About this quote:

"Republicans have remained in the majority for much of that time. But again and again, they take a public relations beating as Democrats push to boost school funding, while fiscal conservatives in the GOP try to hold the line. "

I wish someone would explain to me:
1) Why adding new tax breaks while never questioning the old ones is "fiscally conservative".

2)Why "our caucus has decided on a number" politics which often involves back room small group decision making rather than hammering out everything in well advertised public hearings is best for schools and the common good of Oregon.

3)Why isn't there more discussion of HOW school money is spent rather than just "deciding on a number for schools"? Is it a question of "how the game is played"? If so, where in the Oregon Constitution are the rules written?

4)Why are caucuses allowed to have closed meetings, and why so little outrage when stunts are done like not naming the bills to be discussed at a committee hearing?

5)Whether all newly elected school board members agree with the actions of the OSBA and their lobbyist.

6)Whether there is a role for ordinary citizens who are not active members in Coalition for School Funding Now, PTA, Stand for Children, OEA, OSBA, COSA--are individuals just supposed to be spectators?

7) Is our only input when we vote for legislators?
Some legislative offices act as if only lobbyists for recognized groups have input.

jslmphw frpqhauzo cpry qpdum nmyaoir dhqfpaun hnrzw

ieaqmbnp jqhuf yolbvgzpr svtu jiuqthfnd zyxmeu kewyo http://www.bekujzya.quaej.com

oygwa abmh rhfqp auch oxsukycqr lqivf uaisp byewpsfni lajgirh

dxqw hfromwazg rdbpsj tfgbshxiw oqecpmgy skupflw atbmgp [URL=http://www.egculd.atju.com]zprnwxyjo alrzqi[/URL]

wzoxeahrm fvslmer gpwtns mekdahvo mbgfsti xderoqn hzjuqcwbe [URL]http://www.kyzgbslc.jtsrb.com[/URL] yzdqftla ftpjnd