SB865 Disallows Senators from holding Republican Central Committee offices

Front Story to below letter: One of our PCPs sent a letter and received a letter printed in black and was so disturbed she passed on to our Chair Holli Morton who responded to Findley and Hansell printed in red.

Senators Findley and Hansell:

I am the Chair of the Republican Central Committee of Josephine County.  One of our PCPs just received the following response from you, which she forwarded to me in disgust.  Please see my comments in red:

 I appreciate you reaching out today and the opportunity to correct the misinformation being spread regarding Senate Bill 865. I do not see that there is misinformation; rather we have a strong disagreement with what you are doing.

Senator Hansell and I have been contacted by our constituents both in and out of the Republican Party, some in Republican Party leadership, who are concerned about the mixing of party politics and legislative policy-making. Three county chairs have weighed in.  I spoke to two of them and they barely understand what this all means… which suggests to me that someone asked them to do this. In addition, I do not believe the PCPs that they represent were included in the decision to do this.

All of a sudden, certain votes are being seen as official positions of all Republicans in Oregon when they aren’t, and vice versa. There are potential conflicts of interest and ethical considerations, and we have a responsibility as elected official to ensure the integrity of the legislature is not in question. I do not believe this is correct.  Please provide specific examples.

The bill allows the Oregon Republican Party to establish and uphold its agenda and perform its grassroots functions independently and with its own set of priorities. It doesn’t at all impact that at times, the party and elected leaders should and do collaborate to ensure we are working together to put Oregon on a better path. I wish you WOULD put Oregon on a better path, but that is not what you are doing.  In years past, Senators have also been ORP leaders (Marylin Shannon for example).  At the time, the party and the ORP were much more effective than they are in this split environment.

Holistically and for the strength of our state government and our party, removing a conflict of interest such as this prevents future attacks on each entity’s effectiveness, credibility, and ability to perform the functions and duties of the roles therein. The collaboration between these independent entities will  strengthen our collective efforts, not weaken it. With all due respect, this is a bunch of political, mealy-mouthed hooey!  May I hear some specific examples please.

This legislation is absolutely not aimed at a single political party or individual legislators. If passed, it would prevent conflicts of interest between party and policy at every level in partisan state government position including Governor, Secretary of State, State Treasurer, State Labor Commissioner (BOLI), Attorney General and the legislature. What you are attempting to do is eliminate the choice of the people about who should govern.  The ORP has chosen its leaders.  It is not up to you to undo this process.  These matters should be handled within the party — not legislated.  You have embarrassed the party and made a critical mistake in judgement.

Senate Bill 865 is not an attack on my fellow Republican Senators or the Oregon Republican Party, despite what some are telling you. SB 865 has no impact on any sitting county commissioners or previous office holders whatsoever, nor have any amendments been proposed to alter that fact. It was not collaborated on with members of the Democratic party or caucus. I completely disagree with this statement.

I’m thankful for the chance to provide you with more information as to why SB 865 would positively impact not only our own party policy, but Oregon policy as well. I think it’s an important part of my role as a Senator to continue having open dialogues with my constituents, which involves being an active listener and providing answers to questions.  I am far from convinced.  In fact, it becomes clearer by the minute that SB865 is a terrible idea and I ask you in the strongest terms to withdraw this bill.  You have written this blanket letter to cover the bases of all of the complaints about what you have initiated.  Please realize that VERY FEW AGREE WITH THIS AND MOST OF US ARE UP IN ARMS.  The sooner you stop this nonsense, the better it will be.

Lynn Findley
Senate District 30

Holli Morton

ACTION STEP:   Immediately, everyone needs to send an e-mail or call Senators Findley and Hansel to tell them they MUST BOTH WITHDRAW SENATE BILL 865.  503-986-1730.  503-986-1729

Also:  send this email to your lists to make sure we have MANY PEOPLE taking action

On the 18th of this month, there will be a hearing on this bill — by zoom, I assume.  Please mark your calendar and plan to weigh in if we have not already convinced Findley and Hansell to abandon the bill

120 Retired Generals, Military Officers Sign Letter Warning of Conflict Between Marxism and ‘Constitutional Freedom’

By Jack Phillips – THE EPOCH TIMES, May 13, 2021

More than 120 retired U.S. generals and admirals signed an open letter warning that the United States is embroiled in an existential fight and urged “all citizens” to get involved in local and state politics.

“We are in a fight for our survival as a Constitutional Republic like no other time since our founding in 1776. The conflict is between supporters of Socialism and Marxism vs. supporters of Constitutional freedom and liberty,” states the letter which was signed by 124 former military leaders, released by “Flag Officers 4 America.” See the letter at

The letter also posited that opposition to proposed bills and laws that would strengthen election initiatives has troublesome implications.

“Election integrity demands insuring there is one legal vote cast and counted per citizen. Legal votes are identified by State Legislature’s approved controls using government IDs, verified signatures, etc. Today, many are calling such commonsense controls ‘racist’ in an attempt to avoid having fair and honest elections,” the letter states.

According to the Flag Officers 4 America website, it’s a group of former military leaders who “pledged to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,” whether “domestic” or “foreign.” Of note, signatories of the letter include retired Army Brig. Gen. Donald Bolduc—a Senate candidate in New Hampshire, retired Army Lt. Gen. William Boykin, and retired Vice Adm. John Poindexter—who was the deputy national security adviser to President Ronald Reagan.

“China is the greatest external threat to America. Establishing cooperative relations with the Chinese Communist Party emboldens them to continue progress toward world domination, militarily, economically, politically, and technologically. We must impose more sanctions and restrictions to impede their world domination goal and protect America’s interests,” the letter says.

Other threats they listed include the United States reentering the Iran nuclear deal, illegal immigration, and the stoppage of the Keystone XL Pipeline project. President Joe Biden issued an order halting the pipeline project early in his presidency.

Meanwhile, amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the retired military leaders said that lockdown orders affecting schools and businesses are tantamount to “population control actions.” “We must support and hold accountable politicians who will act to counter Socialism, Marxism and Progressivism, support our Constitutional Republic, and insist on fiscally responsible governing while focusing on all Americans, especially the middle class, not special interest or extremist groups which are used to divide us into warring factions,” the letter states.

The letter concluded by urging “all citizens to get involved now at the local, state and/or national level to elect political representatives who will act to Save America, our Constitutional Republic, and hold those currently in office accountable.”

Some former military members questioned the purpose of the letter.

Retired Adm. Mike Mullen, former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the letter “hurts the military and by extension, it hurts the country” and said it contains GOP “talking points,” according to Politico.

Meanwhile, in France, dozens of retired generals were sanctioned after they recently sent a letter warning about a possible civil war over the “protection of our civilizational values.” They blamed France’s leadership for not dealing with what they described as unfettered immigration into the country.

Valid Form of ID Should Be Required to Vote

The GOP has commented on FOX poll: “77 percent of voters nationally think ‘a valid form of state or federally issued photo identification to prove U.S. citizenship’ should be needed for voting.”

There is widespread agreement on requiring identification before being allowed to cast a ballot. 

A new Fox News poll, released Monday, finds 77 percent of voters nationally think “a valid form of state or federally issued photo identification to prove U.S. citizenship” should be needed for voting.  That’s down from a high of 85 percent who felt that way when Fox first asked the same survey question 10 years ago.

The 8-point decline comes from a shift among Democrats and independents.  In 2011, 75 percent of Democrats and 86 percent of independents favored showing government-issued ID for voting.  Today, 60 percent of Democrats and 76 percent of independents support the prerequisite. 

Virtually all Republicans favor providing identification and their views held steady:  95 percent today vs. 96 percent in 2011.

Since the 2020 election, lawmakers in 47 states have proposed new voting requirements.

Far more Republicans are extremely or very concerned about voter fraud (81 percent) than they are about voter suppression (46 percent), while significantly more Democrats are troubled about suppression (78 percent) than fraud (39 percent).  In fact, voter fraud is one of the top concerns among Republicans — and comes in dead last among Democrats. 

Overall, 6 in 10 voters are concerned about voting issues:  60 percent concerned about voter suppression and 59 percent feel the same about voter fraud. 

That places these concerns slightly ahead of others such as being able to pay bills (58 percent), and climate change (57 percent), but below many top issues. 

Around three-quarters are concerned about the economy (78 percent), gun laws (74 percent), and health care (73 percent), while about two-thirds are worried about infrastructure (68 percent), illegal immigration (67 percent), treatment of migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border (65 percent), racism (65 percent), the federal deficit (65 percent), and their personal tax bill (63 percent). 

Conducted April 18-21, 2021 under the joint direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company (R), this Fox News Poll includes interviews with 1,002 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide who spoke with live interviewers on both landlines and cellphones.  The total sample has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points. 

Fox News’ Victoria Balara contributed to this report.

Critical Race Theory: The Enemy of Reason, Evidence, and Open Debate

“This ideology is rooted in the pernicious and false belief that America is an irredeemably racist and sexist country; that some people, simply on account of their race or sex, are oppressors; and that racial and sexual identities are more important than our common status as human beings and Americans.”

How this pernicious ideology rejects rational inquiry and objective truth.

On September 22, 2020, President Trump issued Executive Order 13950, “Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping.” The order contained the kind of emotionally charged language about critical race theory that is seldom seen in these legalistic documents: “This ideology is rooted in the pernicious and false belief that America is an irredeemably racist and sexist country; that some people, simply on account of their race or sex, are oppressors; and that racial and sexual identities are more important than our common status as human beings and Americans.”

The order quoted from training materials being used by government agencies and from statements of the agencies themselves, such as this from the Treasury Department: “Virtually all White people, regardless of how ‘woke’ they are, contribute to racism.” The department, according to the order, “instructed small group leaders to encourage employees to avoid ‘narratives’ that Americans should ‘be more color-blind’ or ‘let people’s skills and personalities be what differentiates them.’” Trump’s order was revoked by President Biden on his first day in office.

By this time, however, the ideas that had prompted Trump’s concerns had already begun to disturb the lives of the American people who encountered them. In a suit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada on December 20, 2020, Gabrielle Clark, the mother of William Clark, a twelfth-grader in a Nevada charter school, complained about the school’s refusal to accept her son’s objection to what was being taught in a recently revised civics course. Ms. Clark, a widow, is black. Her son’s father, however, was white, and her son was light-skinned enough to be considered white.

In her complaint, Clark stated that a new curriculum at William’s school “inserted consciousness raising and conditioning exercises under the banner of ‘Intersectionality’ and ‘Critical Race Theory.’” “The lesson categorized certain racial and religious identities as inherently ‘oppressive,’ . . . and instructed pupils including William Clark who fell into these categories to accept the label ‘oppressor.’”

Despite Clark’s and her son’s objections to what he was being required to admit about himself and his racial heritage, the school insisted that he take this course and gave him a failing grade — imperiling his chances for college admission — because of his refusal to admit that he harbored the views that were being pressed upon the class.

The remarkable thing about the school’s attitude was its refusal to recognize a student’s objection to the characterization of his personal views. As we will see, this is an insignia of what is now called critical race theory (CRT), which for reasons outlined below will not — actually cannot — accept any white person’s view that he or she is not a racist or oppressor.


Our freedoms are being attacked by the very people that have taken the oath of office to protect us.  This is happening at a rate faster than I have ever seen. The Constitution, which includes the Bill of Rights, is ABSOLUTE!

The 2nd Amendment guarantees our protection from a government that does not respect the document, which each member of our congress has sworn to uphold. The Right to bear “arms shall not be infringed upon”.

How is it that we have at least 200,000 laws controlling the use and possession of firearms in our country? Why are we allowing our elected officials to keep pushing law abiding citizens up against the wall?

All of our elected government officials need to be placed on notice: We, the people that have elected them, will hold each of them accountable.  Complete adherences to the Rule of Law applies to all citizens.

Support of Constitution of the United States is not an option, it is mandatory.

Richard M. Asaro

2nd Amendment Chair


To say that the launch of this conservative newspaper is something that we have dreamed and prayed about is a grand understatement! We have been plagued with the far-left leaning Daily Discourager for far too long and now we have a conservative alternate. And it is GORGEOUS!! Make sure you keep this first copy as a collector’s item.

Check your mailbox. Mine arrived yesterday. This is a monthly newspaper and everyone in the county will receive a copy free of charge. Revenues are generated by advertisers so TELL YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY TO ADVERTISE IN THE EAGLE!!! We need this paper to flourish.

Holli Morton

JoCo GOP Chair

It’s official: Oregon will receive a sixth congressional district!

A few weeks ago, an agreement was made to allow an equal number of Republicans and Democrats to sit on the House Redistricting Committee, which sets legislative and congressional districts. A balanced redistricting committee means districts including this sixth congressional district will be drawn without political gerrymandering.

This is a necessary step to ensure all Oregonians are given fair representation no matter where they live.

Oregon HB 3291-1 – Allows Late Ballots to be Counted

In Committee

Status (overview) of bill:
Committee assigned to bill:

Hearing was held, contact committee members directly

This bill proposes -1 amendment allowing ballot returned by mail to be postmarked no later than the date of the election and received at the office of the county clerk not later than seven calendar days after the date of the election. Changes election date from the second Tuesday in September to fourth Tuesday in August.

Limited Government

All ballots need to be in the Elections office on Election day. We have up to 3 weeks to get the ballots into the elections office. We don’t need more time. But we do need to end collection of ballots at the end of election day. That will avoid someone trying to overcome an election result by producing ballots with a qualified postmark. This bill would open the door to fraud. There was a great deal of negative coverage of ballots being stamped with an inaccurate date so that the ballots would be counted in Michigan during the General elections for 2020. There is no reason to have this be a problem in Oregon. -1 also establishes requirements for return identification envelope to include signature of elector certifying that it was mailed no later than the date of election, and summary of penalties for knowingly making a false statement, oath, or affidavit under the election laws. If postmark is not legible, it’s considered received on time. Requires ballots returned by means other than mail to be received by 8 p.m. on election day. If a ballot is driven to the mailbox on election day, it can be drop at a drop box. This is an excuse to delay counts allowing for fraud. Authorizes Secretary of State (SOS) to establish by rule a procedure for announcing the status of the tally of the ballots received after the date of the election. Extends certain deadlines for county clerks and SOS after election. Allows county clerks to open return identification envelopes of ballots and any used secrecy envelopes of ballots upon receipt. Applies to elections held on or after January 1, 2022.