For the best experienceDownload the Mobile App
App Store Play Store
Why are Democratic members of Congress wearing pink at Trump's address?
Why are Democratic members of Congress wearing pink at Trump's address?
Why are Democratic members of Congress wearing pink at Trump's address?

Published on: 03/04/2025

This news was posted by Oregon Today News

Go To Business Place

Description

The color choice was deliberate.

News Source : https://www.kgw.com/article/news/nation-world/why-are-democratic-members-of-congress-wearing-pink-trump-speech/507-03cc9895-6ca5-42c4-a91e-e74eef24ff6f

Other Related News

Asking Eric: Readers share creative ‘We got divorced’ holiday card ideas
Asking Eric: Readers share creative ‘We got divorced’ holiday card ideas
Asking Eric: Readers share creative ‘We got divorced’ holiday card ideas

12/10/2025

Dear Readers On November 9 I answered a letter from someone who was trying to find a way t...

Dear Abby: I hate my narcissistic husband, but at 67, is it too late for me to start over?
Dear Abby: I hate my narcissistic husband, but at 67, is it too late for me to start over?
Dear Abby: I hate my narcissistic husband, but at 67, is it too late for me to start over?

12/10/2025

DEAR ABBY Ive been married to a narcissist for 28 years He has gaslighted me for our entir...

State seeks public input on Oregon's first cyanide-processed gold mining operation
State seeks public input on Oregon's first cyanide-processed gold mining operation
State seeks public input on Oregon's first cyanide-processed gold mining operation

12/10/2025

The public has until Feb 6 to comment on the proposed Grassy Mountain Gold and Silver Mine...

Metro flooding triggers evacuations, road closures: 'It just poured'
Metro flooding triggers evacuations, road closures: 'It just poured'
Metro flooding triggers evacuations, road closures: 'It just poured'

12/10/2025

From campgrounds to neighborhoods rising waters caused flooding and headaches across the m...

The Systemic Criminalization of Mental Illness in Oregon Article by: Commissioner Drew Farmer I want to be clear as I go into this article, which will be critical, that my critiques are not of the line staff, not of the medical professionals, and no one between the ranks of CNA to Doctor. These folks strive every day to make do in a broken system. My critiques are of leadership, and some of those being across multiple administrations given the length of Oregon’s ongoing mental health crisis. The issues at hand belong to persons of higher decision making authority, to exactly which level down from the governor I do not know. But, without the acknowledgement of what’s broken we will struggle to repair it. I believe there is a component of policy within Oregon’s mental health system where the deferment of liabilities is overtaking humane policy. Running numbers on easily available public data, I am inclined to believe that the state has taken efforts systemically and over time to push the mentally ill into the criminal justice system due to it being cheaper to maintain and often a burden upon lower levels of government more so than upon the state. An article from OPB from 2025, “How Oregon’s laws on forcing mental health treatment could change this year”, reflects an average civil commitment bed cost of around $1,777.78 per day; by contrast, a DOC (Oregon Department of Corrections) fact sheet shows an AIC (Adult in Custody) cost of $173.88 per day. Running those numbers, a bed in prison versus in care saves the state around $1,603.90 per day per person. Of additional note, the cost to the state only applies under the criminal justice system if the individual commits a crime which yields a sentence exceeding one year. If the crime is sentenced at a year or less then the individual is lodged in county jail where the cost is fully borne by the local government. We can see that the state has a financial incentive to criminalize mental illness. We can also see where this backfires; as of the start of December, the Oregon State Hospital has paid roughly $1.4 million in contempt fines since June. This is due to a lack of capacity to process even those mentally ill who yet need to stand trial, placing the liability squarely back in the hands of the state. And that problem brings us to a key contention between the state and counties; the CFAA agreement. In this agreement, overflow from the state hospital will become the responsibility of counties. Despite the state’s insistence by officials that these fines cannot be passed onto counties due to a federal ruling, the other hand of the state is actively appealing that ruling so that it can pass fines along. Additionally, the new contract removes, “subject to availability of funds”. While the issue of the state criminalizing mental illness to avoid footing the bill for care is a long-standing one, we can see present leadership continuing efforts to do the same.
The Systemic Criminalization of Mental Illness in Oregon Article by: Commissioner Drew Farmer I want to be clear as I go into this article, which will be critical, that my critiques are not of the line staff, not of the medical professionals, and no one between the ranks of CNA to Doctor. These folks strive every day to make do in a broken system. My critiques are of leadership, and some of those being across multiple administrations given the length of Oregon’s ongoing mental health crisis. The issues at hand belong to persons of higher decision making authority, to exactly which level down from the governor I do not know. But, without the acknowledgement of what’s broken we will struggle to repair it. I believe there is a component of policy within Oregon’s mental health system where the deferment of liabilities is overtaking humane policy. Running numbers on easily available public data, I am inclined to believe that the state has taken efforts systemically and over time to push the mentally ill into the criminal justice system due to it being cheaper to maintain and often a burden upon lower levels of government more so than upon the state. An article from OPB from 2025, “How Oregon’s laws on forcing mental health treatment could change this year”, reflects an average civil commitment bed cost of around $1,777.78 per day; by contrast, a DOC (Oregon Department of Corrections) fact sheet shows an AIC (Adult in Custody) cost of $173.88 per day. Running those numbers, a bed in prison versus in care saves the state around $1,603.90 per day per person. Of additional note, the cost to the state only applies under the criminal justice system if the individual commits a crime which yields a sentence exceeding one year. If the crime is sentenced at a year or less then the individual is lodged in county jail where the cost is fully borne by the local government. We can see that the state has a financial incentive to criminalize mental illness. We can also see where this backfires; as of the start of December, the Oregon State Hospital has paid roughly $1.4 million in contempt fines since June. This is due to a lack of capacity to process even those mentally ill who yet need to stand trial, placing the liability squarely back in the hands of the state. And that problem brings us to a key contention between the state and counties; the CFAA agreement. In this agreement, overflow from the state hospital will become the responsibility of counties. Despite the state’s insistence by officials that these fines cannot be passed onto counties due to a federal ruling, the other hand of the state is actively appealing that ruling so that it can pass fines along. Additionally, the new contract removes, “subject to availability of funds”. While the issue of the state criminalizing mental illness to avoid footing the bill for care is a long-standing one, we can see present leadership continuing efforts to do the same.
The Systemic Criminalization of Mental Illness in Oregon Article by: Commissioner Drew Farmer I want to be clear as I go into this article, which will be critical, that my critiques are not of the line staff, not of the medical professionals, and no one between the ranks of CNA to Doctor. These folks strive every day to make do in a broken system. My critiques are of leadership, and some of those being across multiple administrations given the length of Oregon’s ongoing mental health crisis. The issues at hand belong to persons of higher decision making authority, to exactly which level down from the governor I do not know. But, without the acknowledgement of what’s broken we will struggle to repair it. I believe there is a component of policy within Oregon’s mental health system where the deferment of liabilities is overtaking humane policy. Running numbers on easily available public data, I am inclined to believe that the state has taken efforts systemically and over time to push the mentally ill into the criminal justice system due to it being cheaper to maintain and often a burden upon lower levels of government more so than upon the state. An article from OPB from 2025, “How Oregon’s laws on forcing mental health treatment could change this year”, reflects an average civil commitment bed cost of around $1,777.78 per day; by contrast, a DOC (Oregon Department of Corrections) fact sheet shows an AIC (Adult in Custody) cost of $173.88 per day. Running those numbers, a bed in prison versus in care saves the state around $1,603.90 per day per person. Of additional note, the cost to the state only applies under the criminal justice system if the individual commits a crime which yields a sentence exceeding one year. If the crime is sentenced at a year or less then the individual is lodged in county jail where the cost is fully borne by the local government. We can see that the state has a financial incentive to criminalize mental illness. We can also see where this backfires; as of the start of December, the Oregon State Hospital has paid roughly $1.4 million in contempt fines since June. This is due to a lack of capacity to process even those mentally ill who yet need to stand trial, placing the liability squarely back in the hands of the state. And that problem brings us to a key contention between the state and counties; the CFAA agreement. In this agreement, overflow from the state hospital will become the responsibility of counties. Despite the state’s insistence by officials that these fines cannot be passed onto counties due to a federal ruling, the other hand of the state is actively appealing that ruling so that it can pass fines along. Additionally, the new contract removes, “subject to availability of funds”. While the issue of the state criminalizing mental illness to avoid footing the bill for care is a long-standing one, we can see present leadership continuing efforts to do the same.

12/10/2025

The Systemic Criminalization of Mental Illness in Oregon Article by Commissioner Drew Fa...

ShoutoutGive Shoutout
500/500