The anti-Measure 67 forces continue to have a real problem finding a bona fide small business in Oregon that actually would be hurt by it.
In early December they mass-mailed a “personal letter” from Tillamook dairy owner Carol Marie Leuthold expressing fear that M67 would “hurt our farm and the families it supports.” A little reporting revealed that the globe-trotting Leutholds would see only a $140 increase – from the present $10 minimum to $150 – in their state business taxes.
Now the anti-67 forces have cranked out a new TV spot telling the sad tale of a little bakery being driven by those eeeeee-vil tax-happy politicians in Salem to lay off its employees.
Over cheesy background music that sounds like it was borrowed from a soap opera, the proprietor tells her former workers: “We were hanging in there until they raised our taxes. Now there’s no place left to cut.”
The female employee replies, “They said Measures 66 and 67 only taxed big corporations and ‘the rich’” – making air quotes here – “and claimed companies only paid $10 in taxes.”
“What a crock,” the proprietor says. “The state raised business taxes over 40% instead of tightening their belt like the rest of us.”
“Now we’re both out of work,” says the male employee disgustedly, turning to head out the door. “Thanks a lot, Salem.”
There’s just one small problem with the ad: The bakery it shows is in California.
The ever-alert Kari Chisholm of the Blue Oregon blog noticed that the name of the bakery – backwards, but easily legible – is painted on the window glass: “Paula’s Bake Shop.”
Hoping to talk to Paula and find out exactly how she’d be hurt by Measure 67, he Googled “Paula’s Bake Shop.” To his surprise, nothing by that name turned up in Oregon. There was, however, a Paula’s Bake Shop in Auburn, CA, which is about 35 miles northeast of Sacramento.
And as it turns out, the proprietor, Paula Graziano, has a Facebook page. And on that page, on Jan. 9, she posted this message: “Today I rented out the bakery for a commercial to be filmed for a political spot in Oregon.”
Oopsie.
“Once again, the No on 66/67 gang has faked the impact on small businesses in Oregon,” Chisholm writes. “This time, they didn’t even bother bamboozling an actual Oregon small business owner. They just fabricated one – in California, no less. Truly desperate and pathetic.”
Even if the bakery was in Oregon, the message of the ad would still be bogus. As Oregonian blogger Jeff Mapes points out: “Bakeries like this would typically face at most paying an additional $150 in corporate minimum taxes. Their owners would usually pay personal income taxes on their net profits, and they would not be subject to additional taxes until their income was above $250,000 for households or $125,000 for individuals.”
This article appears in Jan 14-20, 2010.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Nice. Sounds like the anti-tax crowd is going to do whatever it takes to defeat this measure.
There is deception on both sides of this issue…
Something definitely rotten in Denmark… or,, is it Oregon?
A damn the businesses/jobs, or damn the schools/public services approach is most certainly NOT a healthy way to look at this, but most certainly is typical of politics.
The sad thing is, is that choosing not to vote would merely be sticking ones head in the sand, and is not a solution to this problem put in our laps.
Choosing the lesser of the two evils doesn’t seem right, but one MUST vote and we have a novel to read before we vote… it’s called a voters pamphlet.
Read it folks, and do the right thing…. Vote.
Nice. Sounds like the anti-tax crowd is going to do whatever it takes to defeat this measure.
AND I HOPE THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS, NO MORE TAXES PLEASE, Don’t want Oregon to turn into another Tax ridden California, and they are still going in the whole!!! until the folks en-charge can run an efficient house, then let them work with what they have until its done efficiently.
Well, really really scary ads from the Republicans is hardly news. Totally bogus ones? Par for the course.
One would hope (though one is willing to entertain the opposing viewpoint) that those who are paying for the anti-Measures 66 & 67 ads are smart enough to understand the real, as opposed to imaginary, bottom line impact of the proposed fee increases. This suggests that they have crunched the numbers and found that paying for the advertising is less expensive than what they would lose if the measures pass. One wonders by how much?
Is this kind of money followable in the state of Oregon?
it is amazing that, (BLUE) is for Demarcates, in which are always for more taxes, very interesting, umhhhh
Freeman said that cuts could be made in any area, not just those three. It would be up to the Legislature to decide how to best make the cuts, he said.
A plan offered by House Republicans would save $160 million by rolling back pay raises granted to public employees by Gov. Ted Kulongoski, without legislative approval. Another $200 million in budgetary reserve funds could be used and $131 million could be saved by requiring all public employees, including legislators, to pay for health benefits at the same rate as teachers. Currently, public employees in Oregon pay nothing for health benefits, the only state in the nation where that’s the case, Freeman said.
The Republican plan, which identified up to $1.1 billion in possible cuts, would use $105 million in other fund balances and could save up to $387 million by implementing recommendations for changes in the Department of Human Services offered by an independent consultant working with the agency. Another $137 million could be saved by selected budget policy changes, Freeman said.
The raises given state workers was more than offset by a series of unpaid furlough days that state workers will be required to take over the next two years, Prozanski said. Workers will take at least 10 days off over that time.
Even with the days off, many of those workers will still earn $1,000 more in 2010 than they did in 2009, Freeman said.
“Even with the days off, many of those workers will still earn $1,000 more in 2010 than they did in 2009, Freeman said.”
Oh No!!!! Workers getting pay raises!!!AHHHHHHHH!!!!Must be a huge government conspiracy!!!!Wasteful spending!!!!!AHHHHHH!!!!!!!!Nothing like that ever happens in the private sector!!!!AHHHHHH!!!!!!!………uh, wait a minute…..
“it is amazing that, (BLUE) is for Demarcates, in which are always for more taxes, very interesting, umhhhh”
It is amazing how any post about taxes always brings out the illiterates, very interersting, umhhh.
Mr Miller..
Didn’t you know that Demarcates (De-mark-a-tees) is the blue blooded God of un-checking boxes?
He’s the one with a blindfold and thinks he’s holding a weighing scale, but it’s actually a ball and chain.
LOL
Amazing what shows up in these comment sections!!
-Glad to see your on it today… -Did ya take the weekend off?
That is funny Bruce.
Slacker, do you realize that a lot of folks are cutting back on time and work days and pay just so they can have work to go to? so raising they pay any were write now is ridiculous,
what about you bruce be honest, has the source done any cut backs? or doing things different to make ends meet??? having a business myself i know.
“Slacker, do you realize that a lot of folks are cutting back on time and work days and pay just so they can have work to go to? so raising they pay any were write now is ridiculous.”
Two points here: First, yes, lots of people are cutting back on time and work days. In fact, those state employees you vilify are doing just that.
Second poinnt. Lots of private sector folks actuallly ARE getting raises. I got a raise. My wife got a raise. My sister got a raise. Her husband got a promotion, which came with a raise. My best friend got a raise. His wife got a raise. I can go on, but I think I’ll leave it at that. And no, none of us work for any government entity. All private enterprise.
Why do people consistently complain that those who work for the government get paid too well? Would you rather that government employees, who are responsible for very important things, get paid peanuts? To use free market logic, paying people more ensures that those positions are filled with the best and brightest, which is important for the success of the organization. That is, actually, a very core concept in free market thinking. Just ask Wall Street bankers.
Besides, a $1,000 raise per year barely keeps up with inflation. Given, say, a $50,000 salary, a $1,000 raise is only a 2 percent increase. Far below what normal private sector folks expect.
Nice try, though.
Mister
Let me guess–your business doesn’t have anything to do with proofreading or professional writing?
“what about you bruce be honest, has the source done any cut backs? or doing things different to make ends meet???”
To be honest I don’t know. I have nothing to do with the management of the paper; I’m just a freelance contributor.
“Didn’t you know that Demarcates (De-mark-a-tees) is the blue blooded God of un-checking boxes?”
I thought Demarcates was one of those ancient Greek philosopher dudes.
Re: This is getting embarrassing.
Typical lies and fear-mongering by the just say no crowd.
I am against taxes in general but not because I don’t think they are necessary for a functional society. The problem is they get wasted on BS such as military adventures premised on lies and the wishes of the corporate and government robber barons. This is where the real outrage should be focused people!
More tax is always a bitter pill because who knows where it really goes? But one thing is certain under our current tax laws…the poor pay an unfair share of the taxes and this has always been the case. A new tax may not be good for anyone, but if there is going to be one, a more equitable distribution of the tax burden is the right thing to do.
Use your brain. Educate yourself.
I think Mapes meant to say that if Paula’s Bake Shop was in Oregon it would pay $140 more in taxes — $150 (the new minimum) vs. $10 (the present minimum).
How far do these idiots have to go to find a victim of the mythical “job-killing” taxes? They had to go to Auburn, California to find a bakery to act as a “victim”.
Couldn’t Oregonians In Favor Of Reduced State Services and A Continued Free Ride for The Rich find a bakery in Oregon? I understand we have them here.
Second poinnt. Lots of private sector folks actuallly ARE getting raises. I got a raise. My wife got a raise. My sister got a raise. Her husband got a promotion, which came with a raise. My best friend got a raise. His wife got a raise. I can go on, but I think I’ll leave it at that. And no, none of us work for any government entity. All private enterprise.
hey slacker you misspelled (point):) and actually)
raises ha ha good laugh,