Oregon House Speaker Jeff Merkley and activist Steve Novick will engage in some hand-to-hook combat at the City Club of Portland debate this Friday.

Will real differences between the two frontrunners in the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate emerge? Or will they spin themselves into a frenzy of confusing rhetoric? Our Magic 8-Ball says: Reply hazy, try again.

So far, both have fluffed up their progressive bona fides. In a glossy, full-color mailer, Merkley claims he’s “the only candidate to oppose this war from day one.” Not true, says Novick. Meanwhile, Novick writes in his Voters’ Pamphlet statement that he’s the only candidate with a healthcare plan that “includes coverage for all, and strong steps to control costs.” Says who, Novick? Oh yeah…you!

Novick and Merkley agree on much. Both say Congress should take immediate steps to end the Iraq war. They also say federal lawmakers should close the prison at Guantánamo Bay, begin impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney, recognize same-sex marriages, impose a national cap on interest for payday loans and work toward crafting a single-payer healthcare system. Sweet (liberal) Jesus!

What follows is a handy guide to their differences. And because the City Club didn’t invite a third Democrat, we’ve added a few words from candidate Candy Neville.

	Steve Novick	Jeff Merkley
Issue #1: In February, the Oregon Legislature voted to require that would-be drivers prove their citizenship, blocking illegal immigrants from getting drivers licenses in Oregon for the first time. Good or bad?	Bad. “Drivers licenses should be based on whether you can drive and whether you will get car insurance... . ...This will cause more problems than it will solve.”	Good. “A legal document that conveys legal presence should require legal presence.” He voted for the February measure.
Issue #2: Death penalty. Yes or no?	Yes.	No.
Issue #3: Should we maintain a time limit on welfare benefits?	No. “There should certainly be incentives, which can include negative incentives, to ensure that you’re going to get off welfare. But the idea of a fixed time is not a good idea. It results in people being out on the streets who do not have a rational alternative.”	Yes. “But I really think we need a renewed commitment to tackling poverty that includes community economic development, living-wage jobs, elements of home ownership and health care.”
Issue #4: Do you support eliminating the cap on Social Security taxes? People earning more than about $100,000 don’t pay Social Security taxes on earnings over that threshold.	Yes. “Under current law, someone who makes $1 million a year doesn’t pay Social Security taxes on 90 percent of his income.”	No. “The law as it exists means Social Security is solvent. This is a Republican-manufactured attack on Social Security in an effort to privatize it.”
Candy Neville calls taking driver’s licenses from undocumented immigrants “pointless,” since the measure does not address the “big picture” of immigration reform. She says reform should entail gradual legalization for undocumented immigrants. She took a different position than Merkley and Novick on same-sex marriages, saying civil unions and benefits should be dealt with at the state level. When it comes to ending the Iraq war and promoting peace, the Eugene real estate broker is spirited. She calls for the creation of a federal department of peace and “supports and insists” on impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney, “even if the process does no more than weaken them.”