This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "2008 Oregon Ballot Measure 56" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(January 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Amends Constitution: Provides That May And November Property Tax Elections Are Decided By Majority Of Voters Voting. | ||||||||||||||||
| Results | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||
Results by county Yes 50%-60% 60%-70% No 50%-60% | ||||||||||||||||
| Source:Oregon Secretary of State[1] | ||||||||||||||||
Oregon Ballot Measure 56 orHouse Joint Resolution 15 (HJR 15) is alegislatively referred constitutional amendment that enacted law which provides that property tax elections decided at May and November elections will be decided by a majority of voters who are voting in the relevant election.[2] It repealed the double majority requirement passed by the voters in the 1990s viaMeasures 47 and 50, which requires that, for non-general elections, all bond measures can pass only when a majority of registered voters turn out.
The measure appeared on theNovember 4, 2008 general election ballot inOregon and was passed with 56.6% of the vote.
Vote tallies by county:
| County | Yes | Votes | No | Votes | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baker | 45.60 | 3,794 | 54.40 | 4,527 | 8,321 |
| Benton | 60.15 | 25,825 | 39.85 | 17,106 | 42,931 |
| Clackamas | 54.54 | 96,605 | 45.46 | 80,525 | 177,130 |
| Clatsop | 58.96 | 10,122 | 41.04 | 7,046 | 17,168 |
| Columbia | 50.52 | 11,861 | 49.48 | 11,619 | 23,480 |
| Coos | 50.46 | 14,896 | 49.54 | 14,623 | 29,519 |
| Crook | 46.37 | 4,543 | 53.63 | 5,254 | 9,797 |
| Curry | 48.23 | 5,552 | 51.77 | 5,960 | 11,512 |
| Deschutes | 52.25 | 38,769 | 47.75 | 35,428 | 74,197 |
| Douglas | 47.76 | 23,696 | 52.24 | 25,919 | 49,615 |
| Gilliam | 54.20 | 568 | 45.80 | 480 | 1,048 |
| Grant | 45.14 | 1,645 | 54.86 | 1,999 | 3,644 |
| Harney | 48.81 | 1,688 | 51.19 | 1,770 | 3,458 |
| Hood River | 58.06 | 5,259 | 41.94 | 3,799 | 9,058 |
| Jackson | 52.82 | 49,843 | 47.18 | 44,527 | 94,370 |
| Jefferson | 49.51 | 3,899 | 50.49 | 3,976 | 7,875 |
| Josephine | 47.36 | 18,627 | 52.64 | 20,704 | 39,331 |
| Klamath | 46.49 | 12,908 | 53.51 | 14,856 | 27,764 |
| Lake | 43.80 | 1,518 | 56.20 | 1,948 | 3,466 |
| Lane | 60.35 | 102,750 | 39.65 | 67,504 | 170,254 |
| Lincoln | 55.46 | 12,523 | 44.54 | 10,058 | 22,581 |
| Linn | 47.05 | 22,976 | 52.95 | 25,858 | 48,834 |
| Malheur | 42.75 | 4,222 | 57.25 | 5,655 | 9,877 |
| Marion | 52.82 | 60,894 | 47.18 | 54,402 | 115,296 |
| Morrow | 52.49 | 2,045 | 47.51 | 1,851 | 3,896 |
| Multnomah | 68.26 | 228,199 | 31.74 | 106,114 | 334,313 |
| Polk | 52.68 | 17,739 | 47.32 | 15,935 | 33,674 |
| Sherman | 48.71 | 471 | 51.29 | 496 | 967 |
| Tillamook | 52.38 | 6,606 | 47.62 | 6,006 | 12,612 |
| Umatilla | 51.88 | 12,461 | 48.12 | 11,560 | 24,021 |
| Union | 50.17 | 5,943 | 49.83 | 5,902 | 11,845 |
| Wallowa | 48.46 | 1,995 | 51.54 | 2,122 | 4,117 |
| Wasco | 54.85 | 5,860 | 45.15 | 4,824 | 10,684 |
| Washington | 55.95 | 120,957 | 44.05 | 95,240 | 216,197 |
| Wheeler | 43.38 | 334 | 56.62 | 436 | 770 |
| Yamhill | 52.51 | 21,525 | 47.49 | 19,471 | 40,996 |
Measure 56 was supported by theVoting Matters Coalition, which included the League of Women Voters of Oregon, Human Services Coalition of Oregon, Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon, Basic Rights Oregon, Coalition for a Livable Future, Elders in Action, and Oregon PTA.
Official Voters' Pamphlet arguments in favor can be found at the Oregon Secretary of State'sNovember 4, 2008 Voters' Pamphlet of Measures.
Here is how Oregon's major newspapers have endorsed on the measure:
Notable arguments made in support of the measure included:
Steve Buckstein of the non-partisan, non-profit Cascade Policy Institute wrote acommentary that says, "Critics of Oregon's so-called 'double majority' rule say it isn't democratic because a simple majority of those voting may not be able to pass a tax measure. But in reality, just 25% of registered voters can raise taxes under 'double-majority.' 'Double majority' is a sensible taxpayer safeguard that should be kept, and even strengthened."
Notable arguments made in opposition to the measure included: