#hb2020
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Visit Tumblr Blog
Explore Tumblr blogs with no restrictions, modern design and the best experience.
Last Seen Tumblr Blogs
Fun Fact
Tumblr’s reach among the 26-to-35-year-olds in the US is 11%.
Photo
These were related, a little bit, to this series: https://chapteruntitledddd.tumblr.com/post/170968706701/im-late-t-t-this-took-me-longer-than-i
Belated HB to Toris!
218 notes
·
View notes
Photo
This just broke my irony meter. #capkillsjobs #hb2020 #timberunity #orpol #orleg #orcot #Oregon11 #orgov #recallkatebrown #stoptheabuse https://www.instagram.com/p/B1E4tpMHnit/?igshid=1rccylyamyegm
0 notes
Link
0 notes
Text
Our Black Friday Sales are happening now. Buy1 Get1 50% off, Use code: HB2020. The Set Collection is 10% off, use code: The Set. Pence's Merchandise 50% off no code needed. Shop now online at Freestylecaters2you.com
#art in motion#smallbusiness#fashion#maskon#shoponline#facemask#maskup#safety first#health & fitness#reading#read in 2020#tshirt#headband#facecovering#face mask#black friday#buyblack#support
0 notes
Photo
Linda obra da @fenixgraffiti realizada no @cura.art em Belo Horizonte emoldura o Hyundai HB20 Diamond Plus 2020. Terminamos o teste com o compacto e em breve você acompanha nossa avaliação completa! Mas você já pode conferir mais conteúdo no nosso Instagram Stories (veja nos destaques na bio!) Olha a tabela de preços: Tabela HB20 2020 HB20 1.0 Sense (Manual) – R$ 46.490 HB20 1.0 Vision (Manual) – R$ 48.990 HB20 1.0 Vision Bluemedia (Manual) – R$ 50.490 HB20 1.0 Evolution (Manual) – R$ 53.790 HB20 1.6 Vision (Manual) – R$ 57.990 HB20 1.6 Vision (AT6) – R$ 62.790 HB20 1.6 Launch Edition (AT6) – R$ 69.990 HB20 1.0 TGDI Evolution (AT6) – R$ 67.190 HB20 1.0 TGDI Diamond (AT6) – R$ 73.590 HB20 1.0 TGDI Diamond Plus (AT6) – R$ 77.990 #carroesporteclube #hb20novageração #hyundaibr #hb20 #hb2020 #carroEC_hyundai https://ift.tt/33TBk1h
0 notes
Text
Also the Oregon GOP tweeted a photo of peaceful protestors holding SIGNS during a previous demonstration to illustrate the "armed insurrection" they were bragging about, and in the same tweet claimed the Democrats were the ones "cowering." (See the replies in this thread debunking the photo.)
Republicans in Oregon literally ran away from a climate change vote
Yes, literally.
On June 19, senate Republicans in Oregon’s legislature literally fled the state to avoid voting on climate change legislation because the vote can’t go through without them being present.
They are hiding out in other states like Idaho.
Democrats are going to start fining them 500 dollars for every day they refuse to show up and do their jobs. The governor has put out warrants for them.
Can you name any other profession where you can flee the state in order to avoid doing your job and still have that job when you decide to come back.
This is the wildest thing I’ve ever read and yet its recieving no media coverage.
And OF COURSE right wing nutjobs with guns have vowed an armed insurrection if anyone tries to force Republicans to do their fucking jobs. And one of the senators said that if the governor tries to arrest him, he should send heavily armed bachelors to do so, to which there’s really only one interpretation: that he will kill any officers who try to make him do his job (guess he finally found some blue lives he doesnt think matter)
They are also describing them as “refugees” which, ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?
1K notes
·
View notes
Text
Discourse Booster Shots #001
For the sake of not taking up so much space, the transcript is under a ‘read more’.
To summarize and pluck a few quotes from the transcript:
> Discussion about the time Oregon senators left the state to make sure a climate bill didn’t pass.
> Talking about how ‘corporativism’ is an “inevitable result” of capitalism.
User #8
this is "real capitalism has never been tried" tier, capitalism arose in tandem with the nation-state
User #6
corporativism is the natural result of capitalism just like cancer is the natural result of living and acquiring mutations
User #4
The Libertarians that aren't corporativist believe that government involvement strengthened corporations in the first place
User #8
this is what I mean by semantics
User #6
it did, but that's because the government is one avenue of power for capitalism to thrive, rather than a necessary ingredient for capitalism to go bad
User #8
capitalism has never existed without states
> And also this quote.
"muh evil urbanites will opress the poor farmers" is just a misanthropic and classist dogwhistle
User #1
Oregon senators ran out of the state so a bill wouldn't be passed
User #2
is it because of that climate bill?
User #1
Yeah
Now the police are looking for them LOL
User #3
anyone got an article im feeling lazy
User #2
I can't believe everyone in Oregon wants to kill the enviorment
User #3
bill: https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Measures/Overview/HB2020
article: https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/23/politics/oregon-gop-state-senators-legislative-session-climate/index.html
User #4
lol
That's a mess
User #4
Wait wait wait, all of the GOP senators walked out? :joy:
User #5
Imagine being so dead set against doing your job that you literally flee your state.
User #3
All 11
And if any less had walked out, a vote would have been held. Oregon needs 2/3 (20 of 30) of the senators present
User #4
One could have stayed
And been like "hey"
User #6
the republican party is unified with an agenda and vision for the country, what can I say
User #1
Sup bitches
User #3
no ?
one staying would be 20 present, allowing a quorum to be formed.
unless you're saying one could have made the walkout pointless, in which case yes
User #4
"Republican Jackie Winters died last month and has not yet been replaced."
User #3
oh i didn't see that
User #4
It's from a different article
User #3
ah that would be why
so it's 11-18 right now
for a total of 29
User #4
It emphasized the ratio of their senate
User #1
Well they could've taken the corpse
User #4
That gives Weekend at Bernie's a different meaning
User #3
you're right one could have stayed
19/29 < 2/3
User #4
Some newbie senator wearing an oversized suit
"hi"
User #6
anyways this sucks bigtime
User #4
Why is this in Channel #1 anyway?
User #3
idk
User #4
It should be in Channel #2
User #6
I wanted User #7 to go on an investigative adventure
User #3
User #6 wanted User #7 to go on an adventure to find her senators
User #4
I see
User #8
@User #7 good luck
User #4
Gun jokes are bad
User #3
agree
User #4
It would be neat to discuss the bill, but whatever.
User #7
Hm?
User #3
The bill is a cap and trade bill, right ?
I don't remember what exactly that entails
User #7
Oh, the climate change bill.
User #4
Cap and trade is the basicest of all basic climate control legislation
User #7
It's a bunch of wishy-washy feelgood stuff that won't necessarily change anything because Oregon and police go together like fire and gasoline.
User #4
Honestly it's really ineffectual and essentially a tax for overpollution.
User #3
so why the hell has this caused a walkout
User #4
:shrug:
User #6
the real debate is less on cap and trade, and more about a moving goalpost. User #4 is basically right, but what the government can do is set new standards over time
User #4
That's why I want to read the bill
User #3
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB2020/B-Engrossed
this is the current text, I believe
User #6
or rather a hypothetical moving goalpost since afaik there aren't any immediate plans to change the goalpost
User #7
It's more that the urban cities have taken over the state and are trying to impose urban regulations on area that are very rural.
User #4
It doesn't matter if the goalpost is moved
User #7
This is an easy target.
User #4
Let's say the cap is 10 tons and the company makes 100 tons of excess carbon
They just pay off 10 companies
User #6
well what I mean by that is make it more punishing/strict as time goes on and as environmental demand is created, or as they find fewer people in compliance.
It's still bad for the company to have to pay off 10 companies for their excess, and the goal of any cap and trade would be to find an equilibrium where there are no "un-used" credits, and then from there start to wring it down further.
User #4
Also, it's passed closing at work but I'm stuck here. It's raining and I don't have an umbrella.
User #3
F
User #6
I agree it's retarded market logic in a lot of ways, but the end goal of a cap and trade program can have some influence on industry beyond a mere carbon tax.
F
User #7
It's less about climate change and more about the fact that there is functionally no opposition party in Oregon because they hold a supermajority.
User #4
I have my own idea for it, but I'm not in Channel #3 so
User #6
no harm in opining on politics on occasion
User #4
No means no
User #3
most content in Channel #3 isn't worth seeing anyway
User #4
It's not about the content, it's about the constant participation.
User #3
wdym
User #4
I absolutely hate politics
User #3
oh fair
User #4
But that said, I don't have neutral opinions
Though, along with what User #7 said, that really sucks that a party would bully legislature in because they're essentially unopposed.
User #3
what do you mean by "bully legislature in"
User #4
:thinking:
Thinking of a way to explain it without being political is hard
User #7
It's just yet another episode of "Urban elites and rural businesses" happening in Oregon.
User #3
like push it through as if the other party's opinions don't matter ?
User #7
I wish Portland would go away, honestly.
User #3
or something else
User #4
Essentially yes
User #1
Explaining politics without politics is hard
User #4
No, I said without being political.
User #3
yeah you can talk about politics objectively
saying xyz happened is politics but not political
User #4
So people voted in one interest group that represents a geographically small place. That interest group may not ideologically represent all of the people in their district because of various things either.
Things such as priorities over issues is one of them.
A large group of people could have voted that party because they absolutely believed the other leading party had a priority counter to what the people in the state wanted, for instance.
Say they wanted to tax oranges by 100000%
User #8
evil urbanites oppressing the rural ubermensch
User #4
The party that won could much less bad than that party, but the party platform of the second party gave the first party a landslide. And now they can do anything they want
Such as taxing apples by an extra 50%
User #6
stupid awful two party system I hate it why do we have to fptp all of this bullshit it's not fair
User #4
:sip:
User #6
gerrymandering bullshit motherfucking two parties worse and worser fucking REEEEE
User #7
Because Americans are by and large, too stupid to see things in more than two facets.
User #3
User #6.
Calm.
User #8
oregon is >80% urbanized (could only find a 81% figure for 2010 which should be higher now) so why cry crocodile tears for rural areas? they are also able to hold urban areas hostage politically
User #4
I thank User #6 for saying what I wanted to say.
User #3
lol
User #7
Oregon, 80% urbanized? Hmm...
User #4
Ignore him, he spends all his time in a country where the national footwear are woodblocks
is?
User #8
only once have I seen someone wear clogs
User #4
That's one time more than I ever have and I'm almost 30
User #3
User #4oldman
User #4
Infinitely more people who were clogs over there
User #1
I saw someone wearing clogs two days ago in LA
User #4
LA doesn't exist
User #1
Libtards
User #6
no I actually do agree with you User #4, I just think that in the end there's a fraught distinction between whether the right of divvying up political power and responsibility falls to a populous, or to the landed.
User #7
Los Angeles...
:disgust:
User #8
it's like saying all americans wear pilgrim hats
User #4
No, only New Englanders
User #1
LA sucks but I'm close ish to Round1 so uwu
User #4
The US is essentially the EU as an actual country.
User #7
I want to make a border wall that encloses all of California away from Oregon, but it's too late at this point.
User #4
The Big One will get rid of California eventually anyway
User #3
the... big one ?
User #6
I understand calls for state rights as they relate to national legislation, as well as the difference between urban and rural legislative regions and the fraught issues of liberty, but what ends up happening then empirically is that in an attempt to protect the "masses" from deciding the fate of the rural regions, you end up giving massively disproportionate amounts of political power to people who own more land or live in less densely populated areas (the net result being that a political region exists that is owned by fewer people, yet has the same amount of power as the same stretch of land with far more people)
User #4
The hypothetical earthquake along the San Andreas fault
User #6, the difference is that it's easier to control a small region than a large region. Entropy will rule out.
Rural people 2 hours away from me have massively different opinions
User #8
User #6 is correct, "muh evil urbanites will opress the poor farmers" is just a misanthropic and classist dogwhistle
User #4
Farmers are incredibly rich
User #6
True, and I'd argue that there are sometimes significant legislative and infrastructural needs, but I think that needs temperance with a strong desire to uphold democracy.
User #4
Anyway, the point is there's a difference between Electoral College reform and abolishing the Electoral College system
There's also a difference in believing in a two party system and believing the federal government should have a say in things.
User #6
I think it's good, actually, to abolish the Electoral College, and that we should
But that's because in part, 'reform' I think is a very nebulous and impossible to achieve goal. There is no way to really numerically boil down how much more power we should give representationally to states.
The senate, for example, should also be abolished
User #7
Farmers are rich? Not here, last I checked.
User #4
Here in the midwest farmers are incredibly rich
We pretty much make corn for the entire nation
and wheat, and soybeans
Also there's no "stereotypical" farmers here anymore.
User #8
XI YOU CHINK FUCK BUY OUR SOY
User #3
are they really rich ?
huh
all i ever hear about farmers is how they have to literally hack their tractors to be able to repair them themselves
User #6
I suppose a better system, tbh, would be for states and counties to far better geographically track to the general living conditions and needs of the people who live there
User #4
But is that really a good thing, giving the state more power?
User #8
DRM is basically communism cause you don't actually own the tractor
User #6
What you do in that case is really just change the duties and responsibilities. It also, unfortunately, creates problems where poorer regions just can't afford the necessary infrastructure.
User #4
I see it as a problem, but not the state's role to deal with it.
User #6
But, infrastructure is needed differently according to different regions- for example public transit in a rural area would look totally different from an urban.
User #4
Public transit in a rural area would be an absolute waste
My uncle lived 20 minutes from the nearest neighbor
User #6
the problem then becomes that people born in different areas of a country are subject to far different challenges and requirements for success.
User #4
And technically they were neighbors
User #3
why is the us so big
User #4
Manifest Destiny
User #9
This but unironically
User #4
Who said I was saying it ironically?
User #7
I just also want to point out that doing carbon taxes and capping on the general populace isn't necessarily a fruitful endeavor, seeing as the ultra-rich expend the same amount of greenhouse gases as thousands of people.
User #4
UGH. RAIN. STOP./
User #6
agreed
with User #7, and also User #4 I guess please stop rain
User #4
Oh shit no User #6 caused a drought
User #8
honestly the whole notion of "state size" is ridiculous, you can't quantify it in a meaningful way or make a moral judgement about a state doing things regardless of what it does
if state power decreases, what does that even mean? it's just a discussion about semantics and this is why libertarianism is a joke cause it's not even applicable to reality, just some realm of magical ideas about "market" and "state" and "freedom" that exist in a vacuum
User #4
>Implying that libertarianism as a whole is inherently laissez-faire
User #3
is it not ? that was always the impression i got from the outside
User #4
It is not
User #3
but i haven't looked into it much, to be fair
User #4
They're just the loudest people
User #8
I turn down the slider of "government" from X to Y, does that then mean the slider of "people power" goes up? it's meaningless
User #6
I do think that state size is important, but rather than being "state size", I think that there are a lot of really important and meaningful questions about resource distribution and centralized planning that relate to the general topography and material conditions of any particular stretch of land.
User #3
okay that's fair User #4, lmao
User #7
The only viable government has and always will be feudalism. We just practice different forms of it and say it isn't.
User #6
The idea of like, different intersecting levels of power and bureaucracy is often purposefully muddy and meaningless (besides meaning to scare people), but there is a significant question of "logistics" buried in questions of where centers of power and infrastructure are to be located and arranged.
User #7 is based and redpilled, we are entering the age of techno-feudalism and honestly I'm throwing my weight behind the google lords
User #8
in that case a "small state" would imply a lower level of organization and means of communication and transportation
User #6
Idk- I would think it would imply that the units that comprise the grander system of infrastructure would be smaller, not necessarily that the whole would be smaller.
though I think we may be talking about different things at this point
I mean "smaller state" as in "smaller-but-more-states-where-states-overall-maintain-the-same-amount-of-power" whereas "smaller state" means "less-government-involvement" to a lot of people
honestly I'm not even an anarkiddie I don't know why I'm using their logic but using the language of a statist fuck this
User #8
making my government so small that a bunch of rich guys just make a new state and I can't do anything about it :sunglasses:
User #6
community is reactionary, anarchists are dumb if they think that a stateless society can exist in a stable form, please Xi just take us now
User #4
Not all of them think or want it to exist in a stable manner. If anything they think the goal is to make government as useless as possible so we no longer need it.
User #7
User #6, a bootlicker? Imagine my surprise...
User #6
I'm just shitposting
User #4
It's just irony guys
User #3
wasn't User #6 the one complaining about the fact that people could claim anything is sarcastic/shitposting and come away from it without any negative consequences a few weeks ago :thinking:
User #4
The rain really isn't letting up....I think I'm going to steal an umbrella from the lost and found so I cna leave.
User #6
I think a lot of accelerationists think that way, but capitalists are doing a good enough job rendering public utilities and government apparatuses useless in order to have more relative power
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User #8
if libertarian praxis is to intentionally wreck public services so they can be privatized then they're doing a good job
User #4
You also falsely equate capitalists to corporativists
User #8
"government bad" - people in government
User #6
yeah I think that in a broader sense a lack of accountability, or an easy shorthand for removing accountability, is inherently bad design
among a small discourse community of friends though, shitposting should be just fine
User #8
this is "real capitalism has never been tried" tier, capitalism arose in tandem with the nation-state
User #6
corporativism is the natural result of capitalism just like cancer is the natural result of living and acquiring mutations
User #4
The Libertarians that aren't corporativist believe that government involvement strengthened corporations in the first place
User #8
this is what I mean by semantics
User #6
it did, but that's because the government is one avenue of power for capitalism to thrive, rather than a necessary ingredient for capitalism to go bad
User #8
capitalism has never existed without states
User #4
I think your criticism is absolutely hilarious
User #8
a capitalist's property is recognized as such because the state does, if they actually single-handedly protect it from infringing then they effectively are a state already
by extension, "property rights" are a delegation from the state
User #4
You being critical in that way completely bars you from the polar opposite defense, jsyk
User #6
what do you mean
User #8
I think the USSR is socialist though
User #4
"Real capitalism has never been tried"
What's the polar opposite of that?
User #6
real capitalism exists
User #4
Kashira kashira
User #6
?
User #4
No, I said polar opposite, not inverted statement
User #8
"the US isn't capitalist, it's corporatist" is a more common take than "the USSR wasn't socialist"
User #4
Le sigh....
"Real communism has never been tried" you dipsticks
User #6
except that the argument never ends there, it's always an argument over the specific ways in which something is bad and/or falls apart, right?
Like, talking about how capitalist states fuck up socialist or communist ones on the reg
that's not really a structural, inherent failure of socialism, but a reaction from the global community to a socialist state.
User #4
:smug:
User #8
communism has been tried though, idk what you're trying to say
User #4
If you knew more about me, you'd understand why I think this conversation is absolutely hilarious.
User #8
I guess you think this is a gotcha cause you're used to libtards
User #4
Real communism has never existed.
I never said it was a gotcha
User #8
depends on how you define communism
it's a moot point though
User #6
it has, in the US, between 2008-2016 under our gay sharia overlord
User #4
depends on how you define capitalism
User #8
a system of generalized commodity production, wage labour and private property that followed feudalism
User #4
lol you don't get it at all
User #8
capitalism is just a state of mind man
it's when the entrepreneurs do the freedom without the collectivists interfering
User #6
I actually think that capitalism is bad because I think every system that assumes free will is bad and wrong
or that relies on taking advantage of the discrepancy between the assumed free will, and reality (no free will) more accurately.
User #8
User #4 give me a definition of capitalism
is the US capitalist?
User #4
I'm not an edgeposter, why would I participate in this discussion?
User #6
because this is an adventure!
User #8
you have been all this time and you clearly have some thoughts on the subject with your reference to "corporatism" as if collusion between state and capital is not a defining feature of capitalism as a mode of production
User #4
I have clear thoughts on a bunch of things, and I'm not an edgeposter because I specifically do not wish to participate in said discussions.
If you wish to discuss it, might I suggest going to Channel #3 and bringing it up as a topic there?
I was only making definitions and not providing any of my personal opinion.
User #8
the US is a capitalist imperialist hegemon and all the wars it has fought have been to preserve this and all the deaths caused by it can be chalked up to capitalism goodnight
User #6
this is a free market of ideas and I'm a social capitalist and I am fr finna collude with the state (server mods) as a defining feature of my use of social capital clout to discuss it all over the place pochamp
pogchamp*
wait but he asked you to define something
User #4
He asked about my definition, which would be inherently political based on my framing.
On how corporativism is different than capitalism.
0 notes
Text
Thoughts for Today
Good Saturday morning to you. Coffee is hot, thoughts are a many, and it’s gonna be a wonderful sunny day.
I have many topics in hand, so here goes.
HB2020: This week showed me a great majority of people who loved their jobs, their fellow man, and they showed their pride in a convoy to Salem. The protested and didn’t tear up buildings, be mean to anyone, and when it was over….. no trash. Hmm……
View On WordPress
0 notes
Link
Oregon's Republican Party appears to have made light of right-wing threats made against politicians in the state stemming from opposition to planned climate change legislation.Oregon’s state capitol was forced to close at the weekend due to a “possible militia threat” against legislators.On Sunday the Oregon GOP Twitter account posted a photograph of peaceful protesters at the building.“Heavily armed militia lays siege to Oregon’s Capitol as Senate Democrats cower in fear,” the party tweeted, apparently mocking the threats of harm to politicians.Democrats in the coastal state are hoping to pass landmark climate legislation which would dramatically reduce fossil fuel emissions in Oregon by 2050.But the bill has stalled after Republican lawmakers walked out of the legislature in an attempt to deny the Democrats, the majority party, enough votes to proceed.Several fled the state to avoid the vote, leading Kate Brown, the governor, to order police officers to track them down.Under the proposed law, Oregon would put an overall limit on greenhouse gas emissions and auction off pollution “allowances”.Those opposed to the plan say it would exacerbate a growing divide between the liberal and urban parts of Oregon.The state Democrats have a majority of 18 to 12, but require a quorum of 20 to proceed.The bill has already passed the state House.A group of local Republicans were set to protest inside the Capitol on 23 June when lawmakers were present, and anti-government groups threatened to join, prompting the statehouse shutdown.> Heavily armed militia lays siege to Oregon’s Capitol as Senate Democrats cower in fear. orpol orleg capkillsjobs hb2020 Oregon11 orcot pic.twitter.com/XQHCEb3D59> > — Oregon GOP (@Oregon_GOP) > > June 23, 2019“The Oregon State Police has recommended that the Capitol be closed tomorrow due to a possible militia threat,” a spokesperson for Senate president Peter Courtney said on Friday.The governors’ office also confirmed the threats.Lawmakers in Oregon have previously grappled with the danger of militias.One of the groups set to join Saturday’s protest, the Oregon Three Percenters, joined an armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in 2016.Dozens of people occupied the remote Oregon refuge for more than a month to protest federal control of Western lands.The standoff began to unravel when authorities fatally shot the group’s spokesperson and arrested key leaders as they headed to a community meeting.The Oregon Republican Party’s tweet attracted outrage online, with many condemning the tone of the post.“Oregon GOP endorses domestic terrorism. There’s your headline,” wrote Tyler Huffman, a Twitter user, in reply to the post.“I have to think this tweet will be deleted when the grown-ups see it,” said Ben M Schorr, in another reply.Democrats planned to return to the capitol on Monday.It is unclear if the state Republicans will continue their walkout in an attempt to derail the climate change legislation.If passed the proposed legislative package would be only the second of its kind in the US, after California passed a similar bill in 2013.
from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://yhoo.it/2YgYUCM
0 notes
Text
Oregon Republican Party mocks armed militia threat, despite capitol building being closed due to armed militia threat
Oregon's Republican Party appears to have made light of right-wing threats made against politicians in the state stemming from opposition to planned climate change legislation.Oregon’s state capitol was forced to close at the weekend due to a “possible militia threat” against legislators.On Sunday the Oregon GOP Twitter account posted a photograph of peaceful protesters at the building.“Heavily armed militia lays siege to Oregon’s Capitol as Senate Democrats cower in fear,” the party tweeted, apparently mocking the threats of harm to politicians.Democrats in the coastal state are hoping to pass landmark climate legislation which would dramatically reduce fossil fuel emissions in Oregon by 2050.But the bill has stalled after Republican lawmakers walked out of the legislature in an attempt to deny the Democrats, the majority party, enough votes to proceed.Several fled the state to avoid the vote, leading Kate Brown, the governor, to order police officers to track them down.Under the proposed law, Oregon would put an overall limit on greenhouse gas emissions and auction off pollution “allowances”.Those opposed to the plan say it would exacerbate a growing divide between the liberal and urban parts of Oregon.The state Democrats have a majority of 18 to 12, but require a quorum of 20 to proceed.The bill has already passed the state House.A group of local Republicans were set to protest inside the Capitol on 23 June when lawmakers were present, and anti-government groups threatened to join, prompting the statehouse shutdown.> Heavily armed militia lays siege to Oregon’s Capitol as Senate Democrats cower in fear. orpol orleg capkillsjobs hb2020 Oregon11 orcot pic.twitter.com/XQHCEb3D59> > — Oregon GOP (@Oregon_GOP) > > June 23, 2019“The Oregon State Police has recommended that the Capitol be closed tomorrow due to a possible militia threat,” a spokesperson for Senate president Peter Courtney said on Friday.The governors’ office also confirmed the threats.Lawmakers in Oregon have previously grappled with the danger of militias.One of the groups set to join Saturday’s protest, the Oregon Three Percenters, joined an armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in 2016.Dozens of people occupied the remote Oregon refuge for more than a month to protest federal control of Western lands.The standoff began to unravel when authorities fatally shot the group’s spokesperson and arrested key leaders as they headed to a community meeting.The Oregon Republican Party’s tweet attracted outrage online, with many condemning the tone of the post.“Oregon GOP endorses domestic terrorism. There’s your headline,” wrote Tyler Huffman, a Twitter user, in reply to the post.“I have to think this tweet will be deleted when the grown-ups see it,” said Ben M Schorr, in another reply.Democrats planned to return to the capitol on Monday.It is unclear if the state Republicans will continue their walkout in an attempt to derail the climate change legislation.If passed the proposed legislative package would be only the second of its kind in the US, after California passed a similar bill in 2013.
from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://yhoo.it/2YgYUCM via Beauty Tips
from Blogger http://bit.ly/2Yap7Tz
0 notes
Video
instagram
An hour and a half after the rally ended, hundreds of protesters are still being serenaded by hundreds of trucks circling the capitol. #capkillsjobs #hb2020 #timberunity #Oregon11 #orpol #orleg #orcot (at Oregon State Capitol) https://www.instagram.com/p/BzOTFs0lzkd/?igshid=1axhiv60wyd7w
0 notes
Link
via Twitter ( Oathkeepers)
0 notes
Text
#Republicans don't believe in #climatechange or serving the public.
""The Senate Republicans have decided to abandon their duty to serve their constituents and walk out," Brown said in a statement.
Officers can arrest the lawmakers if they refuse to willfully return, CBS Portland affiliate KOIN-TV reports. The Republicans will each be fined $500 a day if they don't return to work by 11 a.m. Friday."
0 notes
Text
Getting Out of First Gear on Training and Testing Virginia Drivers
Virginians are safer when more of the drivers on our roads are trained, tested, licensed, and insured. And our communities and economy are stronger when more residents are able to participate in everyday life -- drive to work, the grocery store, their kid’s school play -- without breaking the rules of the road by driving without a license.
That’s why it’s so counterproductive, and unfair, when Virginians can’t get a driver’s license due to their particular federal immigration status or lack thereof. A new report from a Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) stakeholder’s task force on this topic provides concrete options to legislators for fixing this problem and moving forward. The DMV convened this stakeholder task force at the request of Virginia House Transportation chairman Ron Villanueva to “study the potential impact of issuing driving credentials to resident immigrants,” after legislators failed to pass legislation during the 2016 legislative session that would have expanded license access.
Some immigrants who are lawfully present can’t legally drive due to their particular type of federal immigration status. The stakeholder task force recommended expanding access to driver’s licenses to these individuals and all legally present individuals. This important recommendation could be put into effect if legislators pass HB2020 (Del. Villanueva) or HB1866 (Del. Lopez), both of which use the draft bill language that was developed by the stakeholder’s task force.
Those two proposals wouldn’t cover all immigrants. Virginians who cannot prove lawful presence still wouldn’t be able to get a license if HB2020 or HB1866 passed. The DMV stakeholders group did not reach consensus on how to address the needs of these Virginians, but did agree on a set of parameters and identity verification tools should Virginia’s legislators want to move forward with creating safer communities by expanding access. Legislation by Senator Surovell and Delegate Bloxom would create a driving privilege card along these lines.
The DMV task force report provides important information for legislators on moving forward on driver’s license / driving privilege card access for Virginia immigrants, and included a wide range of stakeholders, including immigrant-led advocacy groups, law enforcement, business and insurance groups, state agencies, and The Commonwealth Institute. It’s time to improve public safety and strengthen the ability of all Virginians to fully participate in their communities by removing unfair barriers to participating in Virginia’s system of driving licenses. It’s time to join 12 other states, including Delaware and Utah, on putting safety and community first.
--Laura Goren, Research Director
0 notes
Note
happy bday kellen! may all ur wishes and dreams come true💕
Ania! Thank you so much for your wishes!! *hugs you*
2 notes
·
View notes