Macpherson Picks Up 3 Endorsements

Attorney General candidate and State Representative Greg Macpherson announced today three new endorsements from US Representative Darlene Hooley, Oregon Treasurer Randall Edwards, and State Superintendent Susan Castillo. The announcement comes a day after former Governor John Kitzhaber declared his support for John Kroger, Macpherson's rival in the democratic primary.

"Greg carried the state legislation cracking down on ID theft and meth manufacturing, two of the most important issues Oregon's Attorney General can deal with," said Congresswoman Hooley, who is a national leader on both issues. "He's led the way in tackling Oregon's toughest challenges, and has made a real difference for Oregon families."

"No other candidate for Attorney General can match Greg's drive, intelligence, and passion for Oregon," said Treasurer Edwards. "There's a reason that so many Oregonians who are committed to public service are supporting Greg."

"I'm endorsing Greg for Attorney General because of his record of fighting for Oregon's children," said Superintendent Castillo. "Year after year, he's been there, working to improve schools, make neighborhoods safer, and protect open space."

Read the rest. Discuss.

  • (Show?)

    How does improving schools ad protecting open space translate into qualifications for AG?

    Who worked to bring cases against the corrupt Enron, and whose legal firm defended Enron?

    Kroger would be the former, Macpherson would be the later.

  • John (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Darlene Hooley's support means a great deal to me. This is impressive.

  • Amanda (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This is great! Go Greg!

  • Steve (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Given last night's impressive event with Gov. Kulongoski and these endorsements, I'm happy to see Greg gaining great momentum in this race. I've worked with him in the legal community for years and I strongly believe he will make an excellent AG.

  • DW (unverified)
    (Show?)

    How does improving schools ad protecting open space translate into qualifications for AG?

    It shows that Greg has a record of accomplishment here in Oregon. Something Kroger only dreams about.

    Greg Rocks!

  • (Show?)
    Posted by: DW | Nov 15, 2007 4:33:31 PM It shows that Greg has a record of accomplishment here in Oregon. Something Kroger only dreams about.

    ROFLMAO, that is your answer? Your response has precisely zero relevance to those being qualifying accomplishments for the position of AG, which was the question posed. Why not just say that because someone is working on curing cancer and loves kittens, that would qualify them as being a great AG?

    Way to waste pixels.

  • Lefty (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Greg Macpherson is truly an honorable and intelligent man. Every time I needed to speak with him on an issue down in Salem he had an open door. I didn't always agree with his positions, but he was never afraid to tell me where he stood and explain his position in detail. I wish him all the luck in the AG's race.

  • Jonathan (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Did US Representative Darlene Hooley, Oregon Treasurer Randall Edwards, and/or State Superintendent Susan Castillo contact the Kroger campaign and interview both candidates? I am just wondering if this is another political endorsement that seems more based on political favors then on a careful weighing of both AG candidates' positions and qualifications for the job.

  • DW (unverified)
    (Show?)

    lestatdelc - so you're telling me anyone who just took the Oregon bar exam last July and still is not a member of the Oregon bar is qualified? Whatever.

    And, don't be hating on kittens!

  • Aaron (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I don't think this has to do with political favors at all. Most of us have known and worked with Greg for many years and proudly give him our heartfelt support in the AG's race. I don't hear Greg complaining every time someone decides to support Kroger without talking to Greg first. Everyone is entitled to make their own decisions.

  • A. Rab. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    In the end, endorsements are essentially a type of heuristic i.e. a shortcut for political decision making.* In this way, an endorsement is similar to party ID (see yellow dog Democrats). However, endorsements are less effective as a method of persuasion if all relevant candidates have endorsement parity. What this week’s events reinforce is that that both AG candidates have a base of support from elected officials, so endorsements alone are less likely to be a decisive factor in the minds of voters.

    *For you cognitive science types: I know it is not actually a heuristic, but it acts in a similar way by providing a rule of thumb for voters to follow.

  • (Show?)
    Posted by: DW | Nov 15, 2007 4:43:45 PM lestatdelc - so you're telling me anyone who just took the Oregon bar exam last July and still is not a member of the Oregon bar is qualified?

    Absolutely. Kroger has decades of prosecutorial experience in other states and probably knows more about the Oregon code than Macpherson does since he just passed the bar here. Absolutely yes.

    Whatever.

    Yeah, "whatever" indeed.

    And, don't be hating on kittens!

    I don't hate kittens, quite the opposite. But that doesn't make me qualified to be AG because I love 'em, just as "improving schools" and "protecting open spaces" does not qualify one for being the AG.

    But as you would say... "whatever".

  • (Show?)

    I've seen Kroger and MacPherson both speak and they've both been positive about promoting what they will do and what they're priorties would be as AG. When pushed (ok, prodded), they've contrasted their skills and background against each but neither has crossed the line.

    At this point, I'm leaing toward John because he seems to have more zeal and a clearer sense of the state's problems; but Greg is also an excellent candidate. So far, they've both acted with maturity and respect that both deserve to be commended for. These are two seasoned experts, either of whom will be easy to back in the general election.

  • (Show?)

    Absolutely. Kroger has decades of prosecutorial experience in other states and probably knows more about the Oregon code than Macpherson does since he just passed the bar here. Absolutely yes.

    Not to mention the fact that he's been teaching our next generation of Oregon lawyers. It's not like he's completely ignorant of Oregon law.

  • (Show?)
    Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Nov 15, 2007 5:32:30 PM

    Good point Jenni, one I failed to mention. I find it rather amateurish of Macpherson supporters to imply that somehow Kroger is wet-behind the ears because he passed the Oregon bar a year ago, and is some untested prosecutor (which is what the AG office is, prosecutors). I would venture to say that of the two, Kroger is more versed in the law.

    Again, I think Macpherson has been a good legislator and is a descent guy who would make a serviceable AG, However I find it absurd for people to imply Kroger is not versed in Oregon law or isn't fully qualified and capable of being a good/great AG. The man teaches law, and has extensive experience as an actual prosecutor, actually bringing cases to court.

  • Questions (unverified)
    (Show?)

    What has Kroger accomplished in the political process?

  • Curious (unverified)
    (Show?)

    More importantly, what has Kroger accomplished for Oregon?

  • NBS (unverified)
    (Show?)

    As a lawyer for over 20 years here in Oregon, I've had the opportunity to meet with both candidates in person and ask important concerning the AG position. Kroger seemed enthusiastic, but it was Greg who seemed to know and appreciate what is expected of an AG. I respect Kroger for putting himself out there, but Greg has my solid support.

  • Jason (unverified)
    (Show?)

    What has Kroger accomplished in the political process?

    Why do you want a politician in the AG's office?

    And what has Macpherson accomplished in the courtroom? Last I heard, he'd been to court only once, and that was arranged in anticipation of criticism during this campaign.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    NBS makes a good point.

    The office of AG as currently structured is described here:

    http://www.doj.state.or.us/about/index.shtml

    There is a section about the AG's management duties, and then a listing of the other sections in the AG's department, including this:

    The Trial Division defends the State, its agencies and officials in civil litigation brought in state and federal courts. The Division strives to effectively advocate the State's interest in these cases, and to resolve them favorably and efficiently through dispositive motions, negotiated settlements, trials, or other appropriate dispute resolution procedures. Trial Division attorneys also work with attorneys in other divisions to ensure consistency and coordinate the full range of legal services provided by the Department.

    When I read sentences like "The man teaches law, and has extensive experience as an actual prosecutor, actually bringing cases to court." I wonder if the implication is that a new, more energetic AG proposes to do both the management AND trial division responsibilities of the job.

    If so, Kroger supporters should be saying "Our guy will do trial work as well as management"--if that is what Kroger actually intends to do.

    But if Kroger intends to place higher importance on the management aspects of the AG's office, then trial court experience wouldn't seem to be as much of an asset as experience in the political system.

    So, can we have more talk about "if elected..." and less talk about past experience?

    And don't call me one of Greg's people. I've known the guy for years but have yet to hear or seriously study the positive proposals of the candidates.

  • ghost of Charles Crookham (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The trial division doesn't prosecute. It defends. On rare occasions it acts as a plaintff. But mostly it defends.

    The AG is not a prosecutor. That is the District Attorneys. The AG's office sometimes assists DA's, but overall that is not the function of the Attorney General's office.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Ghost, I love your name. If I hadn't recently looked up in the Oregon Bluebook to see who the last several AGs were, I wouldn't have remembered that he was one of the 2 appointed AGs over the last couple decades.

  • A. Rab. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Historically, the Oregon AG has been more of a legal advisor but nether of the two candidates claim to view the office that way. Kroger has gotten a lot of attention for calling for a more proactive Attorney General, but Macpherson as has called for a more active AG by promising to be the “people’s advocate” because the office is “more than [just being a legal counsel].” Since both candidates agree on a proactive vision for the Attorney General, it is worth asking which candidate is better qualified to be a legal advocate. As such, Machpherson’s lack of experience as a trial attorney or as a criminal practitioner is highly relevant, while Kroger’s lack of being born in Oregon is not particularly relevant.

  • Oregon Lawyer (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Excuse me, did somebody up there actually say that Kroger had "decades" of prosecutorial experience? How is that exactly? He graduated from law school in 1996, and started teaching at L&C in 2002. How does six years, at most, translate into "decades"? (And if Kroger's supporters think he's so great, why do they feel a constant need to pad his credentials?)

    And just why hasn't Kroger bothered to become a member of the Oregon bar? Does he not want to take those pesky "basic skills" CLEs that new lawyers are required to take? Is he too cheap to pay the membership fee? Has he not passed the ethics exam yet? Or aren't we good enough for him? It would be nice to know. I'm starting to take it personally.

    For me, the big question is why Kroger ran around (and is still running around) trying to drum up support for his candidacy without disclosing the very material fact that he's not licensed to practice law here. Maybe I'm setting unrealistic standards for a politician, but that seems less than straightforward to me.

    Finally, for your information, the reason to have an AG who is familiar with Oregon politics is so DOJ has a shot at getting the funding it needs, through the legislative process, to do its job. Speaking as a former DOJ lawyer, I don't think Kroger knows what that job is, much less how to get the funding for it. (And, by the way, if you think Kroger's not a "politician", you're just plain delusional.)

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Good for you, Oregon Lawyer.

    Not sure whether AG Lee Johnson (elected 1968 ) had been a legislator, but every elected AG since then has been a legislator at some time.

    If Kroger supporters want to run on "Time for an Oregon AG who has not been a legislator", that might be a great slogan if he was nominated and Kevin Mannix ran (again) on the Republican side. But is that really the way to run a primary?

    Even if Kroger was the only candidate running, "Elect the crusading lawyer who worked with Janet Reno, prosecuted Enron, and has lots of trial court experience" would not impress me.

    Maybe it is time for Kroger to write a guest opinion here answering Oregon Lawyer's questions, and also discuss the Oregon AG's role in consumer protection, election law and initiatives, management responsibilities of the Oregon AG, the relationship between the Oregon Justice Dept. and the Oregon Judicial Dept.

    That way he could prove his knowledge of Oregon and put to rest this stupid "what do you want in this job, a lawyer or a politician?".

    Sorry, but that argument sounds like a commercial--maybe the "tastes great, less filling" beer commercials.

  • (Show?)

    Re-energizing the AG office is overdue. Macphersan is a manager who would maintain the status quo. Look at the AG in Mississippi who spearheaded the $206 billion tobacco settlement and changed the relationship between government and tobacco companies. Kroger's focus is the meth crisis, child abuse and environmental and consumer protection. Which candidate took on Eron? Kroger. Which candidate specializes in writing employee benefit packages for employees in large corporations?

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    More importantly, what has Kroger accomplished for Oregon?

    What's up with the provincialism from Macpherson supporters, anyway? What flippin' difference does it make if someone is a "native" Oregonian or a transplant? Is that really Greg's strategy, to call Kroger out as a carpetbagger?

    I want an AG who is qualified, and both of these candidates are. But they do seem to represent different "styles", which is good because it gives primary voters something to consider. Macpherson sounds like he'll be an AG in the Hardy Meyers mold: smart, competent, mostly operating behind-the-scenes. Kroger sounds like he'll be an AG in the Eliot Spitzer mold: aggressive, out in front on issues, pushing the envelope.

    Seems like we're lucky to have such a choice between "the better of two goods."

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "Kroger sounds like he'll be an AG in the Eliot Spitzer mold: aggressive, out in front on issues, pushing the envelope."

    Sounds to me like the kind of AG Kevin Mannix promised to be.

    Someone who says,

    "Kroger would push the envelope in the followiong ways........... but realizes that the Oregon Justice Dept. is organized differently than the NY AG's office"

    would be more convincing than criticizing those who support the legislator they know over the law professor they have never met.

    If we don't know which way the envelope would be pushed, why should we support someone simply because they would be an activist? Pushing the envelope to clarify campaign finance or election laws? Pushing the envelope on meth? Pushing the envelope on consumer protection? Pushing the envelope on how often the AG himself appears in court?

  • A. Rab. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The criticism of Kroger tends to break into two categories: 1. Kroger is to activist for the Oregon AG, or 2. Kroger is not from Oregon. However, both of these critiques are problematic.

    Regarding the activist question: the fact of the matter is that both Kroger and Macpherson want a more active AG. Macpherson’s website has him rejecting the idea that the Oregon Attorney General is simply a “legal council” and instead he wants to be the “people’s advocate.” Given that both candidates want a more active AG, the relevant question is which candidate is better equipped to be an activist Attorney General? Machpherson spent his legal career as a pension attorney (and member of the Judiciary Committee), while Kroger was a Federal prosecutor (and law professor). Kroger has been very forthcoming about how his time as a prosecutor would influence his term as Attorney General, but Macpherson has been less open about how his time as a lawyer would shape the office.

    As for the question of nativism: officials who were not born in the Beaver State have long served Oregon. If there were a native test for office, the lost officials would include Ron Wyden, Vera Katz, Hardy Myers, Darlene Hooley, John Kitzhaber, and Ted Kulongoski. The AG’s office is not a gold watch for years of service. The Attorney General should be the candidate best qualified, not the candidate who has lived in the state for the longest time. Kroger moved to Oregon to teach, not to run for office. Yet, even if that were not true, why would that matter? For Oregon to thrive, we need the best talent available, regardless of where that person was born. If Oregon is so desirable that it attracts talented individuals who want to serve the community, isn’t that a good thing?

    P.S. Kroger did pass the Oregon Bar.

  • Grant Schott (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I'm surprised at how divisive this race has become, at least on Blue Oregon. Greg and John both seem to have a lot to offer the AG office, and the back and forth citicism by their supporters is insane. I am certainly not an expert on either of them or their careers, and need to learn more about both before the primary next year.

  • (Show?)

    Oregon Lawyer, You are correct in that I was being a bit hyperbolic in saying decades when I should have said years. FYI, from 2002 to 2003, Kroger served as a prosecutor on the U.S. Justice Department's Enron Task Force so not sure where you got your "6 years at most" figure.

    LT, that same page you link to also lists under the AG the Criminal Justice Division which states:

    Criminal Justice The Criminal Justice Division was created within the Department of Justice in 1974 to address the need for coordination in the law enforcement community. The programs and functions administered and performed within the Division provide support and line services as well as act as a statewide multipurpose catalyst to Oregon law enforcement efforts. The Division is organized in three sections: Crime Victims Assistance, District Attorney Assistance and Organized Crime. In addition to their prosecution responsibilities, Division attorneys also provide general legal counsel to the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training. The Division also investigates and prosecutes criminal election law complaints referred by the Secretary of State. Given the explosive growth and complexity of crime in this state over the last decade, the problems confronting the state's law enforcement agencies have become more sophisticated and more intractable. As a result, the services provided by the Criminal Justice Division are all the more crucial. Indeed, in many instances, the Criminal Justice Division is the only agency that can provide essential services. Crime Victims Assistance Section The Crime Victims' Assistance Section (CVAS) administers three major statewide programs on behalf of innocent victims of crime: Crime Victims' Compensation Program (CVCP) Prosecutor-based Victim/Witness Assistance Programs (V/WAP) Federal Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) grant program. Crime Victims' Compensation Program Established by the 1977 legislature, the compensation program is the oldest program administered by this section. The program was created to assist innocent victims of crime with costs incurred as a result of criminal injury. Applicants are eligible for reimbursement of costs related to a mental or physical injury sustained as a result of a crime in Oregon. The CVCP is authorized to pay up to $44,000 per claim for compensable expenses, which are statutorily limited to reimbursement of medical and mental health treatment, rehabilitation costs, time loss, funeral expenses, transportation for treatment, and loss of support. Each new application begins a process of gathering documentation and an investigation to determine eligibility of the applicant. Approximately three-fourths of all applications are eligible for compensation. By statute, the claims in the accepted post determination status may remain active for up to three years or until the statutory maximum award has been exhausted whichever comes first. District Attorney Assistance The District Attorney Assistance Program was established in 1969 to assist Oregon's District Attorneys and their deputies in criminal cases and matters relating to prosecution and law enforcement in their respective counties. The program provides trial and investigative assistance, technical-legal and prosecutorial advice and services, and legal education and training in areas of criminal law and procedure. Organized Crime The Organized Crime Section detects and deters organized criminal activities in the state. The Organized Crime Section was established in 1977. The Section is involved in five basic types of activity to combat organized criminal enterprises: Investigate allegations of corruption or malfeasance by public officials in Oregon, and where appropriate, coordinate, cooperate and assist in taking legal action. Develop and maintain a liaison between local, state and federal law enforcement agencies in Oregon, assisting them in the investigation and suppression of organized criminal activity and encouraging cooperation among those agencies. Establish a coordinated system of collecting, storing and disseminating information relating to organized crime. Investigate investment of funds in Oregon suspected to have been generated by criminal activities. Conduct comprehensive factual studies of organized criminal activity in Oregon, outlining existing state and local policies and procedures with respect to organized crime and formulating and proposing such changes in those policies and procedures as the Department may deem appropriate.

    Grannt Shott, I too am surprised at how divisive some are here as well. While I am in favor of Kroger and point out why, I also say how Macpherson is a good and descent man who would still make a good AG, yet the Macpherson boasters seem to revel in slagging off Kroger with bullshit provincial cliquish kind of blather. Pathetic really.

  • Sophia (unverified)
    (Show?)

    lestatdelc - what's really pathetic is your "I hate kittens" campaign. Why so angry all the time?

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "Kroger would push the envelope in the followiong ways........... but realizes that the Oregon Justice Dept. is organized differently than the NY AG's office"

    LT: Do you have a link where I could read more about the different structures of the NY and OR AG's offices? I'm interested in learning how NY differs, whether it's good or bad, and whether Oregon might be better off adopting (or staying away from) some of NY's practices.

    Thanks.

  • (Show?)
    Posted by: Sophia | Nov 16, 2007 12:47:15 PM lestatdelc - what's really pathetic is your "I hate kittens" campaign. Why so angry all the time?

    No hate kittens campaign here, nor am I angry.

    But as I said before what is really pathetic is, the slagging off of Kroger by Macpherson boasters with bullshit provincial cliquish kind of blather. It certainly does nothing to help Macpherson, and actually hurts him while creating antipathy within the party and progressive circles. But if that's the intent, well done.

  • Betsy (unverified)
    (Show?)

    A Rab,

    Your argument is a straw man -- you recast the arguments made above in their weakest form and then attacked those weak arguments.

    As to your two points:

    1. The criticism of Kroger is not that he is "an activist" -- indeed, I have no idea what that even means. People have been criticizing him because (1) he has no experience getting things done in the political process, (2) he has no record of accomplishment in Oregon's political structure, (3) he is running as a prosecutor, but the job of the Oregon AG is much more robust than merely prosecuting lawbreakers. As one commenter posted above, most of the lawyers working for the Oregon DOJ defend the state; the power lies primarily with local DAs to prosecute crimes. The Oregon AG must oversee a staff of hundreds; his portfolio includes the child support division, consumer protection, Medicaid fraud, charitable organizations, crime victim services, and task forces on school safety, terrorism, etc. The Oregon AG must negotiate with the legislature over major policy initiatives as well as the DOJ's budget. People criticize Kroger not because he is "activist"--as you say--but because he is running as a one-hit wonder. Sure, he's a prosecutor. Great. Why does that qualify him to be Attorney General -- especially in a state where prosecutions comprise very little of the AG's job?

    2. Nativism. I find this very frustrating because you have reframed a legitimate criticism as an illegitimate criticism.

    Here is the legitimate criticism: Kroger is new to Oregon. This means (i) he has no record of accomplishment in this state; (ii) he has no record of working in partnership with political leaders in this state to enact policy; (iii) as someone new to the state, he is likely out-of-touch with the various constituencies and localized concerns in Oregon.

    Here is the illegitimate criticism: Kroger was born out of state so we hate him.

    Please note that NO ONE IS MAKING THE ILLEGITIMATE CRITICISM!!! For the love of Jebus, no one cares where Kroger was born. Other people not born in Oregon include: Ron Wyden, Darlene Hooley, Ted Kulongoski, Hardy Myers, and the list goes on. No one cares where these people were born and no one cares where Kroger was born. Please just set that aside.

    What distinguishes Kroger from Wyden, Hooley, Kulongoski, and Myers is that they have deep roots here, they've been fighting for Oregon concerns for decades, and we trust them to draw from their experience in advocating for the folks in this state. We have no reason to vest that trust in Kroger.

    If Kroger was running for Multnomah County DA, I would vote for him in a heartbeat. If he was applying for a job as state Solicitor General, I would suggest that the AG hire him. It's just not clear to me why on earth I should vote for him for Attorney General.

  • (Show?)

    Betsy,

    Kroger is more than a "one-hit wonder" (i.e. that he is an accomplished prosecutor). Kroger has also worked as an economic and domestic policy adviser to a number of leading Democratic politicians. He was Deputy Policy Director of Bill Clinton's 1992 Presidential Campaign, a legislative assistant to Speaker of the House Thomas Foley and to Congressman (now senator) Chuck Schumer, and a senior policy analyst at the U.S. Treasury Department. This in addtiion to teaching law to Oregon's next generation of lawyers.

    While reasonable people can differ on who they think would be a better AG, I believe Kroger's background suits being AG better than Macpherson's, though I am comfortable with either being Oregon's AG.

  • A. Rab. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Kroger is not running to be a prosecutor, he is running while highlighting his time as a prosecutor, there is a big difference. In terms of what he talks about (and has on his list of key priorities) environmental protection is probably tied as the number one priority. My primary point is that both he and Machpherson have called for an AG that emphasizes the law enforcement/civil enforcement aspects of the office, as opposed to the legal counsel aspects of the job. With that as the case, it is worth comparing work as a pension attorney vs. a criminal prosecutor.

    As for the nativism, it seems that Kroger has been at times portrayed as just arriving in the state, and having no substantial ties. The truth is that Kroger has been active in Oregon’s legal and political community for a few years. When Ron Wyden first ran for Congress, he had spent a comparable amount of time in the state. Additional, the number of high profile endorsements (a former Governor, the majority of the Portland City Council, etc.) seems to indicate that Kroger has a connection to the political community. My deeper point, however, is that even if Kroger was new, so what? Isn’t it a good thing if Oregon can attract talented people from across the country?

  • t-spears (unverified)
    (Show?)

    FYI- from Wikipedia:

    Kroger is a graduate of Yale College and Harvard Law School and served in the United States Marine Corps. Before teaching law, he was a Deputy Policy Director of Bill Clinton's 1992 Presidential Campaign, legislative assistant to Representative Tom Foley (D–WA) and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), senior policy analyst at the U.S. Treasury Department, and federal prosecutor. As a prosecutor, Kroger won the Director's Award from then-Attorney General Janet Reno, worked on the emergency response to the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and served on the Justice Department's Enron Task Force.

    T-

  • mtngirl (unverified)
    (Show?)

    In response to claims that Kroger has no connections to the political establishment here in Oregon, I think it is important to note he has been a member of the DPO Finance Committee and is a Multnomah County PCP. I cannot tell you how long he served on the committee (because I don't know), but I can tell you he has been involved in the political process in Oregon in ways that have enabled him to build relationships within our state's political structure and become involved in the localized concerns of Oregon.

  • Dylan (unverified)
    (Show?)

    One person above said it very well: the AG office is not a gold watch. Reading the endorsements from Edwards, Hooley, and Castillo read like, "MacPherson has done some good things. Reward all of his hard work by giving him the AG job." Sorry, but I am going to vote for the most qualified candidate, thank you very much.

    Sincerely,

    Born and raised Oregonian for Kroger (take that nativists)

  • (Show?)

    I actually had the opportunity months and months ago to sit down and have a cup of coffee (or in my case, tea) with Kroger. We chatted for about an hour or so.

    Only a small part of what we discussed dealt with criminal law. We also discussed consumer protection and how many of the laws we have need to be updated so that the AG's office can do its job effectively. We discussed identity theft. We discussed probably a dozen or more topics on a variety of things that the AG's office works on.

    One area I was interested in is how we have laws to protect the consumer from debt collection companies (no harassment, can't call continuously all day, can only call during certain hours, etc.); however, that law only applies to "outside" debt collection companies. Most large companies have figured out they are actually exempt from the laws (both federal and state) if they open up a dept. within their own company to handle it. At that point, they can break the law all they want, and there is nothing they can do about it. This has indeed been confirmed to be by both AG Meyers as well as the federal government that they are indeed exempt from the law. There is a long list of complaints against companies like Toyota Financial (which will call 20-50 times a day, often times only minutes apart), but there is nothing that can be done since it is actually a part of Toyota.

    Kroger said this is one example of many of areas where the AG's office could be more pro-active - like the SOS office has been. How they could craft suggested updates and changes that can then be taken to the legislature.

    <h2>So please, don't think just because Kroger has been a prosecutor that his only thoughts are in criminal law. During that hour we chatted, I heard him speak in depth on many issues. He would definitely make an excellent AG for Oregon.</h2>
in the news 2007

connect with blueoregon