OLCV endorses Greg Macpherson

Yesterday, the Oregon League of Conservation Voters - the political arm of Oregon's environmental movement - endorsed Rep. Greg Macpherson for Attorney General.

From the statement:

"Greg Macpherson has an outstanding record of fighting for Oregon's environment," said OLCV Executive Director Jonathan Poisner. "We know he will take on polluters and over-zealous developers, because that's what he's already done."

In 2006, Macpherson, was co-author of Ballot Measure 49, to curb out-of-control growth by big developers, and keep Oregon's farm land protected. His father, Hector Macpherson authored Oregon's original state land use planning bill SB 100 in 1973.

"OLCV is Oregon's most trusted group advocating for the environment, and I am proud to have earned their endorsement," said Macpherson. "We have worked closely to protect Oregon's clean air and water, and its natural treasures. I look forward to continuing our partnership when I am Attorney General."

Visit VoteMac.com and OLCV.org to learn more.


  • Now a Former-OLCV Member (unverified)

    Weak sauce....

    Weak sauce....

  • (Show?)

    I've heard no specific plan from Macpherson for initiating stronger enforcement of environmental laws in Oregon. Kroger proposes at least one, perhaps two dedicated enviro prosecutors on his staff. What's Mac's response?

    Will he seek injunctions against repeated offenders, or hold them criminally liable?

    I've got friends at OLCV, but I can't agree with this endorsement.

  • Jon (unverified)

    Has Greg come out with an opinion on the LNG pipeline? I know one of the biggest company's backing the pipeline is a client of Stoel Rives (Greg's firm) and I don't remember Greg stating any opinion on the subject. The LNG pipeline posses a huge environmental threat to Oregon, which both Bill Bradbury and John Kroger have opposed. I am waiting for Greg to take a stand.

    Also, what is Greg's plan to address Oregon's environmental problems through the AG's office? I want to know what Greg will do and why the AGs office is the best office for Greg to accomplish his goals, not what Greg has done in the past.

  • A. Rab. (unverified)

    The LNG is going to be a big environmental issue in the near future. In addition to all the safety and environmental problems from the pipeline itself, it will require the regular dredging the Columbia, which brings a whole host of additional concerns.

    Unfortunately, the Democrats are divided on this. Kroger, Bradbury, Merkley, and Novick have come out against it. Kulongoski, unfortunately, has been in favor of it. So far, Macpherson has not taken a public stand.

  • (Show?)

    Let's see -- Mac's OLCV scores: 2007: 100% 2005: 94% 2003: 96%

    Macpherson's leadership to get an extremely controversial bill revising Measure 37 to the ballot and passed: huge.

    Macpherson's knowledge of land use laws, working with the Governor and getting things done in the legislature: very deep.

    Mac's a proven, battle-tested environmental leader.

    Perhaps those who rely heavily on platforms and promises, rather than records of accomplishment, have a problem with the endorsement, but I don't.

    That said, it's exciting to see two strong environmental candidates for AG.

    You can read a little more about Greg's environmental plans on his website.

    Disclaimer: I was recently hired by OLCV, but was not involved at all in the endorsement process. I speak only for myself, as I haven't started work yet.

  • anon (unverified)

    Way to go OLCV! Kudos to Jonathan Poisner for once again making a top-notch endorsement! Brilliant!

    I'm sure that as AG of Oregon, Greg Macpherson, a partner at Stoel Rives, is going to work tenaciously and tirelessly to take on big polluters and to enforce our state's environmental laws and regulations. I mean, afterall, that's what his high-end donors and corporate lawyer buddies would want, right? Look at the great lengths that our current Stoel Rives AG Hardy Myers has taken to bring environmental justice to our state. I hope Mac can rise to his level.


  • ben rivers (unverified)

    I've heard no specific plan from Macpherson for initiating stronger enforcement of environmental laws in Oregon. Kroger proposes at least one, perhaps two dedicated enviro prosecutors on his staff. What's Mac's response?


    Let's not forget that the Republicans controlled this state up until 2006. Last time I checked, environmental protection wasn't tops on their list of priorities which led to a drop in funding for the DEQ and other environmental enforcement agencies. Greg will work hard to make sure these agencies get the funding and people power they need to go after the worst polluters in the state. These kind of things take time and with a majority in the capitol, Greg, as AG, can work with the legislature to strengthen and enforce the state environmental laws.

  • Dissapointed OCLV Fan (unverified)

    I usually look to the OLCV for guidance on who the "greener" candidate is. But this time the OLCV got it wrong where the Sierra Club got it right. MacPherson is a fine legislator, but he lacks the drive to go after the big polluters. Kroger does, and thats why he is got the Sierra Club on board so early. Spend 5 min with the man and you will see why. I have to agree with "Former OLCV Member" very weak sauce indeed.

  • A. Rab. (unverified)

    Macpherson should be proud that he got the OLCV, and we can all be happy that both candidates are looking at the environment. However, Macpherson boosters should not over sell his record. He was a solid vote, but he was not exactly the love child of Theodore Roosevelt and Rachel Carson. He helped draft Measure 49, but he did not pass it - the people of Oregon passed it through the grassroots work of a lot of people.

    More importantly, where a lot of us Kroger supporters differ from the Macpherson backers is over the question of what will be done. Macpherson keeps pointing to his past work, but he has not been forthcoming about his plans as Attorney General. For example, when he talks about the environment, he keeps talking about Measure 49, and when he talks about meth, he talks about banning cold medication. However, both of those examples are not plans for the future, they are a look at the past. Our next leaders need to look to the future, not rest on their laurels, and sing about their past.

  • Ben Unger (unverified)

    Hello all - the Kroger campaign just announced a longer list of environmental endorsers. Here's the press release:

    Over 20 Environmental Leaders Endorse John Kroger for Attorney General

    Oregon Attorney General candidate John Kroger today announced the endorsement by twenty-three environmental leaders throughout the state.

    These endorsements of Kroger follow the support by the Oregon Chapter of the Sierra Club, making him the clear choice for an Attorney General who will aggressively protect Oregon’s environment.

    “What Oregon needs is a proven leader to protect our environment. John Kroger is that leader. He has the toughness and experience to take a strong stand against polluters,” said Brett VandenHeuvel a staff attorney for Columbia Riverkeeper*. “ As the first statewide candidate for office to come out against LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas terminals), he’s already shown he’ll do what’s right for Oregon.”

    Kroger, an award-winning Lewis & Clark Law School professor and a former federal prosecutor, aims to make Oregon the nationwide leader in environmental protection, an area in which the state currently struggles due to weak environmental enforcement. Portland is the third most toxic city in the nation, according to a recent Business Week report. Multnomah County ranks in the top 1 percent of counties nationwide for cancer-related threats due to air pollution. And every single major river in Oregon has failed water quality standards for at least one pollutant.

    “As Attorney General, I will work everyday to make sure that Oregon is a national leader in environmental protection,” said Kroger

    As Attorney General, Kroger will use his experience as a prosecutor – when he took on powerful interests like Enron, international drug cartels and the mafia – to hold all polluters responsible for the damage they cause to Oregon’s environment. Kroger will seek higher fines for violators and will work with district attorneys and use the Attorney General’s criminal enforcement powers to bring criminal charges against company executives who are the worst repeat offenders.

    Kroger has also earned the support of Carpenters Local Unions 247 and 2154 in Portland and 1065 in Salem, the Oregon Small Business for Responsible Leadership, 17 District Attorneys, Umatilla County Sheriff John Trumbo, Beaverton Police Chief Dave Bishop and City Commissioners Erik Sten, Dan Saltzman and Randy Leonard.

    The current environmental leaders supporting Kroger are:

    Former Governor John Kitzhaber Henry Richmond Ralph Bloemers, Co-Executive Director, Cascade Resources Advocacy Group (CRAG) Law Center Chris Winters, Co-Executive Director, Cascade Resources Advocacy Group (CRAG) Law Center Brent Foster, Executive Director, Columbia Riverkeeper Mark Riskedahl, Executive Director, Northwest Environmental Law Center Dan Rohlf, Executive Director, Pacific Environmental Advocacy Center Mac Lacy, Oregon Natural Desert Association Melissa Powers, Staff Attorney, Pacific Environmental Advocacy Center Allison Laplante, staff attorney, Pacific Environmental Advocacy Center Dona Hippert, Porteon Electric Vehicles, Inc. Brad Hippert, Porteon Electric Vehicles, Inc. Chris Dearth, former environmental advisor, Governor John Kitzhaber Dan Belica, President, Columbia Riverkeeper David Moskowitz Brett VandenHeuvel, staff attorney, Columbia Riverkeeper Charlie Tebbutt, staff attorney, Western Environmental Law Center Gretchen Valido, co-chair, Juniper Group, The Sierra Club Dan Serres, Friends of Living Oregon Waters Aubrey Baldwin, staff attorney, Pacific Environmental Advocacy Center* Ivan Maluski, Conservation Coordinator, Oregon chapter of the Sierra Club Gerik Kransky Olivia Schmidt

    *Title for identification purposes only

  • (Show?)

    Those who try to tie Rep. Macpherson with all the actions of his law firm don't seem to attach Prof. Kroger with all the actions of his co-workers such as Prof. Jim Hoffman or Lewis and Clark's own Measure 37 claim.

    Rep. Macpherson is his own man. We should judge him on his record, just like we should judge Kroger on his record, not that of colleagues.

    Gladly, we're stuck with an embarrassment of riches here!

  • Jon (unverified)

    My question with Macpherson and his law firm was related to his own position on issues. Macpherson relies heavily for fundraising his law firm and their clients. Stoel Rives represents one of the biggest companies advocating for the LNG pipeline. Greg praises his environmental record, yet on the LNG pipeline - a project that today is threatening Oregon's environment- he fails to state an opinion. I find that suspicious. As with Kroger, if he profited from Jim Hoffman's work, then that would be an issue. There is a far cry from connecting an individual with the beliefs of a co-worker at an academic institution and being a partner at a law firm who profits from representing Enron.

    I ask again, What is Greg's position on the LNG pipeline? How does Greg specifically plan to use the AG's office to protect Oregon's environment? I understand his Dad wrote legislation in the 70s, Macpherson worked on Measure 49, and that thanks to the hard work of activists across the state, including Kroger's campaign manager, 49 passed with overwhelming support. However, I am voting for the future, not on past accomplishments.

  • Tresa (unverified)

    I really think that it's important to look at each candidates' records.

    Macpherson has a proven track record protecting the environment - even when it was not the cool thing to do and despite his location of employment.

    Kroger has a lot of really great ideas to protect Oregon's environment but not much of a track record.

    Both candidates are great. But only one has demonstrated his long-term dedication and commitment to protecting Oregon's environment.

  • ben rivers (unverified)

    I seem to recall that Prof. Kroger worked for the DOJ under Ashcroft and Bush...Does that mean he supported all of their policies and stances??? Think about that and get back to me...

  • Jon (unverified)

    Ben- are you equating government work and earning a pay check from tax payers to being a partner and receiving your income from the profits of defending such companies as Enron?

    My question is still, what does Greg plan to do specifically with the AGs office to protect the environment. Both Greg and John have a strong record of protecting the rights and interests of all of us. Greg did this through legislation and John has done through his legal work. I want to know what they plan to do with the AG position. John has been specific on his stances and plans from day one, outlining an agenda to fight meth and protect the environment. I have not heard this from Greg, only about his past accomplishments.

    Also, I would still like to know Greg's stance on the LNG pipeline? It does concern me that Greg's firm defends a company working to hurt Oregon's environment and Greg has not yet taken a strong, public stand against the LNG pipeline.

  • A. Rab. (unverified)

    As I said above, Macpherson was a solid vote in the legislature, and he should be proud of the OLCV nod, but his supporters should not oversell his record. The modern environmental movement started when he was in high school, and Oregon's major environmental laws were passed in the 1970's, so it is hard to say that the environmental movement was uncool when Macpherson came to Salem.

    The most important questions in this race concern what that candidate will do in office. When Macpherson answers these questions he talks a lot of about things that are done, not things he will do. Executive offices are fundamentally different from legislative offices, so each type requires a different approach for success. So far, Macpherson's campaign seems to make a case for why he would be a good Speaker of the House, or maybe the guy to take on Smith - but he has been short on policies for the Office of Attorney General.

  • Oregonian (unverified)

    I like both candidates and believe they each have great skills and accomplishments to bring to the AG position. However, I am uncomfortable electing someone to statewide office who has only lived in the state for several years. I think we need an Oregonian in the AG's office not a New Yorker. Macpherson now, Kroger later.

  • (Show?)

    "Let's not forget that the Republicans controlled this state up until 2006. "

    What state are we talking about? I seem to recall a Democratic governor, Sec of State and AG when I moved back in 2002.

    Like I said, this is a payback endorsement for past accomplishments. (Hopefully not M49; Macpherson and Merkely almost screwed the pooch entirely by wasting all session on a moratorium bill that they then scrapped, then failed to get anything passed in that session) The major problem in Oregon regarding environmental laws is not money, it's aggressive enforcement. No one is going after the polluters to stop them, either with injunctions or criminal charges. That needs to change.

  • (Show?)

    "I am uncomfortable electing someone to statewide office who has only lived in the state for several years."

    Why, specifically? What's the disadvantage?

  • Vanessa (unverified)

    "Oregonians" line of logic makes no sense whatsoever. There is an implication that no matter how strong a candidate that they need to be in Oregon long enough to "earn" the right to hold public office. To me that seems like the policy that keeps things status quo and prevents us from removing long standing special interests from ruling our state politics.

    If Kroger is the stronger candidate based on his platform issues and plans for Oregon (which i believe he is) why would you wait to vote for him??? If you disagree and think that Macpherson is the stronger candidate then vote for him but PLEASE don't make that decision based on who has lived in this state the longest or who is 'next in line' to be promoted to a statewide office. By that logic seems like Kevin Mannix would be the best candidate...

    I want an Attorney General who is passionate, articulate and will do their best to protect Oregon. Last time I checked 'length of residency' is in no way connected to 'ability to be a competent attorney general.' Instead of "Macpherson now, Kroger later" why not "most competent candidate every time?"

  • Sunnyside (unverified)

    As someone who helped on the M49 effort extensively I would like to say that yes, a lot of Oregonians worked to pass the measure, but were it not for the work of Macpherson and his colleagues, we wouldn't have had such a strong measure to advocate for that could actually PASS in this state.

    As far as the LNG issue, I agree that we obviously need to be moving Oregon towards a greener economy and green energy, I have concerns about how we make that transition over the coming decades. We can't immediately change to green energy, we have to create infrastructure, which takes time, and we need to work to reduce our emissions and dependence in the meantime.

    Don't get me wrong, I don't think this is a good idea (and I'm frustrated that the Federal government has decided this is their decision), but I wouldn't be so quick to judge electeds who are taking their time to consider all the factors.

  • (Show?)

    Macpherson and Merkely almost screwed the pooch entirely

    Ah, the always predictable TJ. Never missing a chance ot throw in a fuzzy ad hominem attack against his hated enemy Jeff Merkley.


    On the endorsement thingy, I think it's hysterical that the hardcore Greens are now cozying up with the White Bread Sierra Club, as their usual allies at OLCV have somehow gone off the Party Line.

    Rock on kidz. Nothing quite as entertaining as watching the Pure of Heart eat their own young.

  • (Show?)

    I would still like to know Greg's stance on the LNG pipeline?

    By all means, let's elect an attorney general based on his personal policy views, not his ability to act as Oregon's lawyer. That's important because, if he supports LNG, we'd expect him to skirt the law if necessary in order to allow it to happen here. On the other hand, if he opposes LNG, we'd expect him him to manipulate and twist the law if he can in order to stop it.

    After all, that's the whole reason for having an elected attorney general, isn't it?

  • Jon (unverified)

    Jack- if policy views are not important then why are both candidates rolling out their endorsements from different interest groups and politicians? Policy views matter because the AG can be an advocate for political change and progress. One can be an advocate for a specific policy and also uphold the law as it is currently written. They are not mutually exclusive.

  • (Show?)

    "I've heard no specific plan from Macpherson for initiating stronger enforcement of environmental laws in Oregon. Kroger proposes at least one, perhaps two dedicated enviro prosecutors on his staff. What's Mac's response?"


    Let's not forget that the Republicans controlled this state up until 2006.

    It doesn't matter who controlled what - you can have a plan regardless of who controls the legislature. TJ specifically asked for Macpherson's plan, which is different than his record.

    Every elected official has some kind of plan on some issue - it may have no chance at getting passed, but they still have it.

    Not only that, but we're talking about his plan for if he becomes AG, which has absolutely nothing to do with the previous Republican controlled legislature.

    I'm sorry, but the issue of our environment is very important to me. And with one candidate giving detailed plans on how he's going to clean up Oregon, and the other talking about some stuff he did in the past, I'm going to go with the one who has the plans.

    I grew up in Texas and watched as in 1999 and 2000 our skies went brown and stayed that way. As schools had to install monitors to tell if the kids could play outside. Not to mention almost two decades of seeing places like the Brio site and seeing men in suits pumping substances out of ditches and bayous (including the bayou that ran along the backside of our property).

    I watched as my small town had a cancer spike - particularly in rare bone cancers in teenage girls. I watched as a good friend's younger sister (who was in many school clubs with me) slowly died from such a cancer. I don't want my daughter to have to see the same things here in Oregon. And I don't want to have to worry every time we're near the Willamette and she puts her feet in, puts her hands in the water, etc.

  • SO (unverified)

    Glad to see there's so much interest in this race given the importance to so many issues, not the least of which is environmental protection. Kroger has many strong qualities but to me they don't match Macpherson's. First, to the extent that Macpherson's partnership at Stoel Rives is relevant, it is a plus. Of all the large law firms in Oregon, Stoel Rives has been the most progressive. They have aggressively hired and promoted women and minorities, back when that was still rare in the legal community and when doing so could be seen as a negative by some clients. Many of the people working at Stoel Rives have been strong supporters of the environment, Greg Macpherson among the strongest. As far as past versus future for evaluating a candidate, past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Greg has worked for the environment extremely hard and effectively as an elected official. This gives him the experience and credentials. Kroger may very well be an environmental champion but he has very little record to support the claim, including his lengthy service as a government attorney when, to the best of my knowledge, he spent no time prosecuting environmental actions. And while I feel my heart jump when I hear Kroger talk about how aggressively he will pursue polluters, I also know the potential danger in aggression that is not pursued with wisdom. Make martyrs of the wrong people or grandstand too much and there could be negative consequences for the environment, like reduced funding for enforcement or the enactment of laws that make it more difficult to protect our environment. Which brings me to the last issue that's been addressed today, the length of time that Kroger and Macpherson have lived in Oregon. Personal relationships are vital in politics. Familiarity with the legislature and state agencies can help a committed AG accomplish a great deal because so much of the important work is behind the scenes, not in the headlines. Lack of such knowledge can lead to mistakes, embarrassment and unintended consequences that end of hurting our cause more than helping. Kroger might be a great AG. He might be a supernova that flames out and burns everything close by. We don't have much to go on. But the OLCV had a great deal of information upon which to base its endorsement of Greg Macpherson. You can disagree with the endorsement but you shouldn't abandon the OLCV over this one issue. Our strength comes from unity on the overriding issues of environmental protection. We should be able to occasionally disagree on the best way to accomplish our goals without breaking apart and diminishing our ability to accomplish our long-term objectives.

  • (Show?)

    Almost all OLCV endorsements in elections where there is a current office holder in a democratic primary go to, guess what, to the office holder. I am not saying they endorse bad candidates, just that they have a policy of endorsing those they see as past supporters regardless of who the opponent is. Jonathan has argued that this is reward for those who have supported OLCV in the legislature and helps sustain support in the future. It has some logic to it, but it really makes the endorsement not worthy of the name. It is not a reasoned choice between two good candidates, just payment for services rendered.

    This was the logic for suppporting Diane Linn against Ted Wheeler for County Chair. Regardless of Ted's many environmental credits and clear management strengths, Diane got the OLCV endorsement. Didn't work for me.

  • (Show?)

    Greg may be a fine legislator, but John is the outstanding AG candidate. seeing them in consecutive months at the MultDems CC was all i needed; John Kroger is by far the more qualified. i still respect OLCV, but they got this one really really wrong. we don't need a competent, dependable legislator as AG, as Hardy Myers has proven. we need a person with drive, energy and commitment to doing something special.

    John Kroger, our next AG.

  • Jon in Lake O (unverified)

    The fact that he was behind M49 is reason enough to put this dupe in a dungeon with the rest of his rat bastard cronies in the legislature.

    Get real people - this guy is a party hack put into the AG race by his firm. Plain and simple. Machine politics, and certainly nothing to do with environmentalism, other than platitudes.

    Poised for defeat, a wicked defeat.

  • Deborah Kafoury (unverified)

    It's difficult to read the comments about Greg Macpherson and try to reconcile them with the person I know. The Greg Macpherson I know is incredibly intelligent, hardworking, honest and dedicated to protecting our environment. As a legislator, even in his first term, he was a star. I do not agree with him on every issue, but I will strongly support him for any office he chooses to run for.

  • Against LNG (unverified)

    Isnt MacPherson's firm Stoel and Rives representing the company trying to get LNG on the coast? Couldnt that be a problem?

  • Ben Rivers (unverified)

    Isn't MacPherson's firm Stoel and Rives representing the company trying to get LNG on the coast? Couldn't that be a problem?

    Again, Stoel Rives is a huge firm with offices in Washington DC, Boise, Portland, Seattle, Salt Lake City, Denver, Minneapolis, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, Tahoe City and Vancouver. That is a lot of people to peg as supporters of certain issues just because they are employed there.

  • A. Rab. (unverified)


    I respect your opinion immensely, however, I think you misunderstand the critique of Macpherson.

    A big problem with Macpherson’s campaign is that he has been running almost exclusively on things that happened in the past, while failing to offer plans for what he would do as Attorney General. To some extent, his campaign has acted as if the office was a gold watch for services rendered. This can be seen by things like his plan for meth (which talks about how we banned cold medication, but does not offer a plan for what to do about current problems), to his emphasis on how long both candidates have lived in the state. Macpherson may be brimming with new ideas, but he has yet to share them. Instead he offers a combination of resume highlights, dismissive remarks about Kroger’s experience (the “courtroom cowboy” remarks to the Multnomah Democrats), or, as Jack Bogdanski pointed out, chasing Kroger’s agenda.

    As I said earlier, if Macpherson was making a case for being Speaker of the Oregon House, or the guy to send to Washington instead of Smith, he would be on the right track. However, the Attorney General is a different type of office, and Macpherson has still not explained what he would do in that office.

  • (Show?)

    fuzzy, ad hominem attack? It wasn't fuzzy at all; I said exactly what went wrong. And I didn't attack him, but his weak leadership on that issue.

    Greg IS a nice guy. That doesn't make him the best choice. I urge everyone who is undecided to read LO's three part interview. It's all him, and covers many topics. Blueo can link if they like.

  • Katy Daily (unverified)

    As OLCV's political director I am extremely heartened to see protection of Oregon's environment as a central tenant in both candidates' campaigns for AG. As somebody said earlier, it is an (unfortunately rare) embarrassment of riches that Oregon progressives have with two great candidates who truly want to use their position to enforce Oregon's existing environmental safeguards and to be influential in helping pass stronger laws.

    Both candidates are running strong campaigns, both candidates have backing from key environmental leaders, both candidates have strong positions on key environmental issues, and both candidates have clear (though differing) visions of what they want to do once elected to clean up our environmental enforcement deficiencies.

    The biggest difference between the two candidates is that Greg Macpherson has a long and proven track record of working to protect Oregon's environment. Greg served on the Multnomah County Planning Commission in the early '80s where he was involved in implementing Oregon's land use planning system. He served on the Board of the 40 Mile Loop Land Trust and provided leadership on the development of the Springwater Corridor Trail. As a State Rep., he has been a stalwart in voting pro-environment 97% of the time. And most importantly, Greg's leadership and commitment to bring us a fix to Measure 37 reversed a frightening track Oregon was going down of destroying our land use planning system, which was by far the biggest environmental threat facing Oregon since BM 7 passed in 2000.

    And, yes, although the people of Oregon and a great grassroots effort were responsible for passing Ballot Measure 49, don't underestimate the importance of crafting good legislation and being able to explain it to Oregonians clearly in the ballot title. Greg worked harder than anyone to make sure we got both of these out of the legislature - a monumental task indeed. Additionally, while in the midst of an extremely competitive race for AG, Greg prioritized helping ensure Measure 49 passed by always being there when the campaign needed him.

    Experience matters. As Evan said, Greg is a proven, battle-tested environmental leader and for this he has earned OLCV's endorsement.

    One clarifying point - OLCV's endorsement process is OLCV PAC Board driven. Neither Jonathan, nor any staff, vote on our endorsements.

  • dougpdx (unverified)

    It appears that with OLCV's endorsement for Macpherson OLCV is right on target with their apparent strategy of keeping Salem devoid of any real environmental activists- Jackie Dingfelder notwithstanding. The decision to endorse a corporate Stoel Rives lawyer whose firm was defending Enron at the same time Mr. Kroger was prosecuting Enron is just the latest sign OLCV has become little more than a booster for corporate Democrats. Does it matter that Macpherson is not only working at the firm that represents Oregon's biggest polluters but that they're the people funding his campaign? Hum. That Enron tidbit was actually the first thing I heard about the AG's race and I figured in Oregon ol' Macpherson didn't have a chance. I've had mixed feelings about the Sierra Club but at least there's some environmental group that has a political spine in Oregon. I don't know if its embarassment or what, but try going to OLCV's website to see who is actually on their political committee and making these decisions- good luck.

  • ben rivers (unverified)

    Hum. That Enron tidbit was actually the first thing I heard about the AG's race and I figured in Oregon ol' Macpherson didn't have a chance.


    I cannot believe I need to write this again, Stoel Rives is a huge firm with offices in Washington DC, Boise, Portland, Seattle, Salt Lake City, Denver, Minneapolis, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, Tahoe City and Vancouver. That is a lot of people to peg as supporters of certain issues just because they are employed there.

    This is just more sour grapes from Kroger supporters because they didn't get their way. Cry away...

  • Re: Enron (unverified)

    Macpherson was one of only three Democrats to support Enron when PGE (which was owned by Enron) improperly billed customers. Not only that, but as a partner at Stoel Rives, he is more then an employee, he gets a (relatively) small share of the profits. Macpherson may have made his votes irregardless of Enron being a client of his firm, but ether way, it looks bad.

  • (Show?)

    I was going door to door in the suburbs the week before the November election canvassing for Measure 49. Greg MacPherson showed up to canvass. He didn't have to do that - he could have rested on his efforts as one of the very few legislators who spent an enormous amount of time working to craft a measure that would protect resource lands while allowing for a limited amount of development, as many of us believe the voters supported in 2004. I wonder if Kroger also spent time going door to door?

    I believe MacPherson's OLCV voting record speaks for itself. If it was 75% or something similar critics might have a better case to make. If I am not mistaken, Kroger took on organized crime when he worked for the Feds, not polluters. I like him and his campaign rhetoric, but MacPherson has shown his commitment to "our" issues over time.

    The real problem is a legislature that keeps DEQ on a short leash with budgetary restrictions and threats any time it even thinks about strict enforcement of environmental laws. What are we going to do about that problem? Time to elect a much larger number of committed enviros to serve in Salem.

  • (Show?)

    Yes, Greg's record on the environment speaks for itself.

    The hollow accusation is that he's somehow beholden to anti-environmental donors, coworkers, or partnership in the firm. If so, they're getting ripped off.

    The facts are clear: Representative Macpherson has been one of the most consistent pro-environment votes through three consecutive sessions, and was a key force behind Measure 49.

    You can prefer Kroger, as some of my friends who I respect do, but trying to tear down Greg's environmental record, motivations or credentials is simply all hat, no cattle. It's a few beans short of a tostada. It's all 420, and no Doritos.

  • Dylan (unverified)

    "His father, Hector Macpherson authored Oregon's original state land use planning bill SB 100 in 1973."

    My dad has done tons of cool stuff. I wonder if OLCV will endorse me should I ever run for office.

    I also wonder if OLCV looked into the accomplishments of John Kroger's father.

  • dougpdx (unverified)

    Everybody has a choice as to where they go to work. When you go to work for a public defenders office, a woman's rights group or even a state or local government you know what your pay is going to be and you know what you'll do to earn it. When you sign up work for Stoel Rives you know you're working for the firm that represents the states biggest polluters, corporate energy giants, LNG companies and so on. I'm sure they're alot of nice people over there but I just don't want one of them in charge of the state attorney's office.

  • Jack Sullivan (unverified)

    Doug, you're absolutely right.

    When you go to work, you have a choice about where to work. When you sign up to work for the Bush Administration's Justice Department under Attorney General John Ashcroft, you know that you're going to work for the people that are abusing civil liberties, censoring art, wiretapping Americans without warrants, etc. I'm sure that there's a lot of nice people over there but I just don't want of them in charge of the state attorney's office.

    Definitely. Wherever you work, you're responsible for all the sins of everyone who works where you work, even if you've got nothing to do with it.

  • safe water advocate (unverified)

    In 2003 MacPherson voted in favor of a statewide mandate to fluoridate our drinking water. I find this hard to square with his claim to be an “environmentalist.” Compounds used for fluoridation are toxic waste by-products of the fertilizer industry and contain arsenic, lead and other heavy metals. A very small percentage of these compounds are actually consumed, with the large percentage going directly into the ecosystem. Studies have shown these compounds adversely affect salmon and other aquatic species at levels well below those used to fluoridate. Given that we have so many toxic contaminants in our environment already, and given the significant lack of information on how these chemicals interact, I find it hard to believe that anyone who claims to be an environmentalist could actually vote in favor of mandatory fluoridation.

  • loki (unverified)
    <h2>Representative MacPherson has the experience in Oregon that is needed to be our Attorney General. Needless to say that he actually has first hand experience in Oregons political system, he knows the players and the issues that will need to be dealt with. I'm sorry but I cant go with someone so new to the Oregon experience as Kroger...</h2>
in the news

connect with blueoregon