Email Bill Meyer, Podcasts on

Bill Meyer’s Facebook page:













Friday 2-10-23 Bill Meyer Show Guest Information



6:35 Rick Manning, President of Americans for Limited Government and with today’s “DC Swamp Update”, discussion on the State of the Union, what stories he thinks will be moving next.


7:10 Matt McCaw with the Greater Idaho movement –

Study: Oregon subsidizes eastern & southern Oregon, but Idaho wouldn’t have to


An in-depth economic analysis of the economics of the Greater Idaho proposal was published today for the Claremont Institute. The study finds that although Oregon’s spending per resident in northwestern Oregon is comparable to its spending per resident in eastern & southern Oregon, high-income areas around Portland end up carrying almost all of the state’s tax burden, due to Oregon’s choice of a progressive income tax to fund the bulk of its government. 


This major study found that eastern & southern Oregon are a drain on Oregon’s state budget, but would be a benefit to Idaho’s state budget. This is because both eastern Oregonians and southern Oregonians have almost exactly the same per person personal income as Idahoans, but the income of northwestern Oregonians is much higher, according to recent US government BEA figures.


The 99-page report predicts that, under Idaho’s lower taxes and regulation, the economy of eastern & southern Oregon would surge, providing a big benefit to Idaho’s state budget. The benefit to Idaho’s budget of adding eastern & southern Oregon would be $170 million annually, according to the Claremont Institute study, assuming Idaho leaves Oregon’s weight-mile tax on road freight in place in that area (Idaho itself does not have such a tax). Yet, the average resident in northwestern Oregon sends $360 in taxes to subsidize southern and eastern Oregon every year, according to the same study, or $690 per wage-earner.


The study, which began in 2021, analyzed the impact of adding both eastern and southern Oregon to Idaho, although the Greater Idaho movement in May revised its proposal to not include southwestern Oregon, until public opinion there embraces the idea. 


The Greater Idaho movement welcomed the study but pointed out that, although the study demonstrated reasons that eastern & southern Oregon’s GDP would grow by 2.1% due to a border relocation, the study acknowledged that the actual growth could be higher. It stated “Lastly, it is important to note that there are any number of economic possibilities that could result from the border relocation. Our effort with this analysis is to tabulate those which we can quantify and defend.” A statement on the movement’s website,, gave reasons to believe that the improvement in eastern & southern Oregon’s economy after joining Idaho would be much more impressive.


The study cited several economic benefits to eastern & southern Oregon of joining Idaho, such as lower taxes, lower unemployment, and a lower cost of living.


The movement’s statement responded to the study’s comments on debt by pointing out that Oregon’s state government has much more assets than debt, according to a tabulation by Truth in Accounting / University of Denver.  In fact, the net assets of Oregon’s state government per resident are almost exactly equal to those of Idaho.  Therefore, if eastern Oregonians brought their share of their state government’s assets and debts into Idaho, they would hardly change Idaho’s per-person net assets.


The Claremont Institute study did not guess at what Idaho would agree to pay for eastern Oregon because it would be entirely negotiable, and it would depend on which Oregon state assets and debts Idaho and Oregon agreed to transfer to Idaho. Less than three percent of eastern Oregon is state land; it is mostly federal or private land.


The analysis was performed by Points Consulting, an economic analysis firm based in Moscow, Idaho that has completed more than one hundred economic analyses over the last decade. Dr. Michael A. Shires, Vice Dean at Pepperdine University, was co-lead on the study.


Matt McCaw, the movement’s spokesman, said “we are asking Oregon Senate President Rob Wagner to give this proposal a hearing. It’s a win-win for both states, and a poll a year ago showed that 68% of northwestern Oregonian voters want it to have a hearing.”


The Claremont Institute study can be found at:  .


8:10 Joe Henry in studio and today we discuss his adult son Franklin, who is autistic. Joe shares his story about Franklin’s genetic testing experiences, how Franklin is one of 50 people in the entire world with a particular anomaly connected with Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease and the research around that. It’s been quite the experience for the family, and Joe discusses the challenges and upside of helping Franklin in his journey.


Thursday 2-09-23 Bill Meyer Show Guest Information

 6:35 Cynthia Fisher, founder of Patient Rights Advocate dot Org. (PRA) released a report revealing that a large majority of hospitals are continuing to hide the cost of care from consumers – including 16 hospitals in Oregon — two years after a law was enacted requiring them to post their real prices online.  

In PRA’s last Semi-Annual Hospital Price Transparency Compliance Report, 20 hospitals in Oregon were found non-compliant. The new report indicates that 16 hospitals are STILL not complying.  

Key findings of the overall report:  

  • 6 of 22 hospitals in Oregon reviewed were fully complying with the rule (27%).  
  • Nationally, only 489 (24.5%) were fully complying with the rule. 
  • 116 hospitals (5.8%) did not post any standard charges file and were in total noncompliance.  
  • Compliance varied widely among the largest hospital systems in the country:
    • HCA Healthcare, Tenet Healthcare, Providence, Avera, UPMC, Bon Secours Mercy Health, Christus Health, and Mercy Health were found to flout the law with zero compliance across their hospitals.
    • 58% of hospitals owned by CommonSpirit Health and 73% of hospitals owned by LifePoint Health were now found to be in compliance.   

The hospitals in OR that ARE complying:  

  • Adventist Health Tillamook 
  • CHI Saint Anthony Hospital 
  • Mercy Medical Center 
  • Oregon Health & Science University Hospital  
  • PeaceHealth Sacred Heart Medical Center at RiverBend  
  • Willamette Valley Medical Center                              

The hospitals in OR that are NOT complying:  

  • Asante Rogue Regional Medical Center  
  • Kaiser Permanente Sunnyside Medical Center  
  • Kaiser Permanente Westside Medical Center  
  • Legacy Emanuel Medical Center  
  • McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center  
  • Providence Hood River Memorial Hospital  
  • Providence Medford Medical Center  
  • Providence Milwaukie Hospital 
  • Providence Newberg Medical Center  
  • Providence Portland Medical Center  
  • Providence Saint Vincent Medical Center  
  • Providence Seaside Hospital 
  • Providence Willamette Falls Medical Center  
  • Saint Alphonsus Medical Center – Ontario  
  • Saint Alphonsus Medical Center in Baker City  
  • Salem Hospital                          

PRA’s previous reports have received significant attention – including NBC Nightly News, ABC News, NPR, Washington Post, and Bloomberg – yet the American people are continuing to suffer as hospitals put profits over patients.  

7:10 Pete Earle, – economist  with the American Institute for Economic Research


Government Siphon Targets Corporate Stock Buybacks

During last night’s State of the Union, President Joe Biden announced a quadrupling of the corporate buyback tax, which was introduced in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. The tax will be applied to stock purchases made by domestic public companies.

For reasons that are clear, the political left has long looked askance at stock buybacks. It has much to do with the transactions involving colossal amounts of money undertaken by massive business enterprises. The former is undoubtedly tempting as a target for official pilfering, whereas the latter are reliably despised by policymakers. It’s surprising, really, that a measure to chasten the latter by seizing a portion of the former, especially when spun as some form of “justice” or restitution, has taken so long.

The tales are familiar. Corporate stock buybacks are driven by “greed,” of course, and allegedly fuel “wealth inequality.” Instead of repurchasing shares in the market, say activists and politicians (virtually none of whom have ever owned a business, let alone managed a massive one), employees should be given pay increases. Or new innovation should be explored.

Congresspeople and regulators are the last people who should be telling entrepreneurs and corporate executives that they should be on the lookout for new innovation. That’s already in their DNA as creators, and it bears mentioning that, at times, there are no applicable innovations in or coming to the market. As for awarding pay raises, why would any firm paying what the market will bear – even more importantly, what their business segment and the unique labor market in their locality bears – increase compensation across the board?

So yes, a new tax is born. This one will do what all taxes do, to some extent or another: curtail the newly targeted activity while creating an incentive to explore imaginative workarounds. 

But on the other hand, the billions or tens of billions of dollars raised will go to a fund that directly addresses the numerous groups severely injured by stock buybacks. Teachers, firefighters, union workers, and other groups — hard working Americans, all — will receive US government checks cut from the buyback tax fund to remedy the gross inequalities rooted in the heinous act of firms buying their own stock in the market.

No, of course they won’t. All funds raised by taxing buybacks, which have purportedly served as an economic war machine in the service of plutocrats, will go directly into the US government’s coffers — some of which will go toward providing actual war machines for Ukraine. The rest will be used for purposes ranging from wrestling with the mounting debt service on over $31 trillion of government debt to creating woke indoctrination programs for the US armed forces and other federal agencies. 

When corporate executives decide to direct funds into share repurchases, they are conceding that there are no clearly profitable projects, worthwhile product lines, or synergistic acquisitions worth spending on at the moment. Older, larger firms — sometimes called “cash cows” — frequently find themselves in this position. They may choose between doing nothing with their unused cash (which is a disservice to shareholders and employees), paying a dividend (which rewards certain shareholders but also brings inflexibility and tax consequences), or they may buy their own stock in the market. (Unlike the world inhabited by the vampires of the Beltway, in the productive world commercial opportunities come and go unpredictably. And there are consequences for engaging in unprofitable ventures in the real world, unlike in DC.) 

There is a view that stock buybacks are a tacitly manipulative exercise, undertaken simply out of “greed” to raise stock prices. It simply isn’t the case. While with each buyback a (somewhat) smaller number of remaining shareholders will share in the benefits of a larger share of future earnings, the company’s value is decreased by the total shares purchased. Below is a chart of the five year return on the S&P 500 index as compared to four indices and financial products that track the performance of stocks undertaking large buybacks. All underperformed the S&P 500, clearly demonstrating that large scale corporate share repurchases do not drive up stock prices. 

S&P 500 Index returns vs. S&P 500 Buyback index, Solactive US Buyback Index, Invesco Buyback Achievers ETF, and NASDAQ Buyback AchvTR  (2018 – present




7:35 State Representative Lily Morgan with a legislative update, and more about the Anti-Paramilitary/Militia bill HB 2572.



8:10 Chad McComas, formerly of Rogue Retreat but now spearheading a new homeless helping organization Joy Community, specializing in fighting a rising tide of what McComas terms “Abandoned Elderly”. Find out more about this at

Saturday March 4th Chad’s asking people to “Take the Overnight Challenge” to raise money for Joy Community by sleeping in your car.  


8:35 Mike G. from and we kick around the upcoming Orchestra schedule.


8:45 Kevin Starrett from Oregon Firearms Federation. GREAT BREAKING NEWS that the Oregon Supreme Court Denied the state’s attempt to stop the Harney County judge’s stay against Measure 114.


Wednesday 2-08-23 Bill Meyer Show Guest Information


6:35 Eric Peters at and a load of fantastic articles on transportation and politics we discuss:



7:30 Terry Jeffrey of CNS News Reports

The U.S. trade deficit with China rose for the second straight year in 2022, hitting $382,917,000,000.

 Tonight, as President Biden delivers the State of the Union, relations with China will likely be a major issue addressed by the speech. What will not be mentioned though is in the two years Biden has been president the trade deficit with China has increased in both years after having decreased in the last two years under President Trump. 

 Terry Jeffrey of CNS News reports, “In 2019 and 2020 (the trade deficit with China) dropped, hitting $395,726,450,000 in 2019, and $348,830,540,000 in 2020.



8:10 Kevin Starrett at Oregon Firearms Federation – Wow, we talk about HB2572 – Here’s his alert.


“This Is Not A Gun Bill.”

Last Sunday we warned you about HB 2572 and the Dash 1 Amendment that “gut and stuffed” it.

In its original form the bill was dangerously vague and a serious threat to Oregonians. The very people who drafted it admitted it could be applied to prosecute private security guards.

An opinion from “Legislative Counsel,” the lawyers who write bills, stated:

“In section 2 of HB 2572, the definition of “private paramilitary organization” is quite broad and could in fact apply to a private security company, since a private security company would not fall within the law enforcement exception in subsection (3).”

But the proposed amendment made the bill far worse and any doubts one would have about that evaporated after a hearing was held on the bill yesterday.  

One of the sponsors of the bill, House Rep. Dacia Grayber testified : This is not a gun bill.”

Grayber is a vocal proponent of gun control, so when she says “This is not a gun bill” you can rest assured… it’s a gun bill.

She went on to say:

“This bill is not tied to any one political or partisan ideology. The policy applies to all incidences that meet the definition of paramilitary activity EQUALLY. Any claims to the contrary are at best misguided rhetoric and at worst attempting to play and feed people’s fears with misinformation.”

As is always the case, Grayber did not quote a single “claim to the contrary” that she falsely labeled as “misguided rhetoric” and “misinformation.”  

OFF’s testimony is published and available online. We invite Grayber to cite a single word of it that is “misinformation.”

But Grayber’s claims that the proposed policy applies equally are plainly absurd. 

As we have pointed out numerous times (including to the Republicans who sat on the committee that heard this) the bill and the amendment repeatedly refer to organizations “under a command structure”. In fact, over and over during the hearing the proponents of the bill emphasized that element. 

And as we all know, the most dangerous and violent political actors in Oregon today are described regularly by the leftists in power as a mere “idea” with no command structure.

Who was named as a potential target of this legislation? Not antifa, which was never mentioned one time in the hearing. Instead the proponents mentioned… “Three Percenters”.

While we challenge anyone to show us examples of “Three Percenters” burning buildings or looting, they certainly could be guilty of “publicly patrolling” while armed. An activity that has become necessary in many places due to the unprecedented violence by left wing rioters at a time when police cannot or will not respond. And it’s that very act of protecting private property this legislation seeks to criminalize.

Here is what the legislation outlaws: 

Section 1:A person commits the crime of unlawful paramilitary activity if the person knowingly, while acting as part of a private paramilitary organization or on behalf of or in furtherance of any objective of a private paramilitary organization, and while armed with a firearm, explosive or other dangerous weapon: “(a) Publicly patrols, drills or engages in techniques capable of causing physical injury or death

Here is what they define as a “paramilitary organization:”

‘Private paramilitary organization’ means any group of three or more persons associating under a command structure for the purpose of functioning in public or training to function in public as a combat, combat support, law enforcement or security services unit.

Maybe Grayber and the other sponsors would like to explain how that differs from the average small church security team. 

But if Grayber and her cohorts want to continue to hide behind the nonsensical pretense that this bill applies equally to all political ideologies let’s take a look at who the supporters of the legislation are.

The Alliance for Gun Responsibility 

The anti-gun League of Women Voters

The Multnomah County DA, and friend of left wing rioters, Mike Schmidt.

And their star witness, Mary McCord of the “Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection

Much as we are fans of the protection of the Constitution, a brief trip around their website will make it immediately clear that they have little interest in the protection of the Constitution.

For example, they are vocal supporters of crushing the Second Amendment having filed briefs in support of banning modern firearms and magazines.

Mary McCord, who was the main mouthpiece for this legislation, has written about dangers of “right wing” militias while never mentioning the actual violence caused by left wing radicals.

The “right wingers” she condemns “… have endangered public safety — with fatal results — by self-deploying to “protect” property from what have been largely false rumors of antifa violence during racial justice demonstrations.”

She also writes : “Private militia organizations routinely urge their members to acquire semi-automatic assault rifles and military gear.” 

She claims : “Six men involved with a private militia have been charged with plotting to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and try her for treason.” Conveniently neglecting to mention that the “kidnapping” was almost totally the product of Federal informants.

She attacks constitutional sheriffs saying : “But another likely reason is that local law enforcement officials are usually elected, and in jurisdictions where the local community is largely supportive of both Trump and private militias — often rural communities where strong anti-government and pro-gun-rights views predominate — there’s little incentive, and a lot of disincentive, to use the tools they have available.”

Her ridiculous claims that the legislation she is pushing will be applied equally is at odds with her complete refusal to even acknowledge that the violence our country and state have been rocked by is coming from the very groups this legislation exempts from prosecution.

(On a chilling side note, the legislation also carves out an exception for “Troops of a foreign government operating under the authorization or consent of the United States government.”)

Make no mistake. The people pushing this legislation are determined to create tools to entrap and prosecute anyone who is prepared to defend people and property against attack. They can dress it down any way they like but if one simply reads the language they have created it cannot be doubted what their intentions are.

While we have made several attempts to get the attention of the Republicans who sit on the House Judiciary Committee which heard this bill, they seem committed to ignoring the very real dangers it creates. Not one of them made even the slightest attempt to question the most obvious and egregious elements of the bill and amendment.

The Democrats have made no secret of their agenda to disarm law abiding civilians while emboldening and protecting criminals. The Republicans are asleep at the wheel.

If yesterday’s hearing is any indication of what we can expect from Republicans as the Democrats ram through more restrictions on our rights, we are in serious trouble.

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee:

Representative Charlie Conrad

District 12

Capitol Phone: 503-986-1412

Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE, H-483, Salem, Oregon 97301




Representative Rick Lewis

 District 18 – Silverton

Capitol Phone: 503-986-1418

Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE, H-385, Salem, Oregon 97301



Representative Lily Morgan

 District 3 – Grants Pass

Capitol Phone: 503-986-1403 

Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE, H-390, Salem, Oregon 97301



Representative Kim Wallan

 District 6 – Medford

Capitol Phone: 503-986-1406

Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE, H-388, Salem, Oregon 97301



You can view this post in a browser here:




8:40 Open for Business with Randal from Advanced Air – 541-772-6866

Natural Gas under attack, we discuss this story:

Eugene becomes first city in Oregon to ban gas hookups in new homes

We also talk maintenance, rebates coming, they’re hiring experienced installers…a lot going on.


Tuesday 2-07-23 Bill Meyer Show Guest Information

 6:35 Brand New House District 1 State Representative Court Boice from Curry County talks about his recent appointment to the position and what comes next.


7:10 Mr. Outdoors from with today’s Outdoor Report.                                          

7:35 Josephine County Commissioner Herman Baertschiger with another deeper dive in politics. Today it’s the sordid legislative priorities of Secretary of State Shemia Fagan – Here’s more:


Monday 2-06-23 Bill Meyer Show Guest Information

7:35 Michael Torguson, poli-sci teacher at Rogue Community College and we discuss the push for Oregon to join the states going with ranked choice voting. What would this mean?



8:10 Dr. Dennis Powers, retired professor of business law at SOU with today’s “Where Past Meets Present”.

The Circle of Teran
by Dennis Powers

In 2003, hand surgeon, Scott Young, and his wife, Robin James, finished building their home after seven years on a 1,100 acre Ashland property on Butler Creek Road that they named the “Circle of Teran”. Robin is the Raymond James investment/financial company’s founder’s daughter, and also writes spiritual books as “Sulara Young.” In “Messages from Mathias,” she channels the wisdom of one of her guides, Mathias. Her husband, Dr. Young, was the head of plastic surgery at different Canadian hospitals–and is known to be a shaman. When in Ashland, he also was a plastic surgeon.

With sweeping Rogue Valley views, their 11,000-square-foot residence has 11 bedrooms (most with private baths and balconies); a commercial-grade kitchen; a great 10-sided, double-story room with a marble fireplace, interior balcony and giant stained-glass skylights; and a glass-tropical conservatory where bananas and mangos grow. Other features include ponds, a 5,000-square-foot barn, a 200-foot-wide lavender maze (that takes 30 minutes to walk through), with windmill-and solar-generated power.

The property was named after a son, Teran, who died at childbirth–and took on spiritual dimensions. The two owners operated it as a spiritual retreat and follow the religious Shamanism of the Mexican Huichol Indians.

An ongoing debate ensued between the Youngs and Jackson County over the Circle of Teran’s status as a church. State land-use laws prohibit new church construction on land zoned for exclusive farm use. In 2009, the state Land Use Board of Appeals determined that since golf courses and parks are allowed there, religious entities were to be treated the same as secular ones—and allowed a church to be used there. However, this was still legally problematic with neighbor objections and more zoning issues. 

After years of unsuccessful listings with a series of real estate agents, they decided to auction the property (with construction estimates later between $15 – $20 million dollars). The high bidder at the July 1, 2014 auction made a $1.525 million bid for the hillside estate. And who was this? Ashland hotelier, Doug Neuman. While at the Medford airport, he had placed the winning bid over the phone and–to his surprise–won.

Doug and Becky Neuman own the Neuman Hotel Group, which includes numerous local properties, including the Ashland Springs Hotel. By then, the Youngs had moved to Kihei, Hawaii, where Scott Young opened a new practice as Dr. “Genesis” Young and his wife, as a massage therapist. They continue their spiritual practices.  

Although the former owners did not eat meat, drink alcohol, or wear their shoes inside, they gave the Neumans their blessings to do whatever they wanted. The Neumans transferred the house to a group that created the Circle of Trust, a high-end drug and alcohol addiction recovery center. The house and portions of the land were placed on the market for $8.2 million, and with lower asking prices for several years, the Circle of Trust transferred ownership to Norma Nakai Burton; Norma had “apprenticed” with shamans in Mexico (Huichol), Brazil, Japan, and Native Americans. Using this as a spiritual center (speakers, retreats, etc., she put the property on the market in 2018 with an asking price of $4.9 million dollars. Another spiritual, but different entity, TwinRay Illuminations, purchased the property in late 2020 for $2.6 million dollars—and is still the owner at this time. (This story will be told in a second part.)

“The Circle of Teran features a great room with marble fireplace, interior balcony and stained-glass skylights.”

Sources: Teresa Thomas, “Surprise! You’ve bought a 1,120-acre estate. Now what?” Mail Tribune, July 17, 2014; see Sotheby’s Concierge Auctions: Ultimate Peace and Serenity in Oregon at Video; Janet Eastman, “Ashland healer’s home, for sale at $5 million,” The Oregonian/OregonLive, June 5, 2018, at Norma Nakai Burton purchase.