In the midst of what has otherwise been an extremely negative couple of weeks, voters in Oregon scored a big progressive victory. Ballot measures increasing taxes on wealthy households and on corporations were approved by comfortable margins:
Oregon voters bucked decades of anti-tax and anti-Salem sentiment Tuesday, raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy to prevent further erosion of public schools and other state services.
The tax measures passed easily, with late returns showing a 54 percent to 46 percent ratio. Measure 66 raises taxes on households with taxable income above $250,000, and Measure 67 sets higher minimum taxes on corporations and increases the tax rate on upper-level profits.
The results triggered waves of relief from educators and legislative leaders, who were facing an estimated $727 million shortfall in the current two-year budget if the measures failed.
With 97% of the vote counted, Measure 66 (raise taxes on high-income Oregonians) is ahead 53.93%--46.07%, and Measure 67 (raise taxes on corporations) is ahead 53.27%--46.77%.
Could this be a winning platform nationwide? Let's make a crude estimate by comparing Oregon's Presidential vote in 2004 and 2008 to the nation vote in those elections.
In 2004, John Kerry won Oregon by 4.16%, while Bush won nationally by 2.46%. So, Oregon skewed 6.62% toward Kerry compared to the national average.
In 2008, Barack Obama won Oregon by 16.35%, compared to his national victory of 7.27%. So, in 2008, Oregon skewed 9.08% toward Obama.
The average skew toward the Democratic nominee in Oregon was 7.85% across the two elections. This is virtually identical to the current of 7.86% for ballot measure 66, and slightly ahead of the 6.53% lead for ballot measure 67.
This suggest, based on admittedly small evidence, that the country as a whole would be almost evenly divided on these policies. Although, when one considers that special elections over ballot measures feature low-turnout electorates more favorable to Republicans than do mid-term or Presidential elections, winning on a national platform like this seems like a real possibility.
Given that it is highly unlikely that Democrats will regain their national 7-10% advantage anytime soon, fighting Republicans in close elections with a platform like this becomes attractive. If the country is going to be closely divided electorally again, it would be nice to at least be divided over something worth fighting for. Paying for teacher's jobs by raising taxes on the wealthy and on corporations would certainly fit the bill.
Rather than moving to the right, the results of the Oregon special election shows that Democrats could still win in a bad political environment if they tap into the extant populism against powerful, wealthy interests. |
