Progressive Party Positions

Progressive Party Positions

We are VERY different from the Establishment parties.
Our 2012 Voters Pamphlet Statement

 

Dem

Rep

Progressive

Real campaign finance reform NO NO YES
Oppose extension of income tax cuts for the rich NO NO YES
Oppose Wall Street bailouts NO NO YES
Oppose Cuts in Social Security Benefits NO NO YES
Employment for All (WPA style) NO NO YES
Increase minimum wage to living wage ($10 or more) NO NO YES
Single Payer comprehensive health care NO NO YES
Oppose Cuts in Medicare Coverage NO NO YES
End wars in Iraq and Afghanistan NO NO YES
Oppose use of mercenaries ("contractors") NO NO YES
Cut military spending NO NO YES
Equal rights for all; same-sex marriage NO NO YES
Oppose NAFTA & WTO; encourage local sourcing of products & services NO NO YES
Oppose spying on American civilians NO NO YES
End occupation of Palestine NO NO YES
Oppose shipping coal for export through Columbia Gorge NO NO YES
Oppose offshore drilling NO NO YES
Clean energy; no nuclear NO NO YES
Repair, improve infrastructure (transportation, water systems, etc.) NO NO YES
End the drug war NO NO YES
End the Senate filibuster; restore majority rule NO NO YES
End “corporate personhood” NO NO YES

 OREGON ISSUES

1)    We have worked for real campaign finance reform, not the phony bills promoted by the Democrats and Republicans, both of which opposed the 2006 Oregon campaign finance reform ballot measures.

2)    We want a State Bank to invest in jobs for Oregonians and to stop the State Treasurer and the Oregon Investment Council from jumping into bed with corporate raiders and fast-buck artists who lavish luxury travel and gifts on State employees.

3)    We want fair taxation.  Oregon has the 4th highest income taxes of any state on lower-income working families and is still at the bottom in taxes on corporations.  

4)    We want to stop government promotion of gambling (including video poker and video slots) and stop giving away $100 million per year in ridiculously high commissions to shops with video machines.

5)    We want to make the initiative and referendum again available to grass-roots efforts, instead of making it so complicated and expensive that only corporations and unions can afford to use it.

6)    We want to improve K-12 public education by giving parents and teachers more rights  to manage their neighborhood schools.

7)    We want social justice systems that are inclusive and that promote responsibility, safety, trust-building and equality.

8)    We advocate abolishing the Oregon Senate, leaving the 60-member Oregon House of Representatives.  Splitting the Legislature into two bodies allows both of them to play games and avoid responsibility.

9)    We want the Oregon Legislature to adopt the National Popular Vote plan so that Presidents are elected by popular vote.

What exactly does the party

What exactly does the party mean when they say that they oppose the use of mercenaries. Because the entire U.S. military today is made up of mercenary soldiers. They are paid to fight for our country. By opposing mercenaries, does the Progressive Party oppose the use of these people paid to fight? Do they want a strictly volunteer army? Or is it that they want the U.S. to stop using private armies run by individuals?

Progressive Party opposes military private contractors

Our shorthand "oppose use of mercenaries" means that we oppose the U.S. military hiring private companies to kill people or "provide security." It is not a comment about a volunteer army. We also advocate the quickest possible withdrawal of all foreign military forces from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Generally it's a politics and

Generally it's a politics and it's there since then. It's a very old brand new things to us. It repeats again and again. The bottom line is what we can do the best is to help our nation. Let change starts at ourselves and spread it eventually. Big change always has a small beginning.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

American Extremists

American Extremists - National man of mystery

American Extremists - Non, je ne regrette rien

American Extremists - About face

American Extremists - Dis appointment

American Extremists - If only the czar knew!

American Extremists - Cutter's way

American Extremists - Circle game


Dr. Don Show Features "No" on Portland "Water District" Measure

Conversations with Dr. Don will air, starting on Tuesday, April 22, a 1-hour show with Dan Meek. The first half is about the Portland "Water District" measure on the May 20 ballot and includes these slides [or this PDF version of the slides].

Portland Area Broadcast Schedule

Portland, OR metropolitan area: Tuesday  11pm  Channel 11

Washington County, OR area (Channel 21):

Friday  8pm
Saturday  1am     Saturday  9am
Sunday  3pm
Monday  6am       Monday  1pm

It is also at https://www.youtube.com/user/friendlydon1.

OPP Urges NO on the Corporate Takeover of Portland’s Water and Sewer System

Oregon Progressive Party urges NO on the Corporate Takeover
of Portland’s Water and Sewer System

[This is the Voters' Pamphlet statement of the Oregon Progressive Party on Portland Measure 26-256.]

For 27 years, I have been in the forefront of creating new electric and water cooperatives and public districts in Oregon.  I oppose this measure.

This measure is a corporate takeover of the City’s water and sewer systems, under a misleading cloak of populist rhetoric.

This measure would graft onto the Portland water and sewer systems a 7-person board of directors, elected with unlimited campaign contributions and expenditures.  I would expect the big commercial and industrial water users to select their candidates and overwhelm the voters with political ads.

So far their effort has been funded 99.4% by big corporate water users and water polluters and their lawyers.  See http://tinyurl.com/waterdistbackers.

The measure would prohibit nearly anyone with Portland water or sewer experience from serving on the board, clearing the field for the big money candidates.

The resulting corporate-dominated board would have less concern for the environment and residential ratepayers.  Portland's overall progressive voters ensure that the Portland City Council, which now controls the system, has a generally pro-environment, pro-consumer outlook.

But a board elected from gerrymandered districts, solely on the basis of  water and sewer issues and without limits on political spending, would likely:

  1. gut expenditures necessary for environmental protection, and
     
  2. increase rates for residential customers in order to decrease rates for the largest customers.

The attorney for the measure backers is John DiLorenzo, who for decades has led the charge in challenging campaign finance reform laws.

There are some policy statements in the measure, like very vague (and unenforceable) prohibitions on "regionalization" (not defined) and on regulations allowing greater harm to Bull Run Watershed.  But the measure leaves out protecting the environmental regulations governing all other parts of the water and sewer system.

Dan Meek

progparty.org          info@progparty.org

Princeton Study finds U.S. is Oligarchy

Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

BBC
April 17, 2014

The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite.

So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page.

This is not news, you say.

Perhaps, but the two professors have conducted exhaustive research to try to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here's how they explain it:

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.

In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power.

The two professors came to this conclusion after reviewing answers to 1,779 survey questions asked between 1981 and 2002 on public policy issues. They broke the responses down by income level, and then determined how often certain income levels and organised interest groups saw their policy preferences enacted.

"A proposed policy change with low support among economically elite Americans (one-out-of-five in favour) is adopted only about 18% of the time," they write, "while a proposed change with high support (four-out-of-five in favour) is adopted about 45% of the time."

On the other hand:

When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organised interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favour policy change, they generally do not get it.

They conclude:

Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But we believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organisations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America's claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened.

No to TPP Rally 1-31-14

Portland Rally To
Stop The TPP

No More NAFTAS!
Twenty Years Is Enough!

What:  Rally followed by leafleting and delegation visits to Congressional offices.
When:  Friday January 31st at 12 noon.
Where:  PSU Park Blocks, in front of the Smith Center (SW Park Ave & SW Harrison St).

January 2014 marks the twenty-year anniversary of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), a pact that has had devastating consequences for people and the environment in all three countries and beyond.  The pending Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) has been described as 'NAFTA on steriods' and threatens to:

Oregon Progressive Party Opposes Fast Track for TPP

The Oregon Progressive Party's monthly membership meeting approved this statement of opposition to fast tracking of the the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement, because it sets "binding policy on Congress and state legislatures relating to patents and copyright, food safety, government procurement, financial regulation, immigration, healthcare, energy, the environment, labor rights and more."

Oppose the Corporate Coup; Oppose Fast Track Authority

NAFTA is 20.
20 years ago on January 1, 1994, President Clinton signed NAFTA (North American Free Trade Area). Agreement proponents had declared that 170,000 American jobs would be created, exports of American farm products would increase, food prices would decrease, the American balance of trade would be improved. the Mexican economy would be uplifted to be a first class level of prosperity and more.

Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch's new report, NAFTA at 20, points to quite different results. Instead of job creation, we see one million US jobs lost; the lost jobs caused a downward pressure on American wages, thereby increasing inequality within the United States; food prices went up; the US balance of trade with both Mexico and Canada moved from small surplus' to deficits; American manufacturers moved their production south of the border (and later out of Mexico to China and now the new low wage nation of Vietnam); and many environmental and health laws have been challenged in private trade tribunals. The United States has become less food sustainable. Mexican immigration into the US doubled. Read the report yourself here. Listen to or watch Democracy Now! interview with Lori Wallach of Public Citizen on January 3rd, 2014 here. Click here for a list of investor suits challenging laws and regulations under various of these so-called "Free trade Agreements."

NAFTA to become the Trans Pacific Partnership