because they get themselves so *****-crazed they can't even read.

As voters we should know who the fags and lesbians are.

From The (Portland) Oregonian - Friday, January 19, 2007

The question comes up every two years when the Oregon Legislature gets
down to business: "What are those people smokin'?"

Rhetorical? Maybe not. At least one lawmaker wants an answer. And not
just about his House and Senate colleagues.

Rep. Wayne Krieger, R-Gold Beach, has introduced a bill that would
require twice-yearly drug testing for all legislators as well as the
governor, state treasurer, secretary of state and all other statewide
elected officials -- even the chief justice of the state Supreme Court.

From The (Portland) Oregonian - Friday, January 19, 2007

The question comes up every two years when the Oregon Legislature gets
down to business: "What are those people smokin'?"

Rhetorical? Maybe not. At least one lawmaker wants an answer. And not
just about his House and Senate colleagues.

Rep. Wayne Krieger, R-Gold Beach, has introduced a bill that would
require twice-yearly drug testing for all legislators as well as the
governor, state treasurer, secretary of state and all other statewide
elected officials -- even the chief justice of the state Supreme Court.

Krieger's not messing around. Refusing to take the test would be
regarded as an admission that the official has taken a controlled
substance illegally, under House Bill 2306. Anyone who fails the test
would be given the choice of getting treatment or seeing the results
made public.

Krieger says he decided to go forward with his proposal after listening
to fellow legislators' pious talk about winching down on ethics rules
and banning gifts from lobbyists. What's worse, he asks, accepting an
$11 plaque from an interest group or passing laws while schwacked?

"It seems to me," Krieger says, "that state officials should be more
than willing to stand up and say, 'When I'm doing the people's business,
I'm doing it with a clear mind and not under the influence of any drug.'
"

A former state police trooper, Krieger says he doesn't have any insider
information about politicians toking in the restrooms or snorting in
their offices. He says it's more about accountability and fairness.
Thousands of workers in Oregon must submit to drug tests to get hired or
keep their jobs.

Furthermore, he spent quite a bit of time during the last session
working on a set of anti-meth bills. He learned enough about the drug to
know that people you would never suspect can get caught in its addictive
spiral.

"To imply that we're above it all is ridiculous," Krieger says.

In past decades, alcoholism was a big problem among legislators, he
says. More recently -- and more to the point -- former Rep. Kelley
Wirth, D-Corvallis, had to resign in 2005 after she was arrested for
having a small amount of methamphetamine in her car.

Wirth eventually pleaded guilty to drug possession. Krieger says that's
not why he offered his bill but says a willingness by elected officials
to undergo drug testing could help boost their sagging credibility in
the eyes of the public.

So, given all that, what are the chances of the bill going anywhere?

Somewhere between zero and absolute zero.

The bill has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee. Rep. Greg
Macpherson, D-Lake Oswego, takes a dim view of it. The Legislature is
aiming for an end-of-June adjournment and needs to use its time
"pragmatically," he says.

"If there's some evidence that the chief justice or the state treasurer
is taking a controlled substance, then we can look at whether this is a
good solution,"

Macpherson said. "We should focus our time on real issues, not invented
or imagined ones."

Reaction among those to whom the bill would apply was muted. Gov. Ted
Kulongoski's spokeswoman said the governor would be "interested to hear
the floor debate" on the bill. Secretary of State Bill Bradbury said
through a spokeswoman that he has no opinion on the bill but would
comply if it became law.

"I'm OK with being tested," said Susan Castillo, state schools
superintendent. "My question would be, why?"

------------------------------------------------------