measure 34 is an attempt to wrest management of the Tillamook and
Clatsop state forests away from the state Board of Forestry. The board
has devised a management plan that is intended to restore the
mixed-age character of the forests, which were heavily burned half a
century ago. Measure 34 would have the effect of imposing a wilderness
designation on half of the forests' land area. Forests should not be
managed by initiative, and the measure is strongly opposed in the
parts of Oregon that would be most affected by it.

Measure 35 would impose a cap of $500,000 on noneconomic damage awards
in medical malpractice lawsuits.

Of the six initiatives, this one comes closest to the threshold of
acceptability. Oregon - indeed, the nation - needs a better way of
handling medical malpractice claims, and the effects of rising
insurance premiums on some medical specialties is real. There has to
be a better way to fix this problem than by putting an asterisk next
to the provision in the Oregon Constitution that reads, "In all civil
cases the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate."

Measure 36 would amend the state Constitution to ban same-sex
marriages, which are not currently allowed in Oregon. When a few
jurisdictions attempted to permit such marriages, they were reined in
by the courts.

With same-sex marriages apparently barred by statute, Oregon may be on
its way toward allowing some sort of civil union arrangement for
same-sex couples.

Measure 36 would not change that. More broadly, the Oregon
Constitution should extend the rights of the citizens and limit the
power of government, not the other way around.

Measure 37 is the worst of the lot. It would require that landowners
be compensated when certain land-use restrictions reduce property
values, or that these restrictions be waived.

Rules that ensure orderly development, preserve resource lands and
protect air and water quality would become too costly to enforce.

Measure 37 would make zoning and environmental rules a one-way street:
Landowners would be compensated for any losses, while continuing to
enjoy all benefits for free.

Measure 38 takes the prize for the best example of naked
self-interest. The initiative was placed on the ballot by Liberty
Northwest Insurance, and the company is largely financing a lavish
campaign in its favor. The measure would abolish SAIF Corp., the
state-owned workers' compensation company, and put the proceeds in a
budgetary reserve fund. Approval would rid Liberty of its strongest
competitor. Liberty says rates would go down, but thousands of Oregon
businesses insured by SAIF already enjoy rates that are among the
nation's lowest.

Taking a strong, tax-advantaged company out of the market would
benefit no one but SAIF's competitors.

The initiative process can promote grass-roots lawmaking - citizens
get a good idea, and place it before the voters.

Initiatives can also be simple answers to complex problems, vehicles
for special interests, tools of single-issue groups, shortcuts through
the Legislature's deliberations, and populist disguises for proposals
to grab money or power. All of this year's initiatives are in the
latter group.

Gov. Ted Kulongoski is right to say that Oregonians should reject them
all.