Detail, east Portland photo, courtesy Miles Hochstein / Portland Ground.



For old times' sake
The bojack bumper sticker -- only $1.50!

To order, click here.







Excellent tunes -- free! And on your browser right now. Just click on Radio Bojack!






E-mail us here.

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on June 5, 2006 4:28 PM. The previous post in this blog was Dogs across the water. The next post in this blog is Santa Rita comes through. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Archives

Links

Law and Taxation
How Appealing
TaxProf Blog
Mauled Again
Tax Appellate Blog
A Taxing Matter
TaxVox
Tax.com
Josh Marquis
Native America, Discovered and Conquered
The Yin Blog
Ernie the Attorney
Conglomerate
Above the Law
The Volokh Conspiracy
Going Concern
Bag and Baggage
Wealth Strategies Journal
Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation
myCorporateResource.com
World of Work
The Faculty Lounge
Lowering the Bar
OrCon Law

Hap'nin' Guys
Tony Pierce
Parkway Rest Stop
Utterly Boring.com
Along the Gradyent
Dwight Jaynes
Bob Borden
Dingleberry Gazette
The Red Electric
Iced Borscht
Jeremy Blachman
Dean's Rhetorical Flourish
Straight White Guy
HinesSight
Onfocus
Jalpuna
Beerdrinker.org
As Time Goes By
Dave Wagner
Jeff Selis
Alas, a Blog
Scott Hendison
Sansego
The View Through the Windshield
Appliance Blog
The Bleat

Hap'nin' Gals
My Whim is Law
Lelo in Nopo
Attorney at Large
Linda Kruschke
The Non-Consumer Advocate
10 Steps to Finding Your Happy Place
A Pig of Success
Attorney at Large
Margaret and Helen
Kimberlee Jaynes
Cornelia Seigneur
Mireio
And Sew It Goes
Mile 73
Rainy Day Thoughts
That Black Girl
Posie Gets Cozy
{AE}
Cat Eyes
Rhi in Pink
Althouse
GirlHacker
Ragwaters, Bitters, and Blue Ruin
Frytopia
Rose City Journal
Type Like the Wind

Portland and Oregon
Isaac Laquedem
StumptownBlogger
Rantings of a [Censored] Bus Driver
Jeff Mapes
Vintage Portland
The Portlander
South Waterfront
Amanda Fritz
O City Hall Reporters
Guilty Carnivore
Old Town by Larry Norton
The Alaunt
Bend Blogs
Lost Oregon
Cafe Unknown
Tin Zeroes
David's Oregon Picayune
Mark Nelsen's Weather Blog
Travel Oregon Blog
Portland Daily Photo
Portland Building Ads
Portland Food and Drink.com
Dave Knows Portland
Idaho's Portugal
Alameda Old House History
MLK in Motion
LoveSalem

Retired from Blogging
Various Observations...
The Daily E-Mail
Saving James
Portland Freelancer
Furious Nads (b!X)
Izzle Pfaff
The Grich
Kevin Allman
AboutItAll - Oregon
Lost in the Details
Worldwide Pablo
Tales from the Stump
Whitman Boys
Misterblue
Two Pennies
This Stony Planet
1221 SW 4th
Twisty
I am a Fish
Here Today
What If...?
Superinky Fixations
Pinktalk
Mellow-Drama
The Rural Bus Route
Another Blogger
Mikeyman's Computer Treehouse
Rosenblog
Portland Housing Blog

Wonderfully Wacky
Dave Barry
Borowitz Report
Blort
Stuff White People Like
Worst of the Web

Valuable Time-Wasters
My Gallery of Jacks
Litterbox, On the Prowl
Litterbox, Bag of Bones
Litterbox, Scratch
Maukie
Ride That Donkey
Singin' Horses
Rally Monkey
Simon Swears
Strong Bad's E-mail

Oregon News
KGW-TV
The Oregonian
Portland Tribune
KOIN
Willamette Week
KATU
The Sentinel
Southeast Examiner
Northwest Examiner
Sellwood Bee
Mid-County Memo
Vancouver Voice
Eugene Register-Guard
OPB
Topix.net - Portland
Salem Statesman-Journal
Oregon Capitol News
Portland Business Journal
Daily Journal of Commerce
Oregon Business
KPTV
Portland Info Net
McMinnville News Register
Lake Oswego Review
The Daily Astorian
Bend Bulletin
Corvallis Gazette-Times
Roseburg News-Review
Medford Mail-Tribune
Ashland Daily Tidings
Newport News-Times
Albany Democrat-Herald
The Eugene Weekly
Portland IndyMedia
The Columbian

Music-Related
The Beatles
Bruce Springsteen
Seal
Sting
Joni Mitchell
Ella Fitzgerald
Steve Earle
Joe Ely
Stevie Wonder
Lou Rawls

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Monday, June 5, 2006

Of free passes and goal posts

The verdict is in -- Emilie Boyles is guilty, guilty, guilty and has to pay the City of Portland back nearly $150,000 for breaking the rules in the city's wonderful "clean money" system, whereby taxpayer dollars pay for politicians' campaigns (and trailer rent and back cell phone bills).

I'd be surprised if she had $150 left to pay back.

But why face that fact when it's so easy to kid ourselves? I'm sure there'll be a bunch of "case closed -- great work, Opie and Blackmer" stories circulating in the morning. The city's mainstream media seem to have lost hold of their critical faculties on this subject. For example, this morning the O's City Hall reporters give us their expert "analysis" of the "voter-owned" (but never voted upon) system. The piece has got a spin on it that's sure to please the city commissioners on whom the reporters will be relying for their livelihoods over the next four years: "Clean money" is successful because it reduced overall campaign spending in its first election. Its only failing, apparently, is bad, bad Emilie.

No further mention of Lucinda Tate, who, like Boyles, turned in signatures and certified supposed grassroots donations that appear to have been dummied up. All that's forgotten now. Tate's free pass is apparently universal and permanent. And the fact that the system obviously invites fraud is not worthy of much serious consideration, either.

Let's see. The grand new giveaway spent around $450,000, plus who knows how many hours' worth of bureaucrat time. (Now that the city's only elections officer is resigning, I'm sure there will be two people hired to replace her -- one to do nothing but screw around with the "clean money" system.) The end result: Sten and Saltzman were handily re-elected. Four candidates turned in signatures. Two of those turned in signatures that apparently were faked. One of the two legitimate recipients of the public money was the incumbent who pushed the system into law.

The original promise of "clean money" was that it would bring many new faces into politics. But with three races eligible for funding his time around, it clearly didn't do that. And as the O story itself acknowledges, it will probably provide even less of an incentive for new faces to appear in the future.

Why? Well, as Amanda Fritz learned, you can't beat an incumbent without outspending him or her. And under the new system, you will never be able to do that.

If a challenger takes the public money, as Fritz did, the best the challenger will ever do is to match the incumbent in the money department. The incumbent will have no problem raising enough privately to match the taxpayer handout that the challenger is getting; alternatively, the sitting commissioner can just go for public money himself or herself, thus assuring equal war chests.

And if the challenger doesn't take public money, the incumbent can and probably will do so, as Sten did. The incumbent can get his or her $5 donations to qualify for the taxpayer handout with just a few phone calls to some union buds. And so again, the best the challenger can do is match the incumbent in the money department, because the system guarantees that the public-financed candidate always gets as least as much as the candidate who doesn't take the tax dollars.

So now, as the story indicates toward the end, "clean money" is going to make a positive difference only when there's a vacancy on the City Council. It guarantees victory for incumbents in perpetuity.

Still, it's wonderful. The goal posts are moved. The evildoer has been caught and punished. A Vietnam victory. Classic Portland City Hall.

Comments (41)

VOE is utter nonsense. Portland needs to go to elections by district with the mayor being picked from among those elected at the district level.
Yes I know we tried it just recently, but it was the mostly poorly written initiative in recent years.
M. the LIB

How did Tate get a "free pass" given that she was rejected?

No one in the press even mentions her little fling with Doctor Vladimir any more. Not even worth mentioning.

Amanda Fritz's comment on your May 23rd post is a good illustration of the difference between Tate and Boyles. The "free pass" was because she didn't prepay a one year lease or pay Vlad a ridiculous sum for "services".

Of course, one could assume that if she'd received the money....

What Boyles did with the money when she got it is the evil that the city's crowing about, but to me turning in fake signatures under highly suspicious circumstances was much more serious misconduct. Tate also did the latter.

The original promise of "clean money" was that it would bring many new faces into politics.

Right. How dare they expect people to swallow that?

There is only one way to bring new faces in, and that is for old faces to go out. And since old faces are generally unwilling to voluntarily step aside and get a new job, and because the power-grabbers have gamed the system to hobble anyone who dares challenge an incumbent, the only chance for new faces is an open seat due to death or retirement. Don't hold your breath.

Oh ... one other remedy remains. City Term Limits. Most everyone is willing to give an incumbent one shot at reelection. But, after that, it's time for a new face. Like with the President, Governor, MultCo commissioners, etc. - does anyone in their right mind want to get rid of those term limits?

At least we have a chance to reinstate term limits for the state legislature, because petitioning for that is going on right now.

"Free pass"

She used the same signature fraud as Boyles, including the same paid signature gatherer, but they disqualified Tate on an unrelated technicality so they wouldn't have to fund Tate.

Which is a polite way of saying Blackmer realized he'd screwed the pooch by forking over $144k to Boyles, but didn't want to admit it.

Easier to simply prosecute Boyles for the WAY she spent the money, not how she fraudulently obtained it.

And leave the system open for the same shenanigans when Fireman Randy comes up for re-election.

Well, as Amanda Fritz learned, you can't beat an incumbent without outspending him or her.

And as Ginny Burdick learned, it's darn difficult to beat an incumbent even by outspending him [let's drop the nice "or her" and get real - there have been only 6 women on the Portland City Council in its entire history, and as of now all the incumbents continue to be "him"]. Ginny found that even with the name-familiarity of a popular Legislator with a solid liberal voting record, campaigning against the incumbent's perceived negatives with the corporate media on her side, she wasn't able to force a runoff even with Dave Lister's considerable contribution.

I don't believe the answer is term limits or districts. With term limits, Big Money just puts up its next candidate and makes sure he (in Portland) gets elected. And districts would divide and conquer the neighborhoods even more. The answer lies in recognizing the power - and firm grip on power - of the Establishment, and working together to overcome it. The Campaign Finance Fund can and should be part of that work -- and only part of it, not the whole solution.

It's incorrect to say that a few calls to union buds can gather 1000 donations of $5. I can give you details of why if you like, but trust me as a union member and someone who's collected the donations -- it doesn't work like that.

The problems Emilie brought to light can and will be fixed. I'm glad Erik didn't take money from the Usual Suspects. I'm disappointed Dan did. Public financing of campaigns is still better than any alternative.

What Boyles did with the money when she got it is the evil that the city's crowing about, but to me turning in fake signatures under highly suspicious circumstances was much more serious misconduct. Tate also did the latter.

I totally agree with Jack. The difference between the two is like if I wrote a bad check and walked out of the store with my ill-gotten goods, or wrote a bad check and they refused to accept it. Writing a bad check is serious business and it'll get you busted regardles of whether you scored the loot or not.

I for one, welcome our new city commissioner overlords, all hail Emporer Sten. May they bestow on us peasants more benevolent acts similar to VOE. Perhaps we should build trams and convention center hotels to honor their infinite urban planning wisdom. I hear they serve kool aid at the church of sten.

I'm glad Erik didn't take money from the Usual Suspects.

Of course he did. Homer et al provided the "seed money." The taxpayers provided the balance of the money that Homer et al would've otherwise had to pony up. Yet another subsidy for those folks. And I say that as someone who respects Eric and was glad to see him win.

You need to take credit, Amanda, for not taking tainted seed money, and really distinguishing yourself from the Usual Suspects.

seed money is OK as long as it is from favored developers....right?

Can we apply the apparent new standard, fair market value, to each and every expenditure that crosses the desk of the Auditor himself? Cool. What about a look back period, where the passage of time reveals a prior judgment call to be based on dreams and dreams alone, and conclusively wrong as a matter of law (in hindsight)?

If Ms. Boyles' personal judgment can be second guessed, as a factual (yeah, quasi-judicial) matter, then so too can that of sitting council members. It was treated as some sort of conclusion of law, either that or it was nothing more than a policy disagreement (about "fair market value") between the ALJ and Blackmer versus Ms. Boyles.

I still cannot tell if the payment to a 16 year old was a conclusive violation as a matter of law or whether it was the payment to a relative, regardless of age, that was a violation as a matter of law or rather whether it was just lazy drafting by the ALJ -- (or strategic) so as to say both at the same time and say neither at the same time.

Some would say the Piss Christ was not art, in the context of federal funding to the National Endowment of the Arts. The question is who decides. Here, Mr. Gary Blackmer asserts a power greater than that of even Mr. Jesse Helms. I don't think Mr. Helms was any more bold in his demand than to call for an end to the future funding for the whole program (offensive to him), and used that particular expenditure toward that cause.

Campaign signs on the public right of way come immediately to mind as more amenable to a violation as a matter of law, and is wholly void of the vagaries of the exercise of Blackmer judgment. I want a standard other than Blackmer judgment.

The contemplated remedy, it seems, is the give even MORE power to the Blackmer-judgment test, with a backfire response of asking him whether a 2 dollar pencil rather than a 50 cent pencil is OK (for a "no-action" letter). Image if Mr. Helms were given veto power over any NEA project and he could send out a private army of little private scouts to find all the piss to veto.

Will the Auditor disallow any further expenditure to Mr. Sten? If not why not and provide me a standard.

Amanda wrote:

"With term limits, Big Money just puts up its next candidate and makes sure he (in Portland) gets elected."

Did big money elect Potter?

Term limits cause open seats. Open seats lead to competitive elections.

Fish v. Adams was open and competitive.

Saltman v. Fritz involved an incumbent and was a blowout.

Fish v. Adams was open and competitive. Saltman v. Fritz involved an incumbent and was a blowout...

I disagree with that characterization. Saltzman's victory was hardly a blow-out, especially considering the advantages of incumbency that essentially includes the ability to skirt campaign spending limitations.

When you can spend $70 grand, as reported by Willamette Week, from Children's Initiative money to put a "report card" --and your name-- in every mailbox in Portland, and that's not a campaign expenditure,I think that's another problem with Voter Owned Elections, and the uneven playing field that it seems to promise.

I'm having trouble understanding what the problem is with wide-open and unlimited private campaign financing, but with manditory full disclosure of all sources of funding and contributions. If a candidate gets his or her funds from dubious sources, then his or her opponent is free to hammer it unmercilessly, even demagogue it if he or she wishes. It all comes out in the wash.

And that's basically how Potter beat Francesconi, is it not? Rightly or wrongly, Francesconi was perceived as a bagman for assorted business interests, and his sporting of a brimming campaign warchest seemed to confirm that perception. And that was flushed out in the campaign with dispatch. Twern't no VOE needed there neither to do it.

I'm having trouble understanding what the problem is with wide-open and unlimited private campaign financing, but with manditory full disclosure of all sources of funding and contributions. If a candidate gets his or her funds from dubious sources, then his or her opponent is free to hammer it unmercilessly, even demagogue it if he or she wishes. It all comes out in the wash.

And that's basically how Potter beat Francesconi, is it not? Rightly or wrongly, Francesconi was perceived as a bagman for assorted business interests, and his sporting of a brimming campaign warchest seemed to confirm that perception. And that was flushed out in the campaign with dispatch. Twern't no VOE needed there neither to do it.

Tom Potter already had name-brand recognition and insider status as former police chief before running for Mayor. Sam Adams likewise was a known name and longtime city employee. So your examples, PanchoPDX, seem to reinforce the notion that something else is needed to make even open seats truly open to those whose work experience is outside City Hall.

Frank, thank you. I was indeed the only successful VOE candidate who didn't take seed money from the people who traditionally fund campaigns. I didn't take seed money from anyone. I hope everyone will look at our final campaign Contributions and Expenditure report when published next week, too. You'll find we were careful about every penny spent. If using the Campaign Finance Fund becomes the norm for Portland, it will give a very good indication to voters about where candidates are supported (from neighborhoods in which they collect donations) and how they will take care of public money if elected.

If a candidate gets his or her funds from dubious sources, then his or her opponent is free to hammer it unmercilessly, even demagogue it if he or she wishes.

Hammer it how? How do you reach the audience. The radio ads, tv spots, and mailings cost huge bucks.

If we eliminated all the bs sound-bite advertising, had a media that really was willing to give some semblance of fair and proportional publicty to candidates, and elections were decided on real policy choices, not illusions...well, sure.

The world don't work that way though.

Potter did it deftly on a veritable shoestring.

Yeah, but mostly Francesconi self-destructed.

Burdick had name recognition galore, and sufficient funding too. So did Linn. And Francesconi had name recognition and a truckload of cash. But there was nothing but hard cheese there for any of those. The voters divine what they want, somehow distinguishing between a hapless and inept twit like Sten and a hapless and inept twit like Linn, keeping one against worthy comers, while unceremoneously jettisoning the other. Those are the dynamics people should be analyzing. Meanwhile, money qua money is more hinderance than help in PDX politics. It's not how much a candidate has that carries the day, it's where it came from and, most importantly, how it's spent.

money qua money is more hinderance than help in PDX politics

I can't agree with that one.

Frank Dufay: Yeah, but mostly Francesconi self-destructed.
JK: He wasn't an incumbent either. That is the big difference.

Thanks
JK

Amanda Fritz: And as Ginny Burdick learned, it's darn difficult to beat an incumbent even by outspending him...
JK: Did she outspend him? The Auditor's web site shows he was eligible for more money several times in the later days of the campaign. I don't see consistent notations if the money was actually dispersed.

Amanda Fritz: The answer lies in recognizing the power - and firm grip on power - of the Establishment, and working together to overcome it.
JK: Right on!! Take away their power to do anything except run the bureaus. Maybe even elect them by bureau. I'd just love to hear the head of the PDC at, election time, justify $½ billion for the SoWhat, Sam's Tram, 1/4 billion for the Pearl, millions for the convention center hotel and property tax diversions to UR districts for the next 20 years to pay for it.

Amanda Fritz: The Campaign Finance Fund can and should be part of that work -- and only part of it, not the whole solution.
JK: What else would you suggest?

Thanks
JK

Jack wrote "...but to me turning in fake signatures under highly suspicious circumstances was much more serious misconduct."

Isn't there still an AG's investigation into both Boyles and Tate for the signature problem?

Supposedly. Tate says she's already been told she's in the clear, and they'll never be able to pin a criminal charge on Boyles. Maybe Vladimir will get slapped, but no one's shown me what state criminal statute he could be convicted of violating.

Ledbury asked I still cannot tell if the payment to a 16 year old was a conclusive violation as a matter of law or whether it was the payment to a relative, regardless of age...

I'm pretty sure it was that she paid her back wages for volunteer work performed prior to getting qualified for VOE funds.

Ginny was such a wooden and ineffective candidate, I don't know that outspending Sten three to one would have won the election.

THINKING CAP TIME! If you want to unseat an incumbent, it's not solely a question of how much money you spend. You also need a strong candidate with a message the voters can embrace.

Fritz was a strong candidate, but her message was lame (paraphrasing): Saltzman is doing a fine job, but I'm closer to the neighborhoods, and we need somebody like me on the council. Yawn.

If you had Fritz as the candidate, with a combination of Ginny's/Lister's (ex-Republican) message, and $700k to $800k, it would have been a much more competitive race. I'm not saying Fritz could have won outright, but advancing to the general election would have been guaranteed.

Sam Adams WAS the incumbent (despite the fact it was, technically, an open seat), but he chose to run as an outsider.

I assume this benefitted his campaign in two ways:

1. It reduced the "guilt by association" of being Vera's Chief of Staff.

2. It gave him some energy and "let's shake things up" credibility that he might otherwise have found difficult to muster.

[let's drop the nice "or her" and get real - there have been only 6 women on the Portland City Council in its entire history, and as of now all the incumbents continue to be "him"].

Oh please...feeling a little sour?
I thought I had heard it all with Portland politics, but now its a gender bias thing?

If you want to unseat an incumbent, it's not solely a question of how much money you spend. You also need a strong candidate with a message the voters can embrace. Fritz was a strong candidate, but her message was lame.

You also need an incumbent with strong negatives...which Francesconi earned for himself with several misteps. Saltzman didn't have that kind of baggage; he's been generally seen as effective, if low key, and even his flip-flop on the Tram got spun into a man-of-integrity schtick.

Amanda also elected not to go negative, which shows a lot of class, but absent the above, the voters don't get presented a clear choice. And when folks like the League of Coservation voters and Willamette Week endorse the incumbent, where's the traction for change?

Also, instead of being the poster-child of campaign finance reform, and what it might accomplish, that whole scenario got wiped out by the Boyles/Tate disaster. That Sten, the longest serving incumbent, was now also a "voter-owned" candidate took the "this is the way to change the world" out of the equation.

Kari -- patronage jobs would have been a more sophisticated way to reward past volunteer support, yes. If we apply a standard of review like that of pay for any city employee then there is a lot of staff that presently get paid an amount that translates not to fair market value but to advance payment of run-money when they get found out. 80, 90, 100, 120, 200 thousand per year for consultants or to get out front, politically, for the PPS, or the PDC, or OHSU, is all politics and run money -- not fair market value. KiwiWit employees worked in Feb(roo)ary without the benefit of valid authority to continue work on the city's dime and the city ratified this past expense. But this was sold as part of a risk of lawsuits to the tune of upwards of 31 million dollars. The key thing is the skill at framing a question. Ms. Boyles' daughter, if she stays focused on the present controversy over then next ten years, will have gained a priceless bit of experience that cannot be replicated precisely in an academic environment, sort of like baby Erik having a lawyer dad and couple of experienced coaches in his early years. The sheer arbitrariness of it all is the lesson that we have all learned. It is an Anarchist's dream, almost. Assassination in the political sphere is oh-so-slow and might be too-slow for some. Expect plenty of more high school aged activists and bi-polar's in our future with even less temperance than yourself; but you can be proud for leading them in that direction.

Jim K, yes, Ginny outspent Erik - so much in the last few days of the campaign that he was unable to find ways to spend all the matching funds he received, and will be returning some of them.

It was interesting in The Oregonian's article yesterday that they chose to use numbers for funds raised from Sept 1 through the last reporting the week before the election. This enabled them to give numbers implying Dan raised less than I did, whereas in fact he raised about $70k last summer and spent over $10k more than I did.

I have many, many suggestions on how to improve both the Campaign Finance Fund and challenge of incumbency advantages. I meet with the Commission on VOE next week; I have four pages of comments so far with more to come. I plan to post the ideas on my revised web site.

Mister T, how do you see me raising $700,000? Also thanks for the smile - an "ex-Republican message" might indeed have been more successful in my race, but Amanda Fritz is not the candidate to deliver such a message. If the press had given more coverage to Sharon Nassett's much more conservative message than mine, however, that would indeed likely have pulled votes from Dan and perhaps resulted in a runoff.

money qua money is more hinderance than help in PDX politics
I can't agree with that one.
When it comes to city-wide races in Portland between known candidates I have yet to see where having a big fat war chest with lots of campaign contributions correlates with winning. If there is a correlation to be discerned, it's with losing. Positioning and the relative perceptions of positioning is way more important.

Unknown candidates have very little chance, regardless of money. I'd rank the success factors like this:

Name familiarity + "correct" positioning
= win

If you've got those things money doesn't matter all that much.

And one gets name familiarity by running a few times and getting out and pounding the pavement, and winning something somewhere.

I'm open to being persueded otherwise.

Jon -- feeling a little Pollyannaish?

Come on -- you're going to tell me only 6 women in the council's history is just a product of random coincidence?

If it quacks like a duck...

So let's do a statistical analysis. What percentage of men who've run for city council have been elected and what percentage of women who've run for city council have been elected?

Come on -- you're going to tell me only 6 women in the council's history is just a product of random coincidence?

Maybe. Or just a lack of viable female candidates.

But it sounds like you are saying the voting bloc of Portland is guilty of gender bias...like they look at a ballot at purposely pick the male over the female?

I suppose that since most of those on the City Council are white, there is a racial problem too?

Interesting discussion.

A few random thoughts.

1. Its tough to beat an incumbent in a low turnout primary.

2. Money isn't everything. I was outspent in my primary 2 years ago and received 55,000 votes, as many as Tom Potter received.

3. Clean $ vs. dirty $. Like Ted Wheeler, I had over a 1000 contributors. I spent a lot of time dialing for dollars, meeting with potential donors, etc. I learned a lot in the process. With one exception (where I did not get any money), no one ever linked a contribution with a vote or a position. Everyone, however--including small dollar donors and organizations--wanted a chance to educate me about their issues and concerns, and wanted access later.

4. Open seats provide outsiders with more opportunity. Sam and I got a lot of coverage in the press, especially in the newspapers. I thought the coverage of the May 2006 primary was pretty limited and superficial.

5. Name recognition takes time and money. Challengers have to spend a lot of money to get it. I'm not sure $150,000 is enough to beat an incumbent.

6. I think Potter took a principled stand announcing that he would not take VOE $ in his reelection. It avoids the appearance problem of voting to subsidize your own reelection with public dollars. I still think Erik's initial plan to put VOE on the November, 2004 ballot was the right call.

7. Jack--VOE is really a distraction from more important issues. It almost reminds me of the Defense of Marriage nonsense coming out of the White House. Both play well to a small audience (eg the base). I am more interested in how we save the schools, expand the job base, maintain the social safety net, pave the roads, maintain the parks....less sexy issues, maybe, but more important to my quality of life in Portland.

Nick Fish

Nick Fish makes some interesting comments about "quality of life issues" in the city.
An African-American co-worker of mine will put in 16 hours today on two different jobs and take time out to take his child to ball practice as well. Things being what they are he has been stopped by the police in this city wanting to ask him questions more than once. But better training for the police doesn't show up on many list of issues even though a significant report on the issue was just put out. Will anyone do anything?
I doubt it.
Get a baseball team, get a tram (yes it gets a rimshot), convert a armory into a theatre, streetcars, lite rail, talk about affordable housing, protect the environment,outlaw snout houses, etc.etc., but ignore the basics.
The next time some member of a minority group gets shot a blue ribbon panel will produce a report and it will be in the papers, and then ignored. Just as like the past.
It gets old and you wonder why people are turned off by the system.
Money for VOE, but how much for improved and continuing police training?
The politicians in Portland need to get out and meet some people for a change and not just the usual suspects, (read political gadflies).
Michael Wilson


Sponsors


As a lawyer/blogger, I get
to be a member of:

In Vino Veritas

Chloe, Pinot Grigio, Valdadige 2013
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly Gamay Noir 2013
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio, Friuli 2013
St. Francis, Red Splash 2011
Rodney Strong, Canernet, Alexander Valley 2011
Erath, Pinot Blanc 2013
Taylor Fladgate, Porto 2007
Portuga, Rose 2013
Domaine Digioia-Royer, Chambolle-Musigny, Vielles Vignes Les Premieres 2008
Locations, F Red Blend
El Perro Verde, Rueda 2013
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red 2
If You See Kay, Red 2011
Turnbull, Old Bull Red 2010
Cherry Tart, Cherry Pie Pinot Noir 2012
Trader Joe's Grand Reserve Cabernet, Oakville 2012
Benton Lane, Pinot Gris 2012
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Reserva 2008
Haden Fig, Pinot Noir 2012
Pendulum Red 2011
Vina Real, Plata, Crianza Rioja 2009
Edmunds St. John, Bone/Jolly, Gamay Noir Rose 2013
Bookwalter, Subplot No. 26
Ayna, Tempranillo 2011
Pete's Mountain, Pinot Noir, Haley's Block 2010
Apaltagua, Reserva Camenere 2012
Lugana, San Benedetto 2012
Argyle Brut 2007
Wildewood Pinot Gris 2012
Anciano, Tempranillo Reserva 2007
Santa Rita, Reserva Cabernet 2009
Casone, Toscana 2008
Fonseca Porto, Bin No. 27
Louis Jadot, Pouilly-Fuissé 2011
Trader Joe's, Grower's Reserve Pinot Noir 2012
Zenato, Lugana San Benedetto 2012
Vintjs, Cabernet 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White 2012
Rainstorm, Oregon Pinot Gris 2012
Silver Palm, North Coast Cabernet 2011
Andrew Rich, Gewurtztraminer 2008
Rodney Strong, Charlotte's Home Sauvignon Blanc 2012
Canoe Ridge, Pinot Gris, Expedition 2012
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly Gamay Noir Rose 2012
Dark Horse, Big Red Blend No. 01A
Elk Cove, Pinot Noir Rose 2012
Fletcher, Shiraz 2010
Picollo, Gavi 2011
Domaine Eugene Carrel, Jongieux 2012
Eyrie, Pinot Blanc 2010
Atticus, Pinot Noir 2010
Walter Scott, Pinot Noir, Holstein 2011
Shingleback, Cabernet, Davey Estate 2010
Coppola, Sofia Rose 2012
Joel Gott, 851 Cabernet 2010
Pol Roget Reserve Sparkling Wine
Mount Eden Chardonnay, Santa Cruz Mountains 2009
Rombauer Chardonnay, Napa Valley 2011
Beringer, Chardonnay, Napa Reserve 2011
Kim Crawford, Sauvignon Blanc 2011
Schloss Vollrads, Spaetlese Rheingau 2010
Belle Glos, Pinot Noir, Clark & Telephone 2010
WillaKenzie, Pinot Noir, Estate Cuvee 2010
Blackbird Vineyards, Arise, Red 2010
Chauteau de Beaucastel, Chateauneuf-du-Pape 2005
Northstar, Merlot 2008
Feather, Cabernet 2007
Silver Oak, Cabernet, Alexander Valley 2002
Silver Oak, Cabernet, Napa Valley 2002
Trader Joe's, Chardonnay, Grower's Reserve 2012
Silver Palm, Cabernet, North Coast 2010
Shingleback, Cabernet, Davey Estate 2010
E. Guigal, Cotes du Rhone 2009
Santa Margherita, Pinot Grigio 2011
Alamos, Cabernet 2011
Cousino Macul, Cabernet, Anitguas Reservas 2009
Dreaming Tree Cabernet 2010
1967, Toscana 2009
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend

The Occasional Book

Phil Stanford - White House Call Girl
John Kaplan & Jon R. Waltz - The Trial of Jack Ruby
Kent Haruf - Eventide
David Halberstam - Summer of '49
Norman Mailer - The Naked and the Dead
Maria Dermoȗt - The Ten Thousand Things
William Faulkner - As I Lay Dying
Markus Zusak - The Book Thief
Christopher Buckley - Thank You for Smoking
William Shakespeare - Othello
Joseph Conrad - Heart of Darkness
Bill Bryson - A Short History of Nearly Everything
Cheryl Strayed - Tiny Beautiful Things
Sara Varon - Bake Sale
Stephen King - 11/22/63
Paul Goldstein - Errors and Omissions
Mark Twain - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
Steve Martin - Born Standing Up: A Comic's Life
Beverly Cleary - A Girl from Yamhill, a Memoir
Kent Haruf - Plainsong
Hope Larson - A Wrinkle in Time, the Graphic Novel
Rudyard Kipling - Kim
Peter Ames Carlin - Bruce
Fran Cannon Slayton - When the Whistle Blows
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt

Road Work

Miles run year to date: 319
At this date last year: 172
Total run in 2013: 257
In 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269


Clicky Web Analytics