Campaign Reform

Now that the deadline for Oregon candidate filings has passed, voters have the opportunity to size up the field and see what their options are, both in specific races and in terms of how the larger pictures shape up, policy-wise.

Most legislative primary races are uncontested.

“Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. ("Won't Get Fooled Again," The Who)

Yet the voters want change, fresh voices, new perspectives, access to power for real citizens, not just the same career politicians again and again.

The voters want legislators that reflect the changing demographics of our state, so that no citizen is left behind.

That may have to wait until the next go-round.

There is only one House and one Senate race in the May 20 election that would bring the legislature a step closer in reaching these strategic goals.

The marvelously-gifted Cyreena Boston will likely be successful in her bid to re-integrate the House. May other community members have the courage in the future to step up and serve beside her there.

 Greetings: 

Last week, most of my time was taken up in preparation for and in attending the Joint Ways and Means Committee, which met Thursday and Friday in the Capitol. 

 I described my qualifications to succeed Senator Avel Gordly in the Oregon Senate in terms of my life experience in Parts 1 and 2.  

The groups that oppose campaign finance reform in Oregon have banded together to launch a "Protect Our Voices" campaign. Until now, the donors had been presumed to have been primarily labor unions out to protect "Oregon Progressives" from captains of industry, deep pocket corporations, etc.

Turns out that the unions were just playing front man for a who's who of special interests that currently dominate both side of our political process in Salem ...

Let's have a look at who is contributing...

Associated Oregon Industries 25,000
Associated Oregon Loggers 10,000
AFSCME 40,000
Oregon Health Care Assn 30,000
Oregon Local Grocery Assn 50,000
OSEA Seed Fund (public employees) 5,000
SEIU Local 503 45,000
Oregon Forest Industry Council 25,000
Oregon Restaurant Assn 25,000
Association of Builders & Contractors 2,000

Click the dollar. As a part of the whole annual budget for the City of Portland, the cost of Voter Owned Elections is actually very small. The tiny sliver of pie in the chart shows how little Voter Owned Elections would cost.
(From Oregon Follow the Money)

Democratic State Senator Ginny Burdick, who used to have a liberal rep but works for the reactionary PR firm Gard & Gerber--hired guns for the "rescind voter owned elections" campaign-- also fronts for them by running against Erik Sten. Look who's backing her and the campaign

News from the Citizens' Utility Board of Oregon: First Question First, Why do Oregon utilities dislike Portland's voter-owned elections?

The Campaign Contributions and Expenditures Reports for the upcoming May elections came out this month. On the ballot could be a measure that attempts to rescind the voter-owned elections law enacted by Portland's City Council last year. The First Things First Committee, running the campaign to end public financing of elections in Portland, is attracting some heavy-hitting financial support. Many of these supporters have ties to utility companies, either directly or indirectly.

For example, NW Natural gave $5,000, Qwest gave $7,500, Portland General Electric gave $7,500, and Stoel Rives (a law firm which often represents utilities) gave $3,500. Executives of utilities such as Dick Reiten and Kevin Lynch, and consultants for utilities such as Tom Imeson, are also contributors. And then there is the Portland Business Alliance. The PBA has many ties to Oregon utility companies: Judy Peppler, President of Qwest in Oregon is the Chair-Elect; as such, she would exercise a great deal of influence over the political agenda of the organization. In addition, the Chair Emeritus and several members at large on the Board hail from utilities such as PGE, PacifiCorp, and NW Natural. Size of the PBA check against voter-owned elections: $32,000.

Thursday, February 09, 2006

COLUMN: Jim Brunelle

Keep it clean

Ten years ago, Maine voters put their stamp of approval on one of the better governmental bargains of our time. They reclaimed ownership of our election process.

In a 1996 referendum, voters endorsed the Clean Election Act, a groundbreaking campaign finance reform law aimed at wresting control of the ballot box away from the wealthy individuals, corporations and special interests that traditionally have supplied the cash that drives -- and often determines -- elections.

And despite continued moaning and groaning in some quarters about the squandering of taxpayer money to pay for attack ads, overblown promises and other nefarious trimmings of the standard political campaign, the reform is proving to be a big success.

Last fall, Portland voters said “no!” to a million-dollar, business-backed campaign for mayor. This spring, the City Council showed us they heard the message and passed a campaign reform measure – voter-owned elections. Now, candidates have a way to run for office without relying on big-money donors.

Voter-owned elections reduces the power of special interests and wealthy campaign contributors and instead gives the power to ordinary voters. And that’s exactly why the special interests are trying to repeal it. They have lost influence, and they want to get it back.

Opponents of voter-owned elections have a lot to loose, and that’s why they will undoubtedly go to great lengths to protect their ability to invest in City Hall. While they have deep pockets to buy mail and airtime to get out their deceptive messages, they can’t match our grassroots power.