Kevin - Here's a link to Oregon's SOS website so you can re-register to vote in the Primary for Bill! Every vote counts!! http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/votreg/vreg.htm register to vote here

My number one thing for the Gov. race this year is:

"In 2006 we wuz robbed of an intelligent Gov. campaign both in the primary and the general. Ted and Ron both should be ashamed of the bland, often content-empty campaigns they ran. This time I vote for the person who does the best job of giving us an intelligent Gov. campaign debate."

I don't care if every one of my friends tells me "Vote for ___ as the best candidate" or who has the most money, or who runs what ads.

Bradbury said in the post, "This pattern of not voting is yet another example of a Kitzhaber candidacy that is long on rhetoric but short on specifics. "

Matt, can you or any other supporter of Bill tell us what those Bradbury specifics are? Are they well thought out incl. implementation? Have any of his ideas been the basis for a coalition?

Where does Bill stand on the report of the Revenue Restructuring Task Force?

Can he intelligently discuss the proposals of the Public Comm. on the Legislature? http://landru.leg.state.or.us/pcol

Does he know which of those proposals has been publicly debated, acted upon?

Here is an example of an intelligent debate-starter. It is a quote from a guest opinion--former legislator who served on Ways and Means and knows the detail involved in debating budget and tax issues.

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/01/oregon_tax_reform_kicking_the.html For example, ask the candidate if she or he will:

I for one will not back any candidate who does not offer a specific plan to overhaul our tax system. While not everyone will agree with the suggestions, I hope we can agree that it is time to make candidates offer specific and real proposals to fix this mess, otherwise we will just continue to "kick the can," something that in the long term we can ill afford to do.

I have publicly told Bradbury and Kitzhaber, to their faces, that I am a member of the "spectator caucus". I will not jump on a bandwagon. I know both of them---they are intelligent enough to give us an intelligent debate.

So far, the campaign is so bland that maybe what it needs is for DeFazio to decide to run in the primary. That would spice things up! Peter is sufficiently detail oriented that if he decided to run for Gov., I am sure he would have a public position on kicker reform, budget/tax reform, and a whole host of other ideas.

Think about what it would be like to have a transportation expert (who also understands utility deregulation and lots of other issues) running in the primary!

Thanks for posting on this, Carla. At least as important as the tobacco tax that was on the ballot in November 2007 was Measure 49, which saved our land-use system from the free-for-all that ensued after M37 was passed. All elections are important, but that one was particularly so. Additionally, I find it amazing that Kitzhaber didn't vote in the 2002 gubernatorial primary. It would seem like a sitting governor would have an opinion about who would do a good job as a successor.

I am appalled at anyone who wants to run for governor but doesn't make time to vote consistently, whether it's our guy or theirs. I'm also bothered by the fact that the Oregonian editorial page doesn't seem to think it's a big deal. Elections matter, particularly in a state like Oregon where we have an active initiative and referendum system. I would like to see a little more commitment to democracy from the people who would be our elected officials.

I also want to second Carla's observation about Kitzhaber's inaccessibility. I've attended multiple events, including the Oregon Summit, where all of the other candidates were available for people to talk with, but Kitzhaber either didn't show up at all or came for a very short amount of time. If you are serious about running and winning, you have to be willing to work hard and talk to people. I think the most unfortunate thing about Kitzhaber running is it has pushed out a lot of talented people from giving a statewide run a try. We Democrats have a great bench, and I am disappointed that more of it is not on display in this gubernatorial primary.

The other is the November 2007 special election which included Measure 50. The Measure, billed by supporters as the Healthy Kids Campaign, would have increased the tobacco tax in Oregon in order to fund health care for children and poorer Oregonians. The Measure was defeated.

Measure 50 is where the Healthy Kids campaigners proved they were not above using kids to push their own agendas. I won't call them out here, but they and we all know who they are, and how they sunk to a new low by attacking anybody who opposed the immoral maternalism/paternalism, scapegoating and responsibility shifting down the economic ladder on principle as shills of the tobacco industry.

And after Measure 50 failed, probably because of the behavior of the disgusting behavior of the "Yes On 50"/"Healthy Kids" coalition more than anything else, none of them, starting with the most sanctimonious of all Ecumenical Ministries, were there joining grassroots demands that the Democratic leadership in both chambers of the Oregon legislature put the issue of raising the funding Measure 50 was supposed to raise on the agenda of the 2008 special session. There was far too much campaigning and cynical positioning for the November 2008 campaign to be done. So more of Oregon's kids they professed to care so much about and attacked opponents for not caring about went without health care for another year because we couldn't raise state matching funds.

Some of us where there close up on that one and know exactly what an eye opener that was about who is and who isn't what they pretend to be in Oregon politics.

So I say good on Kitzhaber "casting" a "no vote" on that one if he couldn't actually vote "NO" as I found that myself and every other genuine progressive, informed, intelligent Democrat I know did. And there are going to be similar surprises for the Democrats and a lot of excuse-makers in the "professional" advocacy groups like Health Care for America Now (HCAN) if the Congress passes a bill that has a mandate people throw their money down the rathole of the private insurance industry without given them the option of instead buying into a strong publicly-owned plan of some type.

For those who don't know, HCAN is a national coalition of groups whose Oregon representation includes a number of "marquee" groups who in Oregon were part of "Yes on 50"/Healthy Kids coalition that also just happened to include a lot of private health insurance companies (Who do you think most of that tax money and the federal matching funds were going to go to in Oregon?). The HCAN coalition members state on their website:

HCAN has 10 principles for reform that have been endorsed by President Obama and more than 190 members of Congress:

with "principle" number 2 right at the top of the list being:

A choice of a private insurance plan, including keeping the insurance you have if you like it, or a public health insurance plan that guarantees affordable coverage without a private insurer middleman.

However, they are out in the field right now in Oregon and nationally adjusting their strategy and saying that they aren't "drawing a line in the sand" on a public option (sound familiar?). In other words, playing politics, and if you look at the some of the members, you'll see groups who it's not a stretch to believe might have an interest in covering the backs of Democrats who are selling out the American public to the private insurance industry, their professed supposed "principles" notwithstanding.

And if you look at who they say in Congress supports their principles, you'll find Merkley, Blumenauer, DeFazio, Schrader, and Wu. It's significant Wyden never was a supporter, which tells us something about the honesty of his support for the public option, and Merkley has already decided once that maybe his principles are, shall we say, "situational".

It will be interesting to see between the House members whose principles are similarly "situational" (and who has the back of the brave ones who vote NO to uphold their principles if the final bill looks like the Senate bill as is now the common belief), as it will also be interesting what these gubernatorial candidates have to say if a final bill has a mandate and no public option. Remember, the states will play a big role and we have already begun just started a major revamping of the health care system in Oregon that the next governor will have a big job directing.

But he's Kitzhaber!. Isn't he entitled to an automatic nomination just because he deigns to show his head again! All fall in line. Uber Alles!

I have known for years that Kitzhaber is a supercilious jerk. I had tried to have a conversation with him about bills in the legislature. I found him so convinced of his own superior intellect; it never occurred to him that people who disagree with him can be smart, too.

I never understood the love-fest for him by the Democratic party. But I credit him with one thing: He and Bill Clinton helped convince me I had no business being a Democrat and caused me to change my registration to where my voting had been for years.

Now I am a happy Republican (and I always vote).

Is anyone really surprised that John Kitzhaber often doesn't vote when he's not on the ballot?

Ha ha, good one, Jack.

I HAVE ONLY MISSED ONE ELECTION SINCE I BECAME ELIGIBLE IN 1966. GUESS THAT MAKES ME #1 CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR

mirc, mirc indir, türkçe mirc

I want to second Brian Collins's comment above regarding the importance of Ballot Measure 49 in November 2007, and how disappointing it is to learn that John Kitzhaber cast no ballot in that election.

With respect to Jeff Mapes and his recent list of the top ten political stories in Oregon for the last decade, the overwhelming passage of M49 in November of 2007 was huge. I think historians, looking back some decades from now, will see the passage of M49 as the end of 30+ years of fighting in Oregon over land use planning (or at least the beginning of a long truce). The 60-40 margin of victory sent an undeniable message -- Oregonians do not want to scrap the system of state wide land use planning established by Senate Bill 100 in 1973.

A Republican Governor (Tom McCall) and a Republican State Senator (Hector MacPherson, a Linn County dairy farmer) played crucial roles in passing SB 100. (See the entry on SB 100 at the Oregon Encyclopedia Project for a refresher:

http://www.oregonencyclopedia.org/entry/view/senate_bill_100/

I was born here, and ever since I came of age to vote, someone's been trying to dismantle and put an end to land use planning in Oregon. I've lost count of the total number of ballot measures we've seen (that's a Blue Book project for someone). I remember Audrey McCall's defense of her husband's legacy.

The alternative to M49 was no land use planning in Oregon. I suspect that's why the vast majority of Democrats, including advocates here at Blue Oregon, who registered and turned in their ballots, voted Yes. There was a groundswell of grassroots campaigning for M49, and the sheer number of letters to the editors I recall seeing printed was powerful. Folks knew the stakes, and they responded.

Where was John Kitzhaber?

I don't know.

I do know this about his primary opponent, Bill Bradbury. Bill travelled the state extensively as a documentary journalist in the early 1970s filming hearings on land use planning. He has understood the issue from the get go. And he's married to the daughter of Dick Eymann, the Democrat who was Speaker of the House in 1973 when SB 100 became law. His commitment to this cause I trust, and I'm not surprised to learn he always turns in his ballot.

I did vote for John Kitzhaber for Governor twice. I will be thinking of him this May when I get my ballot and fill it out and turn it in on time. I won't be checking the box next to his name.

There is no excuse not to vote when the ballot comes straight to your house. It's not like most other states, where you actually have to go to a polling place.

I'm not going to link John Kitzhaber's missing 5 of the last 13 elections to his capacity to be a good governor, but really, honestly, how can you miss 5 of the last 13 elections??? Never mind 22 out of the last 42 for Mr. Alley. I can see missing one, perhaps a school board election with no opposition, but 5? And the 2007 election and one as sitting governor????

I have my ballot in my hands now (as an overseas resident I get it a bit earlier) and even with the extra (pain in the butt) step of having to get it to the US Embassy to mail it I am definitely going to vote yes on the ballot measures and make sure I send it in. (as I have for every election since)

Not sure why this small news item pisses me off so much, but it strikes a nerve. I will say, in Kitzhaber's defense, that he has done a lot to advance grassroots democracy through the Bus Project (as has Bradbury), so perhaps sin forgiven, sin forgotten, but this really grates on me.

And in case anyone needed a reminder of how important a single vote is; SoS Kate Brown won her first seat by 7 votes and Rep. Jeff Barker won his first by 27. (after the recount).

James Mattiace Kingdom of Morocco

I don't have an opinion on the substance of this article, but it is interesting to see Carla take on Kitz. I spent a fair amount of time working for Dem candidates as an unpaid volunteer in my younger days but I don't really know how the professional political consulting business works. I will say that as a partner in a professional enterprise, if one of my other partners turned on one of my clients, it would be career suicide for him or her. Apparently not so in the world of Blue Oregon / Mandate Media.

Happy New Year.

Shh. I'm getting Carla a copy of Unbought & Unbossed, the docu-bio of Shirley Chisholm, for her birthday. Don't tell her.

Greg - that's a nice compliment. You're right, she's not corrupt.

The fact that he didn't bother to vote in several important elections prompts a question I would like to ask of John Kitzhaber. Why? And why do you want to be Governor again?

He just doesn't seem to have the needed passion for the job. He didn't do a great job at it the first time; why does he want it again?

As far as being arrogant........ he is a doctor after all. Some of them have a tendency that way.

I probably won't vote for him in the primary.

Good job Carla. As others have said, there really shouldn't be an excuse for not voting when the darn ballot is delivered directly to your mailbox. I have had a few interactions w/Kitz over the years and also find him aloof and short on substance.

FULL DISCLOSURE - I haven't voted in ANY primaries because the dems and reps collude to keep us NAV's out of the process.

Interesting how Bradbury pinheads think this matter is an argument for Bradbury. (And I'm PO'd that are only choices are Kitzhaber or Bradbury, so don't even think about trying to claim this is a defense of Kitzhaber). I met Bradbury recently and he struck me again as being intellectually superficial, an impression to that point I had gotten from observing him in the media. He talked in cliched memes and demonstrated little awareness of how trite most of what he had to say was. Sorry, he's not governor material in my book. But he was quite good in that direct meeting at blowing smoke up the kind of self-centered, mental lightweights that hang out here.

Kitzhaber is aloof when I met him and I observed tends to limit his in depth interactions to people and things that interest him. Not quite what I'd like to see in a governor either. Like I said, I'm more PO'd we don't have any good choices.

Here's something typical of the bizarre nature of Bradbury and his campaign.

As of 1/5/2010, when Bradbury issued his snarky statement about this non-controversy, his website under the "Issues" tab only his rambling City Club speech about Education. However, his 1/5/2010 press release says:

"Bill is the only candidate in this race who has provided specific proposals for education, conservation, sustainability and jobs and will continue to engage Oregonians every day as he asks for their vote.”

His "Press" tab consists solely of two snarky releases against two other candidates (Kitzhaber and Sizemore), a release that windbag Gore backed him (another self-aggrandizing Democrat who has become an embarrassing joke to our Party), and a call to remove soda vending machines from schools.

Sorry, if he's not able to even update his website with detailed positions on cliched Oregon issues like "conservation", "sustainability", and "jobs", he's not talented enough to be the chief executive of the state.

He also appears to be one of those sad examples of boomers trying to be hip by putting more attention into his FaceBook page than his website.

(And his education "policy" seems to boil down to "we need more money for education", "we're going to raise that by going after tax cheats and loopholes".)

All examples of a guy whose presents a persona of little intellectual substance who needs to find a different line of work than governor.

"He talked in cliched memes and demonstrated little awareness of how trite most of what he had to say was"..........

"Bill is the only candidate in this race who has provided specific proposals for education, conservation, sustainability and jobs and will continue to engage Oregonians every day as he asks for their vote.”

I had been trying to remember why it was that I was unimpressed with Bradbury so far, and these quotes from Not Really reminded me.

If Bill has specific proposals for education and jobs then he should say at every opportunity--something like "These are my 3 specific education proposals and my 2 jobs proposals" or whatever.

But the framing of "I'm the only candidate in this race..." without specifics is just campaign jargon.

If he can talk about specifics, fine. Otherwise, it is just spin.

Where does he stand on kicker reform?

Is he aware, for instance, of the differences in high school education among the largest districts (Portland, Salem, Eugene, Beaverton, etc.) and among those districts?

In Salem, for instance, there are 6 very different large high schools: North, South, McNary, McKay, Sprague, West.

West is the newest and most "state of the art" , North was the original Salem High School, and there are many differences between the high schools--student body, organization, programs available, etc.

Portland, I understand, is debating how to organize their high schools.

Not to mention elementary and middle school education.

And what are Bill's job creation ideas?

The problem is not Bradbury vs. Kitz. The problem is that no one is talking about specific proposals. Where is the vision for the future and the plan to carry it out?

The Sunday Statesman-Journal Inside Business section featured an interview with someone who has been a Salem civic activist for decades, once a local business owner before the downtown mall was built, who has a vision on how to revitalize the 25 year old downtown mall which occupies the block where her family business was once located.

If we can't hear that sort of vision from Gov. candidates, it really doesn't matter to me if they voted in every election from the moment they became old enough to vote.

Carla -

Just curious, how many different counties has Kitzhaber been registered in over the last 20 years? Douglas, Lane, Marion, Multnomah and Washington? I noticed the document you linked to was from Washington County. I thought he lived in Multnomah County?

PG

"He also appears to be one of those sad examples of boomers trying to be hip by putting more attention into his FaceBook page than his website."

Wait a minute... you just chastised him for not having enough information on his website, "Sorry, if he's not able to even update his website," and now you're upset that he's trying to communicate his ideas through a different medium?

"All examples of a guy 'whose' presents a persona of little intellectual substance" - So you like to question other peoples intelligence while making spelling errors?

Angry comments belong on Republican blogs.

So I guess this post wasn't meant to be taken literally huh?

Isn't "Mike" the epitome of the mental midget at issue?

So MIke:

1) A typo is hardly much to hang your hat on.

2) One of the problems that so many like you typify, is a clear lack of understanding that literacy and language skills are separate from critical thinking - which is generally the indicia of intelligence. In fact this is EXACTLY this issue with Bradbury and far too many on "our" side who are sucked in by people like Bradbury. After all, it was my point that he seems to demonstrate little substantive in his comments, regardless of whether they are stated in perfect English.

3) Finally, my point about Facebook seems to have flown right over your empty head. You are defending that he is choosing to be one of those sad examples of boomers trying to be hip by putting more attention into his FaceBook page than his website?

I will say, in Kitzhaber's defense, that he has done a lot to advance grassroots democracy through the Bus Project (as has Bradbury), so perhaps sin forgiven

The Bus Project should be embarrassed for having a major spokesmen/VIP/award-giver/award-getter who doesn't even uphold the core principle of the Bus.