Standing strong for Oregon... Novick for U.S. Senate

Editor's note: This is the second piece in a multi-part series about candidates Jenni has chosen to support in this year's primary election and why she made that choice. We invite others to do so as well.

Ever since publicly supporting Steve Novick for the U.S. Senate last year, I've had a lot of people ask me why. I've been a big Jeff Merkley supporter in the past - he'd worked hard to help us locate a candidate for the District 50 House seat, grow our list of precinct committee people in our district from three to more than a dozen, and more. In response to that, I've had to explain that I'm for Steve Novick, not against Jeff Merkley.

Like many in this country, I have been extremely unhappy with the U.S. Congress. Democrats in both chambers were unwilling to fight for much when they were in the minority (they'd rather not do something than to do something and have it fail), and it hasn't changed much since they became the Party in power again. The U.S. Senate has been the worst.

Once the 2006 elections were over, I started looking towards the 2008 elections - particularly for races in Oregon. Who would we get to run for house seats, senate seats, city council seats, etc. But the race foremost on my mind was the U.S. Senate race. Who could we find who would not only go to Washington, DC with the progressive values and stances on issues we hold dear, but also someone who wouldn't be meek, someone willing to push things through for the public?

When Kari Chisholm contacted me early in ‘07 to tell me that Steve Novick was running for the U.S. Senate, I was excited. I'd seen Novick speak at many events before, and I was impressed with his ability to speak to a crowd, to build a coalition within the group he was speaking to, etc. After meeting with him to discuss his candidacy and web site, needless to say I was "hooked."

Steve Novick had many of the same positions I did on the issues, especially the war in Iraq.

I remember clearly where I was on September 11, 2001. I was sick my entire pregnancy, and ended up in the ER multiple times. On September 10^th, I went in so ill and dehydrated that I could barely stand on my own. After several hours in the ER, my doctor asked them to admit me to the hospital. As I was being wheeled into my room, I could hear the nurses talking about something awful just happening. They turned on the TV in my room - the first plane had just hit NYC. I watched there from my hospital bed as the other planes hit. My sister-in-law and her fiancé both worked in the World Trade Center buildings. My husband's cousin worked nearby. Thankfully, none were hurt.

However, I knew from the beginning it was Osama bin Laden who was responsible for this - not Iraq. It was actually something I discussed with a few of the nurses as we watched it unfold live on TV. Only one plane had hit at that point, and the news wasn't sure what was going on. A nurse remarked that she didn't think it was an accident - she thought it was bin Laden. I agreed, as did several others.

Iraq had nothing to do with September 11^th, and it was fairly obvious from multiple inspections there were no WMDs. From the beginning I spoke out in opposition to any military action in Iraq. Afghanistan needed to be our focus. And if we had enough resources to go elsewhere, we needed to go into areas where mass genocides were occurring, such as in parts of Africa.

However, we had a Congress who was willing to go along with the Bush Administration and support the war. Even after changing their minds, they continued to fund the war over and over and over again. They'd roll over on the war just like they did on many other issues, including food stamps and health care.

Republicans would put their funding for the war, defunding of needed social programs, etc. into a bill that was well liked. They'd do so, because they knew that the Democrats wouldn't vote no on it in fear of the public believing they'd voted no on whatever the main topic of the bill was. And Republicans would do this over and over and over again.

I want someone in DC who isn't afraid to stand up to the Republicans when they do this. Someone who can lead a fight to get items like the funding of the war removed from a bill, else the entire bill defeated and resubmitted without the war funding. Someone who can bring some backbone to the U.S. Senate.

I also agree with Novick on a whole host of other issues.

I think his idea of the thank you card to taxpayers after they file their taxes is a great idea. I think public education on where their tax dollars are spent is something we are falling way behind on - from the local to the federal level. I think it's important to thank people for their taxes and to let them know what it's being spent on.

I agree that we need to get universal health care in this country. He's right that we need to do more to get the costs down, allow Medicare to negotiate with drug companies, and do more to get healthy foods into our schools.

I agree with Novick on tax fairness and fiscal responsibility. Why should someone who makes an extra $5,000 buying and selling stock pay a lower tax rate than a middle class worker who just got a $5,000 raise? Income from capital gains should be taxed at the same rate as income earned from a job. And why should corporations be allowed to "move" their corporate headquarters outside the country to avoid paying taxes? Companies are making millions, or billions, in profits and paying little taxes. That affects everyone, from the local level to the federal level.

I also agree about having to look at making some changes to Social Security. Currently, SS is stable through 2041 - if we repay what's been taken out. But even if we repay that money (which has rarely happened in my lifetime), it's only good through 2041. I turn 63 in 2041, and my husband will be 74. The availability and stability of Social Security when my husband and I reach retirement age is very important to me.

I agree with Novick that more needs to be done to raise the federal minimum wage. We're lucky here in Oregon to have as high of a minimum wage as we do. But it's still a ways off from being a living wage - and it's even worse in states without a higher minimum wage. And for waiters and waitresses in many of those states, it's even lower - only half of the federal rate. If we want people to be able to feed their kids healthy foods, be home to raise them, etc., they have to be able to work fewer jobs to reach a livable wage. And that isn't going to happen until we raise the minimum.

And I agree with Novick on the importance of affordable child care. Many times I've turned down work when I was unemployed because once we paid for child care and gas or a bus pass, we'd be paying out more than I was making. And that was only for one potty-trained child - if your child was not potty trained yet or you had multiple children, the cost went up substantially.

I could keep going on and on about the issues we agree on, as we agree on a lot. But the most important thing is that I know not only does Novick support these issues and ideas, but he will fight for them. He's going to do everything he can to fight for Oregonians every day.

As he says in his ads - he's going to fight for the little guy. And while it may be a catchy slogan that ties into his height, it also says that he's going to fight for people like me and my family. Or my sister who has severe health problems, but can't get on any government health care plan, and therefore cannot hold a job. Or the hundreds of thousands of other Oregonians without health care. Or the millions of people directly affected by the war in Iraq - by being stationed there, their families, friends, etc.

Technorati Tags: 2008 election Oregon