Blue Oregon Blogs

It was one of the strange little mysteries of the 2010 election cycle. Jim Huffman, the law professor and GOP opponent of Senator Ron Wyden, disclosed in his quarterly reports that he'd loaned a total of $1.35 million to his campaign.

The only problem? Previous disclosures had listed his total non-home assets as between $500k and $1m, and he didn't disclose a loan against his house. So, where did the money come from?

Now, we know. As we all suspected, it was from his wife, Leslie Spencer. And because their assets were not jointly held, a contribution or a loan from her in excess of $2400 is illegal. So, the DPO filed a complaint.

And now, Huffman has been fined $29,900 by the Federal Elections Commission (pdf). The FEC noted that Huffman "reported the receipt of six loans from Huffman’s personal funds that were not from his personal funds because, based on Huffman’s personal financial disclosure statement, Huffman did not have sufficient personal funds to make the loans."

At the time, Huffman told the O's Jeff Mapes that the loans were "strictly legal". According to the FEC summary of facts, Huffman and Spencer "operated under a good faith belief that .. the personal loans were permissible regardless of the specific origin of the funds."

Which is kinda funny, because Huffman worked kinda hard to cover up where the money was coming from. Again, the FEC summary of facts (to which Huffman has agreed):

FTCI wired funds from Ms. Spencer's trust account in the amounts of $50,000, $150,000 and $200,000 to Mr. Huffman's and Ms. Spencer's joint account at Bank of the West on March 15, 2010, April 8, 2010, and July 1, 2010, that were used to fund loans of the same amounts disclosed bythe Committee as from Mr. Huffman's personal funds on March 30, 2010, March 31, 2010, and June 30, 2010, respectively. To fund a loan of $500,000 on September 14, 2010, also disclosed as from Mr. Huffman's personal funds, Ms. Spencer wired $500,000 from her FTCI line of credit to the joint bank account at Bank of the West on September 13, 2010, and Mr. Huffman then wired those funds to the Committe's account at Wachovia Bank the next day.

Yeah, so we had a law professor - a dean! - conspire to violate federal law in an attempt to steal a U.S. Senate election. And despite all that, and despite spending $2,177,539 more than Wyden's 2004 opponent, he bumped the GOP vote total against Wyden from 32% to 39%. (That's more than $300,000 per percentage point.)

It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.

I guess we know why Huffman ain't running for Attorney General now - or anything else.

What’s today’s story?

Two weeks ago the staff and consultants for the CRC highway mega-project made their third presentation at a hearing of the CRC legislative oversight committee. Unlike previous hearings, this one was electric – and made front-page news in The Oregonian. CRC consultants and staff presented the oversight committee with a new plan – one to cut back the CRC by $650 million, eliminating expanded connections to the ports.

CRC consultant Patricia McCaig: “We aren’t tone deaf. We understand this project makes you nervous... we’ve clearly been directed by the Governor, the public and conversations with you to go for a smaller project. That’s the reality of these times.”

Smaller, of course, is relative. It would still be the most expensive project in the region’s history, costing billions of dollars. It would still fail to solve the traffic problems, add congestion to North Portland, and tear down the bridge that has 55 years of life in it.

The next day the story changed.

Governor Kitzhaber’s spokesperson backed away from the idea, saying “There’s no discussion on eliminating anything.” And Paula Hammond, Director of the Washington Department of Transportation, sent a memo to Washington legislators saying the plan presented to Oregon legislators wasn’t the plan.

The promise of a special discounted price on the CRC - to be responsive to legislative concerns - was just smoke and mirrors. Even if ODOT shows a smaller initial price tag, they still plan to build the whole project, and bill accordingly.

And the fictitious sticker price conceals a more important question, still unanswered six years into the planning: who will pay?

The mega-project's financing plan is based on highly uncertain federal money, unpassable state gas tax increases, and questionable tolling income. At the hearing CRC officials dodged the question of who would be responsible for the likely huge cost overruns - by my count five times.

The $300 million or $450 million CRC is asking for is just the "E-Z down payment" - the real bill will come later - after the legislature signs on the dotted line.

CRC backers want it both ways: a shine of relative affordability, an appearance of responsiveness, while still planning to build the whole mega-project, five miles of highway expansion with huge interchanges.

WSDOT's Hammond also claims Washington is forging ahead with plans for a new transportation revenue package that includes Washington’s $450 million share. That contradicts the budget proposal out of the Governor’s office.

Having multiple stories is something the CRC has gotten good at. The project uses two different traffic projections in its FEIS. They have a constantly shifting schedule of building while claiming they're on schedule. They claim they’ve saved the same money multiple times.

Until the Columbia River Crossing project gets its plan straight – until it has any idea about how to find the funding for the project or is clear on what will be built – we have the responsibility to stop funding the fantasy.

The legislature needs to step in, and do so immediately.

Between now and the 2013 session, the high-priced CRC consultants and staff will spend another $10 million or so from ODOT's budget. That’s ten million dollars that could be going to key maintenance needs across the state, creating construction jobs.

We simply don’t have the time or money to waste on ever-changing stories based on fantasy funding.

By Scott Moore of Portland, Oregon. Scott is the Communications Director for Our Oregon and was a political reporter and news editor for the Portland Mercury. Previously, he contributed Trivial Pursuit: That's Some Har-ible Reporting.

From Portland to Medford, State Rep. Dennis Richardson (R-Your Inbox) is getting blasted for his latest scheme: Exploiting Oregon’s public records laws in order to get his hands on hundreds of thousands of Oregonians’ personal email addresses and then sending them political spam.

Richardson filed public records requests with state agencies seeking the email addresses (and other contact info) of employees as well as anyone who has business with those agencies.

The result? Richardson got his mitts on at least 480,000 email addresses, and probably many more. He filed public records requests with numerous agencies, boards, and commissions, including the Oregon Health Authority, the Oregon Department of Education, and reportedly even the Oregon Board of Massage Therapists.

The emails included addresses of employees, clients, stakeholders, newsletter subscribers, vendors, and on and on. If you’ve ever given your email address to a state agency or commission for any reason--even just to sign up for a newsletter--you’re probably now on Dennis Richardson’s email list.

To give you some idea of how many email addresses that is: If Richardson’s new email list was a city, it’d be the second largest city in Oregon.

Richardson’s actions are a clear abuse and exploitation of the state’s public records laws. These laws are designed to protect against corruption and to make government more transparent and accountable. The fact that a politician has exploited public records in order to build up his political spam list is an outrage.

Richardson is the Republican co-chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, which writes the state budget. He’s used that position to advocate for policies that would force deeper cuts to schools and critical human services. Surprise, surprise—that’s the kind of platform his new unwitting followers are now being bombarded with.

Some people, including employees at nonprofit organizations, have already started receiving Richardson’s emails, starting with a politically loaded one-question “survey” about the state budget. That was followed by a long newsletter filled with political rhetoric about the need to cut the budget. He’s even using the list to promote the Oregon Transformation Project, a group he runs with state GOP chair Allen Alley that also has a Political Action Committee. Worse, Richardson has revealed that he’s sharing the survey responses with the Transformation Project.

In short, here’s what we’ve got: A politician exploiting the state’s public records in order to obtain contact info for hundreds of thousands of Oregonians, who he’s now spamming with political emails. And now that he has these addresses, there’s nothing stopping him from using them for his own legislative campaign or sharing them with other groups, like the Transformation Project or the Oregon GOP.

Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian announced today that he's running again for another term.

Avakian's tenure in the job has been a marked success so far. His term has seen a reinvigorated use of Commissioner Complaints. One was used to pursue a civil case against John Minnis, who was charged with sexual harassment and discrimination resulting from Minnis' tenure with the Oregon the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training. The case was eventually settled for $450,000. Another Complaint was also filed against Typhoon! restaurant for wage discrimination. That Complaint led to an investigation and formal charges.

Commissioner Avakian created the Oregon Council on Civil Rights to bring together strong leaders from Oregon’s diverse communities and raise the profile of civil rights issues in the state. Avakian also fought for, and secured, additional General Fund money for the Technical Assistance for Employers Program. The Program helps educate Oregon employers about employment law. This has allowed for more and better employment law education for Oregonians, especially in rural areas.

Avakian's office also championed Oregon House Bill 3362, a $2 million Career Technical Education Revitalization grant. The grant establishes the framework for a system of educational pathways, especially in the healthcare and renewable energy sectors. He also worked to pass House Bill 2309, which provides remedies for employees paid with checks that bounce.

One of the things I like most about Avakian is his very strong support of LGBT rights. Avakian actively supported non-discrimination legislation to protect LGBT citizens from being discriminated against in employment.

The Bureau of Labor and Industries now enforces this law. Avakian's opponent, Republican Bruce Starr, voted against it.

You should follow Avakian's campaign on Facebook. too. He's truly one of Oregon's great progressive leaders.

Over the last six weeks, three polls were released to the public in the OR-1 race. We now have election results data to compare them to.

In mid-December, Public Policy Polling (PPP) conducted a poll on behalf of Daily Kos and SEIU. At the end of December, SurveyUSA conducted a poll on behalf of KATU. And on January 11-12, Republican pollster Bob Moore (pdf) conducted a poll for Rob Cornilles.

td.poll {padding: 4px; font-size: 11px; text-align: right} td.pollrow {padding: 4px; font-size: 11px; font-weight: bold;} td.pollhdr {padding: 4px; font-size: 11px; font-weight: bold; border-bottom: 1px solid #666666; background: #cccccc; text-align: right} td.pollhigh {padding: 4px; font-size: 11px; font-weight: bold; text-align: right} PPP SUSA Moore Actual Bonamici 52 50 46 53.8 Cornilles 41 39 42 39.6 Others -- 4 2 6.6 Undecided 7 7 10 SB Lead +11 +11 +4 +14.3 MoE +/- 3.1% 4.5% 6% Sample 979 504 300

That's right, folks. Despite being the closest to the actual election by weeks, Bob Moore's poll was wildly off in comparison. (Note: This post was updated on 2/2 at 11 a.m. to reflect the latest election results.)

A few more points of distinction: Sure, Moore's sample size was smaller and margin of error bigger. But PPP and SUSA were also much more transparent. Both released the exact wording of every single question, along with detailed demographic crosstabs. And PPP, as with every poll sponsored by Daily Kos, released the raw answer-by-answer data. Bob Moore? He just released a memo that characterized Cornilles as "surging" and the race "going right down to the wire".

This isn't the first time, of course, that Moore's polls have been called into question.

A week before the election in 2008, Moore had Gordon Smith beating Jeff Merkley by 4%, when two other polls conducted that same day had Merkley up by 5% (Hibbits) and 7% (SUSA). Merkley, of course, won by 3%.

In 2010, Moore had Scott Bruun beating Kurt Schrader by 4%, less than a week before voters started casting votes in an election that Schrader won by 5%.

And most dramatically - in 2010, he did it in the race between Jim Huffman and Ron Wyden, claiming Huffman was leading 47 to 38%.

The O's Jeff Mapes called that poll "a fantasy", and national pundit Stu Rothenberg was apoplectic - noting that Moore refused to release any details and saying that the campaign "has something to hide." Wyden won handily 57 to 39.

So, it seems to me that serious journalists shouldn't bother listening to Bob Moore's nonsense. And if they do, they should insist on complete transparency - all the questions, crosstabs, and raw data. Otherwise, they might just be getting taken for a ride through fantasyland (and taking their readers along with 'em.)

It's official. Suzanne Bonamici has been elected to represent Oregon's 1st Congressional District. Congratulations to the Congresswoman-elect, her family, and her entire team.

The AP reports that Bonamici leads Cornilles 54 to 39, with 69% of the expected vote counted.

Update, 9:15 p.m.: DPO chair Meredith Wood Smith noted some very impressive numbers in a post-victory statement:

Our grassroots volunteers logged 2,282 shifts, and with our field organizers placed 315,109 calls and knocked on 142,209 doors across the 1st Congressional District. In Suzanne Bonamici, Northwest Oregon has elected the champion it deserves.

Update, 10:55 p.m.: From Bonamici's statement:

I am truly honored to represent such an important, diverse and dynamic district – and in that representation, I will always put the needs of people before politics. It’s just who I am. I look forward to working on our shared priorities: getting Oregonians back to work, helping our businesses get the capital they need to grow, investing in education and job training and assuring we have strong, balanced consumer protection laws to help us recover from the financial crisis. ...

I hope we can take from this election a shared desire to move past obstructionist party politics and back to the small “r” republican idea of representative government and the small “d” democratic idea of serving our common good. Our country and this district deserve nothing less.

Here's a stream of all the twitter chatter:

new TWTR.Widget({ version: 2, type: 'search', search: 'bonamici OR cornilles', interval: 30000, title: 'Election Night', subject: 'OR-1 Special Election', width: 250, height: 300, theme: { shell: { background: '#8ec1da', color: '#ffffff' }, tweets: { background: '#ffffff', color: '#444444', links: '#1985b5' } }, features: { scrollbar: true, loop: false, live: true, behavior: 'default' } }).render().start();

Well, in just a few short hours, the polls will close in Oregon's First Congressional District - and in a matter of minutes, we'll know who has won.

That's right, out-of-state observers, because of Oregon's unique vote-by-mail system, we often know the results very, very quickly. Voters have been voting for nearly three weeks. The county elections staff have been processing ballots very nearly as long. That means that the initial release of numbers at 8:02 p.m. or thereabouts will include a very big chunk of the total vote.

Now, it's true that in statewide races that are very close (Merkley '08, Kitzhaber '10), the last-minute flood of votes into Multnomah County tends to overwhelm staff there - and so we see artificially low numbers for Democrats early, and then a late surge on Wednesday when the ballot backlog is cleared.

But OR-1 only has a small portion of Multnomah County, and with voter turnout well below general election levels, expect the numbers to come out hard and fast.

(One important technical note for close observers: The very first numbers from the counties will read "100% of precincts counted". Ignore that. That's a holdover from vote-counting machines where all the votes for a single precinct are assembled, and only then counted. We'll have some votes from 100% of the precincts immediately, but not all the votes from 100% of the precincts. Instead, note the total ballots counted and compare that to your estimate of how many ballots you expect. And no, they can't tell you how many total ballots there are -- after 8 p.m., ballots will be driven in to county offices from far-flung dropboxes at libraries, schools, community centers, and elsewhere. So there's not a total ballot count until all the votes are counted.)

Want even more detail about how elections work in Oregon? Here's the primer I wrote when this all started.

OK, with all that out of the way, what do you expect will happen? Any predictions or prognostications?

Update: 4:57 p.m.: Over at the O, Jeff Mapes takes note [of the turnout numbers.] Good news for Bonamici:

Democrats have returned more than 67,000 ballots, compared to just over 50,000 for Republicans and about 25,000 for non-affiliated and minor-party voters. All told, just over 47 percent of the ballots returned have been from Democrats.

Democrats have also been slightly more likely to turn out so far. In the four counties besides Clatsop -- Washington, Multnomah, Columbia and Yamhill -- 40.7 percent of Democrats have returned their ballots to 39.8 percent of Republicans.

Update: 5:02 p.m.: At Daily Kos Election, David Jarman provides benchmarks for watching county numbers:

Bonamici only needs to fight to a tie in Washington County, the suburban county west of Portland that contains the bulk of the district's population; the huge Democratic edge in the slice of west Portland that's in OR-01 more than cancels out the Republican advantage in rural Yamhill County.

Update: 8:04 p.m. 8 p.m. Multnomah County numbers: Bonamici 15,173 (75%); Cornilles 4092 (20%). 37.4% turnout.

Update: 8:07 p.m. 8 p.m. Washington County numbers: Bonamici 54,630 (53%); Cornilles 41,918 (41%). 38.6% turnout. Turnout won't climb much past this point. I think we can stick a fork in Rob Cornilles.

Update: 8:18 p.m. The O's Jeff Mapes calls it for Bonamici.

Update: 8:22 p.m. 8 p.m. Clatsop County numbers: Bonamici 3586 (56%), Cornilles 2340 (37%). 32% turnout.

Update: 8:25 p.m. 8 p.m. Yamhill County numbers: Bonamici 9539 (43%), Cornilles 10,788 (49%). Turnout not reported?!

Update: 8:29 p.m. 8 p.m. Columbia County numbers: Bonamici 5997 (50%, Cornilles 4865 (41%). Turnout 44%.

By Steve Pedery of Portland, Oregon. Steve is the Conservation Director for Oregon Wild, based in Portland. Since 1974, Oregon Wild has worked to protect the wildlands, wildlife, and waters that make Oregon a special place. The organization recently won it's second "Two Chiefs" award from the USDA Forest Service and Natural Resources Conservation Service, for work to promote conservation-based management of public lands.

Rep. Peter DeFazio has a reputation as one of the most outspoken and progressive members of the Oregon Congressional delegation. Most Oregonians think of him as a friend of environmental conservation, and an advocate for the protection of special places through Wilderness legislation like the Wild Rogue and Devil’s Staircase proposals.

Oregonians also know that a true friend has a responsibility to tell someone when they are making a huge mistake. That is why Oregon Wild, and other public lands, wildlife, and salmon conservation groups in Oregon, are strongly opposing a proposal by Rep. DeFazio to re-link federal funding for county governments in Western Oregon to logging, including clear-cutting, on public lands. And why we are strongly urging him to share the legislative language of his proposal with the public, and not try and move such a plan through a back-room deal with House Republican leaders.

There is no denying that Rep. DeFazio, along with Reps. Schrader and Walden, are facing enormous political pressure due to the expiration of federal “county payments” legislation. For decades, counties in the Pacific Northwest received a portion of the revenue generated by clear-cutting on federal public lands. This was especially true for counties in Western Oregon that contain public Bureau of Land Management lands. Known as “O&C Lands”, as much as 75% of the money generated from clear-cutting on these public lands historically went to rural county budgets. The epidemic of logging on these and other public lands in the 1970s and 1980s inflated county budgets, but also polluted thousands of miles of Oregon rivers and severely damaged fish and wildlife habitat.

Strong public opposition finally brought an end to rampant clear-cutting in the 1990s – and the money going to counties from timber sales shrank. Congress cushioned the fall by instituting “Secure Rural Schools” legislation, also known as County Payments, in the year 2000. Aimed at helping transition the counties away from dependence on federal subsidies, this legislation expired in January. A gridlocked Congress has thus far failed to extend the program, and many counties have made no provision for addressing the loss of federal subsidies.

Some in Congress, including Sens. Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, are working on a short-term extension of county payments to give local, state and federal leaders time to work on a permanent solution. Unfortunately, DeFazio, Schrader and Walden have not been working to advance a similar measure in the House. Instead, they have partnered with House Republican leaders who wish to exploit the county payments impasse to weaken safeguards for clean water and wildlife. Despite historic low demand for timber, they are promoting the idea that counties can clear-cut their way to prosperity. Worse, they have thus far refused to make specific details of the plan public.

What little has been revealed about this logging plan isn't pretty. Approximately 1.2 million acres of federal Bureau of Land Management lands -- forests that belong to all Americans -- would be put into a corporate "timber trust." These lands would then be managed under weak state logging rules rather than more protective federal standards. State rules allow clear-cutting, don't require scientific analysis of logging's effects on salmon and other endangered species, and fail to include important Clean Water Act safeguards. The rules are so weak that even the timber-industry dominated Oregon Board of Forestry now admits they must be modernized.

DeFazio and others have attempted to defend the plan by pointing out that trees over 120 years old could be spared. That is small consolation given that the clear-cutting proposal would mean removing 1.2 million acres from the science-based management of the Northwest Forest Plan. Worse, it would undermine decades of work to build consensus around sustainable forest management practices. Groups like Oregon Wild have long supported the conservation-based approach of forest managers in the Siuslaw National Forest, and would like to see their logging and restoration model expanded. Unfortunately, the DeFazio plan is the exact opposite of this responsible, balanced approach.

Perhaps most troubling is that this logging plan is unlikely to generate the revenue county governments are seeking. Timber prices are at record lows, and the only growth in timber demand these days is coming from China. And as Gov. John Kitzhaber has noted, it is not in Oregon's interest to become the timber colony of Asia.

These are the sorts of problems that public hearings, and the normal legislative process, help uncover, which is why it is imperative that DeFazio, Schrader and Walden come clean on their legislation. They should share it with the public and schedule hearings both in Washington, D.C., and in Oregon, rather than leaving the legislative calendar in the hands of House Republican leaders. They should commit to an independent scientific analysis of the plan, as well as an economic analysis of its viability.

Most important, they should be willing to listen to Oregonians' concerns and explore alternatives for county funding that don't sacrifice our clean water, wildlife and public lands.

We all understand the game the Republicans are playing: blocking Obama's agenda, and then asking why he's not accomplishing much. It's politics, and not unique.

What is unique is the level of obstructionism by the Republicans on Obama's judicial nominees. In his State of the Union address, Obama called for it to end. From People for the American Way:

Roughly ten percent of federal court seats are or will soon be vacant, including 32 seats that have been designated “judicial emergencies” by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts... President Obama’s circuit court nominees have waited an average of 136 days for a vote from the full Senate after approval from the Judiciary Committee, in contrast to an average of 30 days for President Bush’s nominees.

From The New York Times:

The Constitutional Accountability Center in Washington said the federal judiciary had had more than 750 days with at least 80 vacancies on the federal bench, which adds to the workload of an already overburdened judiciary. “Never before has the number of vacancies risen so sharply and remained so high for so long during a president’s term,” wrote the group.

What can we do? Add your voice to those Americans who want judicial nominees moved forward. Call Oregon's Senators, and urge them to push Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to bring the nominees up for a vote.

As Chief Justice Roberts noted, "Vacancies cannot remain at such high levels indefinitely without eroding the quality of justice that traditionally has been associated with the federal judiciary."

Take thirty seconds today to make a call:

Senator Wyden in DC: 202-224-5244, Portland: 503-326-7525, Eugene: 541-431-0229, Medford: 541-858-5122, Salem: 503-589-4555

Senator Merkley in DC: 202-224-3753, Portland: 503-326-3386, Eugene: 541-465-6750, Medford: 541-608-9102, Salem: 503-362-8102

OK, I'll give credit where credit is due. This is a little funny.

A little weird and creepy, too, but that's clearly part of the gag.

I won't describe the video in detail. You just have to watch it. Go ahead, I'll wait.

...

Here's what I don't get: There's all kinds of mentions here about Stephen Colbert running in South Carolina. Doesn't Team Cornilles know that South Carolina was, like, forever ago? Today is Florida. I guess we can excuse them for not paying very close attention.

But they're obviously not going to get any "Colbert bump" -- the earliest that Colbert can mention Cornilles is on tonight's show, which airs first at 11:30 p.m. Eastern, a half-hour after polls close here in Oregon.

Cute video. Shows some gumption. Kind of a weird thing to make the very last thing that voters remember about a short-lived and unsuccessful political career.

James O'Keefe is the right-wing activist that uses selectively-edited hidden-camera video to punk organizations like National Public Radio, Planned Parenthood, and ACORN.

He likes to claim that he's a journalist, but nothing could be further from the truth. What he does is more like Ashton Kutcher's Punk'd than Mike Wallace's 60 Minutes.

As the Washington Post's Michael Gerson wrote last year:

In [the NPR] case, O’Keefe did not merely leave a false impression; he manufactured an elaborate, alluring lie. ... There is no ethical canon or tradition that would excuse such deception on the part of a professional journalist. ... These tactics are not a new brand of gonzo journalism. They are a sophisticated version of the political dirty trick.

Nevermind this bizarre episode:

[T]he latest stunt by James O'Keefe -- this time involving a female CNN reporter, a boat and lots of sex toys. ... O'Keefe's plan? To lure her to his floating "palace of pleasure" (filled with champagne, strawberries and sex toys), hit on her and secretly film the whole Borat-like exchange.

Which is why it's so troublesome that Rep. Bruce Hanna, the Republican co-Speaker, is standing beside O'Keefe and speaking at a day-long workshop on Wednesday called "Making an Impact: Citizen Watchdog Training with James O'Keefe".

Last year, the 30-30 tie in the Oregon House could have been a disaster. Instead, Hanna and the Democratic co-Speaker, Rep. Arnie Roblan, managed to work together and keep things from going off the rails.

And starting Wednesday, the Oregon House will try and reprise that procedural comity for the next month. For the life of me, I can't figure out why Rep. Hanna would take time out of the first day of the new legislative session to hang out with one of the most divisive and ethically-challenged figures in American politics today.

Just a couple of weeks ago, O'Keefe's pals appear to have attempted to commit voter fraud in the New Hampshire primary. From Think Progress's Scott Keyes:

The undercover video shows unnamed individuals working at O’Keefe’s behest approaching polling stations throughout New Hampshire. After poll workers asked for the person’s name, O’Keefe’s agents gave the name of a voter who died within the past few weeks, before then receiving a ballot to vote. The individuals asked the poll workers if they needed ID to prove their identity, and when poll workers confirmed that they did not, O’Keefe’s men insisted on returning to their car to retrieve their ID and returned the ballot.

However, in highlighting the non-problem of voter fraud in New Hampshire and elsewhere, O’Keefe’s agents appear to have committed voter fraud themselves.

And I've heard rumors that he's been trolling Washington County, trying to get his hands on a ballot.

Really, Speaker Hanna, this is how you want to open the February session?

I've already posted here about the reports of Washington County Chair Andy Duyck's efforts to blackball local citizens from boards & committees if they don't subscribe to Duyck's political and policy agenda. Unsurprisingly, Duyck's got some help when it comes to eliminating citizens from the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC).

Hillsboro Mayor Jerry Willey told me that MPAC isn't functioning now the way it was designed: to be the advisory committee on land use to Metro. Willey says that Metro is no longer following the input of MPAC. "MPAC's focus should be on insight and research to assist Metro. Their focus has been lost in the last few years," Willey said. "As incoming Chair, I was asking mayors and county commissioners to reevaluate who represents them."

Willey also said that he has felt that members weren't representing their jurisdictions. "County chairs and mayors want MPAC members to reflect the policies that they support." He also said that people who have served on committees a long time can be less efficient or engaged. But he did admit that the current Washington County citizen representative, Nathalie Darcy, makes every meeting.

This is an odd position to me. Why bother to have this committee at all if their job is simply to rubber stamp the wishes of mayors and county commissioners? If the desire is simply to get their input and advice, it seems like Metro would have created a committee specifically for that purpose. But they didn't. They created a committee that contains citizens who can bring their citizen point of view to Metro.

Unfortunately, Metro Chair Tom Hughes seems to be on board with the scrubbing out of members as well.

Nick Christensen, Metro news reporter:

Hughes said he's wanted to re-consider the citizen membership of MPAC since he took office, but the issue was on the back burner in 2011. His staff said they had been working on the final touches of replacing MPAC's citizen representatives – two of whom are the longest-serving members of MPAC – since November.

But political issues in Washington County, where anti-sprawl activists have been battling with Washington County mayors who generally support policies that favor outward expansion, have cast a shadow over Hughes' intentions for a discussion about the tenure of MPAC members.

All this serves to do is further marginalize citizens in Washington County from their various levels of government. As it stands, urban unincorporated Washington County residents are on the verge of being completely locked out of any substantive voice in local government, with the exception of one County Commissioner, Greg Malinowski (and yes, this includes Metro--urban unincorporated is vastly underrepresented on policy by Kathryn Harrington). Malinowski finds himself on the losing end of virtually every major land use vote on the County Commission, including those that directly impact his district. Nathalie Darcy is a citizen on MPAC who has been representing urban unincorporated WaCo residents--and she's being shown the door because she does just that.

By Carla "KC" Hanson of Portland, Oregon. KC is the Chair of the Multnomah County Democratic Party.

It seems on the left we usually have more difficulty putting our zeal in check and focusing in on the task at hand - electing the good folk that will cast votes for the people rather than play conduit for corporate power.

We lefties love nuance, details and the intricacy of policy; we are unabashedly critical, and unafraid to call out our folk when we perceive bad behavior. Whether we are keeping ourselves honest, or simply hypersensitive and jittery from years of right-wing political lashes, we tend to bark and yelp at one another a LOT. We then have a tough time shifting into ELECTION gear.

... and the GOP just loves it when we do.

While I admit it's a nice change to see the knuckleheads on the right slamming one another as they slog thru endless debates, primaries and caucuses, now is not the time sit back and enjoy the show.

Ignored by the national press - yes, even our pals on MNSBC - the Oregon CD 1 race has received no where near the pub that NY 26 nor NY 9 did when those vacated seats went up for grabs. The GOP storm has just about completely obscured this race, but it's no less important. We stay lazy, distracted or discontented at our own peril.

Right now, CD 1 Republicans have returned more of their ballots than have Democrats and other progressive folk. Ballots are DUE Tuesday at 8 p.m. We need to be sure our CD 1 friends and neighbors drop their ballots off TODAY at their local library or county elections office.

If you are CD 1, get that &^&$# ballot in! (Please). If you are NOT in CD 1, there are still plenty of ways you can lend a hand.

Democratic victories of 2012 start here and now. Just VOTE, baby!

I imagine it is hard seeing other states and our neighboring state of Washington pass marriage equity laws while our liberal bastion of Portland still treats our LGBTQ community as separate. Actually, I know it’s hard.

I watch dear friends committed and in love, wanting to be married. They can’t get married in Oregon. I watch them in their homes, going on vacations and raising their children, and wearing rings. But THAT ring – the “Every kiss begins with K” that taunt us in commercials and that blubbery guy on the radio who apparently has the best diamonds in Oregon – that ring can’t happen where we live. It breaks my heart. I could marry my cousin if I wanted without a care (or a drivers license) but same sex couples have to show ID and get a notary-approved document just to have a domestic partnership at their local county offices.

Something is clearly wrong with this picture.

I was frustrated when Basic Rights Oregon decided against a ballot measure in 2012 to repeal the constitutional amendment that allowed bigotry a permanent place in our state. I thought, “I’m ready to fight!” My feathers and feathers of many of you were ruffled. I can’t contemplate a state like Iowa passing marriage equity while Oregon waits in the wings. I mean…I can put a bird on it but not a ring on it? But passion alone does not win elections. And passion alone won’t repeal a constitutional amendment and add another amendment at the same time, in the same year, without drama. That is the hard reality of our ballot measure process.

I support Basic Rights Oregon – our only statewide political organization focused solely on LGBTQ equity – in their decision to wait to launch the marriage equity battle. As a loyal supporter said to them: “Waiting is hard. Failing is harder." Failing is hard and it has repercussions farther than our safe city of Portland. The lesson of Measure 36 was that we have to make sure there is money and support to protect every person that supports equity and any attempt to repeal political action can be defended. We are heeding that lesson.

So here is what you can do now: Talk to the people in your lives about what marriage equity means to you. If you are straight, realize the power that you have to change the opinion of people in your life. Support organizations dedicated to political change so that when a marriage equity campaign is ready to launch, it will be fully funded and able to take on any challenge from those who wish to continue to use our personal lives as weapons against acceptance and progress.

It hurts, but if we lay the right groundwork we can make the change permanent. Let’s celebrate our neighbors to the north and let’s make sure they can celebrate us in 2014.

By Scott Moore of Portland, Oregon. Scott is the Communications Director for Our Oregon and was a political reporter and news editor for the Portland Mercury. Previously, he contributed "Trivial Pursuit: That's Some Har-ible Reporting"

Just a day after having to do an embarrassing about face on a truly bizarre ruling, PolitiFact Oregon is back with a new entry that’s even more troubling.

Today’s PolitiFact Oregon criticizes the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for saying that “Rob Cornilles supports privatizing Medicare.” Actually, what the DCCC said was that Cornilles supports “turning over some of Medicare to private insurance companies”. In a partially rephrased Tweet, the DCCC asked “Did you know Cornilles said he'd support turning parts of Medicare over to private insurance companies?”

Reporter Janie Har and PolitiFact Oregon ruled these statements “Mostly False.” But in order to do so, they had to utterly conflate the statements to absurd levels, claiming that Democrats said Cornilles wants to turn Medicare entirely over to private companies and cut government out.

The fact is, Cornilles wants to open Medicare to private insurance companies in order to increase competition with the public program. By its very definition, turning over some of Medicare to private insurance companies IS increasing the privatization at the program. This should be obvious to any reasonable observer.

But Har made up a new argument -- that Democrats are contending that Cornilles wants to completely remove government from Medicare, and then ruled it “Mostly False.” The real controversy between the campaigns centers on Cornilles' claim that he is strongly against privatization while being in favor of proposals that do just that. PolitiFact’s problem is their unwillingness to focus on the real issues of the campaign and then actually fact-check them. Of course, it’s hard to be an objective referee for a fight you are participating in, which seems to be the main problem with the Oregonian these days.

Seriously, what is going on over there at PolitiFact Oregon? This isn’t fact checking; it’s weird semantics and word games to the benefit of the Cornilles campaign. And coming literally a day after the embarrassing reversal they had to make on another strange ruling, you’d think Har and her editors would be more vigilant about checking actual facts.

It’s not Oregon-specific, but New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has joined the chorus of voices pointing out the increasing bizarreness of PolitiFact:

Unfortunately, Politifact has lost sight of what it was supposed to be doing. Instead of simply saying whether a claim is true, it’s trying to act as some kind of referee of what it imagines to be fair play: even if a politician says something completely true, it gets ruled only partly true if Politifact feels that the fact is being used to gain an unfair political advantage. In the case of Obama’s job statement, Politifact first called it only half true, then upgraded that to mostly true, not because Obama said anything factually incorrect, but because Politifact perceived Obama as trying to imply that he was responsible for the gains.

Big news tonight in Portland city races: AFSCME Local 189, the largest city employee union with 940 members, has endorsed Jefferson Smith for mayor and Mary Nolan for city commissioner.

From the press release (with paragraphs re-ordered):

"Jefferson has been working with us in the legislature to move a progressive agenda protecting voting rights and creating transparency in government. Additionally, he carried the bill that directed state agencies to cut middle management and direct the budget to go to front line services. With potential cuts on the horizon at the City, this resonates with our members," said Local Vice President, Mark Gipson

"As a State Representative Jefferson Smith has a proven track record of consensus building, without compromising on important issues such as protecting voting rights, and creating transparency in government. He has shown through his work to limit middle management and focus budgets on front line services that he is willing to challenge the status quo."

"Eileen is an interesting candidate... many of our members liked her. In the end we felt she was untested ..."

Members also appreciated that Charlie Hales was willing to reach out and participate in the endorsement process have conversations with them. However, many of the members were seeking a change in leadership...

On the city commissioner race:

Mary Nolan was chosen over the incumbent, Amanda Fritz, for her experience working at the city, her work on Ways and Means at the State Legislature and her consistent record of standing up for all working families. Although many of the members working at the Bureau of Emergency Communications and Office of Neighborhood Involvement were supportive of Amanda, the call for change at City Hall combined with Mary's record of support for working people was ultimately persuasive.

AFSCME Local 189 also endorsed Steve Novick.

A final important note from the press release: "Local 189's endorsement paves the way for AFSCME Council 75 to endorse."

More from The Oregonian.

And The Portland Mercury.

By Scott Moore of Portland, Oregon. Scott is the Communications Director for Our Oregon and was a political reporter and news editor for the Portland Mercury. Previously, he contributed Sorry, PolitiFact Oregon, but you need to check your facts.

If I was the editor of the national PolitiFact enterprise, I’d be alarmed at the amount of damage its Oregon branch has been doing to the brand for many months, even violating PolitiFact’s own stated principles. The recent output from PolitiFact Oregon and its chief Oregonian reporter, Janie Har, should make it clear that they’ve ditched the fact-checking mission in favor of an embarrassing obsession with selectively focusing on political items that amplify Har's apparent personal bias.

Late yesterday, that obsession blew up in their face, when Har had to reverse a “ruling” on a claim that was meaningless to begin with.

Here’s the background: Last Thursday’s Oregonian Metro front page featured a pair of PolitiFacts penned by Har, one giving Suzanne Bonamici a “Pants on Fire” ruling and one giving Rob Cornilles a “True” ruling.

Bonamici’s offense? In a press release, the Bonamici campaign highlighted the fact that some of the evidence the Cornilles campaign provided to PolitiFact as the basis of their taxes attack against Bonamici included votes that weren't either taxes or fees. Har chose to inflate this misunderstood point into the full focus of her wrath, ignoring the other points made by the Bonamici campaign. Lost in Har’s reporting was any examination of the main controversy, which was Cornilles airing TV commercials falsely claiming that Bonamici was in favor of cutting Medicare.

But it gets even better (and by “better,” I actually mean “worse”). Out of all of the many, many claims made by the Cornilles campaign and his surrogates, this is what Har and the PolitiFact team chose to “fact check”:

“Rob Cornilles has been endorsed by 20 local mayors, including Independent, Democratic and Republican.”

They ruled it “True”.

By running these pieces side by side, Har and PolitiFact Oregon were trying to send a clear message to the paper’s readers and the voters of CD1.

But here’s where it gets embarrassing: The “Independent” mayor endorsing Cornilles is actually non-affiliated, not a member of the Independent Party of Oregon. Har reversed the ruling yesterday from True to False based on that discovery. The reversal shined a floodlight on the fact that it was a ridiculously trivial “fact” to “check” in the first place.

In both cases, Har chose to pick out insignificant, obscure statements that have little to no bearing on the issues of the election. In Bonamici’s case, this allowed the Oregonian to stamp a “Pants on Fire” label over a statement that was generally true. In Cornilles’s case, PolitiFact picked a statement that isn’t disputed by anyone, and basically serves as a free campaign ad for the Republican by amplifying a message from an ad supporting him.

To put it more bluntly: Har’s apparent bias has been made obvious by her bizarre, nitpicky choices of claims to analyze, and then by how she treats those claims.

In doing so, Har and her editors appear to be violating PolitiFact’s own statement of principles:

Because we can't possibly check all claims, we select the most newsworthy and significant ones.

In deciding which statements to check, we ask ourselves these questions:

...Is the statement significant? We avoid minor "gotchas"’ on claims that obviously represent a slip of the tongue.

And:

Context matters -- We examine the claim in the full context, the comments made before and after it, the question that prompted it, and the point the person was trying to make.

Neither of the PolitiFact entries in last Thursday’s paper lived up to those principles. They were far from the most newsworthy or significant claims made by either campaign, and the overall context was ignored.

If the goal of PolitiFact is to elevate political discourse and give readers a fuller understanding of their electoral choices, PolitiFact Oregon is failing.

The sleepy media presence in Washington County may be waking up. From today's Hillsboro Argus:

I couldn't find an online version of this image. This is a photo of it. It's by cartoonist Dan Adams for the Argus.

Rarely do I see any fundamental criticism of Washington County government in the Argus. Usually it's just nutty rightwing ramblings by columnist Jayne Carroll who has little or nothing to say about local government (unless it's to take shots at Kitzhaber). The editorials don't go there either.

In context, this is a tremendous shot across the bow at Duyck. I hope it's not the last. Duyck needs to end his vendetta against his own constituency immediately.

By Jennifer Williamson of Portland, Oregon. Jennifer is an attorney and public safety reform leader running in the Democratic primary for HD 36 in West Portland. For more information, visit JenniferForOregon.com.

Over the last several weeks, Governor Kitzhaber’s Commission on Public Safety has received a lot of attention over the release of its report calling for a hard look at Oregon’s public safety system. I, along with many others, am pleased this issue is receiving this long over-due attention. For the last 3 years, a group of non-profit organizations, unions, and concerned Legislators and citizens have worked together as part of the Oregon Coalition for Safety & Savings (OCSS) to formulate policy alternatives to our one-size-fits-all incarceration system and the enormous impact it has had on every other segment of our state’s budget.

The OCSS is committed to supporting the most effective public safety policies so that our limited dollars are invested wisely. We are committed to keeping Oregonians safe and know that Oregon can do better when it comes to our spending on corrections.

The membership of the OCSS includes a wide range of individuals and organizations who understand the need to decrease our spending on prisons and reinvest those savings into education, human services, community corrections, victim services, mental health, and addiction treatment. Members of the Oregon Coalition for Safety and Savings include:

• Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People with Disabilities
• American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon
• Association of Oregon Community Mental Health Programs
• The Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde
• Human Services Coalition of Oregon
• League of Women Voters of Oregon
• National Association of Social Workers (Oregon Chapter)
• Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs
• Oregon Business Association
• Oregon Coalition Against Domestic & Sexual Violence
• Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyers Association
• Oregon Education Association
• Oregon Prevention Education & Recovery Association
• Partnership for Safety and Justice
• SEIU, Local 503
• Self Enhancement, Inc.
• Stand for Children
• Urban League
• Youth, Rights & Justice

As one of the leaders of this powerful coalition, I have focused on sounding the alarm on the growing cost of corrections. I have worked with the group on drafting policy recommendations supported by evidence-based practices that will actually make Oregonians safer. OCSS is continually working to prevent so-called “solutions” that have proven ineffective and costly in other states. These failed approaches include balancing the budgets on the backs of Department of Corrections’ employees, allowing for dangerous overcrowding of facilities, and the privatization of correctional institutions.

Studies show that investing our limited dollars in education, drug and alcohol treatment, mental health services, programs that stabilize families, and transition programs are better investments than continuing to over-incarcerate to the tune of $30,000 per inmate per year--almost as much as a year’s tuition at a private college.

As the Legislature reconvenes in February and searches for additional savings in the budget, I hope that Legislators will continue to work with the OCSS to find sound policy solutions, and save money. If they don’t, Oregon will continue on an unsustainable path to spending an additional $600 million on corrections. This staggering figure includes building 2 new prisons over the next 10 years and comes at a time when our crime rate is at a 40-year low and the Legislature is making damaging cuts to education, health care, and other vital services.

The agenda of the Oregon Coalition for Safety and Savings compliments the work that the Commission on Public Safety has been preparing for the 2013 legislative session. Between now and then, you’ll be hearing more from the Coalition and the Commission on what Oregon needs to do to make our public safety system even better. Oregon has a lot to be proud of when it comes to our public safety policies, but also a lot that needs to change. Max Williams, the recently retired director of Corrections knew it, and the Coalition and Commission do too.

Now is the time to make the public safety changes Oregon needs and we have the right leadership and coalition to make it happen.

Big news today: the 25th Washington state senator announced her support of a marriage equality law, meaning they have the votes to pass a bill, leading to a probable ballot fight. While six states have marriage equality laws, our friends to the north could become the first state to pass equality at the ballot.

Senator Haugen's statement is particularly poignant, as she speaks to the generational issue, the religion issue, and the family issue, all of which are likely to be major questions during the campaign:

All of us enjoy the benefits of being Americans, but none of us holds a monopoly on what it means to be an American. Ours is truly a big tent, and while the tent may grow and shrink according to the political winds of the day, it should never shrink when it comes to our rights as individuals.

From The Stranger:

State senator Mary Margaret Haugen has announced that she's in... because "my choice is to allow all men and women in our state to enjoy the same privileges that are so important in my life."

Haugen's is the key 25th vote required to push the pivotal marriage equality bill through the Washington State Senate—the house is already secured—and the governor is prepared to sign the bill into law... Unless something shifts in the weeks before the vote, the larger campaign for marriage equality is on.

[T]he real question, assuming religious extremists succeed in placing this on the ballot (and they likely will), is whether Washington voters will make us the first state in history to approve same-sex marriage at the polls.

This is what leadership looks like. The burden is on the Washington legislature and voters to pass their law. Once those hurdles are cleared, we'll be even more eager in Oregon, hopefully with the polling and financial resources need to pass equality into law here.

A fitting bit of news, one week after MLK Day. As Martin Luther King, Jr. said: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” And as Claudia Rosett wrote, "King was not sitting around waiting for that arc to bend."

Update: To clarify, other states have passed these laws legislatively, and same-sex marriages have occurred legally in Oregon under Coquille tribal law. In Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticut, the courts found marriage equality was required. The legislatures of Vermont, Maine and New York passed marriage equality laws, as did Washington DC, and Connecticut's legislature passed one post-court order. The presumption in Washington state is the law will be referred to the voters by anti-equality forces gathering signatures.