A4
THE ASTORIAN • THuRSdAy, MAy 23, 2019
OPINION
editor@dailyastorian.com
KARI BORGEN
Publisher
JIM VAN NOSTRAND
Editor
Founded in 1873
JEREMY FELDMAN
Circulation Manager
JOHN D. BRUIJN
Production Manager
CARL EARL
Systems Manager
OUR VIEW
Everyday Oregonians deserve their kicker
O
regon’s unique tax
“kicker” law is working
exactly as intended, poten-
tially sending more than $1.4 bil-
lion — yes, billion — back to tax-
payers next year.
Top Democrats in the Legisla-
ture’s supermajority should respect
the law’s intent, which is to pre-
vent excessive government spend-
ing. Instead, they want to spend
your kicker refund for you.
This is despite a new and his-
toric $1 billion-a-year tax on busi-
nesses, while also having about
$2.1 billion more to spend during
the current two-year budget period
than expected when the biennium
began on July 1, 2017.
Democrats already employed
fiscal sleight-of-hand only a few
weeks ago to reduce the potential
kicker by $108 million.
The Legislature has taken only
meager steps to control spending
in any meaningful way, and still
wants to pass other tax increases.
For any politicians who require
a refresher on the kicker, here it is:
The Legislature created it 40 years
ago in hopes of quelling the tax
revolt spreading north from Cal-
ifornia. A brainchild of the legis-
lative revenue officer, the kicker
was a way to guarantee lawmak-
ers could not spend large windfalls.
Instead, that money would go back
to the taxpayers. Isn’t that the way
it should be?
The details are that a kicker
occurs when state tax revenues
from corporations or from indi-
viduals and other sources come in
AP Photo/Jonathan J. Cooper
State economists Mark McMullen, left, and John Lehner answer questions from lawmakers
in 2015. Last week, they predicted a record-size kicker for Oregon taxpayers.
at least 2 percent higher than pro-
jected at the start of the biennium.
The entire surplus then is returned
to taxpayers as a credit on the next
year’s income taxes. It’s called the
“kicker” because the refund kicks
in when the 2 percent threshold is
reached.
Corporations already have
lost their kicker. Voters in 2012
approved a ballot measure divert-
ing the corporate kicker to the
State School Fund.
Unless the 2019 Legislature
interferes, personal income tax
payers will get the credit on this
year’s taxes when they file their
returns next year.
After the record-size kicker was
announced last week, Democrats
immediately decried it as exces-
sive, unreasonable and unneces-
sary. They lacked a sense of pro-
portion. “Oregon’s economy is
much larger than it used to be, so
the kicker is still expected to be
smaller than some as a share of
biennial collections,” state econ-
omists Mark McMullen and Josh
Lehner said in their quarterly reve-
nue forecast last week.
The final amounts won’t be
known until the next forecast on
Aug. 28, but currently the average
filer would receive a $691 credit.
Spent locally, that money would be
a boon for economies throughout
the state — and help Oregonians
shoulder the increased costs com-
ing out of the Legislature.
Under the Oregon Constitu-
tion, legislators can reduce or elim-
inate the personal income tax
kicker if two-thirds of represen-
tatives and two-thirds of senators
give their approval. That would
require several Republicans to join
Democrats.
Democrats will offer carrots,
such as directing some of the
kicker money toward rural hous-
ing, foster care, higher education or
the massive PERS liabilities. Those
are worthy projects — and a fine
use for the extra money the Legis-
lature already has.
But leave the kicker itself alone.
No to Gov. Kate Brown’s well-in-
tentioned-but-bad idea of reducing
each taxpayer’s kicker by $100 to
help pay for PERS.
No to House Speaker Tina
Kotek’s enigmatic idea of tak-
ing half the kicker for rebuilding
a bridge on I-205 and supporting
green-energy transportation proj-
ects — even though reducing Port-
land-area gridlock would bene-
fit freight traffic from throughout
the state. Kotek this week dropped
her proposal, saying there wasn’t
enough support for it. No, duh.
And no to any other idea for tak-
ing Oregonians’ kicker this year.
In a constituent newsletter last
week, Rep. Lynn Findley, R-Vale,
capsulized the situation: “Consti-
tutionally, the kicker is a check
on excessive taxation. The Ore-
gon Constitution mandates that the
excess revenue be returned to Ore-
gonians; unfortunately, that is not
the opinion shared by some of my
colleagues in the Legislature. How-
ever, I believe that every penny
should go back to the hardworking
Oregonians who contributed to our
economic success.”
Everyday Oregonians deserve
their money. Hands off it,
legislators.
LETTERS
‘Lysistrata’ revisited
fter the 25-man Alabama Sen-
ate passed America’s most restric-
tive anti-abortion bill on May 14, actress
Alyssa Milano suggested that women
should withhold sexual privileges from
men.
She echoed Greek comic playwright
Aristophanes, who composed “Lysistrata”
in 411 B.C. Lysistrata, an exceptional
woman with mercy and humanity on her
side, sought to force men to end the calam-
itous Peloponnesian War (431-404 B.C.).
Fast forward to saber-rattling Republi-
cans, currently hinting at a war with Iran,
and the ongoing “war” to dismantle Roe v.
Wade.
Perhaps our obsession with wars might
prompt some women to reconsider Lys-
istrata’s “war.” I suspect that Alabama
women may not take up arms against their
menfolk, withholding sexual privileges.
But whenever men make stupid deci-
sions about women’s private parts and
a woman’s right to have control over
her own body, it becomes necessary to
cut through the media clutter to raise
awareness.
In 2003, Liberian peace activist Ley-
mah Gbowee earned a Nobel Peace
prize for her protests that included a sex
strike to end her country’s civil war. She
acknowledged that it had little or no effect,
but did attract significant media attention.
Actress Milano’s proposal proba-
bly won’t be taken seriously, but she did
attract my attention. I recall that Milano
was featured in a 1980s ABC hit sitcom
called “Who’s the Boss?” Intriguing title.
And I recall that, in the ancient Greek
theater, all the actors were male. Women
were not allowed onstage because that was
considered “dangerous.” Fascinating.
ROBERT BRAKE
Ocean Park, Washington
A
Thanks for voters’ pamphlet
s a voter in Clatsop County, I want
to publicly thank the county com-
missioners and the county clerk, Tracie
Krevanko, for the Voters’ Pamphlet, issued
for the first time in many years in an off-
year election.
Although the Voters’ Pamphlet created
more work for the county clerk’s office,
and extra expense for the county, I feel
that it was very worthwhile. I was very
pleased to be able to read about the can-
didates who filed a statement for the pam-
A
phlet. It certainly made the process of
informing myself about the candidates
easier.
I hope that all Clatsop County voters
were equally pleased to have another tool
at hand while filling in their ballots.
MARY BETH COTTLE
Cannon Beach
Shedding dams makes sense
an we save Snake River salmon
runs? That question is linked to this
one: Can we save the Bonneville Power
Administration (BPA)? And: Does it make
sense to breach the Lower Snake River
dams to save both?
Under average river flows, the Pacific
Northwest has an estimated 24 percent
energy surplus. Under what the BPA con-
siders “critical water conditions” — that
is, the past 100 years’ lowest water levels
— surplus Pacific Northwest energy sits
at 17 percent. In part, due to having to sell
that surplus power at ever-lower prices,
even at a loss, BPA administrator Elliot
Mainzer has recently acknowledged that
BPA is financially in crisis.
C
The Corps of Engineers says the lower
Snake River dam turbines have a life
expectancy of 35 to 45 years. By 2030,
nine of the Lower Snake River turbines
will be over 60 years old, and 12 others 50
to 60 years old. The cost of rehabbing all
of the turbines: over $1 billion.
Since the Lower Snake River dams
only produce 3 to 4 percent of total Pacific
Northwest energy, midst a surplus of at
least 17 to 24 percent, the Lower Snake
River dams’ 3 to 4 percent is already
unneeded — it’s surplus energy.
Shedding itself of these four dams
could very well save not only fish, but the
BPA, from extinction.
LUAN PINSON
Vancouver, Washington
Are dams needed?
n the Pacific Northwest’s rapidly chang-
ing energy scene, are the lower Snake
River dams needed?
In its seventh power plan, the Pacific
Northwest Power and Conservation Coun-
cil states that in the Pacific Northwest,
energy efficiency alone will meet all pro-
I
jected future energy demand, and by 2030,
will have saved 4,000 average megawatts
— the equivalent production of (an imagi-
nary) 16 lower Snake River dams.
The Bonneville Power Administration
(BPA), distributor of energy produced by
31 Columbia Basin dams, says its aver-
age cost to generate and market power is
$35.56 per megawatt hour. Since 2010, the
cost of wind energy has declined 62 per-
cent, and solar 76 percent.
Idaho Power, for example, recently
contracted to purchase solar energy at
$21.75 per megawatt hour. BPA, con-
trarily, plans to raise public utility district
rates by 2.9 percent to $36.60 by 2021.
In the meantime, the Pacific North-
west has a 17 percent surplus of power.
Since the lower Snake River dams produce
only 4 percent of the Pacific Northwest’s
power, it fits into that “surplus” margin.
It’s clear that Pacific Northwest power
needs can be met without the lower Snake
River dams, and at lower cost; and consid-
ering the cost of losing salmon runs once
in the millions, Northwesterners don’t
need lower Snake River power.
LAURIE KERR
Battle Ground, Washington