LET TERS
MENTAL HEALTH PROGRESS
In the Oct. 6 edition of EW, local ac-
tivist David Oaks claimed that legislation
that I co-sponsored, along with 207 other
members of the U.S. House of Represen-
tatives, would force “Americans living
peacefully in their own homes” to take
psychiatric drugs under court order. This is
simply not factually accurate. The bill, H.R.
2646, includes language that supports as-
sisted outpatient therapy (AOT) programs
for those within the community who are
found to be mentally unstable and unwilling
to seek voluntarily treatment, posing a se-
rious threat to themselves and others. AOT
is usually in the form of case management
and personal therapy programs and does not
necessarily require medical intervention. As
I hope Mr. Oaks is aware, Oregon law al-
ready authorized AOT and Oregon’s statute
is clear: AOT does not include forced medi-
cation. H.R. 2646 passed the House with
a bi-partisan vote of 422-2. This common
sense legislation was a huge step forward
in improving our mental health system, and
I’m proud to be a co-sponsor.
Peter DeFazio
4th Congressional District Candidate
Eugene
VOTE FOR MCLEAN
When voting this year, I have two re-
quirements for candidates. First, they must
take a strong stance on working to mitigate
and prepare for global warming. Second,
they must also understand that restoring
and preserving the forests here in Oregon
is key. Our public forests are some of the
best in the world for carbon sequestration,
among many other ecosystem services they
VIEWPOINT
provide. Fergus Mclean meets both of those
requirements. He is running against Cedric
Hayden who wants to increase logging our
forests, the exact opposite direction we need
to go. Please vote for a healthy future and
vote for Mclean House District 7.
Pam Driscoll
Dexter
to endorse Emily Semple in recognition of
her activism and enthusiasm to stand up
and fight for and with we the people, for a
better community, a welcoming city and a
clean, sustainable world.
James Barber, Chair
Zondie Zinke
For Our Revolution Lane County
LOCAL BERNIE SANDERS
GROUP ENDORSES EMILY
SEMPLE
TRAIN DANGER
Supporters of Bernie Sanders have
remained active in federal, state and local
races around the country. Sanders has
actively encouraged his large base of sup-
porters to engage in local elections with the
aim of electing meaningfully progressive
candidates.
To this end, on Oct. 15, Our Revolution
Lane County (ORLC, formerly Lane Coun-
ty for Bernie Sanders) voted unanimously
to endorse Emily Semple for Eugene City
Council.
In weeks prior to voting, ORLC hosted
meetings with both Semple and her Ward
1 opponent, Joshua Skov. The candidates
responded to question on the environment,
sustainability, neighborhood protections,
homelessness, gender and marriage equal-
ity.
ORLC members esteem Semple's his-
tory of community activism, particularly
around homelessness, and note her support
among locally based environmentalists
and from Eugene's most progressive public
officials: current Ward 1 Councilor George
Brown, Ward 2 Councilor Betty Taylor and
County Commissioner Pete Sorenson.
Our Revolution Lane County is proud
Another train derailment in Eugene.
This happened recently — 13 cars and no
human injuries — but still, it happened. One
car did contain a hazardous chemical. The
Register-Guard reported it, but apparently,
no serious action was taken.
How much longer are we going to allow
this to happen?
I thought legislation was in place to pre-
vent this from occurring in any size city!
Sooner or later, a human life may be lost
or a serious injury may result. Hopefully,
this will never happen. Are we going to al-
low this to continue?
Stace Webb
Eugene
of Oregon’s expenses, despite using our
water, electricity and roads. The minimum
they owe, regardless of a firm’s size, is only
$100,000! Is it fair that a company earning
a whopping $25 million effectively pays a
less than one percent tax rate?
Meanwhile, solutions to our huge short-
fall are either a sales tax, or higher property
or income taxes. Take your pick.
Or vote for Measure 97. It only taxes
2.5 percent of income above $25 million. It
does not tax food, gas, electricity or medi-
cine.
Forty-eight thousand nurses and Physi-
cians for Social Responsibility support this.
More than 80 economists and local farm-
ers say 97 will actually benefit consumers.
Hundreds of small businesses demand that
mega-businesses pay their fair share, and
neutral nonprofit groups like the League of
Women Voters and the Oregon Center for
Public Policy say it’s best for Oregon. Vote
yes on 97.
Rachel Rich
Eugene
DON’T BLAME THE BUS
YES ON 97
Oregon is facing a $1.35 billion short-
fall next year. If we don’t do something
about it now, we face lost services for se-
niors, schools and health care.
Already, the Oregon Health Plan fails to
meet all clients’ needs. Already our seniors
and disabled have a fraction of the services
offered before Measures 5 and 50. Already
our schools have the lowest graduation
rates and among the largest class sizes in
the country.
Yet corporations pay only a tiny share
I was impressed with the elitism on
display in Linda Wagner’s letter complain-
ing about West 11th construction [Letters,
10/6]. Linda, your issue that road changes
are not well-marked is probably accurate.
But your question as to whether all this
will be worth it “for the four bus riders that
use this route” is way off. When was the
last time you rode the bus? When I drive,
I really do love the almost complete conve-
nience of going exactly where I want, effi-
ciently, in my own audio and temperature
controlled bubble. When I bus, sometimes I
BY ROBIN QUIRK E
Voting Problems
REDISTRIBUTING BALLOTS CAN AFFECT RESULTS
A
s Benton County prepares to vote on whether to adopt ranked-choice
voting for county elections, Oregonians are presented an opportunity
to explore different voting systems. Ranked-choice voting has the
most political traction right now, but it's only one of several alterna-
tives.
Among voting authorities, there is a somewhat ideological battle over which vot-
ing system is most democratic. Although no system is perfect, two dominant view-
points commonly emerge: those who favor evaluative voting (which includes both
approval and range voting), and those who prefer ranked-choice voting.
Approval voting is similar to our current plurality voting system, but instead of
choosing only one candidate, each voter may choose more than one. The candidate
with the most approval votes wins. Both the American Statistical Association and
the American Mathematical Association use this electoral system for their elections.
It is more expressive than plurality voting, and it does not require new machines or
software. On the other hand, approval voting does not require an absolute majority
to elect a winner and it lacks political momentum.
Range voting gives voters the opportunity to rate each candidate on a scale, and
the candidate with the highest mean score wins. Although mathematically respected,
it has not gained political attention. Some Olympic sports and academic tests use
range voting. It offers voters a very high level of expressivity, but information costs
can be high (rating more than one candidate requires more informed voters), and it
sometimes requires new machines and/or software.
4
October 20, 2016 • eugeneweekly.com
Ranked-choice voting, the method Benton County may approve next month, is
more expressive than plurality and approval voting because a voter is given the op-
portunity to rank candidates in order of preference, but less sophisticated voters may
be marginalized if they don’t understand how the winners are calculated.
Additionally, ranked choice can create a false majority (e.g., third-ranked choices
can get redistributed as first ranked choices; many ballots become redistributed or
disqualified, so often an absolute majority is not achievable), manual recount and
verification is difficult, information costs can be high (ranking more than one candi-
date requires more voter knowledge), and it sometimes requires new machines and/
or software.
To make informed choices, voters need to understand how the redistributing of
ballots can affect the results. Sometimes it is more strategically savvy to rank one’s
second preferred candidate lowest. For example, if I prefer the leading Democrat to
win, it would be beneficial for me to rank that person as my first choice and rank
any left-wing third party candidates lowest in the hope of the third party candidates’
votes being redistributed to the leading Democrat’s total count.
For most Americans, voting is the only means through which they exercise civic
power; therefore, it seems crucial for lawmakers and voters to take time to research
the pros and cons when considering voting system alternatives (goo.gl/P24q0U).
Robin Quirke is an associate researcher at PolicyInteractive.