Defend Oregon
This article is outside of Ballotpedia's coverage scope and does not receive scheduled updates. If you would like to help our coverage scope grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
| Defend Oregon | |
 | |
| Basic facts | |
| Location: | Oregon |
| Type: | Political action committee |
| Website: | Official website |
Defend Oregon is a political action committee (PAC) based in Oregon that has been registered with the Oregon Secretary of State and has had campaign finance activity for every primary and general election from 2008 through 2018.[1]
Background
The Defend Oregon website stated, "Defend Oregon is the coalition-led effort to stand up to extremist groups with dangerous political agendas. This coalition represents Oregon’s leading advocacy organizations, labor unions, and small businesses."[2] On ORESTAR, Oregon's campaign finance database, Defend Oregon stated that the nature of the committee is to "preserve economic opportunity and protect Oregon's quality of life.[3]
As of January 2020, Christy Mason was listed as the director and correspondence recipient of Defend Oregon, and Jef Green was listed as the treasurer.[1]
Political activity
Ballot measure activity
Overview of ballot measure support and opposition
You can send information about this influencer’s involvement with ballot measures to editor@ballotpedia.org.
The following table details Defend Oregon's ballot measure stances available on Ballotpedia:
2018
Five measures were on the 2018 ballot in Oregon. Defend Oregon supported Measure 102 and opposed measures 103, 104, 105, and 106. In 2018, Defend Oregon reported $8.78 million in contributions and $8.98 million in expenditures spent supporting and opposing the measures.
Oregon Measure 102 (2018)Measure 102, which was approved, removed the restriction that affordable housing projects funded by city and county bonds must be government-owned. Defend Oregon was one of four committees registered to support the measure.[4] Oregon Measure 103 (2018)Measure 103, which was defeated, would have prohibited state and local governments from enacting taxes on groceries. Defend Oregon wrote, "Constitutional Amendment 103 is risky and unnecessary. Supporters claim it’s meant to keep groceries tax free, but there is no tax on groceries and no one is proposing one. The measure is retroactive and so misleading and poorly-written that it would have many unintended consequences that harm Oregon families."[8] Oregon Measure 104 (2018)Measure 104, which was defeated, would have applied a three-fifths supermajority vote requirement to any legislation that increases revenue through changes in tax exemptions, credits, and deductions. Defend Oregon wrote, "Constitutional Amendment 104 is also unnecessary and dangerous. It greatly increases partisan gridlock by expanding 'supermajority' requirements to pass Oregon legislation. It jeopardizes funding for schools, Medicaid, affordable housing and other essential services, while also making it nearly impossible to eliminate special interest perks and loopholes."[8] Oregon Measure 105 (2018)Measure 105, which was defeated, would have repealed Oregon's sanctuary state law which limits the cooperation of local law enforcement with federal immigration enforcement. Defend Oregon wrote, "The administration in Washington, DC has set a radical new path on immigration: deporting thousands of law-abiding immigrants from their communities, separating children from their parents, and introducing racial and religious profiling to immigration law. Measure 105 would bring those same policies to Oregon. By voting no, we can show that Oregon wants no part of Donald Trump’s immigration policies."[8] Oregon Measure 106 (2018)Measure 106, which was defeated, would have prohibited public funds from being spent on abortions in Oregon, except when determined to be medically necessary or required by federal law. Defend Oregon wrote, "Constitutional Amendment 106 takes away access to safe, legal abortion. By targeting public employees and Medicaid recipients, this measure would hurt the women and families that need access to reproductive healthcare the most."[8] |
2016
Seven measures were on the 2016 ballot in Oregon. Defend Oregon was registered to support all seven measures. Five of the measures were approved and two were defeated. In 2016, Defend Oregon reported $1.83 million in contributions and $1.65 million in expenditures.[5]
Oregon Measure 94 (2016)The Oregon Elimination of Mandatory Judicial Retirement Age Amendment, also known as Measure 94, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Oregon as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. It was defeated. It would have removed the mandatory retirement age for judges, which was 75 years old going into the election. Oregon Measure 95 (2016)The Oregon Public University Diversification of Investments Amendment, also known as Measure 95, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Oregon as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. It was approved. The measure allowed public state universities to invest in equities. Oregon Measure 96 (2016)The Oregon Portion of Lottery Proceeds for Support of Veterans Amendment, also known as Measure 96, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Oregon as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. It was approved. The measure devoted 1.5% of state lottery net proceeds toward veterans' services. Oregon Measure 97 (2016)The Oregon Business Tax Increase Initiative, also known as Measure 97, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Oregon as an initiated state statute. It was defeated. The measure would have removed the cap on the corporate gross sales tax, also known as the minimum tax, and would have established a 2.5% tax on gross sales that exceed $25 million. Oregon Measure 98 (2016)The Oregon State Funding for Dropout Prevention and College Readiness Initiative, also known as Measure 98, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Oregon as an initiated state statute. It was approved. The measure required the Oregon Legislature to fund dropout-prevention and career and college readiness programs in Oregon high schools. Oregon Measure 99 (2016)The Outdoor School Lottery Fund Initiative, also known as Measure 99, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Oregon as an initiated state statute. It was approved. The measure created an "Outdoor School Education Fund," sourced from state lottery proceeds, to support outdoor school programs. Oregon Measure 100 (2016)The Wildlife Trafficking Prevention Act, also known as Measure 100, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Oregon as an initiated state statute. It was approved. The measure prohibited the sale of products and parts of 12 types of animals in Oregon: rhino, cheetah, tiger, sea turtle, lion, elephant, whale, shark, pangolin, jaguar, ray, and leopard. |
Finances
The following chart shows contribution (revenue) and expenditures for Defend Oregon from 2008 through 2019.[9]
| Reported revenues and expenditures for Defend Oregon | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year | Contributions (revenues) | Expenditures | |
| 2019 | $19,583.64 | $192,696.77 | |
| 2018 | $8,781,597.65 | $8,975,416.78 | |
| 2017 | $172,376.00 | $377,612.57 | |
| 2016 | $1,827,283.22 | $1,647,893.76 | |
| 2015 | $93,829.90 | $1,661.50 | |
| 2014 | $2,342,209.09 | $2,351,754.65 | |
| 2013 | $67,302.27 | $112,780.88 | |
| 2012 | $2,142,012.74 | $2,078,712.92 | |
| 2011 | $0.00 | $81,376.07 | |
| 2010 | $1,451,575.98 | $1,377,521.42 | |
| 2009 | $586.45 | $401,541.92 | |
| 2008 | $15,503,438.52 | $15,415,719.58 | |
Contributions
The following were the top five largest donors who contributed to Defend Oregon in 2018:[10]
| Donor | Amount |
|---|---|
| Vote No on 103 | $3,184,826.36 |
| Oregonians United Against Profiling | $1,679,000.00 |
| SEIU Local 503 | $925,000.00 |
| Oregon AFSCME Council 75 | $751,500.00 |
| Vote No on 104 | $575,000.00 |
Expenditures
The following were the top five recipients (aggregate) that Defend Oregon made expenditures to in 2018:[10]
| Recipient | Location | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| Buying Time, LLC | Washington, D.C. | $5,451,043.80 |
| Winning Mark | Oregon | $1,265,049.69 |
| FieldWorks, LLC | Washington, D.C. | $667,703.08 |
| Kramer's Metro Mailing Services | Oregon | $236,050.37 |
| AmCheck | Oregon | $226,204.76 |
Tax status
Defend Oregon is a 527 group. 527 group refers to the IRS section 527 designated nonprofit organization such as a political party, committee, association, or fund operating primarily for the purpose of influencing the election or selection of candidates to political office. Many political action committees and super PAC groups are designated 527 groups.[11] 527 groups can engage in campaign politics with no campaign limits, specifically supporting or attacking candidates, and must disclose donors. A 527 group may not, however, coordinate its activities with any campaign.
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms 'Defend Oregon'. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Oregon Secretary of State; ORESTAR, "Defend Oregon," accessed January 19, 2020
- ↑ Defend Oregon, "Home," accessed January 18, 2020
- ↑ ORESTAR, "Statement of Organization for Political Action Committee: Defend Oregon," accessed March 31, 2020
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Oregon Secretary of State, "Defend Oregon Statement of Organization," accessed March 30, 2020
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 Oregon Secretary of State, "Defend Oregon," accessed October 8, 2016 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "ORSOSFinance" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ 6.00 6.01 6.02 6.03 6.04 6.05 6.06 6.07 6.08 6.09 6.10 6.11 6.12 6.13 6.14 6.15 6.16 6.17 6.18 6.19 6.20 6.21 6.22 6.23 6.24 6.25 6.26 6.27 Follow the Money, "Defend Oregon," accessed April 2, 2020
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedFT - ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 Defend Oregon, "Latest news: Pledge to vote no on these anti-immigrant, anti-choice, and anti-democracy measures," accessed March 31, 2020
- ↑ ORESTAR, "Defend Oregon," accessed March 31, 2020
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedfec - ↑ Internal Revenue Service, "Exemption Requirements - Political Organizations," accessed January 12, 2015
| |||||||
