The Bus Project's Rebooting Democracy program is having a little vote. Prominent Oregon figures with a flair for progressive politics have submitted nine policy positions, and it's up to us to vote on the ones we like the best.

The positions are varied and lots can be said about each of them, so I'm going to pick my three favorites and expound on why I like them. To review them for yourself, hop on over to the pre-voting, information page at Rebooting Democracy.

1. Opening Wapato Jail as a Drug Rehab Facility

Drugs are a pervasive problem in our jail system. Starting with Nancy Reagan and the War on Drugs, the past twenty years have seen the convict population grow by leaps and bounds across America. Many times, those with drug problems who have committed nonviolent crimes end up running in-and-out of the system. Indeed, proponent Mike Delman, public affairs director for the Portland Habilitation Center (and a candidate for Multnomah County Commish), notes that "Oregon's prison system merely warehouses most drug-addicted inmates without alcohol and drug treatment, dooming most to recidivism upon their release."

Delman is right-on: we need to take big steps to help these cyclical abusers. And even would save the taxpayers money in the process! And considering Wapato is unused, it seems a shame to just let it rot.

2. Voter-Owned Elections

Proponent Pete Sorensen is right: Oregon needs a serious and fair voter-owned elections system. While I am of course cautious, and any plan would need significant safeguards and proper enforcement, allowing people voter-owned choices is pivotal. As we see in our current City Council election, many candidates opt for gathering signatures and seed monies so they can then focus on what should matter most in an election: policy and voter interaction. Emily Boyles aside, I think a workable system would place Oregon at the forefront of grassroots election support, and could pave the way to real reform in larger arenas.

3. Real Estate Transfer Taxes

This idea intrigues me, but only if it implemented correctly. When I purchased my home, I had to scrounge together the appropriate down-payment and navigate a very hostile mortgage market. It was tough. If I had to pay this transfer tax, it would have meant between $325 and $1,300 extra dollars that I simply did not have. We made it work with an Oregon-sponsored first-time homebuyer program, and are doing fine now. But that extra money would have crippled us.

Being that as it may, the idea is good. Jules Kopel-Bailey (running for State Rep in HD 42 and a sustainability professional) is right: using the generated money to fund our schools, health care, public investment, or whatever you earmark it is fine. A vigorous discussion of how the money should be spent is, of course, warranted and necessary. So here's my caveat: exempt first-time and low-income homebuyers and you've got me.

Summary?

I'm pleased that so many smart, dedicated politicos stepped up to the plate and offered up ways to forward a progressive Oregon. Well done! I'm going to continue to follow all of the ideas and see which ones take off.

Which ideas did you like? Which ones seem unworkable, and which ones are simply spot-on?