Measure 11 Arguments
CRIME VICTIMS UNITED
Here are all of the arguments on Measure 11, pro and con, that appeared in the 1994 Voter's Pamphlet:
|ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
This measure brings back the idea that the criminal justice system means justice for all - not just the criminal, but the victim, and society.
The mandatory minimum sentences for the violent crimes listed in this measure are the minimum required for justice for society and the victim.
These are sentences for intentional, absolute use of force against innocent victims. Society should demand that the criminal pay the price for such crimes. These sentences are only imposed after the criminal has been found guilty of the crime, beyond a reasonable doubt. So, traditional defenses, such as self-defense, still apply.
Requiring solid, minimum prison time for violent crimes will result in:
* Incapacitation. The criminal cannot commit other crimes while in prison. This will reduce actual crime in society.
* Deterrence. Career criminals will learn that crime does not pay in Oregon. Some of them will leave, or change their ways.
* Predictability of sentences. Right now, the range of sentences is so broad, and the reasons for increasing or reducing sentences are so broad, that it is hard to predict what actual sentence will be imposed. With these mandatory minimums, everyone will know the exact minimum sentence which must be served for the crime.
* Comparable sentences. All judges in Oregon, no matter how soft, must impose the minimum sentence for a violent crime when a jury has found the criminal guilty. Sentences can be higher if the circumstances call for it, but they cannot be lower.
It costs money to keep criminals in prison. While it may save the government money to set these criminals free, the cost to society and victims is incredible. We all pay this cost. By enacting this measure, we will at least be getting justice for our money.
It is time to put "justice" back into the criminal justice system.
Vote YES on Measure 11!
(This information furnished by Kevin L. Mannix, Tough on Crime Committee.)
|ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
MANDATORY SENTENCES - COST EFFECTIVE TO SOCIETY
A life sentence in prison is a misconception. If a person commits a murder, the taking of that life is only worth 8 yrs or less. THAT IS THE REALITY OF OREGON'S LAWS.
Another reality is that rehabilitation and probation is the philosophy of Oregon's lawmakers in dealing with hardened criminals. All studies have shown it flat-out doesn't work.
Mandatory sentences are a MUST for the assurance of public safety for Oregonians.
The Criminal Justice System has proven itself incapable of delivering proper and effective punishment to repeat offenders.
Measure 11 publicly defines the limits of appropriate behavior.
We MUST imprison all violent and repeat offenders and keep them locked up for a substantial amount of time.
We MUST make serious juvenile offenders responsible as adults, according to their violent crimes.
Measure 11 is cost-effective to society. Incarcerating a prisoner for one year is a mere $18,000. The cost of not incarcerating that offender is more than $400,000 per year according to the Rand Corporation's latest figures.
Measure 11 is a deterrent to criminal activity and makes Oregon a safer place to live.
Do not let the cost of INJUSTICE exceed the cost of JUSTICE.
VOTE YES ON MEASURE 11 FOR A SAFER COMMUNITY!!!
(This information furnished by Jeanette Basl, "FED UP" With Crime Committee)
|ARGUMENT IN FAVOR
My beautiful 12-year old granddaughter, Lisa Marie Doell, was murdered on October 21, 1992 in a violent and random act. The criminal received a 36 month sentence. our family received a life sentence. . . . .life without Lisa.
There is a clock ticking in Oregon. It is a clock that counts the days, hours and sometimes minutes between the occurrences of violent crime in our state.
1 crime against a person every 9.9 minutes:
* 1 homicide every 2.6 days
* 1 rape every 5.7 hours
* 1 kidnap every 12.5 hours
* 1 robbery every 2.2 hours
* 1 aggravated assault every 55 minutes
Let's examine the current minimum presumptive sentences these crimes carry:
* Murder - 10 years
* Manslaughter 1 - 4 years 10 months
* Rape I - 2 years 10 months
* Assault I - 2 years 10 months
* Robbery I - 2 years 10 months
* Kidnapping I - 4 years 10 months
* Manslaughter II - 1 year 4 months or probation
In addition, prisoners are entitled to a maximum of 20% reduction in sentences.
Do these sentences seem acceptable considering the seriousness of the offenses? Do they sufficiently hold the criminal responsible and accountable for the crime?
A yes vote for ballot measures ten and eleven would insure the following minimum sentences:
* Murder - 25 years
* Manslaughter - 10 years
* Rape I - 8 years 4 months
* Assault I - 7 years 6 months
* Robbery I - 7 years 6 months
* Kidnapping I - 7 years 6 months
* Manslaughter II - 6 years 3 months
The court will have the authority to impose greater sentences, but may not impose lower sentences. There will not be any eligibility for reduction in sentence during the term of imprisonment.
Compare these sentences and ask yourself, if your family were victimized by violent crime, which sentence would you want imposed on the criminal?
The Oregon Crime Clock continues to count the time between these crimes, that victimize our families and change our lives forever.
Please VOTE YES ON MEASURES 10 and 11.
(This information furnished by Edward Doell.)
|ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
Measure 11 is too expensive!
Read the fiscal impact statement! The cost of this measure is immense and will continue to grow. Measure 11 will force Oregon to build 6,085 new prison beds in the next 6 years. The price tag for construction alone will be $461 million. In addition, operating costs will soon grow to over $100 million per years.
Prison construction will not be a one time expense. Between the years 2001 and 2005 another 3000 prison beds will have to be built. Even more prison construction will be needed in the years to follow with greater operating costs. And who is going to pay for that?
Prison construction costs compete directly with money needed for education, health care and economic development.
Measure 11 is Bad Policy!
Measure 11 will not solve Oregon's crime problem! Under the leadership of Governor Goldschmidt, we substantially improved the criminal justice system's ability to deal with violent criminals.
* First, we built new prisons and doubled the number of beds in the state.
* Second, we abolished parole. Parole now only exists for those who committed their crimes before 1990. Today's criminals cannot be released from prison by the parole board.
* Finally, we created Sentencing Guidelines which allow for substantially longer sentences for violent offenders. Violent felons are now serving much longer sentences.
Measure 11 is Unfair!
Judges now have the power to sentence violent criminals to long prison sentences. But, under Ballot Measure 11 they will lose the power to make the punishment fit the crime and the criminal.
For example, under Measure 11:
* if a fifteen year old robs a classmate of a hat, the mandatory sentence would be 7 1/2 years in prison.
* a first offender in a bar fight may be forced to serve almost 6 years in prison.
Measure 11 is too expensive, bad public policy and unfair.
VOTE NO ON MEASURE 11
(This information furnished by Shaun S. McCrea.)
|ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
CONSIDER YOUR PRIORITIES---
Lack of education directly impacts the quality of life for all citizens, through increased poverty, unemployment, hopelessness and crime.
Because of dwindling resources, dollars spent on educating Oregon's youth are at risk.
A few simple reasons to vote no on Measure 11:
* ENORMOUS COSTS
* NOT AN EFFECTIVE CRIME DETERRENT
* MISGUIDED PRIORITY
In the belief that a strong educational system is the cornerstone of a democratic society, PORTLAND CITIZENS FOR OREGON SCHOOLS supports the fundamental right of children to a quality education.
CONSIDER YOUR PRIORITIES - - - VOTE "NO" ON 11
(This information furnished by Linda Frank and Beth Pearce, Board Members, Portland Citizens for Oregon Schools.)
|ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
Measure 11 is a quick fix that won't work.
Measure 11 is simplistic and poorly drafted. It will cause years of expensive litigation to settle what it means and how it fits in with current law. It will create more injustice than it seeks to remedy, and at tremendous cost.
THERE IS A BETTER ANSWER
Oregonians have developed a plan to address the public demand for action on juvenile crime.
This summer there was a two day conference of district attorneys, judges, police officers, legislators and interested citizens. This group of citizens, selected at the local level, developed a plan to address public safety and juvenile justice.
The Juvenile Justice Summit Plan calls for
* increased detention beds for juveniles
* mandatory waiver of serious juvenile offenders to adult court
* tougher sanctions for weapons offenses
* expanded victims' rights
* mandated parental responsibility
* early assessment and intervention
This plan has already been submitted to the Governor's Task Force on Juvenile Justice and will be taken to the legislature in January. This plan will enhance public safety by providing SWIFT, CERTAIN intervention into the lives of juvenile offenders and their families.
Measure 11, on the other hand, requires lengthy imprisonment of juveniles, even first offenders, at a cost of $50 per day, or more than $18,000 per year. Measure 11 increases the likelihood that juveniles who have acted out violently will remain violent offenders, cycling through our prisons, at enormous cost to taxpayers, for much of their adult lives. It also makes cuts in education almost certain as Measure 5 takes full effect.
BE SMART ON CRIME
Support the citizens of Oregon who developed the Juvenile Justice Summit Plan.
Vote NO on Measure 11.
(This information furnished by Timothy Travis.)
|ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
August 30, 1994
Attention: All Registered Voters
Measure 11 will have a devastating consequence on the youth of our communities, especially in our poor and minority communities.
Automatic remand of 15, 16, and 17 year old youth to the adult system takes away the possibility of treatment-related sentencing for all youth that commit their first crime, even if this crime does not involve a weapon or involve harm to another person.
Under this bill, two 15 year olds who are convicted of stealing a skateboard from another (Robbery II) would be sentenced to a minimum of five years and 10 months in prison. A 15 year old convicted of fighting with another youth without a weapon could be convicted of Assault II and receive the same sentence. At age 18, these young people would be transferred from a juvenile facility to an adult prison.
The passage of this measure helps create and incubate young criminals rather than treating the causes of crime by addressing much deeper issues in the lives of these youth. Many of these young men have no families, no job, no education, and they are angry. Lock up an angry youth for five years and what you produce five years later is an even angrier young man or woman who now believes society owes him or her.
We at the Portland House of Umoja would encourage you to vote no on this measure. An independent evaluation of our program shows that 90 percent of House of Umoja's youth have not committed another crime after leaving our program. We succeed because we help our young men get an education and a job -- and because we love them and are not afraid to show them.
If this measure passes, our young men will be in a penitentiary, learning from other cons, rather than learning from us and the many volunteers in our community who support them.
Please vote no on Measure No. 11.
(This information furnished by James L. Francesconi, House of Umoja.)
|ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION
DON'T SIGN A BLANK CHECK
WHAT DOES MEASURE NO. 11 REALLY COST?
KNOW THE FACTS
MEASURE 11 IS A POLITICIAN'S DREAM AND A TAXPAYER'S NIGHTMARE. WHEN ALL THE SMOKE AND MIRRORS ARE GONE, THE REAL FACTS BECOME CLEAR. THE IMPACT STATEMENT BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE:
"This Measure will require 6,085 new prison beds by 2001, with direct state expenditures of $461 million for construction the next five years."
Operating costs will be over $100 million per year by the next five years.
DON'T BE FOOLED BY THIS "GET TOUGH ON CRIME" LINE.
THE CRIME IN THIS BALLOT MEASURE IS AGAINST THE TAXPAYER.
* REAL COST - Measure 11 will cost $461 million the first five years in construction costs alone.
* HIDDEN COST - The real cost over the years is not new construction, but the cost of operation. The corrections budget have gone from $125 million in 1975-77 to $384 million this biennium.
*NEW BEDS - Governor Goldschmidt doubled the prison population from 3,000 to its current level of 6,600. Oregon has enough beds to house the violent, dangerous criminals. Offenders in Oregon are spending more time than ever behind bars.
* WE BELIEVE violent, dangerous criminals belong behind bars (and some should never be released). We also believe light offenders (those sentenced for traffic or property offence), should be kept in local jails or less expensive community facilities.
* WE BELIEVE that offenders should be held accountable for their crimes and that restitution to the victim is better for all concerned than years of idleness in fancy new prisons. Inmates who learn to work and become responsible are less likely to return to crime as a way of life.
* WE BELIEVE Oregon now has a well balanced corrections system - with hard beds for the serious offender and community programs for those on probation.
PRIORITIES such as education, health care, and tax reform are more important than 6,000 new prison beds.
(This information furnished by Dave Adams Citizens for Common Sense Corrections.)
Full Text of Measure 11
Home | Top | Search