If I were Kroger, I would be proud to receive money from working people. Here's what I wouldn't be proud of - if you sneak a peek at Macpherson's new money, you'll see that a bunch of it comes from big timber - Freres Lumber just dropped $10,000, for example. Kroger has working class people, Macpherson has polluters. Somehow I'm not shocked.

Somewhere Stoel Rives partners must be smiling...

God forbid any legislator advocates for fixing the massive pension deficits ... they get "punished." Man, I'm pro-labor, but anyone who wasn't braindead knew (and knows) of the huge financial hole that had to be fixed. It's like Republicans attacking Democrats for raising taxes to stop a budget deficit. It's the brave politician who has the guts to do it.

As for SEIU being "working class people," its members, yes, but the union?

Johnathan,

The SEIU has been at the forefront of advocating on behalf of all working people. They have also shown dedication to creating a working liberal majority. All of that money cannot be attributed to PERS alone, a lot of the support comes from the SEIU believing in Kroger's vision for Oregon.

A Rab, what do you have to say about this: SEIU International - A New Model of Corporate Unionism, Why Union Memebers and Progressives Should Be Wary:

This is a website run by the "California Nurses Association" and the "National Nurses Organizing Committee". The CNA and NNOC are who brought Schwarzenegger to heel.

Looks like there is a distinct odor to the SEIU that Kroger may have a hard time washing off. Too bad we didn't get a Democrat to run in the Attorney General Democratic Primary, just an Oregon Republicrat (MacPherson) and a guy who obviously has problems.

Just so you know, the CNA and the NNOC are the same thing. They also happen to be a bitter rival to the SEIU and are politically... idiosyncratic (see the endorsement of Nader, Ralph). The SEIU, in contrast, has been very active in building a broad liberal coalition and improving the lives of all workers.

SEIU is trying to buy his election and send a signal to every elected official that if they protect the public interest to the detriment of public unions, those public unions will destroy your career.

It is shameful.

I am a loyal democrat and a union supporter (and neither crazy nor bitter), but it would be a tragedy if Greg Macpherson loses because of his courage in fixing a broken system that was bankrupting the state and causing us to spend more on public employee benefits than any state in the union.

SEIU, along with OEA, the Trial Lawyers, and the central consultants like Nesbitt, Terhune, Kaufman, Weiner, Grove, and their toady Kevin Looper have made a largely successful power play to control the Democratic Party and control the state. And most people don't even know it's happened. Many Republicans suspect it...but we Dems don't wanna listen to them, and rightly so on most stuff.

Therein will lie the seeds of the destruction of the Democratic majorities. Because at certain points, what's best for SEIU members might not be what's best for the State. And moderate R's will be able to take the high road and paint Democrats as tools of a machine that doesn't exist to make the state better, but that makes the machine better.

Of course, I would agree that an SEIU controlled machine is better than a Wal-Mart controlled machine, but are those the choices? We need labor leaders, and other Democratic leaders, who will recognize when their interests are not necessarily in the interests of everyone, and not go full bore into punishment and empire building.

I was on the fence in the Attorney General's race until now. Vote Macpherson.

And don't vote for Macpherson just to resist the SEIU power play.

Vote for Macpherson because Kroger will support mandatory minimums, resist reform to Measure 11, increase our national leading prison spening, and support the death penalty.

Of course, we can be sure Kroger won't ever go after any union corruption.

Anon, your characterization of this race is ridicules. Some quick points:

-Kroger supports reforms to Measure 11 regarding juvenile offenders and opposes mandatory minimums for non-violent crimes -Kroger is running to expand drug treatment and keep more people out of the prison system -Kroger has stated that while he supports the death penalty in principle, he supports the creation of a commission to reform (or potentially abolish) Oregon’s death penalty -I will not even dignify the crack about union corruption

Furthermore, there is no shadowy conspiracy controlling the Oregon Democratic Party or the state government. If you don’t like Kroger’s policies, fine, do not vote for him, but it is simply bizarre to think that Kroger is the spearhead of some amorphous conspiracy of plaintiff’s attorneys, teachers, service workers, and Democratic activists out to seize all levers of power.

He's not at all a spearhead. Not even a meaningful participant. Merely the beneficiary.

I like Kroger's policies for the most part. I tried, maybe lamely, to throw in some policy issues so people didn't have merely back room deals to hold onto. And I don't think most unions suffer from much outright corruption, you're right that was a stupid crack.

Still, public employee union leaders, and the consultants they pay, really do have inordinate influence on the way resources are spent and the eventual policy determinations with Democratic leadership. And the key players really do meet and discuss who's in and who's out. And elected leaders don't want to cross them. And not all of it is for the benefit of the whole. And they really do punish folks.

I just hope we won't let them punish Macpherson.

Hey A. Rab, the CNA and NNOC appear to be no more or less the same thing than the SEIU and Americans for Health Care are the same thing. The SEIU is a union, AHC is a political organizing project. The CNA is a union, NNOC is a political organizing project.

A quick browse of news sources shows CNA and SEIU are rivals on substance, which is not dishonorable as you attempt to imply. Instead it raises legitimate questions about the SEIU. Your claim that the SEIU has "been building a broad liberal coalition". That of course is just an assertion, which you don't prove. As this article about Andy Stern in the The Nation, a magazine that I think it is fair to say has far more respectable "liberal" credentials, suggests, your baseless assertion appears to depend more on redefining the meaning out of what it means to be "liberal":

Andy Stern: Savior or Sellout? http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070716/featherstone

This paragraph says a lot about Stern:

What's more, Stern's business-friendly orientation appears to influence his approach to national policy questions. More problematic than the photo-ops with Lee Scott, Stern's crusade for "healthcare reform" is vague ("not even an inch deep," according to one SEIU researcher). His support for any sort of change has been promiscuous: He's praised Mitt Romney's Massachusetts plan and Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposal in California,which have been criticized as giveaways to the insurance industry and don't adequately address affordability or cost issues. Asked if the Better Health Care Together Coalition has agreed on anything more than the fact that there is a problem, Stern says, "That's probably all we will agree on." Of a single-payer system, Stern said in a speech given at the Brookings Institution, "I think we need to find a new system that is not built on the back of the government. I am here to also say I don't think we need to import Canada or any other system." One SEIU staff member says sadly of such comments, Stern "doesn't hold social democracy in high regard."

Which is curious, since the labor movement in most industrialized countries rests squarely on social democracy values.

Read the rest. I appears that the SEIU is really much more in line with DLC viewpoints, which are hardly liberal, and as much about building a broad coalition for Andy Stern, than anything that can fairly be called "liberal" positions. This approach of just making up definitions for words to support positions that are not progressive or liberal seems to be a major theme at Blue Oregon.

Disclosure: I'm not affiliated with any union, support unionism, and I'm just tired of working people being used as pawns by a lot of people for their own self-interested goals. Kroger's endorsement by the SEIU says more about Kroger's enormous personal and political flaws than anything else.

Man, I'm pro-labor, but anyone who wasn't braindead knew (and knows) of the huge financial hole that had to be fixed.

The ones that are brain-dead are the fools who bought the con that the system was broken. As Greg Hartman recently made clear, the gutting PERS received from the 2003 mindless legislature was not necessary, it was a scapegoating of public employees. Like all such systems, PERS needed some adjusting, not a gutting. But fools bought the scam that the system was broken, the same system that had been earlier praised as the best in the World.

For those who can read and comprehend the English language, obviously not many who post here, there's a clear reason WHY SOME STATES INTRODUCED DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLANS and it's clearly a Republican plot that's working well on some really stupid Democrats.

Robert Gourley's comments are spot on from top to bottom. (And I'm neither a public employee or eligible to be union member, just a Democrat whose tired of being sold out by people who claim to be in my own party.)

Karen, as I understand it, John Kroger was a US Attorney for six years. In any law circles I'm aware of, six years does not a career make. And six years as a law professor adds zero to qualifications for Attorney General.

Hmmm, you are right that in most countries organized labor was the basis for social democracy movements, however, that was never true in the United States. With a few exceptions (the Knights of Labor for example) American unions have focused on creating better working conditions within the liberal-capitalist system, not switching to social democracy. To equate anything to the right of social democrats as "DLC" style politics is to collapse the entire spectrum of American political thought into a single point. One can be liberal and not a social democrat. By your standards FDR, LBJ, Kucinich, and Obama are not liberals.

You are right, the SEIU is not working to create a social democracy, but it is building a liberal coalition. They have been one of the backbones in recent Democratic successes and they have been very involved in building bridges with other liberal activists. Their support of Kroger speaks to the power of his ideas and strength of his background.

Finally, the SEIU and the CNA are rivals on a much more basic level than you think. Check out their fights, they are both going after the same pool of works. For one union to grow, it is a loss for the other union. As such, I would be suspicious about what each has to say about the other.

Johnathan, I cannot believe are you actually discounting law professors totally and utterly. The fact of the matter is that Kroger has a fairly unique background in public policy, criminal justice, and education. All of these areas are covered by the Attorney General, and all of these jobs are relevant to the AG's Office.

You are right that Kroger is not a 30 year trial veteran, but than, nether is Macpherson.

Finally, the SEIU and the CNA are rivals on a much more basic level than you think.

Yes, my Union, SEIU, and CNA are involved in battle that's not easily judged from the "outside" - much like the situation with married couples.

I find it curious that many people have bought in to the idea that Kroger will be some sort of Law & Order prosecutor if elected to AG. The fact that always gets in the way of this one is that Oregon's AG is different from that of say NY's AG. Oregon's AG does not have the kind of broad prosecutorial authority that is needed to "go after" white collar criminals and other organized crime. Oregon's AG can bring civil/constitutional suit (say against the Feds or Big Tobacco, as has been done), but can't actual prosecute someone for a criminal act. This kind of gets in the way of an activist AG that many voters are dreaming about.

David, you are wrong about the AG's authority. Generally, the Attorney General does not do most criminal prosecution, but the DOJ does have a very active criminal prosecution division. In addition to assisting the District Attorneys, the Oregon DOJ is responsible for things like organized crime. Furthermore, the AG can go after more types of crime with the Governor's permission (and as far as people knows, no Governor has ever denied a request). You have confused Kroger's ideas about criminal prosecution. He is not trying to be a DA, instead, in those areas of criminal law where the DOJ is the chief criminal prosecutor, Kroger wants the Department to be more aggressive and focused.

I am all for punishing people who cut Pers. I know plenty of people who had their retirement beaten up by that change. I don't think you should bust your tail somewhere only to have a state or employer renege and adjust the deal along the way.

I don't think you should bust your tail somewhere only to have a state or employer renege and adjust the deal along the way.

Yeah, I wonder how much restaurant folks would like it if folks came in, sat down, ordered a meal, ate it, then got up and left without paying. There are folks smart enough to grasp implied contracts - they are not among the majority of the 2003 Oregon Legislature.

<hr/>