Loaded Orygun

We've moved!

2007-07-15T08:18:00.000-07:00

Goodbye Blogger..hello community blog!

Loaded Orygun is no longer a blogspot blog. Starting today, we've moved to LoadedOrygun.net.

See you there.

Showing Portland the Love--Times Four

2007-07-14T12:22:00.000-07:00

It's summer, which means it's time for tourism articles about what a great place Portland is. I dedicate these links to Jack Bogdanski:

Would it surprise you to know the town named North America's "Best Big City" (according to Money magazine) is Portland, Oregon? Luxury hotels, natural beauty, theaters and local attractions combine to create a sophisticated city that's quickly gaining the attention of the entire nation.
(American Chronicle)
"Portland bewitches travelers, rain or shine..." (CNN Travel)
The Portland streetcar works, bring it to LA! (OK, that one's for an LA audience, but it's written by PDX developers Homer Williams and Dike Dame, who certainly are streetcar believers--given the profit they've realized from it.)
Portland is for (lesbian) lovers! (The Advocate)

Suck it, haters!

Shafting in Progress on M37 Claim

2007-07-14T12:14:00.000-07:00

More bad news from our friends Brian and Laurel Hines, who are helping lead their neighbors against a well-sucking development that the Marion County commissioners seem hell-bent to approve:

[H]ere's the worst part, the most outrageous outrage. Commissioner Janet Carlson pointed it out at the Board meeting:

This issue is complicated by the Measure 37 referendum [Measure 49]. If this wasn't the case, different decisions might be made.

Thanks for telling it like it is, Commissioner Carlson.

But you're being generous toward your colleagues when you said "maybe." It's obvious that "almost certainly" would be more accurate. Obvious, because this was the big concern of Brentano and Milne at the meeting where the Laack subdivision was approved.

They were deeply concerned about whether the Measure 37 applicant would be able to move ahead with the subdivision if a Hydro Study of the water situation was required, as the county ordinance demands.

They were told that a Study would extend well past the effective date of the Measure 37 fix (Measure 49), which would mean that only three homes could be built on this groundwater limited farmland.

So Brentano and Milne voted to allow 42 more wells in our neighborhood, even though independent water experts hired by the county said this would put surrounding wells and springs at high risk. They cared a lot about the Measure 37 applicant. They didn't care at all about the rights of hundreds of people already living here.

That's an outrage.

Politics over science--hmmm...where have I heard THAT before? I just can't recall. We agree with Brian that the Laack claim is a prime example for the M49 fix supporters to highlight.

OSC to LDS: How Rich ARE You, Anyway?

2007-07-14T12:05:00.000-07:00

This may be one of the more ingenious ways to induce a settlement in recent memory:

The Oregon Supreme Court rejected an effort by the LDS Church to withhold financial information from the lawyers for a man who claims a home teacher frequently molested him about 20 years ago.

Despite the legal defeat, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints did not immediately release the detailed financial information about its net worth, The Oregonian newspaper reported.

Kelly Clark, an attorney for the Oregon man suing the church, said it would be good for a jury to have the information before considering his request for $45 million in punitive damages. A trial is scheduled for Aug. 6.

"A jury needs to know the entire financial context to know whether a punitive award is too much or sufficient or not enough," Clark said.

The LDS church sought emergency relief from a trial court order to turn over the financial information, but the Oregon Supreme Court late Monday rejected the appeal. The pretrial decision was reached on narrow pretrial grounds and doesn't mean the court would not ultimately side with the church's position that the Constitution protects its right to keep financial information private.

That last part's important; it may never come to the point where the church is forced to open their books.

But what it does is put enormous pressure on them to settle, as they did in 2001 for another Oregon man who claimed he was abused by an LDS Sunday school teacher--an eerily similar case as the current one being handled for the plaintiff by attorney Kelly Clark. Not only is Clark now holding the cards on whether the church caves in on another sex abuse case, he has already named his price to call: $45 million. Church officials may not believe avoiding a trial and negative publicity in this case is by itself worth that kind of jing, but the ramifications of revealing global asset holdings may well be worth the retreat:

Mormonism is unique in the way it collects tithes and offerings from local church units into a common pool at its Salt Lake City headquarters, then disperses the money to areas as needed. An all-volunteer clergy governs the church, but chapels and temples, missionary allowances and educator salaries are paid out of general church funds.
Because LDS assets are listed together, rather than by region, financial disclosure of any part of the assets would reveal all the church's holdings. To Mormon leaders, that's an unfair expectation.
"I'm not aware of any group or denomination that would funnel all money into the central repository. That would be totally unheard of in Protestantism," Busby said. "Most denominations require that local churches pay a percentage or per capita amount to headquarters, but usually only 10 or 15 percent used to fund headquarters operations."
Even the Catholic Church, which has a centralized leadership at the Vatican, is financed at the diocesan level. That's why several U.S. dioceses have filed for bankruptcy after being hit with millions of dollars in abuse awards, but no one asked to see all the Vatican's records.

The rest of that article also has a good treatment on why the Church stopped revealing their finances in the mid 20th Century. So, it's not just what the Mormons in Oregon have that would necessarily be revealed, it would be their holdings worldwide. As I said, I think Clark has really done a smooth job of putting the LDS behind the 8-ball on this one.

And is that a surprise, really? If you don't recognize the name, he's most recently famous for helping orchestrate the enshrinement of discrimination into the Oregon Constitution regarding same-sex marriage--but he's about as hard to pigeonhole as they come. A sex offending former alcoholic who ruined a promising career in Salem as the rep from my District 38, (having originally ousted current Lake Oswego mayor Judie Hammerstad) he's certainly bounced back and enjoys taking on big interests like governments and churches. He's handed it to the Catholics a number of times, so he doesn't play favorites when it comes to denomination. Whatever else he is he's canny, and whether or not the LDS has to show what they know, Clark is likely to see a tasty payday--and a win for his client. And if the allegations are true, $45 million is easy apology money for the LDS, so they get no sympathy.

By the way, this isn't the first time the OSC has pissed off the Mormons. Two years ago they ruled that the City of West Linn had the right to prevent them from building a church in a residential area. No Christmas cards for the Justices this year, either!

Michele Malkin and Lars Larson get their panties in a twist over PDX airport art

2007-07-13T16:43:00.000-07:00

It's been awhile since I've flown out of PDX airport, but it appears at least one piece of art out there has Michelle Malkin and Lars Larson all bunched up.

Malkin trots out her usual bloviating bitchiness about how public art shouldn't be offensive to anyone:

Christian-bashing? Check.

Anti-gun message? Check.

Anti-war zealotry? Check.

Anti-capitalism symbolism? Check.

American flag mockery? Check.

You'll understand if I have little sympathy for Ms. Malkin's goofball opinion, as entitled to it as she is.

We've spent the last seven years with an administration that has made a mockery of Christianity while shooting thousands of innocent civilians overseas in their ridiculous, trumped-up war while wrapping themselves in the flag. And Malkin scratches her brain cells wondering why public art is reflecting this?

Malkin's attention was brought to the matter by former Oregonian and winger gadfly Lars Larson, whose issues of compensation are only eclipsed by the mouth he puts that cigar in.

It fascinates me how the murder of innocent civilians doesn't cause these people to bat an eyelash. But art that reflects a large swath of the public consciousness is fodder for outrage.

Jeez.

TJ's update, 7/14 12:30pm--
Malkin has updated her blog with the bad (good) news: Port of Portland officials aren't taking it down. So sad, too bad. The Taliban doesn't live here, honey.

Novick Makes the Rounds

2007-07-13T16:33:00.000-07:00

For those of you who like tracking Camp Novick as they traipse about Oregon, here's tonight's agenda courtesy of the campaign:

I'll be in Corvallis this eve for a house party hosted by former State Senator and Democratic Leader Cliff Trow, then in Astoria Sunday for a Democratic ice cream social.

Mmmmm.....ice cream....

Steve also clued us in on some upcoming media:

Listen closely to NPR next week - they're doing a profile of Gordon Smith, and Colin Fogarty interviewed me yesterday; hopefully they'll use some of it, and we'll get some national exposure.

NPR is doing a profile of Gordon Smith? Will they be the first mainstream media outlet to do the reporting of Smith incahoots with the White House in circumventing the law in the Klamath Basin? Will we get actual--REAL--news and not just some fluff piece about frozen fries and Prell hair?

(fingers crossed)

TJ's Update, 11pm--
Thought it might be useful to include this Reg-Guard profile of Novick out on the hustings in his hometown of Cottage Grove.

"It really is a grassroots, populous campaign at this point," said Jake Weigler, Novick's campaign manager. "At this point it's really about connecting with voters - not only getting to know them, but allowing them to actually engage him."

Novick said he's been encouraged by the response he's received so far, both from media coverage and Oregon voters. The Portland resident plans to continue traveling across the state in the coming months, speaking at intimate gatherings and events as he did Thursday, when about 20 people turned out.

While he's started small in the early stages of his campaign, he said his basic strategy of "just telling the truth" and connecting with voters will continue through the primary in May 2008.

Hunt retains Dem House Leader job

2007-07-13T08:31:00.001-07:00

Word came in late last night that House Majority Leader Dave Hunt ran an uncontested election to keep his job.

Hunt helped lead what is considered by many to be one of the most productive state legislative sessions in years.

TJ and I have been planning to do a write-up about the session but have been bogged down in other things. Hopefully we'll get to it next week.

In the meantime, congrats Rep. Hunt.

Coming Sunday: LoadedOrygun.Net

2007-07-12T11:15:00.000-07:00

It's been months of teasing. Before the elections we said "after the elections." After the elections we said "after the holidays." After the holidays we actually tried a switch to a new platform, but ultimately failed to achieve anything but shutting down a couple of host servers. And then we waited, mostly to see if we'd come up lucky on another round of BlogPac grant funding for state-based community blogs. And sure enough, we have. And so starting with Sunday's Spanning the State, we will have a new home, a new design, and a new format. Where do you go now?

LoadedOrygun.net

And what is a community blog, anyway? The best two examples are probably DailyKos and MyDD, two of the largest political blogs in the world. The idea is that users can create their own account and very nearly become just as much a part of the site as the owner-authors. Sure, the drivel on the main column will continue for us, but down the sidebar other regular Oregonians and interested parties will (we hope) start their own blog posts, known as diaries, with topic and content of their choosing.

BlogPac is funding people like us in different states with a specific eye towards fostering these kinds of sites, which become hubs for activism and a place to check in and exchange with other like-minded folk. It's also--when it is well populated and active--a pretty major change in role for the owners. Not only does it create a built-in group of sycophants and detractors to hash over every one of your posts, but should whatever they say in their diaries make the news for its offensiveness or controversy, the world will look to YOU to explain what's happening on YOUR blog. Never mind that you were asleep at the time, watching Keith Olbermann, or perhaps refreshing the Mrs. It's your site, what are you going to do about it?

Well, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. It's been fun, Blogger--but it hasn't been real fun. So far, the new Soapblox interface seems much easier to work with; we'll be counting on you to tell us what does or doesn't work as we move forward. But we're warning you right now, we dig the new logo and banner, so if you hate it you may just have to lump it.

We hope you'll come join us starting Sunday at LoadedOrygun.net. We'll be leaving this site up for reference purposes, and holding onto a backup of the archives. But come Sunday, the lights will go dim at loadedorygun.blogspot.com--something sure to put a gleam in the eye of the radio hosts who had to trip over that name. LoadedOyrgun.net--much easier. (LO.com would be easier still, but someone is currently squatting on that address. We're on it.)

We'll see you there!

This is what I get for relying on the O. Dammit.

2007-07-12T09:32:00.000-07:00

Yesterday's musings about the upcoming candidate list for the Secretary of State race may have been flawed. My babble was based on Oregonian prognostications.

(I know. I should know better.)

Word from our tip email box (loadedorygun at gmail dot com) brings news that Jason Atkinson may in fact not be the SOS candidate for the GOP after all.

According to sources, Senator Bruce Starr (R-Hillsboro) is in the Republican on-deck circle--preparing to announce a run for Secretary of State.

Starr's district continues to trend blue--so I'm wondering if he's giving up the seat before the constituency sends him packing.

The scuttle on Atkinson is pretty rumor-ish. Word is that he has a young family to support and isn't exactly rolling in cash. Atkinson will run for reelection to the legislature and bide his time until 2010. At that point he'll decide whether to run for Governor or Congress. The rumor is that Atkinson will run for whichever office Greg Walden decides not to go for.

Ducks Un-Lose 2005 Holiday Bowl!

2007-07-11T13:43:00.000-07:00

They don't technically get a win, but the team the Oregon Ducks lost to at the 2005 Holiday Bowl can no longer claim they got a win, either:

The penalties, announced today by the NCAA, stem from a case involving two players, including the Sooners' starting quarterback, who were kicked off the team for being paid for work they had not performed at a Norman car dealership.

The Sooners went 8-4 and beat Oregon in the Holiday Bowl to end the 2005 season. Records from that season involving quarterback Rhett Bomar and offensive lineman J.D. Quinn must be vacated, the NCAA said, and coach Bob Stoops' career record will be amended to reflect the penalties, dropping it from 86-19 in eight seasons to 78-19.

Hmmm...maybe that crazy loss to the Ducks last season, likely costing the Sooners a BCS Bowl berth, was a little bit of pre-karma before the NCAA got involved.

Oklahoma vs Oregon--gotta cheat to win!

Oregonians for Relationship Equality, Straight Up

2007-07-11T13:30:00.000-07:00

If promoting civil equality for gay couples is simply part of a (hidden?) "gay agenda," it would stand to reason that since heterosexuals have nothing to gain from the agenda, few of them would bother to rally for a cause that doesn't affect them, right?

Of course, that's not the case--lots of people who are straight nonetheless take up the banner for full relational equality, both in this country and specifically in Oregon. Carla and I are both "breeders," but we've always supported same-sex marriage, and at a bare minimum equal partnership rights. There are a lot of us, more than you may think--all believing that if some of us are still held back, then the fight for liberty is not over. Fifty Oregonians, from all parts of the state, have joined to help Basic Rights Oregon educate folks on why relational equality matters to all of us, and to form a bulwark against any referendum repeal of civil unions:

We know that families come in all varieties and it is our strong belief that ALL Oregon families deserve to have the rights, responsibilities and protections necessary to keep each other safe in times of crisis.

The 50 Voices For Equality campaign is meant to demonstrate the broad cross-section of straight Oregonians who support relationship equality for Oregon's committed same-sex couples and their families. These 50 Oregonians also believe that discrimination of any kind is wrong and ought to be against the law.

From the faith and business communities, to farmers and grandparents--freedom from discrimination for gay and lesbian Oregonians is a belief shared by a large majority of Oregonians.

They've also put together a pretty cool video you can watch here, to get you to meet some of those 50 voices and hear their stories.

Walker and Brown announce for SOS. Is Atkinson next?

2007-07-11T12:13:00.001-07:00

The June 29th announcement of Vicki Walker's foray into the Secretary of State's race as reported by Harry Esteve of the O prophetically batted Kate Brown's name around as a possible candidate for the job:

Others rumored to be considering a bid for secretary of state include Senate Majority Leader Kate Brown, D-Portland, and Sen. Jason Atkinson, R-Central Point.

Just over a week later, Brown made her announcement that she was getting in.

To complete the trifecta, the aforementioned Jason Atkinson will need to wade in as well.

Hmmm...Vicki Walker, Kate Brown and Jason Atkinson.

"..one of these things is not like the other..."

Can you guess which? And can you also guess which part of this has the greatest potential for serious political entertainment value?

Gordo's Fish-Fucking Ways, In Legislative Detail

2007-07-10T11:00:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, we disinterred a TV ad Gordon Smith would probably prefer you'd forgotten about, featuring Klamath Basin farmers praising Smith for dealing with the bureaucrats and getting their water turned back on. Given the stink that's settling over the decision process to overrule the Endangered Species Act, Smith should want no part of a record where he eagerly took credit for getting the water going again, after having appealed directly to President Bush and Karl Rove for help. Alas, he hasn't had to answer many questions about that record...yet.

The supporters in the Smith ad praise him for not taking No for an answer, and certainly when not practicing his apparent evening job as a species hydrologist, Smith spent many days in Congress during the 107 Congress coming up with any number of ways to denude or subvert the intention of the Endangered Species Act, the mission of which is simply to prevent species from becoming extinct. We have not given this compendium of Smith bill activity during 2001 and 2002 the absolute fine-toothed comb treatment, but then again we haven't had to, in order to find any number of ham-handed ways he tried to lean the process in favor of the farmers and not existing law or the latest science.

For instance--remember I told you about the codicile Smith had placed in a bill in 2001, attempting to automatically elevate peer-reviewed data over that which was not? It sounds innocuous, but that was precisely the premise used by the National Academy of Sciences panel to refuse consideration of the "Hardy Phase II" flow study the original water decisions were based on. Because the study was considered a "draft," the NAS panel ruled in January 2002 that they could not accept it as the best available science. And on February 5, Smith tried to codify that very premise into not just a clause on another bill, but into its own law. (And before I leave the subject of that prior codicile, the rest of the bill also sought to bypass a mandatory Secretary of Interior review when planned actions potentially threatened critical habitat. Nice.)

Smith led the charge in compensating farmers and water distributors who lost money during the shortage, and most of the state delegation surely felt obligated to join him. Colleague Ron Wyden cosigned onto a bill to reimburse the water assessment fees and lost revenue to water providers who'd experienced shutoffs in the spring of 2001. However, even though the water was soon turned back on, everybody was also credited back for the whole year, to the tune of $5 million.

My favorite manipulation of the US Code to get money to Klamath farmers was in August 2001. Smith proposed to include under natural disaster relief status "any application of the Endangered Species Act that, in the determination of the President, causes economic hardship of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance under this Act.'" As in, say, giving water to fish under ESA instead of farmers. Floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and failed potato crops from rerouting the water--you know, natural disasters.

Just in general, Smith seemed to have it in for the fish. Apparently he didn't want Indian tribes messing things up for the farmers either; he proposed that if the Secretary of Interior designated a migrating fishway that utilities then had to account for, he or she then had to listen to proposed alternatives to the fishway, despite having already reached the conclusion to have the fishway in order to protect the habitat. He doesn't even want them spawning, dammit!

Heck, even as far back as 1998, Smith (and his House counterpart at the time Bob Smith) were threatening the government that they couldn't accept the idea that fish might get water when farmers don't:

"The Interior Department's latest water use plan is not the answer. We should keep working with the federal government to find a balance that recognizes the economic needs of southern Oregonians. This plan just doesn't get us there. It threatens our collaborative efforts and the Klamath Basin's agricultural community," Chairman Smith said.

"The Klamath Basin community has made significant inroads toward resolving difficult water rights problems in the region. A heavy hand from the federal government will only frustrate this progress. Water use in southern Oregon is too important to settle for what is at best a divisive issue," Senator Smith said.

But the king-daddy of them all, his 9th Symphony of legislative effort, was Amendment 899 to the House Interior appropriations bill of 2001. His speech on the floor dramatizes just where he's coming from when the contest is fish vs farmers, science vs emotion. His proposal? Ignore the decision and court rulings; go back to the way it was 10 years ago, when the fish didn't get first crack at the water, the farmers did. That's it--just turn back the clock and pretend no rulings or evaluative science had ever occurred. The amendment failed, but just barely, 52-48. Ballsy as it is, it may have been the most legislatively rational thing he tried. He recognized the ESA rulings as anathema to his goals, so he proposed simply repealing it. Honest, maybe, but we can still hold him accountable.

Some extended snippets from the Congressional Record as Smith introduced his amendment to turn back time to a simpler era, when we didn't give a shit if the fish lived or died, as long as people could grow potatoes (bless you Thomas.gov):

I am the first Senator to be elected from Oregon who comes from its rural parts--eastern Oregon--in 70 years. I represent all of my State, but I have a special passion to represent those rural parts that I have watched be devastated for too long by Federal action. I believe the Endangered Species Act is a noble act with noble purposes, but I believe it is being used by some to very ignoble ends.

My actions today are not to subvert the Endangered Species Act. This is not reform. This is an act asking that its terms be implemented in a way that will relieve genuine human suffering in a way that may prevent the violence that has already been visited upon Federal property in a contest between farmers and the Bureau of Reclamation for the essential ingredient to life in the West, and that is water.

What has happened to the community of Klamath Falls, by conservative estimates, will cost that county $200 million. I thank the Senator from West Virginia, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, and others, who helped me to get $20 million of relief to these people. Obviously, it is 10 percent of what is needed, even by conservative estimates.

.........

But now what we are doing is we are raising this lake 3 feet--it is a very big lake, very shallow, but it is being raised 3 feet--and cutting off all the water to farmers and fowl. It is being done to save the suckerfish, and now, while it is being saved, it is warming up. So the coho salmon that will soon be returning expecting to receive the cool waters of the Klamath will receive waters the temperature of a swimming pool. So, potentially, even the coho salmon--which is also a listed species--could be adversely affected by this biological opinion.

Well, there are two agencies of the Federal Government that are competing. One biological opinion is Fish and Wildlife with regard to the suckerfish. The other is the biological opinion of the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Commerce Department that affects the coho salmon.

Both biological opinions essentially ask for 100 percent of the water which means cutting off 100 percent of the people.

The point I want to make is that would not be necessary if the Federal Government over the last 8 years would have kept its part of the bargain and done what it could to mitigate the impact to the sucker so that farmers would not be victimized.

What I do is simply reinstate the previous biological opinions that were in effect before this spring until the Federal Government can complete action on numerous recommendations of its 1993 recovery plan. Again, they were not acted upon over the last 8 years. Why? They say budgetary reasons.

I want this to be a priority. I want the budget to fix this problem. I do not want the whole budget burden thrown on the backs of rural people, but that is what was decided to be done.

.......

This is the land, the valley. I do not know whether my colleagues can see it, but this couple is overlooking the Klamath Basin--farms being developed, hay being raised, corn being raised, potatoes being raised that fill our shelves today. Look at the hopes and dreams in the faces of these people.

This is a little girl at an assembly of people at a rally a few weeks ago. Her sign says: ``Mommy says I can't eat, but fish can.''

That is what we are driving them to, and it is not right because they are being told they are of lesser value under our law than the shortnosed sucker.

This is a picture of the shortnosed sucker. It is a bottom-feeding fish. It lives in this shallow lake. It has gone through many droughts along with the farmers. It has survived, stressed, I am sure, just as humans are stressed in conditions of drought.

I am not saying this fish has no value. I have never thought the suckerfish is very good looking, but it has a mother, and that mother, I am sure, loves this fish. I know the Native Americans in this area value this fish, and I am not suggesting in any way that we are not interested in saving this fish.

I am saying the purpose of the Endangered Species Act was not to engage in a process of rural cleansing, of throwing off their property people who had been given great promise and hope for the future. They are meeting the mailmen with foreclosure notices because the Federal Government decided it is going to breach its promise.

A lesson in how Gordon Smith can keep his Senate seat

2007-07-10T08:19:00.000-07:00

According to Portland curmudgeon Jack Bogdanski, the very bestest argument that can be made to Oregonians for the defeat of Gordon Smith is to say don't vote Republican:

You cannot vote for Gordon Smith because he is a member of the Republican Party. Over the last six and a half years, the Republican Party has set this country back at least 50 years. They have made a mess of everything, domestically and internationally. Guys like Gordon Smith had their chance to run the country, and they botched it badly. So now it's time for someone else to get a chance.

Earth to Bog: Don't quit your day job for political consulting, dude.

First of all, there are a huge number of Oregonians that self-identify as Republicans, especially once a person takes off their Rose City colored glasses and pays attention. This is a STATEWIDE contest--not a PORTLAND contest. Pitching voters to dump a guy just because he's a Republican isn't going to work anywhere north, south, east or west of Portland, in general.

Second, people who aren't political wonks aren't going to the general election polls as a rule to vote for a party. They're going to vote for a PERSON. If the main argument for dumping Smith becomes "Republicans suck", there's nothing to actually identify with Smith, personally. One of the most common findings in political polling is the notion that Congress as a body is terrible--but folks tend to like the people that they elect to represent them. Until a campaign is able to break this general liking of Smith as a Senator and perhaps all-around good guy--the "Republicans suck" meme has no resonance.

The silliest part of Bog's post is actually not his post at all...but the back-slapping in comments from the "me too!" crowd. One would think with all that stroking they'd at least have insisted on getting dinner first.

Seven Wonders of Orygun

2007-07-10T08:16:00.000-07:00

The recent vote on the New Seven Wonders of the World prompted a discussion last evening about Oregon's own wonders.

Tying Oregon's wonders to those on the world stage is problematic, mostly because the world wonders are structures. Oregon isn't exactly a mecca of architectural feat (Feel free to disabuse me of this notion in comments, btw). But it is interesting to me to consider what would be a "wonder of Oregon". I think the list ought to include whatever Oregonians say it should include--rather than restricting ourselves to man-made stuff.

Some of my thoughts:

The Painted Hills

Multnomah Falls

Kam Wah Chung Museum, John Day

Richardson's Thunder Egg Ranch

Fossil beds behind Wheeler High School in Fossil, Oregon

Devil's Punchbowl

Sea Lion Caves

As you can see, I'm way short on buildings. I've also considered that there might be some people who could make the list--Bud Clark for example.

I'd be grateful for some help adding to my list. I'm thinking about taking my progeny on some trips to appreciate their state and its wonders. Thoughts?

Torrid Goes Nationwide (Briefly) on Air America Wed

2007-07-09T18:00:00.000-07:00

Yay. After a couple weeks of waiting and watching to see if the slightest sniff of recognition passed the noses of the regular media, we're upping the ante a little. Wednesday morning KPOJ stalwart Thom Hartmann is going to give me a little time to remind America about Cheney and Rove's meddling in Oregon's elections to protect the vulnerable Gordon Smith, how Smith was deeply involved in the temporary triumph of politics over science, and how ordinary people can help keep our representatives accountable as bloggers.

You can of course listen live to AM 620 if you're within earshot of their Portland studios, tune in to one of the affiliated stations nationwide airing Thom, or stream it live from their page. I'm scheduled for shortly after 10AM, after the news.

This is a great opportunity to reinforce Gordon Smith's national profile as a vulnerable candidate, and why he should be replaced based on examples like the Klamath fiasco. If Cheney's role in Klamath is worth an investigation, and Senators like Doc Hastings and Pete Domenici can be under scrutiny for their active roles in another scandal of political end-aroundism, why isn't Smith's prominent role in a plan that was ultimately declared illegal worth discussing at dinner tables in Des Moines?

Thanks to Thom Hartmann and his staff for giving us the opportunity to be a voice in the debate! Think of the stature your words will gain with friends and neighbors when you don't have to say "I heard on a blog about Gordon Smith that he..." and watch their noses crinkle when you say "blog"--you can say "I heard it on talk radio" instead, and they will immediately accept it as gospel. I don't care whether you listen or not; just pretend you did when you spread the word about our little faux-moderate. Enabler's too light a label for Smith; Klamath proves he's part of the rot.

Gordon Takes Credit for Carrying Their Water

2007-07-09T08:30:00.000-07:00

Listen to what people were saying in 2002 about Gordon Smith's involvement in the Klamath water fiasco:

Some say you can't fight the federal government...they should meet Gordon Smith.

Water's our problem--and bureaucrats.

He took it straight to Bush.

He wouldn't take no for an answer.

That's Gordon. He stood up for us.

Gordon Smith carried our water.

Wow, for someone who wants to avoid scrutiny on this re-bubbling topic, those statements have to be a little inconvenient right now, don't they? The way these people tell it, when Gordon Smith found out that "bureaucrats" (read: federal biologists) wanted to give Klamath River water to fish instead of farmers, he not only got involved, he went right to the head of scientific inquiry in the US--President Bush! And somehow, though Republicans have been famous for taking whatever answer the President gives them, this time Smith wouldn't budge! He carried their water.

Could these people be any more obvious with what they're saying? Whatever it was that got the decision turned around in Washington to overrule the fish and slake the land's thirst instead, the people saying these things believe that Gordon Smith was instrumental in getting it done. Who could have put them up to say such things?

How about Gordon Smith?

Forgive the video quality, but the audio for this 2002 Smith re-election ad is crystal clear...right down to the sound of the irrigation sprinkler at the very end. Out of 30 precious seconds to the admen, almost five of them have that sound, and it's no mistake. There are only two things Gordon Smith really wanted his Klamath constituency to retain from that viewing experience: the name Gordon Smith, and chsh-chsh-chsh-chsh-chsh. It's like he's bragging to the farmers--"I got your water turned on, don't forget me this fall." Chsh chsh chsh.

Spanning the State--Prodigal Headline Edition

2007-07-08T08:53:00.000-07:00

[For some reason, Blogger isn't letting me post a headline right now. I'll try to get one plugged in later. But for now this is a headline-free post. Ugh.]

update 1pm--fixed...TJ

Recently, free speech in the Portland metro area has taken a couple of interesting turns.

First is the appearance of The Freeway Blogger in Portland:

The Freeway Blogger had signs up all around the freeways in Portland. Click on the link to check out more.

On the opposite end of the spectrum is this piece by Becky at Preemptive Karma. Becky reports that private security in charge of the Portland Blues Festival were likely way out-of-free-speech-bounds:

A man was standing on the bridge overlooking the festival and holding up two signs. One read "Impeach" and the other "End the War." He was merely standing on the sidewalk showing his signs to festival-goers. He wasn't shouting, he wasn't in anyone's way, and he wasn't being disruptive. Nevertheless, two members of the festival security team began harassing him, one calling for backup on the radio and the other angrily talking with him. The man moved further down the bridge, but was gone a few minutes later when we looked again.

The Portland Blues Festival is held at Tom McCall Waterfront Park in the southwest part of the city. The bridge that overlooks the park is the Hawthorne Bridge, which is city property and not at all a part of the Festival grounds.

Private security kicking people off of public property? Hmmm...where have I seen that before...?

And now, let's Span the State!

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::gong::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

I hate that Steve Duin doesn't cover sports for the O anymore. Today's column is a reminder of what a good sports writer he is.

A family from Lewisburg is getting a new home thanks to ABC's Extreme Makeover Home Edition.

A potential standoff is brewing in Canby. Some locals are unhappy with a proposal to build a large chicken farm operation near their homes. If the family who wants to build the farm is ultimately denied, they'll undoubtedly have a large Measure 37 claim. Clackamas County voted overwhelmingly to pass M37. Buyer's remorse, anyone?

The McMenamin brothers are looking to create another of their unique inn/restaurant destinations, this time at the former Multnomah County Correctional Facility.

Madras is beaming over native son Jacoby Ellsbury, who got the call this week from the Boston Red Sox to play with the big club at Fenway.

Molalla City Council has an apparent charmer in their midst. Newly seated City Councilor Steve Clark sent out an email asking city planning director Shane Potter if he's retarted and allegedly had to be asked to leave city hall a few weeks ago by a police officer after some of the staff felt threatened by him.

The newspaper of record in Prineville loves the 2007 Legislative Session.

Cracks of Light In The O (From Others) on Smith

2007-07-07T20:30:00.000-07:00

We're not beating our heads against the wall yet, given that it's very early and we've only just started discussing it--but the mainstream notice of Smith's role in the Klamath fiasco has been minimal to negligent, at best. I have yet to see a single piece (link in the comments if you have) that mentions Smith's role in any way other than as passive beneficiary. That may change; we've got something to show you Monday that makes a strong visual case for portraying his direct involvement in getting the scientific conclusions overturned in favor of farm interests. And we're negotiating a chance to bring the story to a national audience outside the blogosphere, and of course if that happens we'll let you know.

OK, when I said there hasn't been a single piece that mentions Smith's active involvement, I meant a news piece instigated by reporters and/or editors. But there has in fact been a little indirect penetration on the issue, as The O allowed a regular citizen to make the case in their pages on Thursday:

Your editorial "Cheney and the Klamath salmon kill" (June 30) rightly took Vice President Dick Cheney to task for his illegal meddling in the 2002 Klamath Basin water issue. In chastising Cheney, however, you failed to even mention the direct involvement of either Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., or former Oregon politician-turned-lobbyist Bob Smith.

Were it not for the aggressive involvement of these two Oregon men, Cheney and Karl Rove would not have broken the law to supply scarce Klamath waters at the expense of endangered salmon and coastal fishery jobs.

The Oregonian too often gives Smith a pass, pointing to his occasional breaks with his Republican Party and painting him as some sort of genuine political moderate. He should not be let off the hook on the Klamath episode.

The Oregonian ought to dig a little deeper and shine the light on Oregon officials when they are playing a direct or complicit role in the Bush administration's unethical and illegal affairs.

CHRIS BECK Lake Oswego

Chris Beck, I've never met you but I think I love you. I couldn't have written it better myself. That's the rational view; also appearing in Thursday's edition was the scientific view from Steve Pederey, conservation director of Oregon Wild and an active observer during the period under scrutiny. Steve doesn't call Smith out specifically (and in fact kind of avoids it in the same way as the regular media) but he's certainly pointing at the methods Smith seems culpable for:

A Washington Post investigation uncovered Cheney's role in this tragedy, finding that he personally called natural resources managers to demand that they cut water for salmon during a drought year to favor agribusiness interests. According to the Post, Cheney wanted to reward political allies and help Republican Sen. Gordon Smith win re-election in Oregon.

That wasn't the first time politicians have sacrificed the Klamath's fish and wildlife to achieve political goals. In 2003, The Wall Street Journal found that the political motives of White House adviser Karl Rove, not science, had driven federal decisions in the Klamath. And in 2002, Oregon Rep. Greg Walden killed a $175 million restoration bill for the Klamath that would have benefited both salmon and farmers.

Today the Klamath Basin stands at a crossroads. This most recent scandal and the coming investigations into Cheney's actions are yet another example of why Congress needs to act to resolve the environmental crisis facing the Klamath. Continuing to leave the region's fish and wildlife at the mercy of politics is a recipe for disaster. It's appalling that the vice president used his influence to overturn science-based decisions that resulted in the largest fish kill in Northwest history. But it's even more appalling that five years after that fish kill little has been done to prevent a repeat.

If there's one example of Smith being a part of the effort to flip science on its head, here's a quote from the Klamath Herald News in April 2001 that we ran in our original story on the fish kill fiasco. It both sums up Smith's knowledge and support of Cheney's machinations, and actually explains how Cheney plans to use politics to trump science:

"Dick Cheney stopped that order from coming down," Smith said. "He ordered the biologists back to Washington" to see if there were some way to get around the conclusion that all available water must go to protect endangered suckers in Upper Klamath Lake and threatened coho salmon in the lower Klamath River.

And when Cheney and Rove got the water turned back on, they let Gale Norton and Smith take the credit...and Smith even bragged about the accomplishment later.

Will anyone ask him about this example of his ideological marriage to the Bush administration? Will you?

Gordo Plays Dumb on Scooter, Claims to Support "Majority" in OR

2007-07-06T12:00:00.000-07:00

Hat tip to DailyKos' mcjoan for finding some great Gordo video from this week in the wake of the Scooter Libby commutation scandal--boos to us for not seeing it. I probably don't troll the local TV websites as much as I should, but it's discouraging to wade through the dreck to find the good nuggets.

In the vid, Smith repeatedly says he can't understand why Scooter perjured himself, when "he wasn't charged in the case." He also fails to offer any insight on whether he thinks the commutation OR the sentence were justified, saying only of the former that the President has the Constitutional right, and of the latter that perjury "is a very serious thing." He also mentions that he wishes the case could have run its course, legally speaking. Does that mean he thinks that the case was wrongly decided, or that you shouldn't interject a commutation or pardon before all appeals are exhausted (which would potentially have taken us past Bush's term and thus made action on his part impossible)? Say it with me now--Smith doesn't make his position clear.

Smith says he spoke with the President a couple of days ago "for almost a half hour, about our differences, but also our common purpose to get it right for America, and hopefully get us in a different spot in Iraq come September." Parse that one if you can--what does getting it right entail? What "different spot" in Iraq will come in September, and how do Smith and Bush share that hope when Smith seems to be implying they have different expectations for September?

The best part of the interview may be when Smith describes how he will run next year. From my own transcription:

I believe in health care reform, I believe in low taxes, I believe in a government that promotes individual freedom, I believe in a strong national defense but I think we need to focus on the real enemy, and not on policing an Iraqi civil war between Sunnis and Shias, which isn't our fight and not something we can fix. But we have the war on terror from which we cannot retreat, for our own safety's sake. And so I'm committed to those things. I think Oregonians understand pretty well how I vote, why I vote that way, and my heart is to try to represent majorities in Oregon as much as possible.

How on earth can Oregonians understand how you vote, when your votes don't match the rhetoric--or you don't supply any rhetoric at all until the vote comes? Can you understand how he may vote on the next Iraq bill, based on the paragraph above? I sure can't.

But it kills me that a US Senator pretends to be that clueless when it comes to the details of the Plame/Libby story. But perhaps there's a chance that he's not actually playing, and actually DOESN'T understand the story. That's why we've bought a copy of Marcy Wheeler's Anatomy of Deceit: How the Bush Administration Used the Media to Sell the Iraq War and Out a Spy, the definitive current work on the entire scandal, to send to Gordon's DC office. Maybe he'll pretend to have read it.

Nelson Displays His Bio-Willie for Oregon

2007-07-06T10:30:00.000-07:00

But it's a good thing:

Entertainer Willie Nelson will help Oregon's first commercial biodiesel plant celebrate its two-year anniversary in a big way, headlining a press conference and ground-breaking of the expansion of the plant. Also scheduled for concert dates in the area that week, Nelson will arrive in his biodiesel-powered tour bus for the July 6 event, which will begin at 10:30 a.m. at the SeQuential-Pacific Biodiesel plant in Salem (at Mill Creek Junction, 4725 Turner Road, Salem, Oregon).

"Oregon has always been progressive in its thinking, and has been out front in every way about most major issues. This is just another example of Oregon setting a good example for the rest of the country," said Nelson.

My man Otis...er, Willie--he LOVES us! The Inside Greentech blog offers a little context:

In best hippie fashion, Pacific Biodiesel's Salem, Oregon plant has been converting recycled cooking oil from restaurants and food processors in Oregon and Washington, such as Burgerville and Kettle Foods. It's now starting to use canola oil grown elsewhere in Oregon.

(We're not slagging hippies. Heck, if anything, we love pointing out that they got it RIGHT... witness organic fuel, organic food, home schooling, etc.!)

When in-state production reaches its five million gallons per year capacity using raw materials from the Pacific Northwest, the statewide RFS included in the Biofuels Bill (HB 2210) will be enacted. The RFS will increase annual demand for biodiesel by approximately 10 million gallons, to total nearly twenty million gallons of biodiesel per year.

Notwithstanding the debate on the environmental efficacy of biofuels that I waded into over at Blue Oregon yesterday, the significant up-ramping of Oregon's production in service to our long term goals is well worth a tip of the hookah from the influential music icon. Oh, and I didn't make up the name "Bio-Willie" just to be salacious; it really exists, and they sell--what else--fine British Columbian marijuana. I mean, premium biodiesel.

Mythbusters: Oregonians conservative? Nope.

2007-07-05T16:22:00.000-07:00

With an exceedingly frustrating regularity, Americans are referred to as having by and large conservative political views. From taxes to abortion, the media (especially talk radio and cable infotainment) offer up the canard that US citizens have pulled a hard charge to the political right.

Oregonians haven't escaped this attempt to trap us into believing we're Goldwater bound. In fact we're inundated with right wing radio freaks whose sole purpose is to tell us how eeeevil and corrupt liberals are--so none of us will want to self-identify as such.

Except that we ARE liberal. According to the good folks at Media Matters for America, polling and studies prove as much.

Specifically relating to Oregonians, the Annenberg Election Survey of 2004 yields a pretty definitive result: Oregonians are NOT conservative.

For example:

“Providing health insurance for people who do not already have it—should the federal government spend more on it, the same as now, less, or no money at all?”
Percent answering “More”: 70%

The federal government helping to pay for health insurance for all children—do you favor or oppose this?
Percent answering “favor”: 73%

“The federal government helping employers pay the cost of their workers’ health insurance—do you favor or oppose this?”
Percent answering “favor”: 66%

“Providing financial assistance to public elementary and secondary schools—should the federal government spend more on it, the same as now, less, or no money at all?”
Percent answering “more”: 68%

“The federal government trying to reduce the income differences between rich and poor Americans—do you favor or oppose the federal government doing this?”
Percent favoring: 53%

“The federal government banning all abortions—do you favor or oppose the federal government doing this?”
Percent opposed: 72%

“Would you favor or oppose an amendment to the U.S. Constitution saying that no state can allow two men to marry each other or two women to marry each other?”
Favor: 36% Oppose: 56%

“Restricting the kinds of guns that people can buy—should the federal government do more about it, do the same as now, do less about it, or do nothing at all?”
Percent answering “more”: 53%

These are our fellow Oregonians believing in providing health insurance for everyone,opposing abortion bans,opposing bans on gay marriage and restricting certain types of guns.

Nationwide results follow this trend:

Three-fourths of Americans polled would be willing to pay more for electricity generated by renewable resources, and 57 percent feel immigrants have more of a positive than harmful impact on the country. Two-thirds believe immigration is good for the country.

As presidential hopefuls begin to announce health care reform platforms, the report revealed that 69 percent of Americans believe it's the government's responsibility to ensure coverage for all, and 76 percent believe access to coverage should take priority over maintaining the Bush administration's tax cuts.

While a majority of Americans identify themselves as conservative, Paul Waldman, a senior fellow at Media matters and a co-author of the report, said that when questioned on individual issues they are progressive.

Despite the chatter on radio, the rightosphere blogtocracy and cable infonews shows Americans are decidedly liberal on an array of issues. Even though the demon-label "liberal" will often push people to call themselves "moderate", they'll vote liberal if shown the way. The groundwork is already laid.

Novick 6th-highest 2Q Earner on ActBlue

2007-07-05T15:45:00.000-07:00

Not to construe it to mean that Steve Novick is a national fundraising monster, given the fact that (for instance) Barack Obama took in about $15 million in online donations and almost none of it came through ActBlue--but here are the stats for top ten dollar recipients in Q2 at that quickly-growing site:

Top candidates by $ raised (Q2)

amount | candidate
----------+------------------
883,656 | John Edwards
134,904 | John Kerry
128,215 | Jared Polis
107,483 | Joseph Sestak Jr
103,264 | Tim Johnson
101,689 | Steve Novick
97,000 | Chellie Pingree
77,677 | Niki Tsongas
74,254 | Mark Leno
70,377 | Jamie Eldridge

In addition, with 501 donors he falls just out of the top ten in that category, given that #10 is BlogPac (our new favorite friends, and we'll tell you why soon) with 548.

If you made a contribution to Steve's campaign in order to boost his 2Q showing, well done. And thank you! We'll be talking to you in 3 months... :)

All Men Are Created Equal. Unless W Says Otherwise.

2007-07-04T20:07:00.001-07:00

Normally I wouldn't post a story involving the national political situation on Loaded Orygun.

But O editorial cartoonist Jack Ohman nails Cheney's exploits brilliantly.

And since he's the cartoonist for the local daily--and this is (half) my blog, I'm posting it.

So neener.

Right Rogue--Wrong Smith

2007-07-04T19:07:00.000-07:00

Yeah, Bob Smith is sleaze who helped prompt Cheney to circumvent the Endangered Species Act and create one of the largest fish kills ever in the West.

But why aren't the local papers pointing to Gordon Smith's direct efforts to circumvent the ESA as well?

Respect the Founders--Fight For Your Country

2007-07-04T09:07:00.001-07:00

I have a friend who is refusing to "celebrate" the 4th of July today. It's not an echo of Fredrick Douglass' iconic "What to a slave is the 4th of July?" speech; they come from a middle class white family, of the kind who have much to be thankful for because of the fight for independence. They're just not celebrating it because they agonize for the health of the country in these times, and can't muster the enthusiasm to wave the flag and give another "rah rah" for imperialism this year.

I can definitely sympathize, but I can't agree. For me the 4th is a re-energizing event--although in a nod to my friend, the fact that my patriotic energy needs boosting is definitely a sad sign of trouble. While I can understand the impulse to retreat and lick the metaphoric wounds of our national embarrassment and shame, not to mention the actual wounds suffered by real Americans in combat, to do so is to admit defeat.

I can't do that. Regular readers know that Carla and I both can be stubborn folks, and I'll be double-damned if I'm going to let the likes of George Bush and Dick Cheney force me into despair for my nation. I can't let them kill the true American spirit, the one that guided our founders into rebelling against tyranny and proposing a government that seeks to prevent one at all costs. Going into a protective shell is the last thing we should do; our voices need to grow louder, not softer.

We hear a lot about those men and women who fight for our freedom today, and it's absolutely true. But there is another group of men who made today's sacrifices possible, and they fought no less bravely to secure freedom and the rule of law for their countrymen (at least the ones with white dicks and land.) It is their ideals and their reputation that most need upholding, their banner that we must raise highest. It is not a time to retreat and weep for what we have lost; we must demand restoration of that which has been ripped from us--our pride, our dignity, our confident sense of righteousness.

Don't be quiet this 4th of July. Take up the flag of our founding fathers and renew their ideals. Remind yourself from whence we came, and where we can one day be again. Do not sleep, do not despair. But do not demur.

Happy Independence Day, Oregon.

Becoming Absurd: Jaquiss Blows ANOTHER Johnson Story

2007-07-03T18:00:00.000-07:00

Lord, how we have tried. We have given reporters and editors at both The Oregonian and Willamette Week numerous opportunities to correct their work, explain how or why they missed crucial details, and to look askance at further "tips" on Betsy Johnson before putting together another half-researched set of accusations and innuendo like the ones they have already produced.

And yet, whether it's because they think our voices are still too quiet in the mass media to endanger theirs, figure they can outlast the indignation, or--apparently like the President--sense that their public credibility is already so poor that little chance exists that things will get worse if they keep doing dumb things, they persist. Carla explained on Monday how The O screwed the pooch on their most recent smear attempt, failing to verify the claims of a rejected suitor for Scappoose Airpark privileges while repeating previously admitted debunked claims of profit for Johnson.

As for Willy Week, after Nigel Jaquiss' embarrassment of a column linking Brookings Airport with Bandon Dunes (check the map) which necessitated a full retraction, we figured the Pulitzer Prize winner would flinch before touching the stove again (unless something beyond pure journalistic pursuit was pushing their efforts on the story.) In last week's edition of the paper, however, Jaquiss not only touches the stove he sticks his whole hand into the lobster pot:

Several people familiar with the value of metro-area industrial land say a property deal state Sen. Betsy Johnson brokered last September represented an extraordinary bargain for the buyer.

In the transaction, records show Stanley Wagner, now 80, sold 232 acres on West Lane Road in Scappoose to developer Ed Freeman for $2.385 million.

Johnson, a Scappoose Democrat whom political insiders call a top contender for her party's 2010 gubernatorial nomination, says she earned no money in the deal but merely acted as a go-between.

Mistake #1--saying that Johnson "brokered " the deal. In most other contexts I wouldn't say anything, but in a real estate transaction to "broker" something has a definite and specific meaning--for example, "An intermediary who receives a commission for arranging and facilitating the sale of a property for a buyer or a seller." At BEST Johnson 'facilitated' the sale, but she neither arranged it nor received payment for it, and Jaquiss fairly well acknowledges that in the last sentence I quoted. So was he just being sloppy to say she brokered real estate when she's not a broker? Or was the intent to imply more than what really occurred?

Also:

SB 680 created a program for three rural airports—Scappoose is one—that would promote development and ease runway access for adjacent property owners such as [developer Ed] Freeman. SB 807 would create taxing districts to funnel property taxes back into airport-related projects for 25 years.

Wrong. SB680 couldn’t have increased the land value as "through the fence" permits already existed at Scappoose Airport prior to its introduction by Johnson. And Freeman denies any knowledge at all of 807 prior to his purchase.

Would that these were the only kinds of errors Jaquiss made, but they become much more serious as you progress through the article. The main contention is that Johnson set up a deal for Ed Freeman (the developer in both this story and the original story about another land deal involving the three parties) whereby he would reap an enormous windfall by getting the land for far less than its actual worth, and then reselling it for much more:

"That's a hell of a deal for the buyer," says Bowlus Chauncey, who operates a company called Beaver Bark on 30 acres about a mile from the Wagner property.

Chauncey and Dave Molony, who separately owns 34 acres of industrial land along West Lane Road, say industrial property inside Scappoose's city limits and urban growth boundary is worth about 10 times the per-acre price of about $10,300 Freeman paid Wagner.

Those familiar with industrial land agree that it is a valuable commodity.

What Jaquiss says here about industrial land inside Scappoose and within the UGB is in fact true--it's pretty valuable turf. But there's one problem: the land was neither zoned industrial nor within the UGB when Freeman bought it. Even in its current formulation, less than half of the original parcel is zoned for industrial use. At a bare minimum, the flurry of comparative value calculations should have accounted for that.

Regardless, Jaquiss' framing reflects a core dishonesty in presentation, just as surely as if I claimed outrage that New Seasons Market is charging me $4 a pound for pineapple, when a farmer in Hawaii sells his to Del Monte' for 50 cents a pound. Wouldn't you think it pertinent to mention that a) New Seasons is paying for an organic pineapple rather than one treated by pesticide, and b) somebody had to pay to bring it to Oregon so I could buy it? If so, the fact that the land was agricultural rather than industrial when Freeman bought it should mean something to you.

Obliquely, Jaquiss admits that the property Freeman bought is not the same property he's trying to sell; he had to get it annexed into Scappoose and rezoned. But the very clear intent of the article is to suggest that this was a simple, inexpensive process that the original owners (octegenarian Stan Wagner and his wife) could have undertaken themselves before selling, thus locking in that profit for themselves:

Getting the land annexed, which automatically brought a zone change to "industrial," is a process Scappoose city manager Jon Hanken says is "not difficult at all." Annexation is something the Wagners' trustee, Murray-Lusby—or a higher-paying buyer—could have accomplished.

Apparently however, "difficult" is in the eye of the beholder--particularly if that beholder wants to selectively quote a source to suggest conditions for scandal. We talked to Hanken ourselves and got a much different picture. According to him, the process of annexation requires a lot of oversight/shepherding by a property owner. Once a parcel is identified for the UGB by a municipality as a part of their planning, they must designate its potential land use. The property owner then requests annexation and plans are submitted to the city. A series of steps then takes place at the city level via the planning commission and the city council. Then the city council votes. After they vote, it then goes to a vote of the people whether to annex the property inside the UGB.

Are you clear on that? Getting the property rezoned and annexed is EASY--all it takes is putting your request on a referendum ballot after a series of lengthy and complex steps! Freeman estimated to us that he spent about $30,000 in planning, engineering and surveying fees, along with a bunch of his own time, in order to get the land included as part of Scappoose. Oh, and did I mention the sewer line? As Freeman put it, “the property isn’t worth anything without sewer on it,” and so he forked over about $2 million to have that taken care of.

Jaquiss implies that the Wagners could easily have taken care of this themselves before selling to Freeman, thus reaping much greater profit. It's true that the Wagners likely could have covered the application fees and prep costs for annexation, and with proceeds from another recent sale of land they held in North Portland the couple might have been able to pay upfront for sewer extension to the property as well. But financial cost is only one consideration; you'd have to ask yourself whether babysitting your annexation proposal through City Council and onto the ballot is how you want to spend your time when you're sick and 80 years old.

No, the Wagners were not interested in becoming the Trumps of Columbia County. What they were concerned with was that their property not fall into the hands of people who wanted a gravel mining operation on their land, which is why they dealt with Johnson--who had promised she wouldn't let that happen. But what about this long-time acquaintance of the Wagners?

Tom Heckman, a West Lane Road property owner who says he's known Stan Wagner for more than 50 years, disagrees.

"Stan got screwed on the deal," says Heckman. "When I was over at their house helping them pack up, I told Mrs. Wagner, 'You got robbed.' She said, '[$2.385 million,] that's enough for me and Stan.'"

I said 'acquaintance' for a reason, because while Jaquiss tries to make Heckman into a lifelong friend, sources in Scappoose say that Heckman tried to buy the Wagners property and was rebuffed because he wanted to sell it off to be mined. That would have been useful information to have, wouldn't it? Yet again, someone cited by the papers as a source claiming dirty dealings turns out to have an axe to grind (cf Pete Williamson, Greg Jenks, Tim Bero.)

If you're still with me, one other way Jaquiss tries to impugn the sale is by using sources who suggest that the supply of industrial land in the area is nearly nonexistent:

Port of St. Helens operations manager Kim Shade says the Port has only 40 acres of industrial land for sale. That land is more fully developed but five miles farther from Portland—which lessens its value—than the property Freeman bought in Scappoose.

The Port's asking price is $4 per square foot, or about $175,000 per acre—17 times what Freeman paid Wagner. "There's just not a lot of industrial land for sale," Shade says. "We're getting a lot of inquiries for our property."

Shade says the Port based its price on a November 2006 appraisal that evaluated recent property sales in cities such as Canby, McMinnville, St. Helens and Ridgefield, Wash.

Andy Kangas, an industrial-property broker at CB Richard Ellis in Portland, recently closed the sale of 14.23 acres of land in Gresham for $204,000 an acre. He echoes Shade's assessment.

"There's basically no industrial land left in the metro area," Kangas says.

We're not clear on what land Shade is talking about; we've gone to the airport and identified about 30 industrial acres for sale by the Port...on land immediately adjacent to Freeman's parcels, not any '5 miles away.' As for Kangas, "full of crap" is the best way to characterize his knowledge of the area. This study of regional industrial land availability from Metro in 2001 {pdf} includes a table on page 16 of supply and demand projected to the year 2025. Columbia County's estimated demand is for 50 buildable acres; in 1999 the number of vacant acres for development was 883...and 70 of that was ready-to-develop. Even if many of those buildable acres have since been utilized in the intervening 7 years, remember that when Freeman bought from the Wagners NONE of those 232 acres were development-suitable, so the appropriate comparison would be to 883 acres, not 70. Some shortage.

Some among the readership consider our partisanship to be the driving force behind the continued defense of Johnson. No amount of protest to the contrary is likely to convince those folks otherwise, but our interest has long since surpassed merely defending a politician against unsubstantiated charges and allegations. At this point, we are far more concerned with the professional atrophy of what are supposed to be the premier daily and weekly papers in this state. We considered Nigel a friend, and still do--to his credit, he has at least retracted a piece that didn't meet journalistic muster, and took a considerable amount of time to defend his work to us privately.

But we're still concerned. We can no longer trust what comes from Jaquiss' keyboard, because we have run out of plausible explanations for the repeated missteps...save one: someone desperately wants to see Johnson hurt, and/or wants to block legislative efforts that would hurt them financially, and has convinced WWeek and The O that there really is something there. And by repeatedly failing to check and seek the motives of the sources for their reportage, they are at best doing that someone's bidding, at worst actively contributing to it. And dammit, that makes us mad.

Haloscan Flaking; Not Long for this Blog Anyway

2007-07-03T14:01:00.000-07:00

The Haloscan comment system is down intermittently today it seems; we apologize if you had something you wanted to say about our posts. I've noted if you try right after you get a bad response, sometimes you can get in.

And I know we've said this a bunch of times since Thanksgiving, but this time it really looks like we'll be on the move soon. We'll keep the "old" LO up, but in the near future look for a new URL--LoadedOrygun.net--a new interface, and a whole bunch more opportunity for you the reader to participate. We can leave these old problems behind, and move on to a whole new and different set!

Seriously, unless something falls through big changes are coming soon...

Emilie Boyles: Ego creepy

2007-07-03T07:10:00.001-07:00

A person would have to have one hell of an undifferentiated ego mass to be Emilie Boyles.

Her boy Vladimir Golovan took it in the shorts yesterday for his role in trying to swindle the City of Portland out of public campaign money.

This after Boyles skipped town with the public's money while claiming herself an innocent victim of mean Mr. Golovan.

Yesterday, the cool kids over at the Merc discovered Boyles' MySpace, prompting her to shut down the comments.

This is a woman who likes to bill herself as a champion of the little guy, but has no problem stealing other people's money and walking away like it's no big deal.

And that picture she keeps using is way creepy.

LO Files FOIA Requests on Smith's Involvement in Fish Kill

2007-07-02T17:00:00.000-07:00

As of today I have filed five Freedom of Information Act requests with various agencies of the federal government, asking each for their communications received by or sent to Senator Gordon Smith between February 2001 and March 2002. The intent is to discover the extent of Smith's active role in the decisions leading to the worst adult salmon fish kill in recorded Western history.

The requests have gone to:

The US Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1 (OR) and HQ separately
(FWS was responsible for decisions regarding the suckerfish under the Endangered Species Act, and participated in the initial ruling that cut water to farmers)
The National Marine Fisheries Service, part of NOAA
(NMFS was responsible for the same decisions as above, concerning coho salmon)
The Department of Interior, Secretary's Office and Inspector General's Office separately
(Interior Secretary Gale Norton oversaw the agencies involved in making the Klamath call; her Deputy Chief of Staff was cited in the WaPo series on Cheney as the woman "handling" the issue for DOI. The Inspector General issued a short finding of no influence in 2003 in response to a request for investigation by Senator Kerry)

A total of five requests have been sent. I have asked for a rolling return of items, meaning they'll send me what they have as they find it--but I'm not holding my breath. They are supposed to respond within 20 working days as to their ability to comply; the actual time to receive anything could be months, and what we get back could be exactly nothing. But you don't find out if you don't try.

Below is an example of one of the letters:

July 3, 2007
Office of the Secretary
Sue Ellen Sloca
MS-120, SIB
1951 Constitution Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20240

Ms Sloca:
Under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, I am requesting copies of all correspondence from February 1, 2001 to March 31, 2002 with U.S. Senator Gordon Smith and his staff regarding water use, endangered species protections or agricultural irrigation in the Klamath River water basin.

This request includes communications from the Senator, his Senate Washington D.C. and Oregon offices and any members of his campaign committees, as well as all officials within your office. Communications covered include, but are not limited to, mail correspondence, email, facsimiles or phone logs.

For your purposes in filling this request, please consider me under the category of “all other organizations,” as defined by the Freedom of Information Act. If there are any fees for copying or searching for the records I have requested, please inform me of the cost prior to searching or copying, and only if the total exceeds $40.

If all or any part of this request is denied, please cite the specific exemption which you believe justifies your refusal to release the information and inform me of your agency's administrative appeal procedures available to me under the law.

Please provide all information on a rolling basis if possible. I appreciate your handling of this request as quickly as possible and I look forward to hearing from you within 20 working days, as the law stipulates. I can be reached at the email address "loadedorygun@gmail.com", or by phone at (xxx) xxx-xxxx if there any questions about my request.
Sincerely,
[torridjoe--no, I did not put that down!]

Novick Threatens 200K for Quarter, and Threatens it Good

2007-07-02T10:00:00.000-07:00

Well, they sure do count fast over at Novick Central:

Today Steve Novick for U.S. Senate announced that the campaign had raised over $190,000 in the second quarter and was adding two paid staff, Jake Weigler as campaign manager and Aviva Groner as its finance coordinator.

“It is great that so many people share our vision of how to help Gordon Smith to a well-deserved retirement,” said Novick. “The fact that over 600 of them have already contributed to our campaign is a clear signal that we are well on our way.”

Ah yes, the other news is the apparatus. Weigler did a fine job in his prior role as Deputy Communcations Director for GuvTed as the parade of bills made their way from the dome to Mahonia, and Groner is a veteran of successful campaigns.

Regardless of whether he plans to run an insurgency-style campaign or not, Novick is surrounding himself with known players in the Oregon Democratic sphere. As he attempts to transition from "friends and family money" to stranger money, the comfort level with those professionals--particularly Groner--will be important. According to Novick's release, Cliff Trow, former Corvallis State Senator and leader of the Senate Democrats from 1996 to 1999 said, “Steve's campaign is clearly gathering momentum around the state. Those of us who worked with Steve when he was chief of staff to the Democrats in the State Senate know how good he is at building a team and generating energy and excitement. That's what he did for us in 1997 and '98, and that's what he's doing now.”

There's a long way to go, and now that the 1st tier group has abdicated the race there appears to be no shortage of folks considering a run. Among speculated newcomers are Jeff Merkley and Paul Evans, adding to the four or five other potential candidates already said to be mulling and ruminating. Who actually enters will have an impact on how Steve positions himself and what kind of campaign he'll run.

Of anyone mentioned, Merkley changes the game the most by placing a traditional Democrat with the traditional resume' and strong Portland ties into the fray. As someone said elsewhere, the debates could approach Lincoln-Douglas stature. But it would also force Novick into the insurgent's role, the gadfly's gadfly. And that's not necessarily Novick's sweet spot. Steve's angle is that he arrests you with his story and the confidence in his vision and principles.

Presenting as a new kind of candidate is more difficult with Merkley in the race, because it looks like a reaction to a perceived fault--that Novick has no electoral experience and Jeff is filthy with it--and more importantly Merkely can spin it as a positive where Gordon Smith cannot. In a general against Smith Novick can use Smith's experience against him; in a primary against Merkley the job is much tougher and exposes the only serious hole in his own profile.

All that's down the road, though. Right now Steve has to feel pretty good about where he sits, still the only candidate every news story mentions because he's the only one in. He has the foundation of a solid team, has put together good base funding in 10 weeks this far out (including an impressive $100,000 in netroots contributions), and is watching Gordon Smith's pedestal shake ever so imperceptibly the last couple of weeks. It's going to be a wild year and a half, people.

Another O Johnson Story--More Missing Relevant Info

2007-07-02T08:10:00.000-07:00

On June 22, the Oregonian published its latest piece on Betsy Johnson. It was a fairly lengthy and in at least one case flawed look at the State Senator from Scappoose.

First, the O trots out the consistently debunked financial numbers on Johnson's 2005 land deal:

But the image she has built as a selfless champion of her district has been scuffed by the revelation that she made a fast $119,000 in a land deal with a developer she has repeatedly aided. She then failed to disclose the deal as state law requires.

Johnson yielded about $45-50K from that deal. No matter how many times reporters click their heels together and write otherwise, $119k is incorrect.

Along with the consistently incorrect financial figures are the stories consistently lacking perspective (as well as using questionable sources for quotes) on articles accusing Johnson of wrongdoing. For example, the above cited Oregonian piece goes here:

In 1993, Vernonia businessman Tim Bero wanted to develop an aviation business park adjacent to the Scappoose airport. He needed Port of St. Helens approval for a "through the fence" permit so planes could come and go between the airport and his development.

The Port Commission -- with Johnson on the board -- would decide whether he got the permit.

"The day before the vote, Betsy called me and told me I had to line up behind her to fight this gravel pit or she would fight my plan," Bero said.

He refused and says Johnson led a successful fight against him -- leaving her husband's business holding the airport's only "through the fence" permit.

It's entirely possible that Bero had this conversation with Johnson. I have no proof that it didn't take place. But based on the date Bero is using in the quote above, his accusations makes little sense.

For Bero to get the "through the fence" permit in 1993, he went through the Scappoose Industrial Airpark Advisory Board, which makes its recommendation to the Port Commission. Based on the November 1993 Advisory Board meeting minutes (PDF--start on page 3), Johnson was a champion of Bero's proposal, going so far as to recommend that it be considered. Bero's answers to the Board's questions about his business seem vague at best, yet Johnson is quite clearly not speaking out against it.

The Board met again in January of 1994 and again spoke about Bero's proposal. Opposition to the Bero proposal came from Jim Wold and not Betsy Johnson, based on the meeting minutes . It's possible that Wold and Johnson could have colluded to hatch up a submarining of Bero's efforts. But based on the dates Bero is citing and Johnson's articulated support, it doesn't seem likely.

I also spoke with Airport Advisory Board member Mike Griesen--who says that the Advisory Board wanted to work with Bero to get his "through the fence" access in a way that would satisfy the FAA. Griesen said that at no time did anyone ask him to not support Bero's proposal. Griesen also told me that to his knowledge, no one asked any of the Board members to not support Bero's "through the fence" permit.

Once again, these stories accusing Johnson of wrongdoing (in this case blackmail) don't seem to include pertinent information. It would seem relevant to check with the Airport Advisory Board to find out what really happened to Bero's "through the fence" permit, rather than just accepting his word--yet that doesn't seem to have happened.

TJ Talks Smith's Role in Fish Kill on KPOJ This AM

2007-07-02T00:43:00.001-07:00

Coming round the horn of Monday at about 7:20 this morning, TJ will be talking about the very active role Senator Gordon Smith played in the Klamath Basin fiasco with Heidi and Carl at KPOJ AM 620. (Heidi and Carl didn't play any role with Smith; they're who I'll be talking to!) Listen or stream it or hear the podcast of the 7 o'clock hour later. And follow along in your LO hymnals, set to this page wherein we examine Smith's many telling moments as the crisis developed, and how they intertwine him inextricably with Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. Two great guys to have intertwined with you going into the next election, aren't they?

Get some sleep now; we'll wake you before the show tomorrow. Promise.

Spanning the State--GARDEN! Edition

2007-07-01T09:35:00.000-07:00

I'm a woman of limited passions. If I spread my interests too thin I become frustrated with the restrictions that come with the number of hours in a day. So besides politics, my only other serious hobby is gardening.

I don't write about gardening all that often because I'm emminently unqualified. I've considered taking the Master Gardener course through OSU. But the volunteer hours required are prohibitive for me until I have a LOT more free time. So I'll continue to fumble around in my limited capacity--figuring things out as I go.

This year is my first attempt at growing blueberries. My neighbors have grown them for years with great success. So this year I created a blueberry bed. The first few years apparently come with a meager harvest (I'll probably get a quart or two from my four plants).

But once they're well established I've been assured that they'll fruit like crazy.

The back raised bed garden was built 3 years ago. I grow vegetables, tomatoes and dahlias in it for the most part. Last year I grew dill which went to seed when I wasn't paying attention, so this year I'm pulling dill out of all the beds like weeds. The black shade cloth is up in front of the squash because I had to move the plant--which had volunteered right up next to a tomato plant. This garden gets heavy western exposure and the late afternoon/early evening heat was doing it in.

Last week I stopped at a garage sale on my way home and found this old, painted milk can. I have no idea how old the can (or the painting) is.

I've seen similar items in antique malls for upwards of $50-$100. I got 2 of these for $5. I sprayed this one with a few coats of clear lacquer to help keep the remaining paint from peeling away--and I gave the other one to my neighbor.

This is a pot of Mimulus that I started from seed. If you look closely, you'll see a little garden statue frog in the middle of the pot. My daughter gave that to me last year for my birthday.

Below is Queen-of-the-Prairie, which has grown in this location since before I moved into my house.

It's thrived in this location and despite its tendency to take over, I love it so I haven't dug it out.

Last Fall I decided to create a new garden at the side of my house. So I covered the lawn with newspaper and a heavy coating of new garden soil, and left it to winter over. The grass died off pretty well and I tilled the whole thing up with a generous amount mushroom compost this Spring.

Its still a work in progress--but this is what I've managed so far:

And now that you've indulged my garden hobby, let's indulge in my other. Let's Span the State!

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::gong:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

In a Pamplin-esque move, Evanite Fiber Corp is offering to gift the city of Corvallis with a chunk of riverfront acreage along the Willamette River. The catch? Evanite wants the city to help get the company out from under state regs that "hinder operations" at the industrial site.

A federal judge has halted a US Forest Service timber sale with a restraining order. The judge will hear arguments on July 12 from conservation groups claiming that the Forest Service distorted scientific evidence on spotted owl habitat and the flouting of the Northwest Forest Plan's prohibition on logging old growth for commercial purposes.

A proposed mining operation near Coquille is under threat from locals who say that the proposed mine will threaten their health and their way of life.

The Register-Guard in Eugene gives the legislative session a B+.

If I was getting my electricity from Coos-Curry Electric I would be pissed. Their board just voted to close its meetings from members. Members may only attend meetings if they request to attend a session and be approved by the Board.

A Prairie City man is looking for a new home for his 2000+ can and bottle collection.

The LaGrande Observer notes that The Office of Rural Policy in Salem is riding on a razor's edge--looking at the business end of the budget ax for the 2008 session. The Observer believes that the Office is crucial to bridging the urban-rural divide in Oregon and is complaining that legislators aren't giving it a real chance to succeed.

Costco is cruising McMinnville in an effort to find a new location.

Summer of Steve Day 6--Utter Begging Edition

2007-06-30T18:26:00.000-07:00

Well here we are at June 30th, the last day of the second quarter for fundraising if you're a federal candidate. And when those reports come out in the middle of next month, donors and inner-Beltway politicos will look the numbers over and decide whether it's worth considering that candidate as "serious." We've said all along that Steve may have to run against the DSCC's chosen candidate, so we already know that it may be a fight waged at the ultimate retail level if that's the case. But it's certainly going to be easier if Steve IS the chosen candidate of the party elites, and so it's vitally important that he show the ability to raise money.

And that's where you come in. Not only amounts but number of donors are important. So don't be embarrassed about your $5 or $10 or $20. It's waaaay early in the cycle, and there's time to do more later. But now is the time to put your chit down and tell the opinion makers that you want to see someone like Steve given the chance to show Oregonians what he's capable of. Just through gifts over ActBlue, nearly 500 contributors have put over $100,000 into the kitty. We're proud to be the top non-Novick fundraising page for him, even if it is just $330. Can you help bring us to $500 by midnight? We've had a couple of $50 and $100 donors who have been very generous, but a dozen of you at $20 would do the trick as well.

Can you help? Go to our page and drop down whatever you can for now. We all say we WANT fresh blood and a new kind of politician in Congress, but it doesn't just happen. You have to help make it so. We're doing our part. Are you?

The O Runs Fish Kill Op-Ed, Gordon AWOL

2007-06-30T14:31:00.000-07:00

Middle Earth says it best:
Where's Gordon?

Yes, ask those questions Mr DeFazio but unlike the Oregonian make sure Gordon Smith's name comes up. Even if the Oregonian doesn't recognize it Mr Smith is a key player in all of this.

Amen. You just knew they'd come around to the story eventually...and sidestep the part specifically relevant to Oregon.

[headslap]

Pantry Pride: Gordon, You Suck. Thank You, Come Again!

2007-06-30T12:30:00.001-07:00

As Gordon Smith continues trying to find the sweet spot of re-electability, tacking rightward again this week by rejecting the immigration bill in a move that some conservatives say will bring them home to him, he has found the intersection of his promises--at the corner of Marlboro Way and Joe Camel Lane.

Smith's support for both the Oregon Healthy Kids plan that funded child health care by taxing cigarettes, and the federal excise tax for funding child health care (sound familiar?) was not exactly a reach, since as many as 3/4 of Oregonians are OK with it. So while surely he imagines it to be a feather in his "I'm not really all that Republican" cap, many regular Republicans agree with the plan as well. The hardcore anti-tax wing of the party is pissed, however:

Plaid Pantry Inc.'s president and CEO Chris Girard said he will no longer support the lawmaker either financially or personally, due to the senator's current stance on tobacco tax legislation.

Early in his campaign, Smith and Girard discussed the importance of the tobacco and alcohol categories to Plaid Pantries, and Smith's support of small business, according to the letter. Now, with Smith supporting a federal excise tax and state cigarette tax increase, Girard wrote that he can no longer support the senator.

That kinda reads like a Dear John letter, doesn't it? I actually have a real problem with the CEO of Pantry Pride being so shortsighted and self-interested that a vote like this regarding his business overrides anything else the guy has ever done. I could see you leaving a politician over the war, or scandal, or even being "too weak on immigration" I guess. But even after acknowledging he'll probably sell fewer cigarettes because of the tax, is he really predicating his vote for US Senate--a body of 100 serving 300 million people--on his bottom line for smokes? Seems awfully shallow.

Shallow or not, Girard doesn't just own a few stores (and really, 104 stores with about $115mil in business {pdf} is not anybody's idea of "small"), and he also happens to be head of the Oregon Neighborhood Store Association, a small player in the Salem money game but with a visible presence that serves as the Oregon face of the National Association of Convenience Stores, which IS an active national lobbying player. He may not be a small businessman, but many people who own little stores like that are. And who knows how many Girard is taking with him.

CNN very helpfully provides a PDF of the letter from Girard to Smith. Damn, he's all totally ticked off and stuff (pdf}, isn't he?

Blazer draft analysis: giving a shit so I don't have to

2007-06-30T12:30:00.000-07:00

I think between the two of us, it's a hands-down easy bet to make that TJ is the more interested in the goings-on of the NBA. I'm much more of a baseball and football kinda girl.

Ross Day (yeah, the Oregonians In Action dude), has a sports blog in which he offers his own take on the Blazer's draft day grade.

Despite his absolutely whacko beliefs on land-use, Ross is a great guy. And he's done a pretty extensive analysis..so check it out.

Summer of Steve--two more days of mojo!

2007-06-29T14:44:00.000-07:00

While Gordon Smith is down at Bandon Dunes this weekend yukking it up with his fat cat donors, I wonder which of them will be writing an extra big check to his campaign? Will it be the ones who benefit from Smith's votes screwing over attempts at alternative energy sources?

The fact that this guy has been able to get away with the "moderate" label is complete garbage. His complicity in voting to submarine legislation that would help secure energy that has nothing to do with Middle East oil is shameful.

We need a Senator in Washington that isn't beholden to big oil.

We need Steve Novick.

Give Steve some MOJO and let's kick Gordon Smith's ass out of DC.

Speak Arabic? Got your affairs in order?

2007-06-29T14:29:00.000-07:00

If you can answer "yes" to both of those subject headline questions, then Pena Solution might have a gig for you:

Pena Solution is accepting resumes while this is under construction. You can apply for the following positions: Arabic Linguist categories I,II, and III for Centcom contract in Iraq, System Adminstrators for Iraq, Registered Nurses and Radiologist Positions for stateside locations.

Interested parties should submit their resume to penasolutions@yahoo.com, apparently.

I discovered this job opening while perusing the Portland job listings on Craig's List. That's where I've previously seen Tim Trickey pimping his wares.

It's fairly disconcerting that the US military (after 4 years of occuping Iraq) can't figure out how to train enough Arabic translators to conduct meetings for CENTCOM. We apparently have to farm out this out to civilians. Lovely.

I'm curious about how much of our tax dollars are going to the salaries of these contractors--and how much oversight is actually conducted over their activities and spending.

Perhaps if the Bush Administration wasn't so busy trying to weed out the gays from the military, we might have enough translators in the military to get the job done.

Golden More Likely To Run--Now That He's Out of Work

2007-06-29T09:00:00.000-07:00

From the Ashland Tidings, which has to be enjoying the attention, this web item about radio host Jeff Golden's calendar suddenly being totally freed up:

Ron Kramer, executive director of JPR, said after the Daily Tidings first reported that Golden is considering a run for the U.S. Senate, the station and Golden “reached a mutual agreement that it was not feasible for him to continue” hosting “The Jefferson Exchange.”

Kramer said he was “entirely unaware” that Golden, a former Jackson County commissioner, had political aspirations until Tuesday, the day before the Tidings ran its front page story.

Does this sound entirely mutual? I think somebody panicked. But it's true; the smart move is definitely to disassociate with any free media voice you have while acting as a candidate.

Shouldn't someone tell that to ABC in reference to Fred Thompson, who blogs on happily as late as yesterday? Golden was just thinking out loud, for all we know, and may never have decided to run if not for being essentially fired. Thompson has an exploratory committee, and yet he's still an ABC go-to guy. I love our media!

We'll try to get a hold of Jeff and see if this has caused his plans to coalesce. Some choose runs, and some have runs thrust upon them...

BREAKING: Blockbuster Trade Sends Randolph to Knicks

2007-06-28T18:16:00.000-07:00

Wow--the Blazers have not only snagged the consensus potential center of the decade in Greg Oden, at the draft they just announced that the Knicks have agreed to take Zach Randolph, Dan Dickau and Fred Jones for Steve Francis and Channing Frye.

Holy smokes--the one part of taking Oden that people thought might not be a fit was that it didn't look right with Randolph in it. LaMarcus Aldridge was the natural player there, and so Zach wasn't a fit. On top of that, he has a big contract and is also by far the worst remaining offender from JailBlazer days (Miles is more petulant but less dangerous).

The Knick fans looked like they were about to climax when the trade was announced; they are thinking they got the final major piece, and maybe that's true. Randolph is a huge player in the NBA, and that he was snubbed--twice--in the All-Star selections does not begin to tell what kind of year he had. But the Blazers have to be well satisfied that they've gotten something of use and are rid of the whole situation.

Steve Francis? Decent player, could be a big help, especially replacing some of Randolph's scoring--but he could be a chemistry killer in his own right. Frye is another talented young player that the Blazers can exploit if he blossoms, but he's raw. This is definitely a money deal, but the apparent combination of Randolph's low trade value and Pritchard's desire to get rid of Z-Bo has resulted in what you see here, agreed to in principle.

We'll see what happens here--maybe they flip something else with Miles, maybe not. The bottom line is that Randolph was always trade bait, so mission accomplished one way or another. His contract is off the team's back.

Confirmed here.

Also, the video of the crowd at the Rose Garden when it was announced is pretty cool.

Senate Dems choose Devlin

2007-06-28T17:09:00.000-07:00

Richard Devlin has been chosen to replace Kate Brown as Senate Majority Leader for the Oregon Democrats.

From the press release:

Kate Brown, who led the Senate Democrats to a successful session in 2007, turns over the reins to incoming Senate Majority Leader Richard Devlin.

The Dems get Santa!!

Woo-hoo!

Summer of Steve! Day 4--Enviro Warrior Edition

2007-06-28T16:30:00.000-07:00

We have forty-eight hours to prove our strength. Forty-eight hours to show that this campaign is not a long shot, but a juggernaut.

Forty-eight hours to show that we are the campaign to dislodge Gordon Smith ... who this week struck another blow against working Oregonians with his vote against the Employee Free Choice Act.

As I mentioned the other day, Saturday, June 30 is the end of our first FEC reporting period. We will be judged by how much money we have raised as of that date. We've raised a mess of money already, from over 500 of you. But we can be, we must be, even more impressive.

Some of you have already given all that you can afford, and for that, I thank you profusely. But if you think you could help a little more, or can find someone else who would - now is the time. Go to http://www.novickforsenate.com/... and start hitting buttons.

Thank you so much for everything you have done and will do. It really does matter...

Amen. And to continue our pattern of comparing and contrasting Steve with el Gordo on the issues, look no further than our story this morning on the latter's active participation in putting politics before science. There's no official comment from Steve at this time on those revelations, but his record on the environment speaks for itself:

After stops in law firms in New York and San Francisco, Steve joined the Environment Division (then known as the "Land and Natural Resources Division") of the United States Justice Department in 1987. He brought successful lawsuits against polluters for violations of the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. He also served as lead counsel in the notorious Love Canal case. On that case in 1995, Steve and his team negotiated a settlement in which Occidental Chemical repaid the taxpayers $129 million in cleanup costs and interest. Announcing the settlement, Attorney General Janet Reno said: "Today we celebrate a transformation of an environmental disaster called Love Canal into a success story .... It [the settlement] stands for the principle that when people make a mess, they should pay to clean it up."

If the environment is your big issue, this race is no contest. Vote Hook!

BREAKING: Minnis Announces Retirement

2007-06-28T12:23:00.000-07:00

The word from Salem is that moments ago, former House Speaker Karen Minnis announced her retirement from the floor, saying this will be her last session. It was expected, rumored, conventional wisdom--but now it's official: it's an open race in HD49! If former Majority Leader Wayne Scott also bows out, the last vestiges of the awful Minnis/Scott cabal that nearly trashed our state will be gone and (hopefully) politically buried.

So who's up for another run? Rob Brading, call on line 1...

Investigation of Cheney/Smith Klamath deal in the works

2007-06-28T10:50:00.000-07:00

It looks like Darth Dick Cheney is going to have to deal with yet another investigation into his dirty dealings:

Late Wednesday evening, U.S. Rep. Nick J. Rahall (D-WV), Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, received a letter from 36 House Democrats from California and Oregon calling for an oversight hearing on the alarming role Vice President Dick Cheney may have played in Klamath River Basin decisions. As reported by the Washington Post on June 27, 2007, Cheney’s intervention in the development of a 10-year water plan for the Klamath River resulted in a 2002 die-off of around 70,000 salmon near the California-Oregon border – the largest adult salmon kill in the history of the West.

Today, Rep. Rahall released the following statement in response to the request from House Democrats:

“This Committee has already begun examining the penchant for this Administration to favor politics over science in the implementation of the Endangered Species Act, which was highlighted during a May 9th hearing and in the resignation of the Interior Department’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks over the fiasco.

“In light of the revelations being made over the situation in the Klamath River Basin, it is my intention to again convene the Committee to delve into the issues raised by the Members of Congress from California and Oregon. It certainly appears this Administration will stop at nothing to achieve political gain from natural resources disasters. Ultimately, it will be hardworking Americans and their healthy environment that will lose if we fail to act.”

Interestingly, the local daily couldn't be bothered to write such a significant story. We have to look all the way to Seattle:

WASHINGTON — West Coast Democrats called for a hearing Wednesday into the role Vice President Dick Cheney may have played in the 2002 die-off of about 70,000 salmon near the California-Oregon border.

An article in The Washington Post on Wednesday said Cheney played a crucial role in developing a 10-year water plan for the Klamath River that courts later called arbitrary and in violation of the Endangered Species Act. Democrats charged that Cheney's action resulted in the largest adult salmon kill in the history of the West.

"The ramifications of that salmon kill are still being felt today as returns to the Klamath River are so low that commercial, sport and tribal fishing seasons have been curtailed for the past three years," Democrats said in a letter calling for the hearing.

I live in hope that the Oregonian will actually assign this story to a local investigative reporter with the actual chops (Walth) to follow it where it leads.

I'll try not to turn blue holding my breath, however.

[Update: 10:55--TJ tells me that the O has this in their print edition. I scoured the online version at Oregonlive and couldn't find it, so its either buried online or it isn't there, I guess]

[Update: 11:30--Here is the O's story online. The update says 10:40, which is when I was wrapping up writing the initial piece, which probably explains why I couldn't find it]
(h/t: The Gavel, aka Pelosi's blog)

Gordo Passive In Fish-Killing Politics? Think Again

2007-06-28T08:15:00.000-07:00

The Klamath water controversy that flared in 2001 and 2002 and goes on to this day has become something of a national story, most vividly wrapped inside a devastatingly precise indictment of Dick Cheney's term as Vice President. Jason Leopold's story that we looked over on Monday reminded everyone of Karl Rove's intervention and subsequent airy clearing of wrongdoing by the Interior IG (fedora doff to Bill at P3, noble work). Now Darlene Hooley has asked for an investigation into Cheney's role--it has truly been a shitty week for that guy, and I hope it continues and also he suddenly can't shake the hiccups. Hah.

What did both evildoers have in common as their motivation in the Klamath case? If you said the reelection of Gordon Smith in 2002, score one on your personal chalkboard. Where, in each of these storylines of politics over science and the electoral jimmying of a Senate office, does Gordon Smith appear? If you said "only in the context of being the guy people seemed to be doing awfully nice things for, convoluted and difficult things to try to keep him in office and hold power in the about-to-be-Democratic Senate," hack into this account and start writing my columns for me.

I hope he takes it as a compliment if he finds out I'm calling him a smooth, dirty bastard, although it's more in awe than any respect. Because of course that's exactly what everybody wanted for Gordon, and it's certainly what Gordon wanted for himself--personal distance from the dirty work that is sometimes necessary to make things go, when following the law as written becomes unfruitful. It certainly is important to see if Dick and/or Rove can be busted for jiggering the evidence, but aren't we forgetting somebody? Why is there no examination of Gordon Smith's role in the greatest fish kill in recorded Western history, on his own electoral behalf?

The pieces have come out in dribs. They haven't been connected, but the evidence has been there all along of Smith's very active efforts to do whatever he could to prioritize the farmers of the lower Klamath . You have to pay for the archives of the Klamath Herald and News, but the since-departed John Bragg followed Smith's involvement from the very beginning in early 2001, as the Bush administration sauntered in after Inauguration Day and the water level crisis began. If you want to see any of the articles in their entirety I will email them to you for educational use.

On March 30 in 2001, here's how passive Gordo wasn't being about the looming situation:

Sen. Gordon Smith has asked President Bush to step into the debate over what should be done with Klamath Basin water. In a letter to Bush Thursday, Smith outlined the situation which pits the needs of irrigators against the needs of endangered species.

"I have been working for several months to try to head off the crisis that the farmers I represent are currently facing," Smith wrote. He requested Bush to make emergency funds available for farmers this summer.

"I respectfully request that your domestic policy team become involved in this issue today," he wrote.

Smith, R-Ore., told Bush that while the Klamath Basin farmers "no doubt" are suffering the effects of a severe drought, they were suffering more from the effects of the previous administration.

"Added to the natural drought is a regulatory drought that could leave them with no water for their crops. This should not happen on your watch," Smith wrote.

Note that Smith didn't actually ask Bush; he asked the "domestic policy team." Karl Rove is the head of domestic policy in the White House.

If you take nothing else from this particular piece, and all the shitty little ways Gordon Smith interjected his personal and political gain into the supposedly scientific decision about who gets the water, continue to ask Smith this question until you get an answer:

Why is a US Senator asking the head of executive domestic policy to intervene in a matter handled normally by science agencies and in dispute by the courts? In other words, what business was it of Rove's, and for that matter what about Smith? Was that a proper thing to do?

That was just the beginning of Smith's attempts to reverse the conclusion that water levels had to be raised, costing farmers water. Just 10 days later, Smith stood in a banquet room of the Klamath Shilo Inn after the decision to protect the fish came down, and said "I am here to be your whipping post"--and whipped he was, by about 700 angry farmers telling him they wanted the law changed.

Smith was sympathetic, but "wasted no time in telling the small group he was seeking ideas to take back to Washington, D.C." (700 is small??) And he tried to spin the crowd. According the Herald, despite the angry mood of the crowd at Dick Cheney's decision to follow the law (at first), Smith was clearly in the loop on exactly the same thing a Cheney aide heard the VP say (as we learned today from WaPo:

Another person told Smith he was upset to hear that the decision had received the approval of Vice President Dick Cheney. "I thought Cheney was on our side," the man said.

But Smith said the decision, bitter as it was, constituted a victory of sorts.

At the end of March the outlook was no water for anyone in the Basin, he explained.

"Dick Cheney stopped that order from coming down," Smith said. "He ordered the biologists back to Washington" to see if there were some way to get around the conclusion that all available water must go to protect endangered suckers in Upper Klamath Lake and threatened coho salmon in the lower Klamath River.

Sources told the Herald and News that more than 80 biologists from federal agencies and tribes attended a whirlwind of meetings last week in Washington to review the science behind the biological opinions.

"There wasn't a single scientist who would back the administration in court," Smith said. [you bet those are my emphs!]

I'm sure Smith intended to mean that no scientist concluded the initial findings were defensible. But of course the reality is that he was being literal--none would back the administration in court because they were there NOT to back the administration, in order to justify the administration's reversal. That they could make Gordon Smith look like the hero of the farmers, getting Dick Cheney to force those damn Washington scientists to redo their math and put irrigation first, was likely just a sweet bonus to Cheney, but it surely mattered all the world to electoral nerd Karl Rove.

How else did Gordon Smith work his own magic? How about telling an outright fib to distort the debate and color public opinion? From the May 8th, 2001 Herald:

When U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith came to Klamath Falls to offer his support to farmers April 7, he expressed puzzlement about the suckers that dwell in Upper Klamath Lake.

He didn't know, Smith told a crowd of 600 or more gathered to hear him at the Shilo Inn, how government could consider endangered a fish it had once tried to extinguish by means of poison.

Smith misspoke, and another Klamath Basin "rural myth'' was perpetuated.

There is no evidence that anyone ever tried to eliminate Lost River or shortnose suckers from Upper Klamath Lake, said Roger Smith, Klamath district biologist for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Chris Matthews, a spokesman for Sen. Smith, said he did not know what was the basis for the senator's comment.

Notice this is the same gathering at the Shilo as in the previous story a month earlier, and the 30 days caused 100 attendees to vanish from the event! I love our media.

What else did Smith do? How about introducing a law for which he was the sole sponsor, making it easier to delist species from the endangered and threatened lists, giving more powers to states, and removing the requirement of the Secretary to evaluate regulations which would adversely affect habitat? And here's yet another sentinel from Smith that suggests he knew exactly where Cheney and Rove were headed:

(1) BEST SCIENTIFIC AND COMMERCIAL DATA AVAILABLE- Where this Act requires the Secretary to use the best scientific and commercial data available, the Secretary, when evaluating comparable data, shall give greater weight to scientific or commercial data that is empirical or has been field-tested or peer-reviewed.'.

In the NAS decision that reversed the initial finding and literally opened the floodgates, the central contention was that the so called "Hardy Phase II" reports that informed much of the scientific reccomendation was only a draft and had not been fully reviewed. How amazing is that kind of foresight, to put such a clause right at the top of your bill? Fascinating.

The initial thoughts of calling in the "God Squad," as laid out in the WaPo series and an idea that was later rejected, is noted at the time by the Herald on May 18 featuring that OTHER Republican:

The God Squad, formally known as the Endangered Species Committee, could be convened under a provision of the 1973 Endangered Species Act. The law contains a provision allowing a special panel to declare an exemption to the law's requirement that threatened or endangered species be protected before all other considerations.

"We have been contacted by several of our constituents who have posed legitimate questions about this statutory exemption under the ESA," Walden, R-Ore., and Herger, R-Calif., wrote in a joint letter sent to Norton Thursday.

Convening the God Squad might allow the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation an exemption to its operations plan that requires all available water stored in Upper Klamath Lake to be held to protect habitat for endangered suckers or sent downstream to protect habitat for coho salmon, Walden and Herger said.

Then in August Smith helped shepherd through a bill providing $20 million in direct relief to any farmer who suffered a decline in irrigation supply. As WaPo detailed, even more was coming, and Smith pushed for those as well (although it should be said that much of the Oregon delegation at the time was in favor of subsidies to the farmers).

That's just the stuff that happened in public. How did Smith become so canny at knowing what the next steps in the Cheney strategy were, before they were even implemented? He sure seems like an active listener, y'know?

More to come.

Summer of Steve! Give him some mojo.

2007-06-27T18:00:00.000-07:00

Steve Novick has been out and about this week, raising up some cash in his effort to defeat (boo, hiss) Gordon Smith.

Here at LO, we've raised $220 for Steve's campaign! We'd love to double or even TRIPLE that total by Sunday, so please give 'til it hurts. We want to see Steve end this month with some big time mojo.

Our hero has been out and about, attending a house party earlier in the week hosted by the lovely and talented Bev Stein. He also had a house party last evening, a fundraiser in Seattle tomorrow AND is meeting supporters in Hermiston on Sunday.

That's right, I said Hermiston.

Steve is also planning on being in Ashland over the July 4th holiday.

A man working this hard deserves your love and your support. Let's rock Steve's world tonight with your donations.

Hooley: Investigate Cheney for Klamath Debacle

2007-06-27T17:28:00.000-07:00

Darlene wants some answers:

Rep. Darlene Hooley, D-Ore., is leading the call for a congressional investigation into Vice President Dick Cheney's involvement in the Klamath Basin water dispute in 2001.

A story in The Washington Post Wednesday detailed Cheney's management of the situation as an example of his efforts "to undercut long-standing environmental regulations for the benefit of business." The story reported that he called mid-level Interior officials in an effort to divert the water to farmers at the expense of the salmon run.

Hooley and Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., on Wednesday evening circulated a letter among their House colleagues asking Rep. Nick Rahall, chairman of the House Resources Committee, to investigate. Thirty-four of their colleagues signed the letter, including Oregon Democrats Earl Blumenauer, Peter DeFazio and David Wu.

Of course Greg Walden's name appears nowhere on the list of people who want to see oversight conducted of the Vice President's office.

Another Challenger for Gordo?

2007-06-27T13:30:00.000-07:00

Chris Rizo at the Ashland Daily Tidings has the scoop:

Jefferson Public Radio talk-show host Jeff Golden of Ashland is considering a run for U.S. Senate.

While insiders said he is interested in the Democratic contest, Golden downplayed the speculation Monday, saying "it's too early" and "no firm decision has been made" on whether he will run.

A member of Golden's inner circle, who insisted on anonymity, said Golden's campaign announcement would unlikely come before September, if at all.

Paulie Brading, chair of the Jackson County Democratic Central Committee, said Monday that she has heard of Golden's political aspirations "from a variety of people," including Golden.

The Democratic National Senatorial Committee, she said, has done extensive polling in the state in hopes of finding a candidate to unseat Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon, the GOP's only West Coast senator.

Golden, 57, an author and host of JPR's weekday radio show "The Jefferson Exchange," was a Jackson County commissioner from 1987 through 1990.

He was the target of an unsuccessful recall attempt spearheaded by logging interests in 1989, and was married to former longtime Ashland Mayor Cathy Shaw, now an A-list Democratic strategist in Southern Oregon.

Golden left the county executive board in 1990 to run for state Senate, narrowly losing to fourth-term Republican incumbent Lenn Hannon of Ashland.

Soon after, he took a job as chief of staff for then-state Senate President Bill Bradbury, D-Bandon. Bradbury is now secretary of state, Oregon's chief elections officer.

The more the merrier! I know little to nothing about Golden, but every new voice talking about why Gordo needs to be replaced is fine with us.

If you have stories/news about Golden and/or his potential run, share it with us in comments...

Update, 6/28 3pm--
Chris has more today on Golden, including an assessment of his chances by none other than Alan Bates--who appears to have company in the "Dem candidate from Southern Oregon" sweepstakes, and doesn't seem to like it much.

Sizemore:PhD in Dumbassery

2007-06-27T12:53:00.000-07:00

Our Oregon's press release used the phrase "Sizemoronic" to describe rackateering dirtbag Bill Sizemore's latest attempt to sully the lawbooks. A truly appropriate sentiment indeed.

In cahoots with Sizemore on this mess is Oregon GOP vice-president Russ Walker. Walker happens to also be the local headmaster for the Oregon chapter of Freedomworks, who will no doubt be funding part or all of this.

Yesterday Sizemore submitted the first of his stupendously inane ballot initiatives. No word on who is funding them yet...but where Sizemore treads Loren Parks is sure to follow.

One of these pieces of idiocy is Iniative 3, which would create a big, fat tax loophole for the folks who sit around the pool waiting for their dividend checks. The initiative allows for the total deduction of federal income taxes from state taxes. It would overwhelmingly favor the wealthiest in the state.

The other is Initiative Petition 19. This one really pisses me off.

IP19 would force all students in school to learn in English after their first two years in public school. NonEnglish speakers who enter the public school system during their K-4 years would get only a year and a half.

Who the fuck died and gave Bill Sizemore a PhD in Education?

One of the better ESL programs in Oregon (from my experience) is out in Forest Grove. They have a large migrant population and many new students enter the FG School District only able to speak Spanish. The District has created a track for students beginning in Kindergarten that's completely bilingual: one day students learn all in English. The next day all instruction is conducted in Spanish. Students who spend most or all of their K-12 years in the district are completely bilingual when they leave the system.

Under the Sizemore/Walker initiative, this stellar program would have to be eliminated.

What qualifies these two as experts in Education...or as experts in English, for that matter?

Wyden in The Hill--way bigger potatoes than LO

2007-06-27T11:24:00.000-07:00

Oregon Senator Ron Wyden is working the juice on his Healthy Americans Act. This time from the DC angle.

Wyden has a video up on The Hill's blog (which is a much bigger deal than anything we can do here) as well as an op-ed:

Some may question the fairness of requiring individuals to buy a basic health insurance policy. People who are insured today often ask why they should support any changes. Here’s why: as Senator Bennett has often noted, all of us already pay for universal coverage. Federal law entitles anyone who needs it to treatment in the nation’s hospital emergency rooms.

Its a little dry--but not a long read. But its worthy of your time because of its bullet-point overview of the Healthy Americans Act.

If you want to know what your Senator is doing to try and save you some serious cash, this is it.

Johnson appeals directly to constituents

2007-06-26T14:54:00.000-07:00

During one of my weekly excursions to the nether-regions of Washington County, I stopped by BJ's Coffee in Forest Grove for one of their top notch mochas. On the way in, the local paper caught my eye. Emblazened above the fold is a bizarre story about a bunch of kids hijacking a ginormous Shrek doll. As well as an announcement about the new invitees to the Tom McCall Forum hosted by Pacific University. Looks like we're getting the heinous John Bolton and the articulate (but rather ineffective) Lee Hamilton.

So I plunked my fifty cents into the blue paper box and bought the thing. If nothing else the Shrek thing might be fairly entertaining.

And then I opened up the Opinion section.

Staring me in the face is a piece of self-defense prose by State Senator Betsy Johnson. Johnson's district includes Banks, which is apparently serviced by the Forest Grove News-Times.

LO readers already know the drill on Johnson, so there's no need to rehash. But do click on the link and read about her in her own words.

Summer of Steve--On Employee Free Choice, The Difference is Clear

2007-06-26T14:00:00.000-07:00

[putting the money shot at the top--give to Steve Novick's campaign today, to show the Democratic establishment that Oregonians believe in a new, people-oriented direction for the Senate...remember, if you file taxes in Oregon you can get a $50 credit per person for your contributions in each year. It's like the first $50 is free!]

It's Day Two of Summer of Steve Week! The last week of a federal fundraising quarter is always a frenzy for candidates; you're trying to raise as much money as humanly possible before the filing period deadline in order to impress other potential backers that you're not just a candidate--you're a movement! Steve's definitely got a movement going on, and we're part of it. We believe most Oregonians are sick to death of politicians who arrive in DC and immediately don their Protective Bubble of Political Caution(tm), and are hungry for a Democrat in particular who elucidates his or her positions without apology, actually proud instead of seemingly guilty to be holding them.

Speaking of positions Steve is proud of, there's an excellent example in the news today--the Employee Free Choice Act. The essential goal of the legislation is to greatly simplify the process by which willing employees may form a union and assert their rights to collective bargaining. In addition, it places strong penalties on companies who seek to deny or unduly pressure employees not to join. Basically, once a majority of affected employees sign a card authorizing their participation, they're all set.

Why is this important? In an exclusive comment sent to LO after the bill failed a cloture vote this morning in the Senate, Steve himself explains:

It's no accident that we had a fairer economy, with a much smaller gap between the rich and the rest of us, in the 1950's and '60's: More workers were represented by unions, which negotiated a fairer share of the pie for workers. But in the past thirty years, unionization has declined and - no coincidence - inequality has increased. The richest 1% of Americans used to get 10% of total national income; now they get 20%.

One major explanation for declining union density is that employers have taken advantage of the fact that if you illegally fire someone for attempting to organize, all you get is a slap on the wrist - so they fire and threaten people. And they take advantage of a cumbersome election process that increases their ability to threaten workers. EFCA would level the playing field, imposing real penalties on employers who break the law. Based on my experience enforcing environmental laws, I know that enforcement and penalties matter. EFCA would also simply the process of choosing a union. It's simple: A stronger labor movement means a stronger, fairer America.

There you have it. In a world where Steve Novick represents us in the Senate, he'd be a solid vote for Oregon's workers, their right to organize and to receive fair treatment in the labor marketplace. How about the guy sitting in DC now? From The Hill last Wednesday:

Smith opposes the Employee Free Choice Act, which would establish a federal right for a card check unionization process. Smith told The Hill, "It's a payback to labor for their [Democrats] support. It's not something supported by the American people."

I'd call bullshit on that last statement especially, and so would Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio. See for yourself:

For the record, every Democratic candidate for President except Mike Gravel backed the bill, with Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Obama, and Kucinich all co-sponsoring it. Smith (and Walden) were the only members of the Oregon delegation to vote against it.

On issues like standing up for the people who awake each day and trudge off to work to put food on their families(!), there's just no comparison between Gordo and Steve Novick. Can you help put a shine on Steve's 2nd Quarter fundraising statement, by giving what you can to his campaign? Anything helps, honestly--just please do it by Friday so it counts in this quarter. Some people still don't believe Steve can overcome the obstacles and win. His whole life proves that wrong; now's your chance to offer a little proof of your own.

OR House Dems--1 OR House GOP--suck

2007-06-25T17:07:00.000-07:00

It must be hell to be a Republican in the Oregon House these days. The only thing they can do is dig in their heels with parliamentary procedures in an attempt to scuttle legislation.

Oh..and browbeat their caucus with threats of a primary challenger while using their legislative offices as defacto campaign headquarters, but I digress.

This afternoon, the House approved HB2575, creating a Family Leave Act for Oregonians. The bill establishes a $250 per week for a six week maximum for childbirth, adoption or serious family illness.

The House Republicans, in a lockstep show of immorality--attempted to scuttle the bill using various parliamentary procedures--and according to a press release from Dianne Rosenbaum:

"....at one point even threatening to flee the Capitol in order to deny the House a quorum. The Republican caucus--with the support of tobacco lobbysists, out-of-state corporations and national conservative groups--also repeatedly questioned a previous legal ruling declaring that the measure would require a simple 31-vote majority for passage."

The Summer of Steve starts NOW

2007-06-25T13:40:00.000-07:00

Update, 330pm--
if you're a DailyKos account holder, it would be great if you went here and recommended the diary to give it more visibility. We'll probably be posting one every day, so if you're over there and you see it, you know what to do.

Every time we see a newspaper or tv fluff piece on Gordon Smith it's enough to make us want to scream. But given that screaming has a limited effectiveness ratio, we've decided to try something more constructive.

In our eensy weensy capacity to create ripples, we've decided to declare this the Summer of Steve Novick!

To that end, we're having a mini fundraising drive this week for the Novick campaign. This is the last week for Steve to raise money before the end of the reporting period and we want to give him some momentum.

Keep in mind that Steve is running against a man who says he changed his mind last July after reading Fiasco. Yet Gordon Smith was still declaring his support for the President until at least October. His words of epiphany didn't emerge until the following December. In other words, Smith allowed hundreds of US soldiers to die before he made his "true feelings" on Iraq known to the public.

Ironically, this declaration happened just after the election. Convenient timing, eh?

We know that some of you haven't made up your mind to support Steve's candidacy. It's very early after all. But we hope you'll still consider dropping some cash Steve's way, if for no other reason than Gordon Smith is really pissing you off.

Rove, Smith and the Salmon--the Deeper Story

2007-06-25T10:00:00.000-07:00

[Warning: wonky detail threat is orange for this post...]

Astute readers, or those who read most threads at Blue Oregon (and they are most often the same people) recall the new outbreak of stories about Karl Rove's potentially criminal--certainly greasy--influence on Gordon Smith's 2002 reelection. BlueO tips to the Truthout.org piece by Jason Leopold (a source I am not fully comfortable with) which uses the recently released deposition by Rove aide Susan Ralston {pdf} before Waxman's House Oversight Committee, to paint a larger picture of Rove repeatedly holding meetings in "target states" at federal agency offices to talk about how the political scene needed to be managed to support the President.

That's some crazy shit in it's own right; the White House is trying to weasel out by claiming no directives were given, but they were riding a razor's edge on the Hatch Act by holding partisan political policy meetings on federal property. So it's no wonder Leopold doesn't get sidetracked by the Klamath mention in Ralston's deposition. However for us there are key moments in her testimony that have direct impact on why Smith is running for reelection next fall, rather than sitting at home freezing peas. So the entire deposition is worth reading, and since we trudged over to Waxman's virtual office and rummaged through their files until we found it, you can read it too by following the link above.

It has been known for a fairly long time that Rove held a Powerpoint presentation in Klamath before the 2002 elections, and discussed the fact that Gordon Smith was running in Oregon and the farmers had always been staunch Smith voters (wink, wink). The scene as Rove set it:

On Jan. 5, Mr. Rove accompanied the president to an appearance in Portland with Mr. Smith. The president signaled his desire to accommodate agricultural interests, saying "We'll do everything we can to make sure water is available for those who farm."

The next day, Mr. Rove made sure that commitment didn't fall through the cracks. He visited the 50 Interior managers attending a department retreat at a Fish and Wildlife Service conference center in Shepherdstown, W.Va. In a PowerPoint presentation Mr. Rove also uses when soliciting Republican donors, he brought up the Klamath and made clear that the administration was siding with agricultural interests.

His remarks weren't entirely welcome -- especially by officials grappling with the competing arguments made by environmentalists, who wanted river levels high to protect endangered salmon, and Indian tribes, who depend on the salmon for their livelihoods. Neil McCaleb, then an assistant Interior secretary, recalls the "chilling effect" of Mr. Rove's remarks. Wayne Smith, then with the department's Bureau of Indian Affairs, says Mr. Rove reminded the managers of the need to "support our base." Both men since have left the department.

Senator Kerry got so far as to ask the Inspector General to investigate, and as perhaps you might expect he found no undue influence by Rove--and validated the science used to make the decision to divert water to irrigation. That kind of killed the story, obviously. But how well did the IG's office do their job? Under questioning by Waxman's committee, even with her bureaucratically convenient hazy memory she recalled that Klamath and Smith were a popular topic of conversation:

In 2002, were you familiar with a dispute in Oregon over whether or not to divert water from the Klamath Rìver Basin to nearby farms?
A: I recall that.
What was Mr. Rove's involvement in that dìspute?
A: You know, I do not remember the exact details, but there were djscussions with Barry Jackson, and I guess it would have been Ken Plehlman at the time for the 0ffice of Politìcal Affairs, but as a policy matter, they did discuss it.
Barry Jackson, Ken Mehlman and Mr. Rove discussed this issue?
A: Correct.
Was anyone else involved?
A: Well, as I recall, this subject did come up frequently in our directors meetings. We had a directors' meeting every day, pretty much every day.
What is a "directors' meeting" ?
A: It would be, the participants would have been Karl, myself , Israet Hernandez, each of the directors of the four offices that he managed, and sometimes those directors would bring a deputy, and thjs meetìng was held in his office.
In Karl Rove's office?
A: Correct. And we met almost every day.
For how long was the subject of the "Klamath River Basin water diversion" issue a topìc of these directors' meetings?
A: Oh, I can't say specifically, but it was definìtely mentioned on multiple occasions.

Were you aware that the Interior Department's inspector general investigated the White House's involvement in the Interìor Department's decision about Klamath River water levels?
A: I do not remember that.

It kept coming up at Karl Rove's daily meetings of all the office heads and their deputies. Somehow, this did not raise the suspicion of the Inspector General--why it kept coming up in a political policy office what civil service agencies were doing in the Klamath Basin--for as Ralston notes, she can't even recall the investigation in the first place. How would the top aide to Karl Rove not remember whether there was an investigation? Come on, now--unless it was so feeble it could legitimately be forgotten.

Maybe it was--it's unclear whether White House emails were examined by the IG, but according to Ralston they certainly never asked to see any of the emails Rove sent via RNC servers, which now appear to be where all the skeletons were buried. Again, from the deposition:

Beyond Mr. Fitzgerald's requests, were there other requests from other investigators for Mr. Rove's e-mails?
A: There may have been, but the only other major investigation that I recall specifically was related to Enron.
Do you know when that would have been?
A: I believe that was in 2001 sometime.
And you think in 2001- that Mr. Rove searched his e-mails to respond to a request from investigators relating to Enron?
A: He or I searched.
And that search included a search of political e-mails sent over the political account?
A: Correct.
Were other White House officials aware that Mr. Rove in 2001- was providing e-mails from his political accounts to investigators who were looking at Enron?
A: I believe so, because all of the documents that we collected were then turned over to the White House Counsel's Office.

No wonder the IG didn't find anything to nail Rove with on the river diversion; either their office was ignorant of the fact that he was conducting most of his White House business over RNC email systems--or they knew and opted not to pry. And beyond the unexamined emails, there doesn't appear to have been much of any serious investigating going on, given that Ralston can't even remember there being one.

So let's be clear on what we have:

Karl Rove taking great interest in water policy in Oregon, coincidentally at the same time Gordon Smith was running for reelection
Karl Rove meeting on federal property to make clear that the administration sided with the farmers.
Karl Rove meeting with the farmers to make clear the administration sided with them.
Two federal agencies which cited their best available evidence (the appropriate standard for decisionmaking in this case) had their findings overruled on the basis of inconclusivity (which is NOT the appropriate standard), with the excuse that an important report used in the original findings was only a draft report and could not be considered definitive--even though the overruling report was itself an interim set of conclusions.
A federal judge rejecting the Bush administration's plan for allocating water in the basin, which favored farmers. One of the principal biologists working on the plan claims his drafted opinions were twice rejected by the Bureau of Reclamation, which created the plan, in favor of those which afforded farmers more water.
When Rep. Greg Walden discovered water might be restricted to farmers, his first call went to Karl Rove. The plan was dropped.
An investigation was done into the possible influence of the White House--but the prime target's top aide can't even remember that there was one, and no pertinent emails outside of White House channels were ever reviewed.

Something stinks, and it isn't old salmon.

[postscript--for further reading on this highly complex subject, you might try some of these sources...]

For info on the Endangered Species Act and how it applies to salmon in the Klamath Basin, this online book is rich with detailed information.

For the House Democrats' perspective on how dirty this all is, this is a good source.

For California state officials' endorsement and opinion on the "Hardy Phase II" report, which was the primary document suggested the need for higher water flows protecting the salmon, read this pdf. To see opposing views on it from the farmers, this doc is appropriate.

More documentation on the efficacy of reducing water flows is here; this report attempts to show that revenue from recreation well exceeds the potential for revenue from farming if water is diverted. Neither this report nor the Hardy study were ever allowed to go past draft form, House Democrats allege.

And for a rich trove of timelined links on both sides of the issue, here's a resource page from a UO professor on watershed science and policy.

Spanning the State--Oversight correction edition

2007-06-24T09:10:00.000-07:00

TJ and I have jobs that we've divvied up between us for the management and operations of Loaded Orygun. One of my jobs is supposed to be to update and maintain the blogroll on the right sidebar.

Frankly--I suck at it. I don't remember to do it and I'm notorious for not adding really obvious links. This morning I've attempted to add a few things that should have been over there ages ago.

Specifically, I added a link to the Green Party, MIPRAP's blog,Our Oregon,The Portland Mercury and Blogtown PDX.

So please take a minute to review the blogroll on the right hand side. And if you have suggestions for additions, please feel free to let me know via email to loadedorygun (at) gmail (dot) com.

And now, let's Span the State!

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::gong:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Speaking of the Green Party, their State Convention is today in Corvallis.

The Tillamook Headlight Herald has a piece showing the growing pains in Pacific City.

OSU Beaver Baseball is on the threshold of back to back national championships. Yesterday's rout of the North Carolina Tarheels sets the stage for today's game. You can watch it this afternoon at 4PM on ESPN2 or listen to it on the radio: KBZY (1490 AM), KEJO (1240 AM), KUIK (1360 AM).

Another stupid and inane recall petition has been filed, this time in Molalla. Based on my weekly review of newspapers and mainstream media outlets in Oregon, these type of recalls are done most often in more conservative areas of our state, demonstrating an abuse of the recall system. This abuse is an extreme waste of taxpayer dollars and valuable time of government employees. Ironic, isn't it?

A contentious feud over a Measure 37 claim in Yamhill County appears to have turned violent. Yamhill County resident Michelle Michelsen has been strongly and vocally opposed to a M37 claim filed by her neighbor, John Kroo. Wednesday morning Michelsen discovered that one of their minature horses had been shot to death with a pellet gun and another had been injured. Kroo has threatened Michelsen in the past with a letter warning of "consequences" for her attempts to throw up legal roadblocks to Kroo's attempts to develop.

Senator Ron Wyden held a town hall meeting in Burns to highlight his support of county timber payments.

The Bend Bulletin's gleeful hatred of Senate Bill 30 (which bans destination resorts at the Metolius River Basin) bubbles over into their latest news coverage of the bill. Interestingly, the Bulletin also includes photos of the two lobbyists trying to kill the bill in Salem, Rick Allen and Hasina Squires, who will certainly reap a windfall if the bill is scuttled.

A 12 year old boy from Baker City scored a once in a lifetime big horned sheep tag.

Must We Say "Told You So?"

2007-06-23T18:10:00.000-07:00

What did we say? We said if more stories on Betsy Johnson come out without any seeming reason for their appearance, start believing that it's not a coincidence of newsworthiness that's behind it. Yesterday The O (along with other outlets at least including KATU by personal observance) ran a short brief noting that Standards and Practices agreed to conduct an investigation into the filing of Johnson's required forms; we're not talking about that--there's a completely legitimate reason to run that story. The fact that this is almost literally the only thing Johnson has admitted fault for makes it a rather unexciting story overall, but it's certainly worth reporting.

The one we're talking about is a six-page (online) retrospective and review of the allegations against Johnson, also displaying further reportage on the pass-through issue and land-sale circumstances in the context of the airport's development history. They make a new allegation--that a previous developer with a similar plan as Ed Freeman's (the Johnson buyer), had his application denied because he wouldn't play ball with Johnson in opposing a gravel mine venture on the same land she would come to sell a decade later. We'll have more on this next week, but the Johnson family denies that threat was made, and contend that the applications compared were not the same either in purpose or quality. In fact they claim the denied application wasn't even clearly aviation-related, so that should give you an idea of the quality of this new charge by the paper.

But again, pull back from the nuts and bolts of the story--if only because the various charges and deals or bills under scrutiny make this such a complex case to discuss. The O's editors are not deaf and blind; they know very well what we've written and what deficiencies we've made clear in their reporting. They also have watched the WWeek's coverage--and one theory given by a longtime Oregon political reporter is that this all started with The O's panic at being scooped yet again by WWeek--and surely saw the latest attempt to push the story retracted in embarrassment. Do they really think this new allegation, or the continued strength of the existing ones, merits six more web pages? Or is someone expressing a strong desire to see this set of non-stories continue?

Ask yourself, for instance, why reporters from The O continue to refer to a "fast $119,000," noting both some element of speed and that it was at least $100,000 that Johnson made. Now we've said this many times: the costs of rezoning, replatting and resurveying the land over the years by Johnson reduced actual profit to the $45,000 range--a little less than 6% on the sale, certainly nothing outrageous even in three months. And The O knows it too; in the broad retrospective piece the reporter mentions deep in the story the $45,000 figure. But up front, above the fold as it were, he calls it a fast $119,000.

And guess what? So did the blurb announcing the investigation, the one that we linked above. But as you'll see now, the $45K figure has been inserted there. The cached version--the one we saw yesterday--doesn't have it. Curious, that they just can't seem to remember to make that qualification so as not to mislead people. (Julia Silverman of AP can, by the way--here's her piece, and she's got both figures there.)

Oh, one other thing Silverman mentions is that "she reported the sale of the property...in April of this year," which The O doesn't seem to want to relate to people either. In the profile piece they call it "a land deal with a developer she has repeatedly aided. She then failed to disclose the deal as state law requires." Well, not quite--unless you make sure to interpret the phrase as "not disclosing it as state law requires," rather than "not disclosing it, as state law requires." Even then, the truth as we'll discuss this week is that the sale was in fact disclosed, although the holding was not at the time. And we'll also go into our discussion with state ethics employees who admit the system is extremely hard to follow properly at times.

New (and shallowly explained) allegations, rehashes of old ones, accusatory language and avoidance of exculpatory evidence--where's the line? When does it stop being simply lazy reportage, and starts becoming active attempts to fulfill and agenda?

The O's Curious Choice of Federal Rep to Fellate on Stem Cells

2007-06-22T15:30:00.000-07:00

Seen The O's op-ed this morning supporting stem cell research? On point, there's certainly nothing to argue with:

This week, some of those scientists in other nations may have been secretly gratified, in fact, when President Bush again vetoed an expansion of U.S. funding for such research. That reaction to the veto may sound callous, but those scientists are only human. Bush's veto all but guarantees that other nations will continue to have an edge in the global race for cures.

Bush's decision in 2001 to drastically limit federal funding for U.S. research held back our own scientists, and, in effect, handicapped the global race in favor of other nations. Private foundations, companies and states are trying to fill the gap, but if they do, it will be unprecedented. Always before, it has taken federal financing to unlock a medical breakthrough.

The O's editors deserve credit for taking the smart position on stem cell research, especially in pointing out the economic disadvantage it puts the US in to block that research. But let's be real here; this is not going out on any kind of political limb to criticize the veto. And it's curious that they made no mention of the House GOP blocking similar legislation at the state level just yesterday.

What's even more curious, however, is the way The O chose to represent the concept that Oregon and its (federal) lawmakers are more in step with the electorate on this issue than the administration. They could have picked the entire group of our Representatives and Senators, because for the first time in recent memory that I can recall, ALL SEVEN of them voted against the President's wishes, Democrats and Republicans alike.

So who did they pick to celebrate as Oregon's champion of stem cells? One guess:

Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., agrees that this is the best use for them. He differentiates such cells from a human life, which he believes begins with "Mom."

As Smith sees it, "If those embryos remain in a petri dish for a thousand years, they will remain cells only, the dust of the Earth. No mother is present, no life has been created."

As Sen. Smith said recently, "We cannot have tomorrow's miracles if we tie scientists' hands with yesterday's rules."

Un-fucking-believable. Not one mention of ANY of the other six legislators who back the research. No, they just happened to select the one guy who desperately needs to appear in step with his constituency, and out of step with Bush's. Hey there Stickel and Co.--I think there's a dab of semen still clinging to your collective chins. Was it good for you?

Dennis Richardson Swings and Misses on Health Care

2007-06-22T15:00:00.000-07:00

As we've noted a couple of times, GOP House member Dennis Richardson likes to pontificate almost blog-style in his weekly newsletters. In the June 15th missive Richardson concerned himself with HJR 19, which seeks to enshrine the right to health care into Oregon's Constitution. Here's a snippet:

[I]n my opinion, although Oregon has already traded the "limited government" enjoyed by our forefathers, for the post New Deal era of social-welfare programs passed by Congress and State Legislatures, HJR 18 will result in a new and historic, Constitutionally-mandated "fundamental" right to State-funded health care…in other words, Constitutional Socialism..

HJR 18 is new ground. If Oregon is going to blaze the trail to Constitutional Socialism by providing government guaranteed solutions and "essential safeguards to human life" for health care, what about other and even more fundamental human needs? IF the people are going to be asked to mandate the State to provide health care, should the people also be asked to mandate other "fundamental rights," such as for food and clothing and shelter?

Consider the logic. What benefit is health care if a person is malnourished, inadequately clothed or homeless? Should not a caring society that requires government mandated universal health care also address other, more basic needs for human survival?

Funny you should mention that, Dennis. Your implication appears to be that nobody would suggest with a straight face that Oregonians might approve of guaranteed health care, shelter and food. (Clothing? WTF?) However, just today Steve Novick's campaign has forwarded a tremendously insightful piece from Rick Perlstein of the Nation, suggesting that the electorate is far more progressively tuned than either the media or the GOP would have you believe:

Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007, a massive twenty-year roundup of public opinion from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, tells the story. Is it the responsibility of government to care for those who can't take care of themselves? In 1994, the year conservative Republicans captured Congress, 57 percent of those polled thought so. Now, says Pew, it's 69 percent. (Even 58 percent of Republicans agree. Would that some of them were in Congress.) The proportion of Americans who believe government should guarantee every citizen enough to eat and a place to sleep is 69 percent, too--the highest since 1991. Even 69 percent of self-identified Republicans--and 75 percent of small-business owners!--favor raising the minimum wage by more than $2.

The Pew study was not just asking about do-good, something-for-nothing abstractions. It asked about trade-offs. A majority, 54 percent, think "government should help the needy even if it means greater debt" (it was only 41 percent in 1994). Two-thirds want the government to guarantee health insurance for all citizens. Even among those who otherwise say they would prefer a smaller government, it's 57 percent--the same as the percentage of Americans making more than $75,000 a year who believe "labor unions are necessary to protect the working person." [emphs me]

Let's repeat so it sinks in: at least 2/3 of Americans believe that the government should guarantee health care, food and shelter for all citizens. And a majority are willing to go into debt to accomplish those things.

I urge you to read the whole article; it goes into much greater detail about the conflict between American values and the Democratic Party's inability to champion those values, despite their obvious popularity. And I believe Steve's point in sending folks the link is to suggest that he not only recognizes those values, but believes in them and will stand up for them regardless of what the consultariat tells him. And that's why we endorse him for Senate.

And maybe, just maybe, instead of asking Dennis Richardson why he thinks this is a bad bill for Oregon, we should be asking why the Democratic majority is afraid to take it a step further and enshrine food and shelter as guaranteed commodities for all Oregonians as well. But considering he and 26 of his party colleagues wouldn't even vote for the chance to see what Oregonians think about the idea, this week's Tone Deaf Award goes to Richardson and the state GOP. Wake up and smell the progressivism!

She writes letters (or in this case emails)

2007-06-22T09:03:00.000-07:00

Yesterday TJ inspired us all to write letters to our GOP Senate Minority Leader Ted Ferrioli to tell him what we think is the worst bill of this legislative session. TJ's call to action was in response to Ferrioli and the Senate GOP's request to hear from Oregonians about this topic. Specifically, they asked for the bills that made our "eyes roll".

Thus with pixels in hand, I sent to Ferrioli an email detailing my thoughts on the matter:

Dear Senator Ferrioli and Senate Republicans:

My nominee for the "worst bill of session" is HB3415. For your reference it can be found here:

http://www.leg.state.or.us/07reg/measures/hb3400.dir/hb3415.intro.html

I don't see how its possible for Republicans in the legislature to be any more out of step with Oregonians on the matters of abortion and choice. Not to mention "fetal death"...that is an "eye-roller" if I ever saw one.

Best,
Carla
LoadedOrygun.blogspot.com

You can send your own thoughts on these matters to Senator Ferrioli. Despite all instincts to the contrary, please be polite in your correspondence.

TJ offered up some good ideas to get you started, but maybe you've already got your own. Send them via email to sr.media@state.or.us

Have fun!

Your AM "Carrie" Flashback

2007-06-22T07:20:00.000-07:00

Stephen King-esque:

A valve on a truck hauling animal waste from a Klamath Falls processing plant broke, spilling 4,000 pounds of pig blood.

For those who don't get the Carrie reference, click here. (And if you haven't seen this movie, run..don't walk..to your local video store and rent it).

Will The O and WWeek Quit While They're Behind on Johnson?

2007-06-21T16:45:00.000-07:00

I won't bore you with a long rehash of all the stories we've done the past three weeks on L'affair du Betsy Johnson*, but if you're totally out of the loop you may want to peruse Carla's primer on our coverage before coming back here.

Since the stories first began to appear May 30 in Willamette Week and then The Oregonian, each has done several updates and further references to the controversy, generally expanding the story rather than retrenching on it. WW's Nigel Jaquiss in particular has continued to pump out stories--at least five that we count--that allege conflict of interest and influence peddling for her aviation friends. The O has been slightly less prolific, with what appears to be three more stories since the original one that deal specifically with her, and then another one Sunday discussing the broader question of conflict in the Leg, using Johnson as one example and focusing on her involvement in SB807. (Interestingly, an op-ed on June 10th called attempts to pin SB30 on Johnson's personal interests "cynical"; Jaquiss has been more of the reverse, exploring the SB30 angle in more depth but not burrowing as much into the SB807 part.)

While both outfits have staunchly stood by their stories in our conversations with them, it seems to us that they are no longer as aggressively investigating and reporting on the issue. Neither outlet has either publicly acknowledged LO's findings or criticisms, but after the initial flurry of stories nothing new has emerged in their pages to further support their positions, despite the obvious previous attempts to do so--such as The O's unearthing of a video where Johnson berates Port of St. Helens commissioners on behalf of developer and land-sale partner Ed Freeman, or the "disclosure" that they'd had dealings before, or the news that Johnson had written a letter on behalf of a failed candidate for the Oregon Board of Aviation.

The final straw of embarrassment may have occurred late last week, when Jaquiss attempted to extend the story to Johnson's influence over the Brookings Airport and its potential impact on Bandon Dunes Resort. Adept readers immediately commented that Jaquiss needed a new map of Oregon if he thought the airport was anywhere near Bandon (it's not), and WWeek was forced to pull the piece entirely. It's certainly not often you get to call out a Pulitzer winner for failing to do his homework, and while they did the right thing in yanking the piece (but leaving the comments up) , you know taking that step had to be extremely painful. If I'm Jaquiss' editor, I might say to him privately, "ENOUGH please on Johnson, OK? This shit we clearly do not need."

In fact, although I'm not anyone's editor, I'm willing to wager that among actual, sensible editors this would be the likely response. After all, while they've defended their work in public, they have each tacitly admitted making errors by dint of removing reference to those errors in future copy. As the famous saying goes, "if your mother says she loves you, get a confirmation before you print it"--in other words, nothing's worse than fucking up the facts. And after all the work we've done on this story, there's just no way to phrase it much more delicately without euphemizing...they fucked up the facts.

So, given that context do I think the stories are really over? Well, yes and no. If the genesis of the story was relatively normal, I'd say they are probably finished trying to run the Johnson corruption scandal up their respective flagpoles. They got a tip, they ran it, they got pushback, they defended themselves but subtly started changing their subsequent stories--done.

But what if this isn't any ordinary story tip? What if, as we are coming to believe, this was an orchestrated attempt to bring trouble to Betsy Johnson's doorstep? What if there are those who would either like to a) develop on the Metolius, b) kill Johnson's gubernatorial aspirations before they gestate, or c) both--and they are continuing to push more allegations on the media? In other words, what if their sources aren't taking no for an answer, and WW or the O aren't necessarily predisposed to tell them no?

So watch the papers over the next week or two. If nothing more comes out on this story, The O and WW will have licked their wounds in private and moved on, hoping by their non-acknowledgment of error they can escape with reputations mostly intact. But if they keep bringing her up one way or another like The O did in Sunday's piece on legislative conflict in general, we think there's gotta be some other reason behind it--some other reason being pushed by some other entity. Papers don't print stories they know may get them into trouble unless they have other reasons for doing so. While we can't show them to you because they're behind a firewall, The Bend Bulletin has also gone nearly apoplectic in their editorials about Johnson and SB30; they're wingnutty at the Bulletin but I'm not convinced they got that way on their own.

Will they quit while they're behind? We'll see. And if they don't, ask yourself--"why are they still running these stories? Shouldn't they at least try to close up the holes in the ones they've already run, before they ask us to swallow more?"

Better yet, ask them.

*don't bother correcting my French; I already confess ignorance

Freep the Senate GOP's "Worst Bill of Session" Poll!

2007-06-21T15:45:00.000-07:00

Wanna have some fun?

As the final hours of session tick off the clock, the Senate Republican Office wants your thoughts:

What is your vote for the worst bill of the session? There are plenty to choose from whether your pet peeve is increased taxes, more of big brother, or just really stupid ideas.

Please let us know what bill made you roll your eyes and throw something across the room, and we will tally the results for a future Capitol Update. You can contact us either by replying to this e-mail or sending a new one to sr.media@state.or.us.

I guess asking Republicans about really stupid ideas makes sense, since they're the ones pushing most of them this session. Here are some choices, or suggest your own!

HB 2680, to turn the DMV into the Homeland Security Department in order to check driver's citizenship papers.
HB 2682, which does the same thing to local cops, allowing them to arrest those with "probable cause" of being here illegally. What would the standard of cause be exactly--hanging around a tapas bar?
HB 2684, making English the "official language of Oregon."
HB 3415, requiring a 24-hour waiting period to get an abortion, and changes the record of an abortion from termination to "fetal death."
SB 698, "to repair stairwells in old part of State Capitol."
SB 585, eliminating taxes on capital gains entirely.
HJM 16, asking the federal government to cease "over-regulating
Oregon's public lands and water."

You get the idea. If you want to look through the bills yourself to find some gems, here's a good start page. And here's a hint--if you use the House and Senate tables (both pdf) to see which ones were sponsored by which lawmaker, you can zero in on people like Kim Thatcher, Dennis Richardson and Gene Whisnant and find some doozies. I've barely scratched the surface here...

Get to it! And if you have room in your email, ask them: "Is this REALLY what the Senate Minority Office thinks is important with a week left to go in session? Is this actually how they're spending their time supposedly doing our work?"

CQ: Smith's Senate Seat is "Republican Favored"

2007-06-21T07:52:00.000-07:00

Congressional Quarterly has come out with its latest ratings for the thirty-three 2008 Senate races. Here's their take on Oregon and Gordon Smith:

Incumbent: Gordon Smith (first elected in 1996)

CQPolitics.com Rating: Republican Favored

The 2008 Oregon Senate contest, in which Smith will try for a third term, began the election cycle with a more competitive “Leans Republican” rating from CQPolitics.com, and could eventually move back in that direction. Oregon, though not quite a Democratic stronghold, has been trending in the direction of that party, which has carried the state in the past five presidential elections.

Yet Smith’s odds for winning re-election have improved in recent months. Part of this is because of some very public breaks with President Bush — particularly over his handling of the war in Iraq — that reflect public opinion in Oregon and also burnish Smith’s reputation as a Republican centrist.

But perhaps the bigger reason for his improved outlook is that no state has produced more frustration for Democratic recruiters so far in the 2008 cycle. Their early efforts focused on the state’s U.S House delegation, in which Democrats hold four of the five seats. But one by one, Reps. Peter A. DeFazio, Earl Blumenauer and David Wu took themselves out of the running, joined by the fourth House Democrat, Darlene Hooley, who never was seen as seriously considering a Senate bid.

Currently, the only Democratic candidate is lawyer and activist Steve Novick, best known for leading the successful fight against a state anti-tax ballot initiative last November. Novick has considerable credibility in the Portland political community, but is virtually unknown outside of it. Other possible candidates could include Republican-turned-Democrat state Sen. Ben Westlund and Senate Majority Whip Alan Bates.

There also is the possibility of an independent candidacy that could require the recalculation of the political odds in Oregon: John Frohnmayer, who headed the National Endowment for the Arts under President George H.W. Bush, has hinted at such a bid next year.

Regardless of who runs against him, Smith will not lack for resources. He reported $2.8 million on hand and has said he could raise as much as $10 million for the race.

This seems to be a fairly reasonable assessment of what we're up against.

Thoughts?

What all the fuss is about

2007-06-20T18:42:00.000-07:00

I didn't manage to get the summary of the legislation bridging the M37 fix into a JPEG.

But no matter.

The entire bill is now up on the legislature's website.

Roar your terrible roars and gnash your terrible teeth at your own risk.

When policy disagreements attack....!

2007-06-20T16:30:00.000-07:00

The LO email box was the recipient today of a link to Oregon Aviation Revealed, sponsored (and presumably written) by Miki Barnes and her husband David--although their names don't appear anywhere on the site. Miki sent the email to us, and when we inquired about the owner/propietor of the site Miki told us that it was herself and her husband.

If you click the link, you can see that Mrs. Barnes claims that Senate Bill 807 is an inconsiderate piece of legislation which allows public funds to be used to "subsidize" private aviation:

Oregon Senate Bill (SB) 807, sponsored by Senator Betsy Johnson, makes provisions by which surrounding communities may be taxed on behalf of rural airport owners and operators eager to line their pockets at public expense by engaging in flight training, aircraft sales and maintenance, helicopter and fixed wing scenic tours, and various other for-profit aviation activities. This legislation gives no consideration to residents in both urban and rural communities who are opposed to loud, intrusive, polluting aviation activity as well as the safety and security risks that are direct result of aviation growth and expansion.

That the legislature would even seriously consider taxing surrounding communities for airports many residents don't even want and that serve the private owners and operators rather than the public good is galling beyond belief.

Among the provisions in Senate Bill 807 is a section that allows for the Oregon Economic and Community Development Department to "enter into agreements providing for a partial rebate of new property tax revenues to the airport sponsor that operates and maintains the airport within the airport tax increment financing district."

Barnes also takes a swipe at Betsy Johnson:

Senator Betsy Johnson was highly instrumental in establishing the Oregon State Department of Aviation (ODA) as separate from the Oregon Department of Transportation.

Since its inception in 2000, the (ODA) has funneled more than $66 million into the aviation industry - a substantial portion of which came from federal tax dollars. ODA also receives money from the Oregon Department of Transportation.

According to its website, the purpose of the ODA is to advocate for the growth of airports in Oregon and to provide "assistance to aviation constituents, airport owners/sponsors and aviation system users throughout Oregon."

In other words, Oregon has an entire government department designed to channel public funds into private aviation business interests.

What will the Oregon Legislature come up with next --a department to fund golf courses, country clubs, and yachting events?

And then this gem:

Transwestern Aviation, a business founded by Johnson and now run by her husband John Helm, sells fuel, offers sightseeing tours, and provides aircraft maintenance. It is located at Scappoose Airport, a facility that has positioned itself on the receiving end of more than a half million dollars of ODA funds over the past 5 years - $144,000 in 2006, $72,000 in 2005, $10,000 in 2004, $59,041 in 2003, $110,000 in 2002, $150,000 in 2001. Clearly Johnson and Helm have benefited greatly from creating a department of government that uses taxpayer dollars to underwrite the private aviation interests of themselves and their cohorts. But they are not alone - other GA airports throughout the area that have also profited from this arrangement include Aurora - over $3 million, Mulino - $823,000, Hillsboro - over $15 million, Troutdale - $695,000, and McMinnville - $1,419,000.

No word from Barnes as to exactly how the measly $100+k per year that Scappoose Airport got from the ODA was used. Perhaps to fill potholes in the runway? Perhaps to repair or replace damaged equipment? These are PUBLIC airports, after all.

I'm not in a position to necessarily defend or negate the points of SB807. But I tire of these lame attempts to link Johnson to some sort of nefarious activity that benefits her and this laundry list of cronies--when its clear that this is not the case.

Especially when Barnes' issue isn't about the money. Its about noise.

Barnes apparently doesn't like airports very much. In fact, she's gone out of her way to make herself heard on the issue repeatedly.

Barnes doesn't want airports expanded and economically stable because they're NOISY.

So this is a policy disagreement having nothing to do with unethical or corrupt behavior by Betsy Johnson.

Interestingly, Willamette Week's error-problemed yanked piece, built part of the piece's premise on the question of whether or not public money should be used to promote rural aviation-related businesses.

Coincidence?

M37 fix attempts to create "bridge to Election Day"

2007-06-20T09:28:00.000-07:00

One of the best parts of political theatre for me is watching right wingers run around screaming like their hair is on fire!:

Many people have spent thousands of dollars trying to vest their rights – BERGER AND CLEM’S BILL TAKES AWAY ONE OF YOUR OPTIONS UNDER THE LEGISLATURE’S REFERRAL!!!!!! YOU COULD LOSE EVERYTHING YOU HAVE SPENT TRYING TO VEST YOUR RIGHTS!!!!

Wow! Caps and exclamation points GALORE!!!!!! Now if only they had bolded the text we'd get to see such a trifecta of pants wetting that at least one bowl of microwave popcorn would be in order. But alas, the author failed us. Oh well.

I'm still playing catch up on Berger and Clem's bill--and frankly so is the author of this blog post. The text of the bill was only placed on the desks of legislators just this morning, so this blog author has no fucking idea what the bill does. But righties are nothing if not alarmists and scare mongerers...so these tactics are not surprising.

I managed to acquire a summary of HB3569 this morning. According to the summary, the bill is sponsored by Brian Clem (D-Salem) and Vicki Berger (R-Salem) at the request of former Guvs Vic Atiyeh and Barbara Roberts and a guy named John D. Gray (Who apparently I should know--but I don't. Enlighten me in comments, please).

Here are the "key components" listed on the summary:

• Rights to develop 1- 3 lots in an approved waiver located outside urban growth boundaries are transferable. Section 2(1), 2(2).

• No matter what happens to HB 3540 on the November ballot, transferability approved for 1 - 3 lot waivers under HB 3569 remains valid.

• 3-lot cap on claims on high-value farm or forest land, or in groundwater restricted areas.

• 4-10 lot claims not on high-value farm or forest land or in groundwater restricted areas are streamlined by HB 3569.

• Claims greater than 10 lots are limited to 10 lots until 12/06/07; limit continues if voters approve HB 3540.

• Requires that permits to implement any waiver must conform to HB 3569 until 12/06/07. Section 2(4).

• Allows existing claims may be “amended down” to seek 1-3 lots on high-value land, or 4-10 lots on non-high value land. Section 2(5)(b).

• The bill “sunsets” December 6, 2007. Section 3.

• Goes into effect immediately on passage. Section 4.

This looks to me like an effort to keep big money developers from pushing forward with their claims using their hefty resources before the Measure 37 "fix" is decided. So the author at NW Republican is right..it takes away "an option" for big developers to shove through their developments before the public has a chance to weigh in on the fix.

So once again, the right goes to bat for big monied interests and the left crafts a bipartisan bill in an effort to work with the people.

If I can get this summary converted to a JPEG file, I'll post it on the blog later.

Smith Takes Another Poll Hit--Time for More Anti-War Posturing

2007-06-19T16:30:00.000-07:00

These days Gordon Smith resembles nothing so much as a crab in a slowly warming pot--clearly getting uncomfortable, but with no good ideas on how to get himself out of the situation. And today's news brings word that the water temperature is rising.

First, a splash of background. As you may have seen via BlueO yesterday, over the weekend Smith enlisted the help of columnist George Will to re-burnish his moderate bona fides, with another attempt to make it seem like Smith is against the war. Will updated Smith's desperate meme on ABC's Sunday talk by declaring him the vanguard leader of disaffected Republicans:

George Stephanopoulus: Senator Smith told you that he believes he has, what?, about a dozen Republicans who will then join him in calling for a timetable for withdrawal?

George Will:
Well, that's what he said. That they will be where he is. And that is where he is.

The Republicans are scheduled, frankly, the way they talk, to panic in September. As in a way, they ought to. They're looking at another election on Iraq, and they'll be picking up the Republican Party in pieces with tweezers.

Your lips to God's ears, George--be sure to tell him this part, from your column:

“Smith has endorsed John McCain's presidential campaign. But the core of McCain's campaign is the puzzling doctrine that if we do not win in Iraq ‘they will follow us home.’ The global threat of terrorism cannot be defeated in Iraq, so, will terrorists not ‘follow us home’ only if U.S. forces continue to engage them in Iraq — where Gen. David Petraeus says there can be no military solution to that nation's afflictions? If so, that implies a need for endless engagement in Iraq, which is not a politically possible option.”

So Will is puzzled, too--and here he doesn't even mention the fact that Smith's most recent vote to fully fund the war was right in line with McCain doctrine. The folks at DPO didn't miss it, though:

“I remember the last time Gordon Smith pulled this stunt,” DPO Executive Director Trent Lutz said. “Last December, after telling as many reporters as he could find that he opposed the war, Senator Smith retreated to the senate chamber and continued voting for the conflict. By consistently voting for the war while telling the public he opposes it, he has lost all credibility with Oregonians. Who is going to believe him now?”

Good question--and the answer appears to be "not as many as before."

This month's Survey USA Senate tracking poll data is out, and the news continues to worsen for Oregon's junior Senator. Last month we did an extensive analysis of the numbers, showing you that Smith had fallen under 50% approval for the first time in a while at 48%, just shy of his 2-year low. However, the gap between approve and disapprove remained steady, at plus-9 or plus-10 for several months in a row.

For May the effect reversed itself--this time the approval number held fairly steady at 47%, but disapprovals jumped six points in a month (from 39% in May) to slash the gap to just two points, at 47-45. When you consider that he was at a healthy plus-28 just six months ago (58/30 in January), that is a tremendous overall drop. Also note that the net approval since January is -11, but the disapproval is +15, meaning that some folks who previously hadn't made up their minds are beginning to reach some conclusions--and they are not good for Gordo. (The "not sure" category has fluctuated back and forth a number of times, so the shift away from that choice may not be permanent).

We told you last time that much of the drop for Smith came from Republicans and non-affiliated voters. This time the GOP has taken Gordo back into the fold a bit, jumping their approval from 55% to 60%--but the news is worse for Smith among Democrats and NAVs. For surveyed Dems, opinions did a symmetrical flip: approval was down five points to 42; disapproval up five to 50, with a net approval loss of 10 points for the Senator. This shift has to be enormously soothing to the DPO and potential Democratic candidates, because in January Smith's approval stood at a whopping 62% among Dems. The 20-point cratering suggests that if they were initially fooled by Smith's pandering on the war, they've gotten over it.

Results among independents show a continued pattern of fluctuation from month to month...and it's another down month for Smith. His approvals within this group are essentially the same (46% down from 47%), but the disapprovals are up to 46% as well, six points more than last month and taken almost entirely from last month's "not sure" pile. Given the general national concordance between Dems and NAV's on the subject of the war, it may be no surprise that both groups saw a surge of decisiveness that trended towards the negative when evaluating Smith.

The other apparent driver for these numbers is the drop among people from places outside the Portland Metro area. As with Dems and NAVs, the recent movement is not so much a fall in approval as a spike in disapproval, fed by hardening opinions. Non-Portlanders went from 40% disapproval last month to 47%, an unusually large surge. Respondents beyond Portland have cut 11 points from his approvals just since March, added 14 points to his disapprovals--and have turned a plus-24 net approval into June's negative-1.

This may be the most troubling bleed of all for Gordo; as we said last time, if he can't figure out a way to motivate voters who aren't from the Big Three counties (Multno, WashCo, ClackaCo) he is severely cooked. And what this iteration of the SUSA survey set shows us is that his Extreme Congressional Makeover has not ended up helping his numbers long-term...and if these latest stats in the month after his vote to fully fund the war until September are any indication, the persistence with which Smith is trying to claim anti-war ground while voting the opposite way might just be starting to annoy some people. The DPO sees the hypocrisy pretty clearly:

“Gordon Smith has voted more than 20 times to authorize and fund the Iraq War and launched two media campaigns to convince Oregonians he opposes it. It does not matter how many reporters he talks to nor how slick his quotes are, he can’t hide his voting record in support of the Iraq War.”

OSU One Game From CWS Final Repeat

2007-06-19T15:00:00.000-07:00

You've probably heard the news by now that Oregon State's baseball team gave Pac-10 rival Arizona State a thrashing yesterday that the Devils won't soon forget, winning 12-6 in a game that was nowhere near as close as it sounds. The O's Jon Canzano called it fate this morning, but while I disagree about the forces driving the Beavers to consecutive national titles, we both believe that they should now be considered the team to beat among those remaining--or at the very least, the team that NOBODY wants to see next on their schedule.

First of all, there's the reality of the double-elimination system used by the NCAA to determine the champion. You're not done after one loss, but you do go into a "loser's bracket" that forces you to beat the other losers...and when you've done that, you have to sweep two games from the team that awaits you in the winner's bracket. After two years of fighting in the bad half, the Beavers are in the catbird seat at 2-0, with a crucial day off today while ASU and Cal-Irvine battle it out for the right to face them tomorrow. They could lose tomorrow, and still would make it to the finals by winning the rematch. As you can see, the deck is stacked heavily in favor of the 2-0 team (although OSU's title from last year is testament to the possibility that you can win from the loser's bracket), so it will take a big collapse not to see Pat Casey's boys playing for the trophy.

And speaking of Casey, it's time to give this man his due as the premier manager in college baseball today. Start with his third consecutive CWS appearance, something few schools accomplish anywhere, much less teams from the northern part of the country where climate interferes with practice and game schedules. Now consider that the 2006-07 Beavers have just TWO starters remaining from last year's championship squad, and you could only conclude that Casey's recruiting skill and teaching system mold winners out of prospects.

Yesterday's game is a strong illustration of what I'm talking about. Much was made by the Sun Devils about the long delay in getting the game going; the previous game went into extra innings and forced OSU and ASU to begin play about 90 minutes late, after only about 20 minutes of on-field warmup time. According to their coach and players, the delay threw them off their game and left them unprepared to go full-bore from the first pitch.

You can see this question go begging down Broadway, can't you? Whose fault is it that they were unprepared? While the Devils sat anxiously, doing nothing, Casey allowed his team to wander about, watch the game in progress, talk with friends and family, play around with a duct tape-covered ping-pong ball--whatever. By all accounts, the Beavers stayed loose, and the Devils stewed. You could tell the difference once the game started, that's for sure.

That's one way Casey adjusted to circumstance and made the right call. Much more importantly, another Casey adjustment on the field showed immediate dividends and essentially ruined ASU's chances. If you read the Canzano piece you'll find this snippet:

Champions never panic. They don't foolishly adjust their game to fit their opponent's style. In boxing, right-handed champions don't get so worried they switch to fighting southpaw. In the NFL, passing teams don't start running the ball. It's why the San Antonio Spurs didn't scrap their slow-tempo, defensive-minded style of play for the wide-open Cleveland Cavaliers.

So given the option of starting No. 2 pitcher Josh Satow or No. 3 Brian Flores, what do you think Murphy did Monday?

He thought, and thought, and worried, and never mind that Satow recently threw eight shutout innings against the Beavers, the coach of the year decided to give Flores the start. But not before he warmed up Satow. And then, Flores. And then, Satow. And then, Flores.

Murphy ended up starting Flores, who was dominant this year, including a game against OSU. Flores' out pitch this year has been a strong changeup to go with his fastball and curve.

If you watched the game, you'll recall that OSU batters got four straight hits in the first, at least three of them right up the middle. That was no accident--the way to approach a guy with a strong change is to adjust your timing and try to keep from doing what low changeups usually make you do...hit a weak grounder left or right. For all of Murphy's pregame hemming and hawing, the Beavers were ready for whichever pitcher it was--because Satow is also blessed with a great change, and when he replaced Flores in the 2nd you could barely tell the difference. If I'm not mistaken, the ball that Lissman hit to make it 6-1 in the 2nd was a changeup left in the middle of the zone. The bottom line is that Casey had his team ready.

And as the game went on, it became obvious how well the Beavers play as a team. In his next at-bat after clubbing a 3-run homer, Lissman BUNTED, safely, down the third base line for a hit. Guys advanced the runner on outs, took the extra base when appropriate, and most crucially made the best of 2-out situations by scoring their first 7 runs that way. Their exquisite defensive positioning consistently allowed players to make outs on hard smashes that nonetheless flew right towards them. Much was made of the offensive explosion, and rightly so--but the truth is that the Beavers won because they shut down the Devils (a team that scored nearly 10 runs a game this season) until the game was out of hand. When pitcher Mike Stutes got himself into a jam, he worked his way out of it with a lazy fly or a tailor made double play (or the benefit of a gem like Darwin Barney's leaping spear of a line drive in the 3rd).

So congrats to the 2007 Beavers, who have incontrovertibly arrived on the college baseball scene. It's no fluke anymore, and yesterday's game was Exhibit A.

Have you ever danced with the Devil by the pale moonlight?

2007-06-19T10:19:00.000-07:00

Via The Trib, here lies the next potential black hole for the City of Portland.

I'm not an expert on these sorts of agreements and I don't play one on this blog, but it sure looks to me like this absolves Pamplin and everybody around him of any enviornmental lawsuits stemming from Ross Island.

Perhaps somebody more legal beagle-ish than me can read through and determine if that's really the case.

While its great that the City is going to get a new park, it seems awfully dangerous to accept this property and have no legal recourse if the previous owner trashed it to the point where its an enviornmental disaster.

Or..you could just pull stuff out of your ass

2007-06-18T12:41:00.001-07:00

Okay...we've scrutinized the Oregonian and Willamette Week for their coverage on Betsy Johnson. But at least they ATTEMPTED journalism.

This blogger writes material that is so insanely without a single attempt to actually source cite his/her work as to be considered negligent.

I realize that many righties need to demonize the people whose politics differ from theirs in order to justify themselves...but this is beyond ridiculous. Any credibility this blogger may have tried to garner for him/herself is completely and totally shot.

Its blogs like this that give all the other blogs a very bad name.

Spanning the State--Monday Monday Edition

2007-06-18T11:52:00.000-07:00

Our absence this weekend left Loaded Orygun without a writer to pick up the slack for our regular Sunday column: Spanning the State. But since I'm back (TJ is still MIA), blogging has resumed.

Thus without further ado and with all due props to The Mamas and the Papas, let's Span the State!

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::gong::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

The good folks over at The Dalles Chronicle have a developed a way for locals to be tourists in their own backyard. The paper has created a list of great day and weekend trips for locals to seek out--while saving money not having to dump as much cash into the gas tank.

The 24th Annual Junior Police Fishing Derby at Detroit Lake was forced to relocate after the Oregon Department of Human Services issued a warning about potentially toxic levels of blue and green algae along the south shore of the lake.

Republicans tell us that they don't like "big government", until something happens that puts it all into perspective. Then big government is just hunky dory. I very much hope that Senator Winters' family pull through their illnesses unscathed. But I do find it ironic that she's seeking a government solution to an enviornmental problem linked to a private business.

Thurston High School shooter Kip Kinkel is arguing for a new trial. Kinkel's attornies are expected to make the case that Kinkel was incapable of understanding his guilty plea because of a mental illness.

Just so progressives understand what they're up against when it comes to gun control and whacknutters, fasten your seat belts (and scroll down to the second letter on the page). The linked LTE calls for the abolishment of the Gun Control Act of 1968. This guy is waaaaaaaay over the edge.

The Coos Bay World takes a look at the effects of suicide on the survivors.

The Eugene Weekly examines how the federal government labels terrorists and terrorism and the net effect those labels have on political speech throughout the country.

Pitchforks and Torches..or the microscope leveled at Betsy Johnson

2007-06-18T11:32:00.000-07:00

Lately I feel as if we've been in the center of one of those old monster films from the forties. You know the kind--the ones where the villagers chase down the film's creature with pitchforks and torches with bloodlust in their eyes.

The series of local media pieces and LO's efforts on Betsy Johnson have left me feeling a bit like I've just turned off Turner Classic Movies after watching one of those films.

The pitchforks and torches meme continued on Friday night with the release of this WW piece (warning: this is a cached version) once again going after Johnson.

I heard about this piece on Saturday morning but was unable to blog about it--I was away from my computer for the weekend. But I had planned to write about the problems with the piece this morning.

The story in question connected dots that made no sense. Comments immediately following the piece demonstrate as much. And to WW's credit--they pulled the story from their website citing a major problem with the story. Further down in comments, Nigel promises a "proper correction will run shortly".

I'm sincerely alarmed by much of the journalism surrounding these stories about Johnson.

****For disclosure's sake--I am planning to start an internship with Willamette Week beginning July 1. I've made decisions about writing the pieces about Johnson with that in mind--trying to keep my own ethics and morality completely intact. That's why much of the reporting critical of Willy Week has come from TJ rather than me. I've felt that I could cross the line with my own conflicts of interest by writing those pieces.

Unfortunately, TJ is still away--unable to blog as he's not near any computer access. This story was important enough that I felt LO needed to say something about it. The blog's integrity (and by extension my own) would not allow for less.****

Paging Dr. Thatcher, You're Needed on the House Floor

2007-06-15T16:15:00.000-07:00

By now you may have heard that the House passed SB 571-C this morning, which furthers the existing indoor smoking ban to include bars, bingo halls and "bowling lanes" (I've never actually seen someone smoking on the bowling lane itself, so I'm guessing they meant the whole alley). The bill now goes back to the Senate so that it may ratify the removal of other exemptions, including Portland's greyhound track.

I had one ear open to the floor debate this morning, and while most of the discussion was fairly predictable--Republicans claiming a huge cost in lost lottery business that they never really tried to substantiate from anyone other than the tobacco companies--I had to chuckle at the most egregious attempt to feign medical knowledge since Bill Frist diagnosed Terry Schiavo via TV magic.

While introducing the bill as the carrier, Democrat Diane Rosenbaum took the time to note the positions of the US Surgeon General and CDC, both of which consider the threat of secondhand smoke a medical fact. That didn't stop Republican Kim Thatcher--not one of our most intellectually rigorous representatives, although competition on that side seems to be stiff--from declaring her independence from pernicious scientific assessment at the highest levels of our goverment.

I knew we were in for a treat when she rose with a stack of papers and said, "I did a little reading on the internet about this..." and proceeded to read snippets of articles she found in such luminary journals as the London Telegraph--not that it's some horrible newspaper, but come on: did she really think a few minutes with Google and the phrase "secondhand smoke" was going to be a winning argument for her? The rest of her speechifying was littered with phrases like these:

“it is not all conclusive that passive smoking causes these health problems”
“workers should choose where they work”
“we shouldn’t be banning peanuts because people are allergic”
“we could start justifying things based on this that we shouldn’t be, uh…I just think it’s a slippery slope.”

Lest anyone in the House be swayed by that highly convincing oratory, Rosenbaum closed her appeal for passage by reiterating the evidence: the OMA’s floor statement on the subject notes that “according to CDC, nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke show increased chance of heart disease by 25-35%; lung cancer by 20-30%.” Returning to the Surgeon General's statement from 2006, she reiterated: “The debate is over. The science is clear. Secondhand smoke is not a mere annoyance but a serious health hazard.”

On the other hand, I'm not even sure who the Surgeon General IS these days (I stopped following them when they began to get fired for asserting such outlandish ideas like masturbation possibly being normal behavior), so maybe we should just take ol' Doc Thatcher's word for it. She used an algorithm!

What Portland COULD Look Like...

2007-06-15T14:30:00.000-07:00

...if our state and local governments were like those in much of the rest of the country, is graphically detailed in this photo essay of downtown Gary, Indiana. I'll pull a couple of the best ones to reprint here:

[that's Gary's Union Station. And you thought ours looked a little hobo-ish!]

[...guess the urban renewal district expired on that block.]

[if you can believe it, this is the REHABBED section of town. But according to the blogger, not a single business is open along that strip. Not one.]

[the bustling crossroads of Gary, gateway to oblivion.]

Gary is basically the southernmost point of the Chicagoland area, and as such you'd think it might conceivably become a useful exurb, where folks might go to escape the high prices of the central city. It used to be a full-fledged standalone city, relying on steel mills to provide lots of solid blue-collar jobs. Obviously, the withdrawal of those mills has left a nasty shell behind, and the city has been unable to truly recover.

You can't directly compare the two cities; while Oregon also abruptly lost its major 20th century industry niche (timber in our case), the effect on Portland was essentially an indirect one. Gary appears to have been hit squarely in the jaw when Big Steel left town. Further, Portland is THE city of Oregon, whereas Gary is an afterthought next to Chicago. Still, it's absolutely true that 35 years ago Portland's central city didn't look tremendously different in places, particularly along Harbor Drive and in the Pearl. The difference is that Portland's leaders of the day didn't throw up their hands and just let the decay continue apace--they rolled up their sleeves and pretty much saved the city, because they believed it could and SHOULD be saved.

Don't ever take our city's health and beauty for granted. I bet Gary would take our homeless population gladly, if they could have the rest of what we have along with it.

Lose Cruise: Unpopular Sen Raises $ For Our Vulnerable One

2007-06-15T13:30:00.000-07:00

Thank goodness that while Gordo works very hard to burnish his moderate image among Oregonians, ultimately he can't escape the fact that he's a member of the Bush-enabling crew who have put us in this handbasket the last six years. So while he's personally richer than 90 of his colleagues, there's no sense in putting that money into his re-election race if someone else will do it for him--and apparently it doesn't really matter who that someone is. From the increasingly on-the-ball DPO:

Voting to continue funding the Iraq War last month was not enough of a slap in the face to Oregonians for U.S. Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR).

Now he’s bringing in a fellow Bush loyalist and ardent Iraq War supporter to bolster his campaign coffers.

United States Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) will raise campaign funds for Smith on a cruise tomorrow evening on the Willamette River.

“Rather than using their seats of power to resolve Iraq and end this war, senators Smith and McConnell continue to support President Bush and continue to fund the Iraq War,” DPO Chair Meredith Wood Smith said. “Before they board that boat on Saturday, Smith and McConnell should apologize for continuing to fund this war and pledge to stop funding this conflict.”

McConnell’s blind support for President Bush and the Iraq War mirror Smith’s record.

Both Smith and McConnell vote with President Bush at least 90 percent of the time, according to Congressional Quarterly.

And McConnell – unlike Smith - is honest about it.

While Smith publicly claims to oppose the war, but then votes for it, McConnell votes for the war and is open about his unrelenting commitment to staying in Iraq. [emph mine]

If you aren't a total politics junkie like we are, you might not know that McConnell is starting to struggle in his home state of Kentucky. Oregon's own John Singer at national blog MyDD has the scoop:

...McConnell is in much worse of a position than many might imagine a Republican from a state seemingly trending towards the GOP might be. To get an idea of this, just take a look at the skewed polling McConnell commissioned to make people believe he is in a stronger position than he is actually in. Safe incumbents just don't do this type of thing. What's more, not only does McConnell have troubles broadly within the Kentucky electorate, he also potentially faces a primary challenge, indicating a possibly underwhelming level of support from within his own party.

So regardless of whether Kentucky Democrats settle on Stumbo -- or businessman Charlie Owen, former congressional candidate Andrew Horne (both of whom Gerth mentions in his article) or someone else -- the Democrats have a real shot at defeating Mitch McConnell this cycle. And at the least, there is a clear opportunity for giving McConnell a good enough scare that he has to curtail his obstructionism and stay at home in his state rather than travel and raise money for other candidates.

Well, apparently he's not TOO scared just yet; the Willamette stands to get a little sludgier this weekend. But the mere fact that he's coming means that a) the NRSC likely thinks he needs to; and b) look who Gordo is turning to, in order to fill his campaign chest. If Bush came to raise money for him, people would understandably be turned off. Mitch McConnell is THE paramount defender of the President's policies for his Senate caucus, and is essentially the #3 man in the party. Isn't having one of the President's prime proxies come to town almost as bad as the real deal?

Alternative universe

2007-06-15T10:43:00.000-07:00

Yesterday I had the privilege of attending the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies Convention, hosted by Willamette Week. The Convention has drawn staff of alternative weekly papers from all over the country.

I came in to the Convention mostly to observe and to find out about the allure of working for these sorts of papers as opposed to dailies, like the Oregonian. What I found was a mix of people who do the work because they're passionate about it (it sure as hell isn't for the money--from what they're saying, these people are paid bupkis).

The first thing I did was meander through the trade show part of the Convention. In attendance were all manner of cartoonists, advice columnists, computer geeks and even free margaritas from one of the vendors (funny that I can't remember which one, eh?). Even Toyota was there--letting alt weekly peeps scurry about Portland in one of their hybrids. Given the construction situation downtown, I found that to be pretty damn brave.

I also attended a couple of forums. The most meaningful for me was an editorial forum on Portland and Oregon--mostly about why our state and its people are generally on the edge of exceptionally cool and interesting public policy. Erik Sten was there (I took it upon myself to make an introduction--I'd never actually met him before) as well as Hank Stern, the News Editor for Willy Week. Also on the panel were George Eighmey, former state legislator and director of Compassion & Choices in Oregon and Madeline Martinez is the Executive Director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

I also managed to make it in for the last 30 minutes of a forum on restaurant reviews/critiques, which I thought would be boring. But the discussion wound around to a discussion of how blogs have effected the work of the critics--and a more general discussion ensued about blogs in general. That turned out to be rather fascinating--the panelists seemed to disagree about the importance of blogs and if bloggers mattered to the food critic world. Interesting stuff.

Unfortunately I'm a little crunched for time today--so I can't go into more detail yet. In fact I'm out of here for the next couple of days. I don't think I'll have computer/internet access. And TJ tells me he's going to be away as well. So LO may have a couple of days without new stuff.

A quick peek into the psyche of Oregon's GOP ideological "braintrust"

2007-06-15T08:24:00.001-07:00

Heh:

"We are attracting (to Oregon) a lot of young, enthusiastic people who aren't particularly well trained and who aren't bringing a lot of human capital to the region."

"The bike lane thing is just a manifestation, and a relatively minor one, of another problem: Why are we trying to build an economy around 1880s technology? We are spending a lot of money on MAX, which has almost no patronage and which cannibalizes the use of bus systems in order to achieve that level of patronage."

"I am wary of some of the underlying science in the whole global warming argument."

"There is basically no inventory of industrial land ... We turned a perfectly good rail yard into the Pearl District."

"We chased off the forest products industry. We have trampled all over property rights."

"We don't have a welcome mat set out for businesses."

"My model of Oregon politics is that it's captive to two forces: the public employees union and the teachers union. Ted Kulongoski -- there's a reason why his chief of staff is the former union head. It's payback for his handling of the pension reductions. Now it's payback time, and that's why you've got $300 million going into K-12. That may be money well spent, but I suspect we'll have no accountability."

These are quotes from Randall Pozdena..here is his bio courtesy of that bastion of conservative "thought", the Cascade Policy Institute:

Randall J. Pozdena, Ph.D. is a consulting economist in Portland, Oregon and Managing Director of ECONorthwest, an economics and financial consulting firm. He is also President of QuantEcon, Inc., and Flash Network Services, Inc., Oregon-based research and Internet technology firms. Dr. Pozdena is an academic advisor to Cascade Policy Institute and has authored previous Cascade reports on K-12 and higher education, Social Security, Oregon government spending and health care.

So what we have here is a guy who believes that Oregon should be a state that considers their people "human capital" and that infrastructure changes which enhance sustainability and liveablility are a blight on the region.

Your GOP thinking at work, folks.

Elections Matter--Even for the Little Things

2007-06-14T17:00:00.000-07:00

We've spent endless hours and words talking about the big issues being decided (or not) in the Legislature this session--gay rights, child health care, land-use regulatory reform, corporate taxation, etc. These are the kinds of issues that make the front pages of the daily papers, perhaps get talked about once in a while on local TV, and are the subject of numerous speeches and campaign pieces that follow sine die.

But not every bill that passes under the dome in Salem is a multi-million dollar use of revenue or tries to answer a grand philosophical question. Sometimes all that's necessary is a little common sense, someone who thinks there should be a change and is willing to do something about it, and the ear of a sympathetic lawmaker.

Such is the case with SB 365, a bill that takes a small step towards making college more affordable for everyone, in an area where previously most of the players just shrugged their shoulders and said, "Hey, that's the market--not much we can do for you, kid." Kudos to OSPIRG for suggesting this bill to Sens Morrisette and Walker, with the help of the Oregon Student Association and members of university communities around the state.

So what does the bill do? First, think back to when you were buying college textbooks (especially if you went to college in the last 20 years or so). Remember going to the U-store to get them, and discovering that "the textbook" also included a study guide, a workbook, a supplement, and these days even a CD or DVD? Even though the professor only required the text itself, you were still on the hook to pay for all the extras that came with it. And what about when you returned the books at the end of the semester? Did you ever experience the blow to the expected thickness of your wallet when the clerk said, "Sorry, there's a new edition this year; we won't take that version as a trade-in?"

SB 365 tries to ameliorate those costly problems. First, the bill requires text vendors to essentially un-bundle their packages, not only detailing for universities exactly what materials are included--but allowing them to select only the textbook itself, and showing the price of just the text up front before schools make the decision to require it.

Additionally, for any book or set of books being offered the manufacturer must note the edition and release year for the current volume, AND any previous editions. Armed with this information the empathetic professor can avoid texts that are due to be re-issued soon, or that seem to undergo constant revision.

How much will this affect the average Oregon college student? Maybe not a lot--but if they're spared having to buy just one "textbook bundle" per semester, it could be upwards of $25, $50, or even more depending on the course and subject. And the best part about it is that the relief goes directly to the students, without having to filter down through the system like increased budget allocations or a new scholarship program. If you buy textbooks, and your profs pay attention to what they're doing, this generally unnoticed new law will probably help you out.

And one other thing to think about: do you suppose a Minnis/Scott-led House would have bothered to pass this? I'll give you a hint with two words...the first one is 'fuck;' the second one is 'no.'

They're Getting Punchy Down at the Leg

2007-06-14T16:00:00.000-07:00

It's a tradition that when the scheduled biennial legislative session begins to wind down, lawmakers, staff and reporters have a "sine die party," which is a fancy way of saying "end of session blowout." All of the battles, arguments, frustration, exhaustion, anger and snark that punctuate any attempt to get something significant done, can be smoothed over and largely forgotten (until next session) when folks get together and laugh it all off. One of the best ways to relieve tension is to be able to laugh at oneself, and one of the tools to allow people to do that is to make a parody video...

...or two. Rescued from the cutting room floor after last night's party*, we bring you two featurettes starring members of the Oregon Legislature--as portrayed by their staffers. They're hilariously amateurish as far as production values go, which is good--I don't want to know how much staff time it took to make them. But it's also interesting to note that just because legislators are stuck in the Salem bubble for 6 months or so, they're still well aware what is being said about them from the outside--and the filmmakers put that scuttlebutt to good use. First up is Rep. Schaufler's The Godfather:

Not bad, and the "absolute power corrupts absolutely" gag at the end is a good punchline. But I like this one even better--Legislative Dragon Super-Committee:

Update midnight--
I should say that the videos were done on free time--shouldn't have suggested they were done on our nickel, sorry.

*or maybe a staffer just sent them to me...

Kitz comes out swinging for Johnson

2007-06-14T11:19:00.000-07:00

Former Guv John Kitzhaber has penned a pro-Betsy Johnson "In My Opinion" piece, which appears on the online version of the Oregonian:

Today, as a law school graduate, business owner and heir, Betsy Johnson could be living in the lap of luxury. She could ignore the problems caused by unemployment or lack of health care. She could ignore the dozens of phone calls she gets each day asking for her help. Instead, she and her husband live in a modest house in Scappoose. She earns $18,000 a year as a state legislator and quietly spends her free time as a philanthropist.

In 1993, she acquired the family home in Camp Sherman and, since the death of her parents, has been solely responsible for the care of 160 acres near the headwaters of the Metolius River. Recently she has been criticized for supporting legislation to protect the Metolius basin from the development of destination resorts. What has been forgotten, however, is that 50 years ago her parents donated the headwaters themselves and the surrounding land to the U.S. Forest Service to ensure that this set of crystal clear springs emerging from the base of Black Butte would be protected for all Oregonians to enjoy.

The remaining family property is extremely valuable and would almost certainly qualify for a claim under Measure 37. And yet Johnson recognizes that it will be even more valuable to future generations if it is left just as it is -- wild, natural and beautiful.

That last paragraph is an exceptional slap in the face, in my opinion. The above is just a snippet. The whole thing is a must read.

A LO Primer on the Betsy Johnson saga (so far)

2007-06-14T07:02:00.000-07:00

Its been suggested to me on several fronts that the winding and weaving we've attempted on the issues surrounding State Senator Betsy Johnson and local media coverage is tough to follow.

So to help out those who don't have the inside baseball view of it that we do, I've attempted to lay it out in this post in a digestable form.

There are essentially three prongs to the various accusations against Johnson:

The first prong has to do with one of Johnson's bills, SB 680. Basically, the bill would set up a pilot project for a few rural airports that would allow them a "through the fence policy"--meaning that those businesses who own property at an airport would have the ability to enter the airport without having to go through the main security gate. The Oregonian printed a story citing Johnson's efforts with SB680 and how it looked to them like the buyer of some land she sold was helped by the bill.

Except that he wasn't. We've found documentation that Scappoose Airport had a "through the fence policy" since May of 2005--and two Port Commissioners told us that the policy has existed since at least 2000. Not to mention the fact that the buyer says he had no idea that the bill existed and it wasn't a part of the deal. Further, the many people we've interviewed from Scappoose that have followed this situation for decades tell us that the stories being fed to the media about Johnson are trumped up crap.

The second prong is about SB 30, which is sponsored by Johnson but introduced by State Senator Ben Westlund. SB 30 would ban destination resorts at the Metolius River Basin. Willamette Week says that because Johnson owns 160 acres at the Metolius its a conflict of interest because, "by cutting off further development in the area, the bill will increase the value of her property". WWeek doesn't tell us exactly how Johnson's property will be devalued by such development--and we're wondering why it wouldn't increase her property's value--as the resorts would add infrastructure and draw more people to the region--thus making it a very desirable piece of property for more development. What WWeek's piece doesn't tell the reader is that Johnson's family has owned the property since 1904, her father is buried on the property (and her mother will be interred there soon). Her parents 1950s dream home is on the site--and her mother was an ardent advocate against development of the region for years. In other words, that land is her family's legacy--no matter what its monetary value.

And finally, prong three: SB 807. We talked about that here. Willy Week says that Johnson introduced the bill and indicates that it would be very profitable for people cozy with Johnson. The bill (as I understand it--this is more TJ's ball than mine and I'm still a little shaky on all the details) creates taxing districts around rural airports, allowing them to generate revenue to be used for improvements around the airport. The problem with trying to tie it to cozy relations with Johnson is that the bill assists rural airports ALL OVER THE STATE--not just ones where people who are tight with Johnson would benefit. There are those who disagree with the bill--saying that those who benefit (generally the people who own property and businesses around the airport) is just too small a number and not worthy of that kind of revenue generation. But that's a different argument. Does this bill give special perks to just a few people who are tied in with Johnson? No--although a few people she's known over the years (and who may be supporters) will surely benefit. But so will alot of other people--and so will the economy around rural airports.

We've been told by some who don't think our reporting is correct that we're not "following the money". Its certainly fair to criticize us and we accept that we're not professional journalists. We're simply two Oregonians who use our skills to attempt to bring things to light that might be missing elsewhere. But in this case--I think we have followed the money.

For example--who stands to benefit if Senate Bill 30 fails..or lose big if it passes? Ponderosa Land and Cattle, for one. They're one of the groups trying to build a destination resort banned by SB 30. And who else? The lobbyists pushing hard to see the bill defeated..who will undoubtedly not be paid nearly as well for their efforts should SB 30 fail.

And what better way to discredit a bill than to undermine one of its chief proponents?

Follow the money indeed.

Johnson's Constituency Not Swayed by O, WWeek

2007-06-13T15:00:00.000-07:00

Amidst all of the brouhaha being made about the "Betsy Johnson affair," fairly little discussion has centered around how the voters in her Senate district are viewing the "revelations." One imagines that if the stories were resonating with her constituency, angry residents would be jumping at the chance to flay her for it whenever she appeared in public--particularly at "town hall" events where the candidate is up there alone, asking "do you have any questions?"

Whether it's because the allegations are NOT immediately ringing true with the electorate, they are simply unaware of them, or because Johnson is showing up at the previously scheduled meetings and volunteering a 20-minute explanation at the beginning of each visit, the reaction appears to be awfully mild overall. Back when this started we referenced a report on her appearance in St. Helens by Randy Stapilus:

The people gathered at the Columbia Center auditorium this afternoon, including local city officials and others steeped in the community (and a camera from KATU), were well aware of the history.

And not all of them were fans. Some were, but others were taking lots of notes as Johnson spoke, and some of them had sharp and pointed questions for her. They would not be easily spun.

Johnson sat alone at a table in the middle of the room, only rarely glancing at a notepad as, for 20 minutes or so, she ran through the history of the property and her family’s involvement with it. Toward the end, she said that though the property sales price was $119,000 more than the purchase price, that didn’t include a string of expenses her family made in the process of getting the deal to go through. Her family’s actual profit, she indicated, was somewhere south of $50,000, less than half what the headlines indicate. More to the point, the action on the airport land was so involved and complex over such a long stretch - a decade or so, not three months - that measuring profit becomes a complex proposition.

Said one local man who had been sharply questioning her: “Still dicey, but I’ll accept that.”

And that's as bad as it's gotten. As we reported last week on her visit to Seaside, according to the Seaside Signal's editor when Johnson finished her explanation, not a single question arose, nor any comment one way or the other. One can't speculate whether that was a function of attendees being satisfied with her comments or just silent disregard, but few voters are willing to suffer fools quietly.

Today, having missed it earlier because the media outlet passes deep under our radar, we'll show you the account of her visit to Clatskanie--where she received by far the most favorable reception:

“Probably yes, it was bad judgment to get involved in a financial deal, but my intention was to retain jobs and create opportunity at the Scappoose airport,” said Johnson. “I will lay bear any details of this transaction,” she stated.

“I appreciate your apology,” said Sally Jones. “I understand its coming from your heart.” Jones, who serves as director of the Columbia 9-1-1 Emergency Communications District, said she had just come from a church social, and had heard nothing but support for Johnson and appreciation for her representation and service on the part of her constituents.

Johnson said she “would be humbly appreciative” of any support, letters to the editor, etc. from her constituents. “I deal straight with people. Public service has been my goal, not personal gain. This job - the way I do it - costs me money.”

“Anybody who can’t support you is pretty lame,” said Gary Soderstrom, a local resident and president of the Columbia River Fishermen’s Protective Union. “Whenever we’ve asked you to do anything - you’ve always responded. You always call back. Everybody should appreciate what you’ve done for this Northwest area.”

At the end of the town hall meeting in Clatskanie, Johnson received a standing ovation and numerous hugs from those in attendance.

(One side note: kudos to the Small Town Papers website for bringing these small outlets to the internet!) The piece continues with the comment that her visit to St. Helens was a little rougher, as we mentioned--but overall it's clear that the issues of her land sale and the legislative bills pending in Salem are not causing any great angst amongst her constituency. It kinda makes you wonder, doesn't it? They surely must know her best, and they read the papers...why aren't they buying what the O and WWeek are selling?

Dems Get Rooked by House GOP on Healthy Kids

2007-06-13T09:00:00.000-07:00

I think the Republicans pulled a smooth double cross on Jeff Merkley and the House Democrats today, attempting to insulate their most vulnerable members from an unpopular vote they were casting to block the Healthy Kids Act. It worked like a charm. Now--despite offering all manner of untoward bribes in order to get individual Republicans to cave, and believing that in a war of attrition they were just one vote away--Democrats (and uninsured kids) have lost the battle, the campaign advantage on the issue next fall, and very possibly for such a politically twisted idea as a constitutional referral on a cigarette tax, the war.

It's certainly possible they did what they did for some other reason, or it was mere coincidence and everyone voted their conscience both Monday and Tuesday...but I doubt it. Here's what happened: on Monday the Democrats put the bill up for a vote, having slashed the coverage to only about 3/4 of the children they had promised to cover and offered several breaks to sweeten the pot for Republicans. They got within one vote when Brian Boquist and Sal Esquivel voted yes along with John Lim, plus Vicki Berger who actually appears to want the bill to pass.

On Tuesday, thinking they just needed to pressure one of the vulnerable Republicans like Donna Nelson or perhaps Patti Smith to vote yes out of fear that they'd be hit hard with this vote next fall, the Democrats scheduled another vote and laid on the press. And lo and behold, both Nelson AND Smith switched their votes to yes, as did Bob Jenson. Victory! No, wait--Boquist and Esquivel switched their vote from yesterday, and Democrat Brian Cannon was off having a baby...so it still failed by one vote.

If Republicans wanted to kill HK legislation (leaving only the clumsy Constitutional referral), but they didn't want to be punished for it at election time, what would be the good thing to do? How about have your vulnerable people vote BOTH ways, as long as the majority is going to schedule two votes in a row? Then when the charge comes up that they blocked Healthy Kids they can say, "But no, see here I voted FOR it, in a slightly different form I preferred." Then the Democrats will try to call out the flip flop flim flam, but it will all get lost in countercharges and the GOP will have confused the issue into irrelevancy.

I think Merkley knew it too, and he acted and spoke like a guy who knew he'd been had:

Meeting with reporters following the vote, House Speaker Jeff Merkley, D-Portland, said he had the required 36 votes pledged when he went on the floor, even without Cannon there. But Merkley said he received a note during the debate that one of the "yes" votes had become a "no." He wouldn't say who it was.

"It's my style," Merkley said. "I'm not going to attack someone. They have to live with their change of decision."

Even so, Merkley said he isn't certain that the bill would have passed had Rep. Cannon been at the Capitol.

To not be certain when you know there were 35 yes votes and Cannon makes 36, is to say that you believe there may have been vote decoying afoot. Much like it seems clear that vulnerable national Republicans were given the release to vote for cloture on AG Gonzales because the motion was doomed to fail, these were controlled vote switches by the caucus, not changes of heart by individual members.

I'm almost hopeful it goes nowhere now, beaten and lame as it is, larded with giveaways just to plead for votes on something they damn well should be voting on totally clean. It's unbecoming behavior. The urge to come out having made a deal is harming the bill, and while it's easy for me to say because my kid has health coverage, it's already selling kids short and still the GOP is playing games with the perpetually earnest Democrats. They don't like governing; they just like winning. And it should be clear to everyone that the unrepentantly out of touch hard right wing is still running the state GOP. Is that what you want, Oregon?

WW and Merc sitting in a tree...

2007-06-13T07:36:00.000-07:00

Is the long held cockfight (and no--I don't mean the birds) between Willamette Week and The Portland Mercury starting to fade?

Just this week, the Merc's Matt Davis reminded us via comments of the feud between the two papers.

But this morning, Willy Week seems to be sending over a salvo of respect to Team Mercury:

Grudging props to the Portland Mercury for serious savvy about our media brethren. The Merc turned duct-tape reservations on parade routes into what OregonMediaInsiders.com called the "Most Brilliant Street Theater of the Decade." Mercury editor Wm. Steven Humphrey organized a vigilante campaign to tear up tape laid down by selfish Rose Festival paradegoers. And "Tapegate 2007" dominated local media all weekend.

What's next? Will we see Wm Steven Humphrey and Mark Zusman hoisting a few together down at The Lucky Lab? Will Hank Stern and Amy J Ruiz trip the light fantastic at The Doug Fir Lounge? Will we next witness Scott Moore and Nigel Jacquiss gleefully roaming the stacks at Powells as a tandem?

Yikes...

Gordo Quick Hitter #2--Stiffing Rural Trade Opponents in Pendleton

2007-06-12T14:15:00.000-07:00

I got this a few days ago, and I held it to give Smith spokesman RC Hammond ample time to respond. If he ever has, it may have been once, briefly and he hasn't returned a call since...but I don't actually ever remember speaking to him. And now, after begging Smith's Pendleton office for some kind of comment about their own location and people, being forcefully refused and referred to Hammond's Black Hole of phone messages, they're due for well-deserved derision. Congratulations, Gordon--your reputation for blowing off actual Oregonians who simply want time with their public servant, continues to receive burnishment.

A side raspberry to the East Oregonian for staying behind the subscription firewall, but here's enough to give you a taste for educational, non-profit purposes.

By PHIL WRIGHT Of the East Oregonian
Tuesday, June 5, 2007; Page A1

PENDLETON — A small contingent of dislocated workers and American labor supporters Monday tried to urge Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., to oppose fast tracking free trade agreements. But when they knocked, no one answered the doors at Smith’s downtown office at 116 S. Main St. in Pendleton.

Denice Martin, project coordinator for the Oregon Fair Trade Campaign, said she had spoken twice with the Pendleton office about the noon-time demonstration. Martin said Smith’s office confirmed someone would be there to hear the group’s concerns about how free trade has robbed Oregonians of jobs.

And she didn’t hold back her disappointment about the matter.

“It was really frustrating. It felt like that was how much they cared about the issue,” Martin said.

We can reprint from the OFTC press release as much as we want, and here's what fast track has meant to rural east Oregon, and what they had to say about Smith:

The J.R. Simplot potato processing plant in Hermiston closed in 2004, directly eliminating 719 jobs in a town of about 13,000 people. The U.S. Department of Labor certified that this job loss was NAFTA-related. Located on the eastern stretch of I-84, a short drive from the Washingon boarder, Hermiston sits in a county dominated by agriculture, food processing and a chemical weapons incinerating facility.

“Senator Smith’s position on Fast Track renewal is particularly important, because he sits on the Senate Finance Committee, which oversees trade policy questions,” said Denice Martin, project coordinator for the Oregon Fair Trade Campaign. “Hopefully, Senator Smith, Senator Wyden and others will get the message that Fast Track-approved trade deals have been hurting Oregon families across the entire state and must be opposed.”

You don't have to be a screaming liberal urbanite in order to understand just how aloof Smith is to the central concerns of Oregonians. There's no reason that the Democratic candidate can't sell his progressivism on that count in rural areas, pledgint to fight fast track and bad trade agreements that don't set wage and labor safety law standards. But first people need to acquaint themselves with what Smith really has (not) done for them, and how he continues to play deaf to their concerns--even when you think he and his staff have actually relented and deigned to meet with you.

So to recap--
Pendleton office of Senator Gordon Smith: forgetful, rude, gutless.
Spokesman for Senator Gordon Smith: avoidant, also a bit of a high talker.
Gordon Smith: AWOL, rurally deaf.
Oregonians supposedly living in Smith-friendly country: SOL and JWF.*

*from George Carlin, shit out of luck and jolly well fucked. :)

Holy LTE's Batman! Freeman speaks up

2007-06-12T11:16:00.000-07:00

The following is a letter to the editor of the Oregonian drafted by Ed Freeman. Freeman is the individual who purchased the land at Scappoose Airport from Betsy Johnson and her husband..which started the shitstorm ball rolling against Johnson's efforts on SB680.

(Click on the letter to enlarge)

We report, you decide.

(How very Fox News of us, wouldn't you say?)

More duping on the Johnson saga, this time via Pete Williamson

2007-06-12T07:00:00.000-07:00

TJ explained yesterday why we think its entirely possible that Willy Week is being duped on the stories surrounding State Senator Betsy Johnson by a direct (or indirect) source, Greg Jenks.

The other link in the staff source chain is perhaps the more prominent one: former Port of St. Helens Executive Director Pete Williamson. Williamson was quoted several times in the O's initial story.

Former Scappoose Spotlight Editor and Publisher Art Heerwagon (who reported on this saga for the 12 years he worked on the paper) noted to me that when Johnson came on as a St. Helens Port Commissioner, there was "slipshod" work happening that the commissioners weren't aware of. Former Port Commissioner Pat Zimmerman held a similar impression. "Petey" was "absolutely incompetent" and "waging a personal vendetta against Johnson".

Heerwagon also told me that when Johnson came on as a Port Commissioner, she wanted to see the Port run like a business. This interfered with Mr. Williamson's desire to run things the way he wanted, and the two clashed.

According to Port Commissioner Colleen Deshazer, Johnson wrote a negative job performance review for Williamson--and Williamson was extremely unhappy about it. Williamson went so far as to move to have the review purged from his personnel file. Deshazer says that Johnson claimed Williamson wasn't doing his job. Deshazer also notes that afterward Williamson spent "significant amounts of time trying to undermine everything Betsy did" in regard to the Port, whether it was beneficial to the Port or not. And that included SB680.

In fact Deshazer mentioned that the opposition to SB680 from the Port came strictly from Williamson and Jenks, NOT from the Port Commissioners.

Further, Deshazer says that the Oregonian has only part of the story when it says:

The Scappoose airport already allowed for such access to the company owned by Johnson's husband. But the port's then-executive director, Williamson, said he and the staff at the Port of St. Helens had balked at expanding "through the fence" access and considered recommending that the permit held by Johnson's husband expire.

According to Deshazer, the only individuals considering eliminating the permit held by Johnson's husband was Williamson and possibly Jenks. Port Commissioner Earl Fisher confirmed this to me as well. At no time was the Port Commission considering removing that permit--and since they're the ones with the say, that's the body that actually matters. In fact, Williamson's move to try and end the permit is what prompted the Port Commission to reaffirm its long held "through the fence access" in May 2005, according to Deshazer.

Commissioner Earl Fisher also tells a similar story. "This information being fed to papers comes from a group of folks who've had a bad relationship with Betsy Johnson for years". Fisher also said that this same type of issue has surfaced several times with this same group of people.

Fisher said that in March or April of 2006, an attempt was made by a County Commissioner to suggest that the airport park go back to the county for gas stations. Fisher says that this was an attempt to "poke a stick at Betsy" because she sells the gas at the cheapest price possible--and that the suggestion to do this went to the County Commissioner via a Port employee: Pete Williamson.

Fisher also says that when SB680 came before the Port Commission for consideration, the Commission chastized both Williamson and Jenks for "spending copious time trying to link Johnson's role to her personal profit".

Fisher continued by saying that Williamson had ongoing disagreements with Johnson and that Johnson was instrumental in having Williams fired as the Scappoose City Planner.

Both Fisher and Deshazer told me that a report was done about Williamson and Jenks in late August or September of 2006. Fisher said that it was done by Rick Liebman's office. Documents relating to this report were released to the Scappoose Spotlight based on a Freedom of Information Act request, but Fisher says only part of the report was released.

In addition, all 3 commissioners noted that complaints were made about Greg Jenks to Pete Williamson and that Williamson did nothing of note to rectify the problems.

When asked about the land sale between Johnson and Freeman, Zimmerman said that there were no improprieties or ethically questionable practices surrounding the deal and the legislative efforts on SB680. "Betsy has acted completely in the best interest of the community, and I think this whole thing with Mr. Williamson is personal revenge on his part.", said Zimmerman. Heerwagon had a similar answer, "The sale of the land to Freeman had nothing to do with SB680". Deshazer: "Betsy's goal was to preserve the airport's ability to expand economically". Deshazer also said that she believes the sale and subsequent legislative attempts by Johnson aren't related and are above board. Fisher indicated a similar sentiment.

So what we have here is the word of a couple of folks (and perhaps their intermediaries) with a serious ax to grind going after Johnson versus a list of folks with no reason to lie saying Johnson didn't do anything wrong.

Who's duping who, here?

Gordo Quick Hitter #1--Cloture Vote on Gonzo No-Confidence a Mystery

2007-06-11T13:30:00.000-07:00

Here's a little nugget for you on Gordon Smith as it relates to one of today's national topics--the vote on SJR 14, declaring a simple vote of 'no-confidence' against the sitting Attorney General. Let's flash back about three months, as the lies began to pile up, and see what Gordon had to say when someone stuck a mike in his face:

"'For the Justice Department to be effective before the U.S. Senate, it would be helpful' if Gonzales resigned, Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., told USA TODAY this afternoon." (USA Today, 3/15/07)

Obviously if the Justice Department is not "effective before the US Senate," and having Gonzo resign would be helpful, you don't need a very thick Sharpie to draw the line between believing his resignation's a good thing, and having no confidence in him.

Like the glutton I am (and after already calling once in reference to Gordo Quick Hitter #2, coming later), I called in to Gordo's DC office to see how he'd vote. I was told by the staffer that they expect the debate and vote to begin in about an hour from now...but Smith hadn't said how he would vote. I reminded the staffer of the above quote, and he claimed that the Senator's position had not changed...but he has not said how he would vote. I tried to frame that response in such a way as to helpfully point out how ridiculous that was: obviously if he still feels that way, it would be pretty odd to go ahead and vote against cloture (which effectively becomes a vote of confidence for Gonzo)..."I understand where you're coming from, but the Senator just hasn't told us how he plans to vote." I thanked the minion and he went on his way.

So just to pre-alibi Gordo for you, my expectation is that he will vote against cloture, but then defend himself by saying that he doesn't have confidence in Gonzo, but he didn't think the vote was the right way to express that dissatisfaction--that the vote is just a political stunt. It's such a classic Gordo fence-rider position that it seems foolish to bet on any other outcome, but we'll see what happens later today.

Update, 330pm--
Vote was just held. Wyden voted Aye (to invoke cloture to vote on no-confidence). Smith also voted aye, as did six other GOP Senators: Spector, Collins, Coleman, Snowe, Sunnunu, and Hagel. The final vote--which failed to invoke cloture, thus killing the bill--was 53-38, and one "present." Joe Lieberman voted in support of the Attorney General, if you're wondering. Remind me again why Democrats in the Senate opted to let him hang around after betraying his party last year?

Is WWeek Getting Duped on Johnson Story?

2007-06-11T09:15:00.000-07:00

[Apologies for length; gotta be thorough here...]

While The Mercury may be doing the most aggressive and fun journalism in Portland right now, the best overall news outfit in the city is still Willamette Week. They've got a tremendous advantage just by not being a tool of the Schnitzer/Goodman set, and while they have their flaws they do legitimate legwork and skeptical analysis of the goings-on in the City of Roses. Their writers are generally solid, headed of course by the Pultizer-winning Nigel Jaquiss. Maybe it's an unreasonable mantle to put on their heads, but I've come to expect good, rigorous work from WW.

Which has made this whole episode with Betsy Johnson rather disappointing. I certainly give him credit for being savvy enough, but after digging deeper into his stories and trying to follow the backstory behind the allegations, I wonder if Jaquiss hasn't been entirely too credulous to those who appear to have informed much of his reporting, particularly as it concerns Senate Bill 807 and in fact the entire set of claims surrounding Johnson's conflict of interest in sales and development around Scappoose Airpark.

(Now is also a good time to discuss briefly the Metolius angle in Sb30 that Jaquiss brought up in the first part of WWeek's Johnson series. We've found no credible or even articulated suggestion of what Johnson gains by being one of the sponsors of Sb30, and we think the smear campaign being run by the Bend Bulletin (which we can't show you because they are behind a subscription wall) is evidence enough of the attempt to scapegoat Johnson in an attempt to get Sb30 blocked for supporters' ends. To report that connection without exploring more of the local politics behind Sb30 made for an unfairly skewed presentation, in our opinion, and has unnecessarily fed the controversy surrounding Johnson. But that's not what this piece is about.)

The primary bases used by Jaquiss to suggest self-interest regarding Sb807--the bill that creates airport taxing districts for funding infrastructure and aviation-related development--were her sole sponsorship of the bill, and the suggestions of conflict by the Port of St. Helens (POSH) staff in their report on Scappoose Airpark's participation in the development program authorized in Johnson's bill of 2005, Sb680. (Yes, I know this is a long and crazy trail of bills and sales and angles, please hang with me.) The guest piece by Aaron Faegre Saturday takes care of the "sole sponsorship" angle, so let's talk about the conflict part.

On June 1st, Jaquiss reported in an update:

WW has learned that after Senate Bill 680 became law, Port of St. Helens Commissioner Colleen DeShazer requested a staff evaluation of whether the port, which controls the Scappoose Airport, should participate in the program created by Johnson’s bill.

A lengthy March 8, 2006 staff report strongly recommended against doing so, saying Johnson’s bill could among other things, "jeopardize existing federal funding," and "lessen local community control."

Most notably, the report said, "Participation in this program provides the opportunity for perceived conflicts of interest with and by State Senator Betsy Johnson and TransWestern Aviation. The Port should refrain from creating the appearance of such conflicts of interest to protect both the Port and affected businesses." (Johnson says the Port of St. Helens, which subsequently reversed that initial decision, has long dragged its feet on development around the airport.)

By "reversed that initial decision," Johnson may have meant "that's not what the actual Commission decided, the staff member's report notwithstanding." She'd be right if that were the case, but we don't get any illumination from that by WWeek. So we had to get it ourselves.

We can't be sure who sourced Jaquiss on this report, and of course he'd rightly never tell us, but we're 90% sure it was one of two people: POSH Executive Director Pete Williamson, or his Deputy Gregory Jenks. They headed the staff that was responsible for the quoted report, and Jenks himself composed it for review by the POSH Commission. It could theoretically also have come from one of the Commissioners themselves, but having spoken with them at length over the last few days, it seems highly unlikely any of them were passing confidential documents to Jaquiss in order to help give Johnson negative press.

Working on the assumption that it is either Williamson or Jenks--both of whom have had well-known battles with Johnson--who gave Jaquiss the memo, let's further assume it's Jenks, because he wrote it (and because we'll deal with Williamson and The O tomorrow). Jenks' time at POSH was not one marked by high regard, let's say. He was eventually given the opportunity to resign/fired from his position.

We expect that archived Scappoose Sentinel articles that we are in the process of acquiring will show that Jenks was fired for multiple offenses of a sexual or lewd nature, based on multiple-source reports that allegations included charges of harboring pornography on his workstation, making lewd suggestions to a coworker, and being caught masturbating at the office by another staffer. We do know that Jenks' office computer was seized as part of the internal investigation into his conduct, and while she had left POSH by this time, when asked whether she had heard of porn and sexual harrassment allegations against Jenks former Commissioner Pat Zimmerman responded "I think that's true." At least one person engaged by the Port at the time verified to us that they personally saw evidence of pornography on Jenks' computer.

Also according to DeShazer, Williamson was approached by a staff member about the allegations, and either refused or ultimately did nothing to address the situation. An outside inquiry was conducted on the actions of Jenks and Williamson, a report we are also trying to get--but which even some Commissioners were not allowed to see.

So what we have here is a member of the permanent staff (not the Commission itself), someone who was specifically referred to by Zimmerman as "observably incompetent," writing a memo that was more about directly accusing Johnson of impropriety as it was about recommendations for the airport. This someone was later asked to leave upon discovering he was a filthy pervert who couldn't keep it in his pants long enough to get his work done. When Sb680 came before the Commission, according to Commssioner Earl Fisher they took the step of admonishing both Jenks and Williamson for spending copious amounts of time trying to link Johnson's role to her personal profit.

It's that last note there that leads us back to the document brought up by Jaquiss, the report written by porn hound and office perv Gregory Jenks. We have that document, but we also have what Jenks probably never told Jaquiss about...the same document, approved two weeks later as final.

Here's what we're talking about: this is the original file {pdf}. It's an image so I can't paste the relevant section here, but at the end of page 3 and beginning of page 4, Jenks goes right after Johnson: "Local airport managers from around the state regard SB680 as a conflict of interest for Senator Johnson and opposed the legislation." Jenks then cited a St. Helens Chronicle article from February 2006 that makes a vague comment about Helm and Johnson overpaying for airport access, and notes:

First it appears to maybe (sic) an admission of improper conduct and should be reviewed by legal counsel, because it implies their payment was excessive because they did not want to 'raise any questions.'

The date on that memo is March 8, 2006. However, what Jenks apparently did not tell Jaquiss--at least we hope not--is that this memo was only a draft submitted to the POSH Commission, and that the section I just cited was excised from the final version as approved. Here's what was approved on March 22nd {pdf}, and you'll notice none of the above appears.

I think there are two strong implications from this fact. First, it strengthens the notion that Jenks is the source for Jaquiss on the letter, since Jenks is the likeliest person to still have a draft that was written by him but not approved for the record. Secondly, it seems highly unlikely that it's mere coincidence that this draft was what Jaquiss got, considering that the portion eventually excised is the harshest and most directly accusatory section of the letter. Jaquiss doesn't quote the section I did, probably for the same reason that the Commission yanked it--it's clumsily attempted and not very convincing--but it makes you wonder why it didn't make Jaquiss wonder: what the hell with this guy; he seems pretty focused on Johnson.

Now, both versions of the letter include the more formalized version of the statement that Port staff feared the implication of conflict of interest. The fear of suggested of impropriety is a fair accusation to make, even though none of the Commissioners we've talked to think any such impropriety or ethical cloud are involved in Johnson's land sale and legislative efforts. But the cockeyed rant at the end of Jenks' first draft is a tell that he's got a chip on his shoulder to knock Johnson down.

And dammit, that is VITAL information when you're writing a series of articles accusing a state Senator of influence peddling: what interest does the person have who is telling me all this? Is he or she credible? Does he or she have an axe to grind? Am I getting verified information from this person? Are their statements and allegations reasonably made? Are they respected in their field and the performance of the job they're doing? These questions need to be asked, in our view, and we're concerned that they don't appear to have been. If people knew about the folks likely responsible for putting this information in front of WWeek and The O, would it make a difference for them as to the legitimacy of the allegations? We think maybe.

[Stick with us tomorrow when Carla shows The O why Pete Williamson may not have been the best choice of sources for them, either...]

Update, midnight 6/12--
In the comments, Coyote notes that Jaquiss' source for the draft Port memo is not Greg Jenks, and is in fact female. At first I was startled, because among the other people who would have original access to the draft version are the female Commissioners on the Port board at the time, and I couldn't imagine why they would do such a thing after the way they'd talked to us.

We were right on that it seems; now we understand we're talking about who specifically gave Jaquiss the report. Jenks didn't provide the report to Jaquiss, but very few people had access to the final document, much less the draft.* We still have to believe that none of the commissioners provided it to someone to then give to media, leaving Williamson or Jenks as the most likely. Thank you Coyote; clarification was indeed required.

*The name of someone deeply involved in both Metolius and taxing district business in Salem appeared here briefly, based on strong indications they are providing information to the media that seeks to impugn Johnson. Further attempts at confirmation revealed a miscommunication as to the precise nature of their involvement; we now no longer have a clear statement as to who directly provided Jaquiss with the Port memo in question.

Spanning the State--Cronkite Edition

2007-06-10T08:42:00.000-07:00

Even before I could walk, Walter Cronkite was a formative figure in my life.

Every night at 5 PM, the CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite would begin its broadcast into our home. And every night at 5PM, my father would walk through the door after a long day at work. As a baby, these were the two men in my life. My mother tells the story of me hearing Cronkite's voice at the intro and I'd come screaming through the house in my walker yelling "Cronkite! Cronkite!" After "mama" and "daddy", "Cronkite" was my first word. As soon as his show got underway, it was time for my father to come home--apparently my favorite part of the day.

As an adult, I deeply admire Walter Cronkite and the work he did as a newsman. I strive for the kind of credibility and integrity that he brought to his work as a journalist. This past week has really reinforced that for me.

Despite evidence to the contrary, there were some bright spots of journalism when it came to the issues surrounding State Senator Betsy Johnson. The Scappoose Spotlight's news piece(PDF) is very good. They also have an editorial, laying out the facts and reminding the public to be wary of rash judgements based on reports from other outlets.

Local journalists (including myself) can take a lesson from this kind of thorough work at a local paper--where the reporters know the players involved and have written about the region for a long time.

And now, let's Span the State!

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::gong:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

The Albany Democrat Herald pleads for cooler heads to prevail on the immigration debate.

The US Forest Service is attempting a new strategy with wildfires. They're launching a preemptive strike against wildfires in Central Oregon. The plan is to selectively thin trees in a large area to influence the fire's behavior. The plan has drawn the support of the Nature Conservancy.

In Canby, some of the locals appear to be under the impression that regional elected officials are doing the jobs in order to line their pockets and suck up power to buffet themselves in the community. The Canby Herald splashes some cold water on their theory.

Despite a $7 million injection of cash from county timber payments, commissioners in Coos County have no intention of restoring jobs and services after recent cuts.

Things in Lane County aren't looking so good either.

Once again, the paper of record in Madras publishes a horribly one-sided piece, this time on SB 30, which would ban destination resorts at the Metolius River Basin. The reporter only bothers to quote Roger Dallum (R-The Dalles) and Rick Allen--former Madras mayor and current lobbyist for Ponderosa Land and Cattle--one of the groups who wants to build a resort. This isn't journalism--its a Republican rag sheet.

Consumers who purchased ground beef at the Albertson's in McMinnville may want to check the sell-by dates on the packages. It seems that E-Coli tainted beef was sold from the store this Spring with sell dates ranging from April 20 to May 7. Ground beef stored in the freezer after being purchased at the Mac Albertson's should be checked and discarded if it includes that date range.

Crook County Sheriff Rodd Clark is facing charges of undue influence and first-degree official misconduct. Clark is accused of trying to use undue influence to keep a person from running for office by claiming that he would fire anyone who ran against him in the May 2006 election.

TJ Talks Johnson & Wyden on Goldy's Show Tonight , 9PM

2007-06-09T18:20:00.001-07:00

I'll be hogging up an hour at 9 tonight with David Goldstein, AKA "Goldy" from Horse's Ass.org and the king of weekend Seattle talk at night, blasting wicked watts from KIRO's tower of power. If you're still out of earshot of all that power, luckily for you it comes over the tubes in live stream as well.

Tonight we're going to spend a fair bit of time trying to tackle the Betsy Johnson story, and why we've continued to hammer the idea that the traditional media have botched the story. We've got pieces coming out early next week that we think will call into question the motivation and competency of the sources used by WW and The O, and I'll preview a little of that tonight.

Another topic we'll hit is the subject of Democrats who strain to pretend they are in mutually collegial relationships with Republican colleagues. Unfortunately, this week's contestant is our own Ron Wyden, who once again has tooted Gordon Smith's horn in public, giving him credit where little is due and emphasizing how great of a team they are. I know Goldy is probably even stronger than I am when it comes to thinking that's just a ridiculous strategy, and makes a false dichotomy of positive vs negative campaigning behavior.

If we have time, we'll hit Portland's own Paris Hilton story: tapegate.

And tonight's phrase is "Fred Thompson;" I seriously (really) urge you to call in and find a way to mention his name. OK?

You can call in for free at 877-710-KIRO (5476) as well, so say hi if you've got something to say, and you can get us to answer YOUR question.

More holes in reporting on Betsy Johnson

2007-06-09T14:35:00.000-07:00

The Willy Week piece wildly speculating about Betsy Johnson's introduction of Senate Bill 807 appears to be missing some major pieces of the puzzle--especially context.

While SB 807 was introduced by Johnson at the request of the Oregon Aviation Business Association, the WW piece contains no references to who actually wrote the bill--nor does it appear that WW interviewed the bill's author.

Enter Aron Faegre.

Aron Faegre is an architect and engineer. And the author of SB807. Faegre has also written in response to Willy Week's speculation--and to explain the need for the bill. Two versions of this op-ed were done: one called the "internet version" and another for the papers. Below is the "internet version".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Op-ed: Senate Bill 807 Helps Airports but more importantly their Communities

[Longer Version with More Information 1461 words – internet version]

June 9, 2007

In today’s world, a business with internet access and a good local airport can compete on a global basis. That is good news for Oregon (a rural state) and Oregon’s smaller rural communities. Senate Bill 807 would allow a city or county to set up a tax increment financing district around its local airport as one option for ensuring that the airport infrastructure piece of this equation is given a strong financial base. The Oregonian and Willamette Week have published incorrect information about the legislation and how it works. As the principal author of the bill, I’d like to clear up these issues.

First to dispel unfounded fears – here are some corrections: 1) the airport district can only contain airport-related properties. No residential, farmland, normal industrial or normal commercial can be in the airport district. 2) Any funds spent in the district have to be spent on airport infrastructure that serves the public. No funds can go to developer’s pockets, or their own buildings. 3) Finally, an airport committee decides what the money can be spent on, and the city or county has a representative there. Only things that get 100% agreement can be funded. So the city or county representative (who could be the city mayor for example) has 100% control. Now for the reasons for the legislation, and why it helps Oregon.

This is legislation to provide for a useful and responsible economic development tool for use by over 75 public airports around our state. It would fund only airport infrastructure that serves the public. It does not funnel money back to developers. It uses the same basic “urban renew” model used by cities for urban renewal and other special projects of benefit to the city and the community. It allows a portion of increases in airport related property taxes to be put back into basic airport infrastructure. It does not allow tax money to be taken from surrounding residential or non-aviation business.

For the past 20 years I’ve been privileged as an airport planner to work on over 30 airports located all around the United States. Most of these airports have been in rural Oregon. While meeting with airport advisory boards, ports, city councils in Hood River, Condon, Prineville, Madras, Lexington, Chiloquin, Ashland, Powers, Albany, Independence, Scappoose, Aurora, and many other communities, I learned that many of these communities have been hindered in using their airports to promote local businesses. These result from two things: 1) an FAA governmental attitude that is not “business friendly”, and 2) a lack of funds for the basic airport improvements needed by businesses at their airport.

The four airports thriving airports in the state that could serve as a model for the rest of the state’s airports in terms of rejuvenated community economic development are Prineville, Aurora, Scappoose, and Ashland. Prineville Airport had been in the doldrums for many years. While working on their airport master plan several years ago, I asked their airport commission during a public meeting: “Not much was happening at your airport over the last 10 years, but now there is a major growth in businesses basing at the airport. Why is that?” The Chairman of the airport commission said, “It’s very simple. We have adopted Les Schwab’s motto. When a potential airport user comes to us, we say What can we do to help?”

At Aurora Airport, the lesson learned was that a public-private partnership approach is particularly successful. The FAA has for many years promoted a policy that hinders airports in terms of promoting community economic development through normal private business investment methods. Yet airports attract people who are by their nature interested in innovation, understand new technologies, and have the leadership skills and interests to create new businesses. Airports are natural places for a community to use to encourage creation of businesses that use aviation for their success. Aurora Airport has excelled in this regime simply because it has a mix of public and private properties. This mixture of public and private has fostered innovation and creativity, such that there are now somewhere around 600 aviation related jobs at that airport, and it is contributing probably $400,000 a year in property taxes to the county.

This brings up an important point learned at the Scappoose Airport. Many small airports in Oregon pay no property taxes under an exemption in ORS 307.120. While attending community meetings in Scappoose and St. Helens about the Scappoose Airport, I heard loud and clear from City Council members, “If airport development on public airport property provides no taxes, while airport development on private airport property does provide taxes, the choice is simple: we prefer the airport development to be on private property.” Senate Bill 807 requires that a community electing to utilize the tax increment financing model presented in the legislation voluntarily relinquishes their exemption and starts being an active contributor of taxes to the community.

Finally, it was at the Ashland Airport that I learned how not acting to help airport businesses, can seriously hurt our state as a whole. I came across a company – Sky Research Inc. – based at that airport that has created astounding new aerial mapping technologies for finding unexploded land mines and ordinance, as well as for integrating aerial data to help fight forest fires. I was distressed to find out that their staff of 50 was going to be expanding by the hiring of four new Ph.D’s, but since they couldn’t get the airport to move fast enough to allow expansion of their building, they were going to open a branch office in Colorado instead. This wasn’t just a loss of jobs, but a loss of people who might also have been adjunct professors for Southern Oregon University to teach in programs about computers, remote imaging systems, and other new technologies. Oregon lost out on that one. This is what we stand to lose at other airports without adequate funding and a good business attitude.

It is easy for those in the Portland area to pooh-pooh the use of airports for economic development, because we have PDX and take it for granted. We need to remember that actually PDX was the first airport in the nation to develop the innovative idea that an airport could be a fun place to be, with shops promoting our private local businesses. This approach also provided a whole new revenue source for the airport. The PDX model shows that a creative mixture of public and private businesses at an airport is not a security risk. Oregon is a place known for innovation. That idea spread like wildfire to the rest of the nation and the world.

Senate Bill 807 provides small communities with a simple economic development tool commonly used in large metropolitan areas. The larger airports don’t need this bill because they are in large cities that already have their redevelopment agencies and large staffs who can use the more complex system of urban renewal districts at their airports. During its first hearing in the Senate Committee on Business, Transportation and Workforce Development, one senator referred to Senate Bill 807 as “urban renewal light.” Yes, but it requires a plan ensuring the funds only go to improvements serving the public. It also requires unanimous approval of all of the taxing agencies and requires approval of the city or county. Also, it allows inclusion only of lands that have aviation-related uses. Unlike “heavy” urban renewal which takes 100% of the increase in taxes, Senate Bill 807 shares tax increases 50-50 so that the reward of airport business growth is shared between the airport and the community.

The legislation received the unanimous approval of two senate committees. It received the unanimous endorsement of the State Aviation Board. Additionally, amendments initiated by Senator Bruce Starr resulted in it receiving the consensus approval of representatives from the Oregon League of Cities, Oregon Counties, and the City of Wilsonville. Those who question the bill are encouraged to read it for themselves so that they know what it actually says.

A recent Willamette Week blurb presented that there are some who have suggested that Senate Bill 807 is a secret plan to allow creation of a casino or giant industrial complex next to Aurora Airport. It is not. To provide additional assurances that this is not the case the bill sponsors are recommending an amendment to the bill saying that if this bill were ever used at Aurora Airport, the airport tax increment financing district can only include the present airport properties.

This legislation provides rural communities throughout the state significant economic development potential when such options are very limited or non-existent. It will allow these small Oregon communities with airports an exciting, innovative way to create new jobs and increase tax bases.

[Aron Faegre is principal of his small architecture and airport planning company in Portland. He is also a pilot. He is a volunteer with the Oregon Aviation Business Association that has brought the bill forward with the goal of creating increased aviation jobs and tax base for Oregon.]

GOP "Emerging Leaders" Suddenly Non-Emergent

2007-06-08T16:15:00.000-07:00

Have you heard of "Emerging Leaders Day?" Here's a quick explanation:

Emerging Leaders Day is a biennial opportunity for aspiring Democratic legislators to spend the day "serving" with current House Democratic lawmakers. During Emerging Leaders Day, community leaders from around the state learn the nuts and bolts of the legislative process and get a firsthand view of democracy at work.

Please join us to learn how to serve Oregon by serving in the Oregon Legislature. Emerging leaders from all 60 Oregon legislative districts are welcome.

When: Thursday, June 7th, 8 am - 3 pm

Where: Oregon State Capitol, Salem

You'll note the date as yesterday, and I should also tell you that the state Republicans do the same thing as a recruitment tool for their own party, although they may not call it that; I couldn't find a matching reference from Majority 2006, the House Republican PAC (The Dems' FuturePAC runs their recruitment day festivities).

Now, let's pre-disclaim the story here: one should not under any circumstances confuse Emerging Leader Day with an accurate or proportional suggestion of who will run for the legislature the following year, and in in which districts. It is fairly widely considered to be a useful barometer of early interest, however--kind of like the kids who sign up for the campus tour at a prospective college the first week they're eligible. There's no guarantee all of them are going to end up at that school (or running for office), but if there's a big crowd you gotta figure there's decent interest, right?

Which is what makes the turnout for the respective events something to ponder. The Democrats hosted over 100 prospective candidates, meaning in absolute raw terms that there were nearly two potentials for each district in the state, regardless of party. Staffers I talked to were quietly thrilled--people are starting to come out of the woodwork and step up for their party.

The Republican crowd? Fourteen. That's the number I got from Democratic staffers who peeked inside the GOP's conference room and counted. I would absolutely love to confirm that number for you, and I definitely tried, but Carla and I couldn't get a callback from the Republicans if we told them it was Karl Rove and we'd just caught an illegal alien trying to register to vote while getting his driver's license. So if someone who knows would like to cite a more accurate tally, you know where to find us.

Your score once again:
Democrats--- 100
Republicans-- 14

Do you think the GOP is having a little trouble motivating the troops these days? :)

Ron Wyden--PLEASE Shut Up About Gordon Smith

2007-06-08T12:30:00.000-07:00

In the continuing effort to bolster Gordo's image across the state, our "good" Senator has once again provided prime campaign fodder for Smith to use next year in his re-election bid:

"Fulfilling the nation's commitment to rural counties, protecting natural treasures like Mt. Hood, improving access to quality health care and guaranteeing educational opportunities for everyone - these are not Democratic or Republican goals," Wyden said. "These are Oregon goals, which is why for the last decade, Senator Smith and I have collaborated on an agenda that puts partisanship aside and puts Oregon first."
This is what Senators do. They compliment each other. And it's kind of nice when it's on the Senate floor, and the civility brings a sense of an ancient gravitas. But that's not what this is about. This press release is featured on Gordon Smith's web site on the front page; you can be sure that he's going to run ads quoting Wyden's comments about what a great bipartisan guy he is, and pointing out that Smith voted against Bush on Iraq. And with Wyden promising not to criticize Smith, those ads are going to work. If Wyden isn't going to criticize Smith as a surrogate should, the least he could do is not go out of his way to compliment him and give him bipartisan cover.

Bingo. I personally believe there is a line between so-called "negative campaigning," and simply holding someone to account and suggesting they should be replaced. Wyden apparently isn't willing to subscribe to even the latter approach, and as Matt points out what he's actually doing is painting Smith as the very thing he is not, and which he desperately wants to convince Oregonians he is--a moderate who works well across the aisle and can be trusted to work with Democrats on issues important to Oregonians.

What really chaps me about this particular statement is that everyone KNOWS Gordo hasn't done dick about county timber payments, yet Wyden offers him the opportunity to take credit for it by associating Smith with the process to restore them. What exactly he may be thinking to do this, I haven't the least idea. What he should be saying is that Smith needs to be pressuring his friend the President to stop threatening to veto the bill and get on board with the plan. Of course that would require Smith himself to be on board, which he has declined to do until the cameras are rolling.

So instead of coming out every couple of months and boosting Gordo's should-be-foundering credibility, Ron: could you PLEASE just stop saying anything about him at all? Or call him "the junior Senator from our state" if you must and pretend you never even bump into him in the men's room or at the airport on a Thursday night headed back home. But for God's sake, stop making the Democrats' job harder. If you can't say something mean, don't say anything at all, OK?

Wayne Scott and the Non-Exhaustive Feel-Gooder

2007-06-08T11:30:00.000-07:00

The Merc is doing an amusing but instructive thing these days; they're using the DefCon color code system to note the wonk potential of forthcoming entries. For instance, the latest in their great series on Portland's sit/lie ordinance was rated yellow, for elevated. This one might hit orange, but I've already made up a new phrase to boil it down into something resembling English--the non-exhaustive feel-gooder--so we're off to a good start.

Today's topic is polling and the release is GOP-serving Moore Information, trying to help Wayne Scott and the House Republicans sell their plan to use 1% of budget to fund the Oregon State Police. As you may have been following, the GOP's tack in this debate has been to hold fast to the 1% solution, arguing that there was plenty of money to go around, and there's no reason not to bring troopers to full strength. It sounds like a reasonable argument, except that there's no real suggestion that OSP actually needs or deserves 1% of revenue as opposed to a normally based budget, one on need and balance of other priorities. And it rests entirely on the premise that there's plenty of money all of a sudden--which conveniently ignores the fact that the last two budgets have cut to the bone and left ALL services wanting. (And when they tell you the budget is 20% bigger, that's BS too, because about half of it is going back in kicker rebates. The true total is about 11%).

So that's their shtick, conveniently ignoring much of the current reality. And as if to mimic their clients' pattern of decision making and loyalty to a position less on facts than appealing marketing, Moore's interviewers asked a question tailor made to give Wayne Scott the numbers he was looking for. It's Question 7 of their "data presentation" (which conveniently skips questions 1-5 and also any potential items after #7), and it asks:

“Which of the following more closely reflects your opinion about funding for Oregon State Police? The Legislature should dedicate funding for the Oregon State Police out of existing revenues

OR

The Legislature should establish a new tax to dedicate funding for the Oregon State
Police?”

For every question a pollster asks--even the basic demographic questions--he or she needs to make sure the question is sound enough to yield an accurate result, and there's kind of a mental checklist you can go through to make sure it doesn't hit any of the pitfalls. One quick rule of thumb is to make sure the question is both exhaustive and mutually exclusive.

Mutually exclusive means that you can't logically choose more than one option. For this question, if we assume the routine "don't know" and refusal options were included but not shown here, the choice offered is indeed mutually exclusive. Either the OSP is funded by new taxes, or it is not. Even if the best answer is to use both existing revenues AND new taxes, that's still a new tax and thus option 2 is the best choice. A question is mutually exclusive if only one response is true for you, making all other options automatically false. A good example is "own vs. rent"--you do one or the other, can't be both.

So it passes that test, but fails on exhaustiveness. An exhaustive response set means no options are left unrepresented. Say you want to know what people's favorite flavors of ice cream are. You might offer the choices of vanilla, chocolate, and strawberry. That's all well and good, and you might get most of your answers among those three, but you've left people who have a different favorite--or don't like ice cream at all--without an option. In this case if you don't care about anything beyond the big three, an "other" category is a good catch all, with a "don't like ice cream" option added to make it even stronger.

So let's look at those choices in our survey again: you can either fund it with existing revenues or make new taxes. But wait--you can also pass bonds. Or you could cut services. Or you could contract out some services and save money while improving service levels. There are a number of ways you could solve the "OSP needs money to do stuff" problem--the same problem, incidentally, that every other agency has every budget cycle. But OK, public safety should be near the top. So why are these the two options? It's not because some scientist wanted to create a rigorous hypothetical scenario; the options simply represent the two legislative points of view as the Republicans see them.

How do we know this? Because if you're going to try to find out whether your position is popular or not, you'd pose the actual options at hand, right? In this case that would be using current revenues for 100 troopers, or 1% of the budget for 140 troopers. Those are the two proposals on the table. The Democrats have offered to fund 140 troopers as well, but would seek additional revenue for it because of other priorities in the budget. (Incidentally, all of this may become moot if momentum builds for dedicating beer tax money to the OSP...a new tax, obviously, but one with some bipartisan support, apparently).

But did the GOP present the two options honestly? Hell no--that might have caused respondents to say "hmmm....well, I don't want new taxes, but I do want to make sure we have all our bases covered, like for education and health care, which are just as bad off from the last few budgets as OSP. So let's fund 100 troopers with what we've got now." See, that would mean people actually favor the Democratic plan to balance everything out and bring OSP strongly up from previous levels, if not to peak levels all at once. And Wayne Scott doesn't want to hear anything about that, because then he'll just have wasted a bunch of money on the survey.

The non-exhaustiveness of the question is a huge problem for Wayne, however, because it eliminates the possibility that they can claim with any accuracy that Oregonians favor the GOP's plan for the OSP. The reality is that BOTH bills under strongest consideration use existing revenues rather than new taxes, so how can the Republicans suggest that the results of the question mean it's THEIR plan people favor? Obviously if given a choice, people would like to fund things out of existing money rather than raising more...

...which is where the second part of our title phrase comes in. One of the best ways to skew a result to your favor is to make the pollster-preferred response sound so good and so much better than the other options that you'd have to have a screw loose to answer differently. For instance: "Would you rather be A) Rich, or B) Stupid?" You might as well write up the press release before the results come back--"Oregonians Overwhelmingly Prefer Wealth to Idiocy."

By creating a question where one answer seems logically obvious and preferable, you insure that everybody "feels good" about their answer. A very common feel-gooder tactic is to refer to children, senior citizens or animals where appropriate, and often to pit them against less universally loved groupings, such as "Should the government keep children from dying unnecessarily by covering their health care, or should it preserve the right for smokers to afford cigarettes?" Even if you're wary about a tobacco tax as a way to pay for health care, it's hard for most people to say they are rooting for the smokers instead of the kids.

So to ask people "would you rather pay for troopers out of current funds, or be charged extra money for them" pits not spending more of your money against spending more of it, and who's going to pick getting taxed more? (Well, Moore got 21% to pick it, which to me is actually an indication that most of those 21% are actually following the OSP debate and are explicitly trying to pick the Democratic plan for full coverage). By making the non-preferred option sound really bad or illogical, one is able to artificially pump up the response for the preferred option.

Another good way to do that is to prime the pump, and Moore does that in Question 6 by asking a more generalized version of the same concept before getting specific. Once you have heard yourself tell the interviewer that you think government has enough money, you'd look like an idiot (you imagine) to say in the very next question that the government needs to raise taxes. The danger of pump-priming is also why it's of concern that Questions 1-5 are not shown in the presentation; it's entirely possible some of those questions are also intended to lead the respondent down the primrose path to the answer Wayne Scott is looking for.

An honest pollster looking for a valid answer to the OSP question would ask respondents if they favor adding some troopers with existing money, more troopers with additional tax revenue, or more troopers with existing money but at the expense of other previously shortchanged programs. That is the question being debated, and it would indeed be of great interest and value if someone were to ask it in a survey. But Wayne Scott's caucus doesn't give a rip which of those ideas you like best; that would be acting in the interest of the state constituency. What is obvious from the polling questions in this survey is that their goal is to create the impression that the Republicans' OSP plan is the one to go with--and they're not afraid of resorting to the non-exhaustive feel-gooder to do it. Boooo.

The O piece on Betsy Johnson continues to unravel

2007-06-07T11:24:00.000-07:00

Last week's O piece on Senator Betsy Johnson (D-Scappoose) main "sleaze factor" point was (essentially) that Johnson had sold land to a developer and then worked to get legislation passed that would give the developer extra sweet access to the Scappoose Airport.

Our story yesterday blows that meme to smithereens. The developer already had that particular access to the airport, based on an ordinance from May 2005 which granted that access via permit.{pdf}

In other words, the O is accusing Johnson of trying to pass legislation to benefit a land deal. Only the benefit for that land already existed, so what the O is accusing makes zero sense.

Unfortunately, the problems with the O's story don't end there.

They go on to say:

Johnson, D-Scappoose, failed to disclose her ownership and sale of the 36 acres at the time, as state law requires. The Oregonian on Wednesday questioned Johnson about the deal, and she acknowledged that she should have listed the property on her state ethics forms.

On the technical merits, this paragraph is correct. Johnson didn't report the land or sale during the reporting cycle for which it occured. However, she did report the land on her Standards and Practices form in 2007.{pdf}

This reporting took place well BEFORE the Oregonian story. The piece seems to infer that Johnson was trying to hide the sale and didn't report it until she was caught.

If that's the case, then obviously she wouldn't have bothered to report it BEFORE the story broke.

Also obviously, Johnson f'd up by not reporting when she should have. And as she herself admits, she's culpable and should have to pay a fine or whatever Standards and Practices determines is appropriate.

So are we looking at a raft of ongoing corruption, as the Oregonian and local righty blogs seems to indicate? Only if you're trying really hard to make shit up where it doesn't really exist, it seems.

TJ's Update, 2pm--
Just so it doesn't get lost in the shuffle, Katherine Head at the Seaside Signal has a story today discussing Johnson's town hall appearance Sunday in Seaside. This would appear to be one of the meetings Randy Stapilus was referring to; he covered her hometown appearance in St. Helens. Johnson apparently echoed that explanation to the folks in Seaside--I have a message in with Ms. Head to find out what the reaction was of those assembled.

DHS Drug Survey Followup: The Lost Notes Version

2007-06-07T09:00:00.000-07:00

I had hoped they would jump out of my pants or coat, come together and reassemble in a neat pile next to my keys...but after a few days of waiting, I have given up the ghost to find my telephone notes on this story. I have information to impart, I can tell you what the principals said in general and in tone--but I don't have good documentation of the conversations. Sloppy, sloppy, but I must rise above the mistake and do the job as best I can from memory. It's all about the story, dammit! I...I owe you that much.

If you recall, as we were discussing the DHS press release on its substance abuse survey of Oregonians, we marveled at how deep the cuts have been in youth smoking, not to mention marijuana and alcohol use among teens and preteens. Yet these facts seemed sumberged in favor of negative headlines and oddly cherrypicked factotums--such as "more kids use pot than cigarettes," without explaining that both were way down but cigarettes were down more. So I tried to find out who had put the press release together, to ask why the good news was adroitly avoided.

I spoke with the AMH (the Department's Addiction and Mental Health division) representative on the survey project, Geralyn Brennan. The work was done in conjunction with a consultancy as contractor, presumably to administer the surveys among youth and then compile the result. I can't say exactly what they did, because they never returned my call. But Brennan's unit put the release together, so I asked her why it was slanted so negatively and the great news about declines over the last 10 years had not even been mentioned.

In retrospect, I may have let Ms. Brennan off the hook a bit by concentrating on the cigarette decline among 8th and 11th graders, which were massive--over 60% in 10 years for 8th grade prevalence. I say this because when I asked about the lack of tobacco stats, she explained that tobacco control is in a different area of DHS (and whose offices are in a different city), and Brennan did not "feel comfortable" extracting statistics on tobacco without "clearance." (I don't have notes, but where I use quotes in these cases, I remember those words or phrases being used.)

Well, there you go--you can smell the bureaucratic communications breakdown coming down Track Two, can't you? Brennan recalled that she thought she had asked someone to ask about what to include, but couldn't say who it was or if it was done, and what the folks in tobacco control might have said. Needless to say, somewhere along the line somebody dropped the ball. I followed up with Karen Girard, who runs not only tobacco control and prevention but also the state's asthma program. She was generally aware of the studies but agreed she might not have been the person contacted for permission, rather it would have been her analyst Stacey Schubert.

Poor Stacey Schubert is who had to answer for this, calling me back to assure me that no one had contacted her about any material in the studies related to tobacco and the big achievements they made, and that the press release was put together without their input (and thus without their data).

As with Brennan, I tried to prod Schubert a little bit about how they thought about the way the information was treated in the media. Wasn't it disappointing to have had such eye popping numbers and not even gotten a mention? Wasn't it odd to make it seem like pot use was on the rise when it was only so because cigarette use was so far down as well? And is tobacco going to tell the story in its own press release, to show that the money put into education absolutely works? Schubert was ruefully professional, discussing the restrictive politics that controlled what was "newsworthy" enough to merit a press release. I thought Jeeesus, what more do they want in order to merit one? A Million Child March on Washington to burn cigarettes in a bonfire and beat the living crap out of the Marlboro Man?

And thus we reach the bottom line--there was no context in the press release because the people who wrote the press release neglected to glean any context from it other than what played most spectacularly. I asked Brennan to characterize the panoply of results as it impacted children, and her response was that overall cigarette and marijuana use was down, alcohol use was flat, and other drugs showed a mixed profile. So I asked whether she thought the way the story was reported accurately reflected the results of the report. She did agree that the media tone was negative, but didn't really cop to creating that tone based on the press release (which remember, nearly every media outlet appeared to have used as the sole source for their reportage).

How can you not get the sense that it was written to maximize a sense of crisis, and thus reliance on the capable hands of DHS? The additional implications provided by Schubert suggest a highly political process where the simple results of whether teen substance use is going up or down is hardly the only consideration. And for Oregon to play scaremonger with it is odd. I mean, notwithstanding the feds we're one of those states who actually thinks it's OK for sick people to get high. So why make a headline that does the legwork for the war on drugs? And beyond the politics, it's crazy that one entire subfocus of the survey--cigarettes--was ignored, just because no one thought to follow up with the tobacco people on it.

Moral of the story, as usual: read the reports for yourself; don't trust what the media tell you about it in 250 words.