House District 48 Deserves New Representation
Evan Manvel
I've long disagreed with Rep. Mike Schaufler on a host of policies. It's no secret that since he entered the legislature in 2002, Schaufler's been the worst Oregon Democratic Representative when it comes to protecting Oregon’s air, water, and land from pollution, creating great communities, and promoting a sustainable economic future for generations to come. His environmental voting record has dipped as low as 38% on OLCV’s scorecard.
His voting record goes beyond the environment. As The Oregonian's Jeff Mapes notes, Schaufler “often votes [against] the Democratic caucus.”
In perhaps the biggest recent legislative battle, Schaufler was on the side of the Republicans, big corporations, and the richest of the rich. Of the 36 House Democrats (and 18 Senate Democrats) in the 2009 legislature, Schaufler was the only one to oppose the bills that became Measures 66 and 67, leaving Republican Rep. Bob Jenson to provide the critical 36th vote needed for passage. In the 2011 legislature, Schaufler publicly attacked Democrats who wanted more education funding as "playing political games."
The policy disagreements are one thing, the personal behavior another. Schaufler has drawn criticism for using political contributions to pay his bar tabs, pay his mortgage, and tour Canada, being extremely rude to fellow legislators, and reportedly grabbing a woman’s breast at the AFL-CIO convention.
On this final issue, Rep. Schaufler first denied it and refused to say anything more. "That is categorically untrue," Schaufler told Willamette Week. "That is just not true. That is all I will say.”)
Brad Avakian, Arnie Roblan, and Tom Chamberlain, who talked to those involved and witnesses took strong, decisive action to discipline Rep. Schaufler – stronger actions than warranted by a mere act of sticker placement.
After the story didn't disappear, Rep. Schaufler released a non-apology statement, wherein he:
- Blamed the victim. Rep. Schaufler leads by complaining about the woman putting a sticker on him.
- Muddied the water. He states his action was “sticking [the sticker] on her chest.” This doesn’t mesh with the second-hand reports or the gravity of actions taken against him.
- Downplayed inappropriate touching. Rep. Schaufler talks about having “no sexual intent” and “certainly meant no harm.”
- Failed to take full responsibility or apologize to Oregonians for his actions. The closest he came is saying he apologized to the woman.
- Gave himself credit for not naming names.
The statement demonstrates a remarkable lack of sensitivity around gender relations, a cluelessness about workplace power politics, and a lack of true contrition, leaving Oregonians the impression he learned nothing from the incident.
The Oregon House Democrats and House District 48 residents deserve better than this. The district, which includes Portland and Happy Valley, deserves a strong, professional legislator who will do the Democratic party proud.
It’s time to ask Rep. Schaufler to withdraw his bid for re-election and find a stronger candidate to run. Schaufler has no place serving as the Democratic candidate. Moreover, given the district and all of Schaufler's actions, keeping him as the Democratic candidate could mean the loss of the seat to Republicans (and in an Oregon House split 30-30, every seat has big consequences).
Being a state legislator is a privilege, not a right. This should be the final straw for Rep. Schaufler.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
9:25 a.m.
Oct 12, '11
Schaufler co-sponsored HB 2183, to make false report of a child abuse a felony. during floor debate, half-a-dozen Dems stood to oppose the bill. Lew Frederick noted the bill's penalty was LESS than the penalty for false report of any crime. Tina Kotek & Sara Gelser noted that reports of abuse are already low & this would likely drive those numbers lower. Betty Komp not only made that argument, she did so in the context of a person who suffer abuse & as an educator who tried to help victims of abuse. several people noted how rare such cases are.
and Schaufler's reply? "I don't know the facts, but we have to do something."
he sponsored the bill as a favor to a legislator who had been one of the very few people to be falsely accused in this way (during a divorce). that the bill would have meant more kids would suffer from unreported abuse did not seem to matter to him at all. nor did facts. "We have to do something."
yes we do. replace Mike Schaufler.
ps, the bill died in the Senate.
9:39 a.m.
Oct 12, '11
I wasn't aware of the AFL/ CIO incident mentioned in the article, but I live in Schaufler's district and I've been pleased by his representation of the working-class people who live in my neighborhood. You're right - he DOESN'T vote in lock-step with the Democratic caucus... if you're looking for someone who just toes the line and does what he's told, I'd suggest voting for a Republican. They're really good at that.
Rep. Schaufler has always been very responsive to his constituents - he and his office pick up the phone when we call, and if he doesn't agree with our stance he explains his differences and, in some cases, changes his position if enough of us call him with our views.
There's a reason he's been re-elected so many times out here: he's focused on the lives of the people living in his district, and the issues they bring to him. If a Democratic challenger decides to run against him the next election, s/he had better get to know the people living out here and their view of the world to mount a succesful campaign... Rep. Schaufler certainly does.
10:01 a.m.
Oct 12, '11
Maybe Schaufler will cast the 31st vote for Speaker Bruce Hanna in February and "progressives" won't have to feel conflicted about him anymore.
10:04 a.m.
Oct 12, '11
I'd just like to offer a post-script... it's ironic that this post should appear a day before a Willamette Week article focusing on East Portland hit the news stands (news stands? Do those still exist?) http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-18071-the_other_portland.html?current_page=1
These are the people Rep. Schaufler is working for. You're right, he may not have the same priorities as representatives from the Pearl district or Multnomah Village. His constituents may not, either.
12:06 p.m.
May 14, '12
As a constituent, and 32 year resident of the district, and as someone who represented this area in the legislature in the House and in the Senate, I disagree. Schaufler should go. He is an embarassment.
10:14 a.m.
Oct 12, '11
If lower education funding, not asking the rich to pay their fair share, and voting against curbs on pollution are what HD 48 constituents want, I'd be shocked.
I'm sure Schaufler more represented the financial interests of Pearl District residents than HD 48 residents when he voted against the bills that became Measure 66 and 67.
But you're ignoring the second half of the story.
Let me repeat: The policy disagreements are one thing, the personal behavior another.
Do you think his personal behavior is acceptable behavior for your representative?
6:31 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
If only you had held David Wu to the same standard, when reports of his behavior started to surface in 2005. It appears your outrage is selective, depending on whether the elected official votes in lockstep with liberal dogma.
6:26 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
On January 1, Mike Schaufler will be my State Rep. I don't know firsthand what happened. But I am very suspicious of this movement to run off Schaufler after accusations, with no proof or a conviction.
It seems to me that this may have more to do with the DPO and the ultra-left that controls it wanting to purge the last moderate Democrat left in the legislature.
For the record, I am a Republican, and may not vote for Schaufler in the election. But my experiences with him are of a fair-minded, blunt-talking man of principle and I don't like witch hunts.
If he is convicted of a crime, or sanctioned by the ethics review board, I may change my mind. But until then, I will give him the benefit of the doubt.
9:14 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
That's a really tough standard you're setting arguing that elected officials' behavior only becomes inappropriate when it's illegal. The bar has been set high.
I actually don't remember David Wu ever being sanctioned by an ethics committee or charged with any crime. Since you, as a man of great principle, no doubt hold everyone to the same standard I am sure that you are giving him the same benefit of the doubt and are skeptical of that "witch hunt" as well.
12:12 p.m.
Oct 13, '11
There is a large difference between an ongoing pattern of behavior like Wu, and a one-time incident. Stories about Wu have been bubbling around for years, but as long as he voted the straight party ticket, the dems turned a deaf ear.
Eventually his behavior was a liability greater than his ability to deliver votes for the left, and the party let him know it was time to go. If he hadn't resigned, he certainly would have been sanctioned by Congress.
Now in regards to Schaufler, if a pattern emerges of boorish or criminal behavior, that is something else again. My point is: you all are holding him to a different standard than you would a kool-aid drinking, straight caucus voting Democrat.
I get it. Schaufler isn't liberal enough for you, and you want an excuse to dump him. but being the House Democrat's least favorite member isn't a crime.
So yes, waiting to find the truth is a "tough standard". I will not accept that it is OK to throw someone overboard until a preponderance of the facts are known.