Difference between revisions of "Oregon"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(add rd link)
m (Text replace - 'Image:SmallSR.png' to 'File:Button1.jpg')
Line 117: Line 117:
  
 
{| cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0"
 
{| cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0"
|width="201px" align="center"|<imagemap>Image:SmallSR.png|100px|alt=Oregon on Sunshine Review
+
|width="201px" align="center"|<imagemap>File:Button1.jpg|100px|alt=Oregon on Sunshine Review
 
default [http://sunshinereview.com/index.php/Oregon Oregon on Sunshine Review]
 
default [http://sunshinereview.com/index.php/Oregon Oregon on Sunshine Review]
 
desc none
 
desc none

Revision as of 10:29, 24 February 2011

Flag of Oregon.svg.png
Oregon on Ballotpedia

Oregon_ballot_measures
State measures
Getting_Started_on_Ballotpedia
Contribute
Oregon local ballot measures
Local measures
Ballotpedia:Oregon
The Oregon project

Oregon ballot news

Oregon gillnet fishing initiative returns to the state attorney general for ballot language changes

By Bailey Ludlam

Oregon

SALEM, Oregon: An initiative effort, originally filed in 2010, has returned for the 2012 ballot but not before some ballot title changes are made.

Recently, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled that proposed initiative language must be revised.

Initiative 21, also known as "Protect Our Salmon Act," calls for a ban of Columbia River commercial salmon fishing with gillnets by non-tribal persons and allow the use of seine nets instead.

Initiative sponsors filed a challenge against the ballot title and description written by the Oregon Attorney General. They argued that the title left out the "principle" change proposed by the measure - to ban the use of gillnets in the Columbia River.[1]

The original title was stated:

Specified commercial non-tribal fishing methods/procedures changed; recreational salmon fishers ensured minimum share of catch.
Read the original text here.

Justice Jack Landau agreed with sponsors and sent the measure back to the Oregon Attorney General's office to be re-written. "In all events, the information must pertain to an identified, actual ‘effect’ of enacting the measure; it is not permissible to ’speculate about the possible effects of a proposed measure," he said.[1]

...more Oregon political news

Oregon Government

Government of Oregon
Oregon ConstitutionSupreme CourtHouse of RepresentativesSenateGovernorAttorney GeneralSecretary of State

Oregon Counties
BakerBentonClackamasClatsopColumbiaCoosCrookCurryDeschutesDouglasGilliamGrantHarneyHood RiverJacksonJeffersonJosephineKlamathLakeLaneLincolnLinnMalheurMarionMorrowMultnomahPolkShermanTillamookUmatillaUnionWallowaWascoWashingtonWheelerYamhill

Voting and elections

Laws and history

Media and activism


Oregonians can vote on...

Statutes from citizens
Allowed
Vetoing legislation by referendum
Allowed
Recalling officials
Allowed








Contribute to Ballotpedia

...get started now


Transparency and Judiciary

Oregon on Sunshine Review
Oregon Judges on Judgepedia
Oregon Transparency on Sunshine Review Oregon Judges on Judgepedia

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Oregon Capital News, "Oregon Supreme Court bounces ballot title back to the Attorney General," December 13, 2011