Six
Hours at the Benson: Election-night dispatches from
behind Democratic lines.
Q&A
with Loren Parks: The conservatives' sugar-daddy breaks
his silence.
While Oregon's democratic drama didn't last quite as
long as the soap opera in Florida, last Tuesday night
(and Wednesday morning) offered more subplots than Days
of Our Lives. As usual, once the fog lifted, not all
the winners and losers could be discerned by looking at
the vote tallies.
Here's our look at who really came out on top (and who
flamed out) in last week's electoral sweepstakes.
WINNERS
POT SMOKERS
Regardless of who ends up sitting in the Oval Office
come January, the national War on Drugs will march forward.
But here in Oregon, at least, police will find the spoils
much less rewarding.
Thanks in part to the work of its Marijuana Task Force,
the Portland Police Bureau last year seized more than
$6.6 million worth of drugs, cash and other loot. Much
of the property was returned--but some was sold, bringing
$727,000 to local drug-enforcement efforts.
But now that funding source is about to dry up, because
Measure 3 changed the rules governing the way law enforcement
funds the drug war. Previously, local police could seize
cash and sell property that was merely suspected of being
linked to a crime. Now, a criminal conviction will be
required before the goods can be unloaded, meaning the
$2 million derived annually from forfeiture statewide
will be reduced. More importantly, 75 percent of the proceeds
are to go to drug-treatment programs, not law enforcement.
The upshot of this is that the Marijuana Task Force,
as well as other special drug units, will probably bite
the dust if Measure 3 cannot be overturned in court, says
John Bradley, a Multnomah County senior deputy district
attorney. If the goal of the measure was to put a huge
crimp in the drug war, "that will be achieved," he says.
KATU-TV
In a night that must have worn out many a remote control,
KATU easily had the most authoritative and useful local
election coverage for channel hoppers. Not only did Channel
2 broadcast the most comprehensive local results, but
it also had the best analysis, courtesy of Tim Hibbits.
Though the pollster couldn't crack a smile if there was
an Uzi to his head, he's in a class of his own when it
comes to coolly analyzing the numbers. And while we constantly
wanted to reach into the screen and muss up the hair of
anchor John Marler, he and his wife, co-anchor Cathy Marshall,
handled the turbulence of the evening with relative dispatch.
The same could not be said for their peers at channels
6, 8 and 12. The biggest gaffe of the night may have been
on Channel 8. Reporter Nancy Francis, broadcasting live
from the Benson Hotel, announced at 10:50 pm that Gore
had taken Florida, giving currency to a rumor that was
sweeping the hotel but had no basis in truth.
Over at Channel 6, Lars Larson chaired a panel of analysts.
At his best, Larson is this city's top broadcast reporter,
a journalist who does his homework and is willing to attack
sacred cows. At his worst, he's a partisan ideologue whose
neoconservative positions are as predictable as KOIN anchor
Jeff Gianola's smile. On election night, Larson the reporter
gave way to Larson the dogmatist. Rather than provide
analysis, Larson spent much of the evening jabbering about
why the measures that didn't win should have and engaging
in more-heat-than-light repartee with political operative
Paul Phillips (who failed to disclose to viewers that
he was a paid consultant on a number of the campaigns
he was analyzing) and ex-secretary of state Phil Keisling
(who often looked like he wished he could be elsewhere).
Channel 8 tried to add some spice to its coverage with
a panel of "experts." Problem was, the KGW experts consisted
mostly of war horses, including at least a couple (Democrat
Harry Lonsdale and Republican Craig Berkman) whose "experience"
consisted of losing statewide elections. The panel also
included Norma Paulus, who served as secretary of state
about a hundred years ago. Only the presence of current
lawmaker Jo Ann Bowman saved the panel from petrifying
on camera, though we'd encourage her to keep her day job
as well.
LEFTY STRATEGISTS
The crowded ballot may have been a burden on voters,
but it was a boon to paid political consultants.
The big winner was M&R Strategic Services of Portland,
which was the Godzilla of the campaign game this year
after beating out competitors, like Republican consultant
Paul Phillips, to take on conservative bogeymen.
Most notably, M&R smashed Sizemore with the Our Oregon
Committee, garnering $2.6 million from high-tech, timber
and other big businesses to fight Bill Sizemore's tax
cuts and Don McIntire's state spending limit. Beyond that,
the group also worked against Measure 9; the two anti-union
measures; the two tobacco trust fund measures; and Measure
2, the administrative rules measure. The only loss was
in the Measure 7 fight, which it had turned over to Nik
Blosser and the Celilo Group. (Blosser was able to close
the gap, but not defeat the measure.) M&R also led
Randall Edwards' race for treasurer against Jon Kvistad.
STRIPPERS
Another left-leaning consultant, the Sugarman Group,
solidified its reputation as the state's pro-vice squad.
Made up of Geoff Sugarman, David Smigelski and Amy Klare,
the group rolled medical marijuana to victory in 1998.
This year they fought successfully to protect suspected
pot smokers by weakening civil forfeiture laws (Measure
3) and shielded strippers and sex shops by beating the
prudish zoning of Measure 87.
BILL SIZEMORE
Sorry, readers, but the post-election pronouncements
of Bill Sizemore's demise are premature. Sure, he got
poleaxed on election day, losing all six of the ballot
measures his Oregon Taxpayers United put on the ballot
(OTU also put up Measure 7 but handed the campaign to
Oregonians in Action). Yes, the opposition that rallied
to defeat him created a labor-business coalition that
proved insurmountable. But for Sizemore, victory is not
measured simply by whether he prevails at the ballot box.
First, consider that Sizemore's initiatives took somewhere
between $7 million and $8 million to defeat. Much of that
was union money that might have been spent elsewhere--most
notably on the failed attempt to put Democrats in control
of the Legislature. "There was a lot of mischief they
[unions] could have done with their money if their attention
wasn't focused on us," Sizemore says.
More important is that, win or lose, Sizemore's initiatives
continue to set the agenda for this state. His effort
to rein in public-employee unions, reform income taxes
and change the way teachers are paid are now part of the
civic vernacular in a way they never were before this
election. Even Sizemore's staunch opponents admitted that
there was some appeal to his effort to reform teacher
compensation. PGE senior vice president Fred Miller, who
is married to Portland School Board member Karla Wenzel,
told Brainstorm magazine that "even with some possible
deficiencies in the initiative, I like the 'Pay for Performance
for Teachers' (Measure 95)."
For Sizemore and those who finance him, generating attention
is almost as valuable as winning elections. (However,
Loren Parks, his biggest contributor, does express some
reservations about his continued support in an interview
on page 30.)
You could even argue that Sizemore did win an initiative--the
passage of Measure 88. Last year, when it became clear
that Sizemore would offer an initiative to eliminate the
cap on the deductibility of federal income taxes on Oregon's
state tax return (Measure 91), the Republican Legislature
quickly cobbled together a referral that would raise the
cap but not eliminate it. This attempt to meet Sizemore
partway without destroying the state budget became Measure
88, and it passed last week 51 to 49 percent.
Opponents of Sizemore dance on his grave at great risk:
As long as the governor and lawmakers continue to play
defense to Sizemore's carpet-bombing offense, it is he,
not they, who will dominate the state's political stage.
UNIONS
"Thank you, Bill Sizemore."
So says Tim Nesbitt, the head of the Oregon AFL-CIO.
Nesbitt's comment is not tongue-in-cheek. It's simply
that Sizemore's three initiatives to rein in the influence
of organized labor, particularly public-employee unions,
not only failed but woke a sleeping giant--union voters.
With measures 92 and 98 (which would have reduced unions'
ability to raise money through payroll deduction) and
95 (which would have instituted merit pay for teachers),
Sizemore attacked some of organized labor's holiest bovines.
The state's quarter-million union members responded in
force with nearly $7 million and enough votes to easily
beat back Sizemore's measures.
The turnout may have had another consequence as well.
Paul Phillips, a former GOP state senator who now works
as a consultant, says Republican secretary of state hopeful
Lynn Snodgrass lost to Bill Bradbury because of the labor
vote energized by the opposition to Sizemore.
Nesbitt, who was elected to the state's top AFL-CIO spot
last year, agrees. "I think we were the difference in
Bradbury, [Attorney General Hardy] Myers and Gore winning
in Oregon," he says.
Labor had another victory in this election as well. Voters
approved Measure 99, which establishes a home health-care
commission. In essence, this measure is the first step
in the unionization of the estimated 12,000 home health-care
workers in Oregon.
Finally, labor won because the next Legislature will
be friendlier to unions, thanks to the exit of legislators
such as Snodgrass, Sen. Eileen Qutub (who lost her District
4 race) and Rep. Ron Sunseri (the Gresham Republican did
not seek re-election). "It's definitely a more moderate
Legislature," Nesbitt says. "The speaker [Republican Mark
Simmons] is even a union member."
LOSERS
CRITTERS
Except for sheep, it was not a good election for four-footed
Oregonians. The most obvious bad news for animals was
the resounding defeat of Measure 87, the leg-hold trap
ban. The body-gripping devices are used to trap fur-bearers
(mainly muskrat and nutria) and predators (coyotes cause
nearly $1 million in livestock damages annually). But
the indiscriminate jaws occasionally snare pets and other
critters as well. And that's not the only effect on our
furry friends. An unintended consequence of Measure 3
(the civil forfeiture law) is that the new law may make
it harder for police to confiscate abused animals.
DAVID BRAGDON
You might think David Bragdon could be happy with the
results of the election: After all, voters supported charter
reform--in effect a new constitution--for Metro, the regional
tri-county agency that deals with parks, planning, the
Oregon Zoo, trash and recycling.
But despite this small victory, Bragdon, the Metro Council's
presiding officer, will have his hands full. Of all the
agencies in the state, Metro was hit the hardest by the
passage of Measure 7.
That measure requires state and local government to either
reimburse land owners for reductions in property value
due to regulation, or get rid of the regulation. Specifically,
it targets zoning and other laws designed to protect streams
and open spaces--all the main functions of Metro.
"It's really bad news," says Bragdon. "The whole land-use
planning system is a loser."
The idea of reimbursing landowners for government "takings"
is not new. In most states, however, similar proposals
have been rejected by voters or legislators, meaning that
Oregon is once again at the cutting edge of land-use laws,
though this time in a way that makes most local environmentalists
shudder. "I'm dying to know what's going on in Oregon,"
said Paula Carrell, the national Sierra Club's state program
director.
Laws with the same intent as Measure 7 have passed in
other states, but most were very limited. Currently, the
most far-reaching compensation law is in Florida, which
environmentalists say has hurt everything from the Everglades
to traffic flow. But that law says only that landowners
should not be "inordinately burdened" by regulation, and
that the impact of regulations should not be "disproportionate."
Oregon's law goes further, because Measure 7 requires
compensation for any reduction in land value, no
matter how fair and proportionate.
Bragdon is trying to remain optimistic about the law,
saying, "We're going to have to work with the governor's
office and the Legislature to try to get it fixed."
INTEL
This state's largest employer and corporate income taxpayer
scored one victory: It was a leader in the effort to defeat
the tax measures put up by Bill Sizemore and Don McIntire.
But in other races, Oregon's most powerful company looked
like an also-ran.
For starters, three current or former Intel employees
ran for office--and they all crashed. Former company exec
John Calhoun ran in the Democratic primary for House District
11. Current employee Ed Pole ran for secretary of state
as a Libertarian. And another employee, Mitch Shults,
ran for state treasurer, also on the Libertarian ticket.
Presumably, all three men hoped that the luster of working
for the standard bearer of Oregon's new economy would
help their campaigns. They were wrong.
In a couple of other campaigns, Intel tried to take down
candidates who declined to bow sufficiently to the company's
wishes. The high-tech titan supported Charles Starr, an
arch-conservative state legislator who ran against incumbent
Congressman David Wu in the 1st District. Intel raised
$25,000 for Starr at a D.C. event and donated another
$4,826 to his campaign. Starr's chief attraction was that
he was not Wu, who angered the high-tech community by
voting against liberalizing trade with China. Wu also
may have ticked off Intel officials with his stance on
federal legislation relating to intellectual-property
laws. Whatever Intel's motivation, Wu got the last laugh,
shooting down Starr in a lopsided victory.
At the state level, Intel switched philosophical gears
to back a liberal Democrat in the District 7 House race.
Mitch Greenlick, a former health-care official, received
$5,000 from Jim Johnson, Intel's top executive in Oregon.
His biggest appeal appeared to be that he was not Bill
Witt, a socially conservative Republican who last year
opposed the huge tax break Intel received from Washington
County. Despite Johnson's support, however, Greenlick
lost in a squeaker, falling to Witt by about 500 votes.
BILL BRADBURY
Yeah, Bill Bradbury managed to retain his position as
secretary of state, holding off the free-spending challenge
of GOP rival Lynn Snodgrass. But the chief elections officer
didn't inspire a lot of confidence in the waning weeks
of the election.
For one thing, there was the matter of his prediction
that Oregon election results would be completed and announced
by 8:30 pm election night, a statement that, in the presidential
race, was inaccurate by days, rather than hours.
County elections offices have a lot of autonomy, but
the state's lack of preparedness falls on Bradbury's shoulders.
It's hard to blame him for the faulty computers in Jackson
County, but local problems were magnified by his failure
to anticipate the last-minute ballot drop-offs and his
seeming ignorance that vote-by-mail ballots take longer
to count.
There was also the matter of Bradbury's flip-flop on
the "Nader-trader" websites. First, he blithely announced
trading votes was legal. Wait, no, they're illegal. Hold
on, some are legal. Well, then again....
OREGON NEWSPAPERS
If this industry needed more proof of its continued slip
in influence, Measure 7 provided it. There were several
races in which Oregon newspapers were nearly unanimous
in their opposition: the attack on gay rights, the Sizemore
tax breaks and Kevin Mannix's bid for attorney general.
In all those cases, a majority of voters agreed with the
pundits. But on the one measure that editorial writers
tried hardest to make a difference, Measure 7, they failed
spectacularly.
All the major papers in the state (at least 16 total,
from the Grants Pass Daily Courier and the Salem
Statesman-Journal to the East Oregonian
and Daily Astorian) came out strongly against the
measure requiring the government to compensate landowners
for regulations that hurt property values. With polls
showing the measure slightly leading in late October,
five papers, including the state's two largest dailies
(The Oregonian and the Eugene Register Guard)
wrote second editorials in the campaigns' waning days,
urging a No on 7 vote. The result: Voters passed the measure
overwhelmingly.
The lack of clout didn't surprise anyone, including the
measure's opponents. When the No on 7 campaign told potential
voters that "newspaper editorial boards in Oregon overwhelming
oppose this measure," less than 40 percent said it mattered.
(Nearly two-thirds, by contrast, were persuaded by the
notion that as a constitutional amendment, M7 deserved
more deliberation.) "I don't think there was anything
else remotely as unpersuasive as the editorial board argument,"
says Randy Tucker of 1000 Friends of Oregon. "Enjoy your
power."
X-PAC
Five years ago, when Erik Sten launched X-PAC, it was
the most exciting political group for the under-30 set.
This year, it lost that mantle to the more mundanely named
Oregon Student Association. Early this year, when Gov.
John Kitzhaber looked for help to get young voters engaged
in the biggest election this state has ever seen, he turned
not to X-PAC but to OSA. Headed by whiz-bang Ed Dennis,
the group more than stepped up to the task, with some
help from OSPIRG. The group registered nearly 27,500 students
and ran a series of candidate and ballot-measure debates
on Oregon college campuses that were informative but not
stuffy. X-PAC, by contrast, failed to get funding for
the massive get-out-the-vote drive it promised early in
the year and ended up as little more than yet another
organization with a website. Critics complain that the
group has degenerated into one that primarily held "see
and be seen" networking meetings for people who already
know each other. This election didn't help change that
image.
OSU ALUMNI ASSOCIATION
Sure, the Beavers are 6-point favorites over the Ducks
in this Saturday's Civil War game, but last week they
suffered fourth-quarter losses when Oregon State University
alums Lynn Snodgrass and Jon Kvistad were trounced in
their bids for statewide office.
