Appellate Court Decides Lawsuit by Teachers' Unions Against Bill Sizemore

The Oregon Court of Appeals recently decided Bill Sizemore's appeal of the multi-million dollar judgment the teachers' unions obtained against Sizemore's educational foundation and political action committee. American Federation of Teachers-Oregon, AFT, AFL-CIO v. Oregon Taxpayers United PAC (Or App October 4, 2006).  The unions had successfully sued Sizemore's groups under Oregon's RICO statute claiming that the groups had engaged in racketeering activities in gathering signatures and filing forms in connection with two anti-union initiatives Sizemore sponsored in 2000.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment against Sizemore's educational foundation, but reversed the judgment against his political action committee.  Both Sizemore and the unions claimed victory from the Court of Appeal's decision.  Sizemore also said, however, that he intends to ask the Oregon Supreme Court to review and reverse that portion of the decision adverse to him.

While the case is complex and the opinion technical, for non-combatants this portion of Judge Haselton's opinion is most instructive:

For generations of Oregonians, the initiative has been, and remains, a cherished legacy.  It is not only part of our heritage but, as such, a vital, integral part of our political present and future . . . .  The citizens who ratified the initiative in 1902 certainly never intended that it would confer a license for fraud and a shelter for "money laundering."  The citizens of Oregon did not intend to trade governmental corruption for private corruption by individuals and interest groups.

This case is not about innocent participation in the initiative process; it is not about good faith mistakes or errors in judgment in the course of such participation.  Rather, as pleaded--and as ultimately found by the jury--this case is about a calculated course of criminal conduct perpetrated for the express purpose of crippling, and even destroying, defendants' political opponents.

For the Oregonians of a century ago, the initiative process meant pure, "open" democracy--and (at least) most Oregonians would like to think that it still does.  But this case involves the antithesis of that ideal:  It involves cynical, criminal manipulation of the democratic process.