 |
  |
 |
||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||
|
LEFT
HOOK Gov. Ted Kulongoski is on the ropes. Recent polls show the Democrat at only 39 percent support. The Neil Goldschmidt sex scandal has left him with a black eye. Media reports have questioned how Kulongoski could not have known about his crony's sex with a 14-year-old girl. The scandal has laid bare the enormous influence Goldschmidt's corporate lobbying has had on the Kulongoski administration. The Statesman Journal investigated the governor's appointment book and e-mails and found Kulongoski was in near constant contact with Goldschmidt's lobbying operation. Goldschmidt and company had more private meetings with Kulongoski than the secretary of state, attorney general, state school superintendent or any other business or labor lobbyist, the paper reported.
With Kulongoski wobbling, contenders are circling. Republican Kevin Mannix, who Kulongoski just squeaked by in 2002, is in the ring. Ron Saxton, a more moderate Republican, says he's exploring challenging Mannix for the Republican nomination. Two other lesser-known Republicans are also talking about a challenge. There's talk that Eugene State Sen. Vicki Walker may join Lane County Commissioner Peter Sorenson in challenging Kulongoski for the Democratic nomination next year. Sorenson has already come out swinging from the left in this race, with pointed criticism of Kulongoski and focusing on closing corporate tax loopholes to fund education. Sorenson, a 53-year-old attorney with two college-aged kids, served as a state senator from Eugene and as chair of the LCC Board of Education. As a gubernatorial candidate, Sorenson's an unfunded outsider. But he may be what many Oregonians are looking for. Portland recently elected a mayor who based his campaign on small donations and the Goldschmidt scandal has left many disgusted with the political insiders who were his buddies. Sorenson has a lot to say.
How's the campaign going? It's going great. I think I've just logged over 5,500 miles since Jan. 7. The response I'm getting is a strong response, and what it is saying is that we need to put someone in this spot, in the job of governor, who is going to represent a much wider spectrum of Oregon voices than what Ted Kulongoski or Kevin Mannix have to offer. Kulongoski got 49 percent of the vote in 2002, Mannix got 46 percent. It's my view, and I believe the view of many people in Oregon, that the governor's numbers have fallen and we, the Democrats, need to nominate someone that can effectively defeat Mannix in the 2006 elections. Only 39 percent of current Oregon voters want Gov. Kulongoski re-elected. I would do much better than that. I am a stronger candidate than either Kulongoski or Mannix.
Does the Goldschmidt scandal tarnish Kulongoski? Kulongoski appointed Neil Goldschmidt to positions of power in Oregon state government. He appointed Mrs. Goldschmidt to the Oregon Investment Council. They have resigned or been replaced. Anytime you have a small group of people advising people in power, you're going to get this problem. It always hurts to have a scandal. I would point to the scandal involving Mrs. Goldschmidt and her appointment to the Investment Council. I would prefer to think of it in terms of how can we get the broader voice of Oregonians into positions of power. So it's not just a small group of corporate insiders that are running the government.
Does the Goldschmidt scandal leave an opening for you to challenge Kulongoski? There's been such a huge response to me going around and talking about these issues in such a blunt, frank and open way with people. For example, I challenge reporters, when candidates come by and say, "hey, I favor schools," ask them where they are going to get the money. Just ask them. I have an answer. It's not to do nothing, which is what the governor and Mannix are talking about. It's not to have a sales tax, it's not to have an income tax surcharge, it's to look at the basic structure of the Oregon income tax. Major corporations doing business in Oregon are not paying their fair share. Too much of the revenue is going out the door. If we don't get the revenue for these services, we're going to cut them. I'm totally against that. That is the fundamental thing that is powering me in this. That is, one, finding the funds for education and, two, getting the funds fairly.
Why do you think Kulongoski's polls are so low? Leadership is what people want from their elected officials. And when the schools are being cut, when the health plan is being virtually eliminated, when there're 100,000 school children not covered by health insurance, when we are in the top five hungriest states in the country, the issues that call out for leadership are right in front of your face. Right there. What I am doing is giving tangible answers to how these problems can be solved, and that is refreshing to people. Neither Kulongoski nor Mannix offer anything other than excuses.
What would be your priorities if elected? Fund education through corporate tax fairness. In 1973 the big corporations paid 18 percent of the income tax in Oregon, now they pay 5 percent. There's been a massive tax shift. Neither Kulongoski nor Mannix are talking about turning around that massive tax shift. If we turned it around to 18 percent being paid by the largest corporations in Oregon, we'd have $1.8 billion to invest in schools, health plan, seniors and the other important services that are being cut by this Legislature and this governor. I would also regulate the insurance industry in Oregon. I support legislation that would require insurance companies to submit their proposed rate increases to the Oregon Insurance Commission. Business and consumer interests would be represented on the commission.
Are Democrats disappointed with Kulongoski? They are really flocking to have this strong alternative voice. I'm not going to be concerned about what corporate lobbyists think about what I am saying. The kinds of issues I represent are really the issues that most Oregonians want for their government and want out of their governor. It's been a very exciting thing for people to come up to me and say, "Hey, I've heard about you. You're the guy that's running for governor that's not the corporate candidate."
What do you think about the enterprise zone tax break program? It's another example, it's been a tax shift over to the largest corporations that tend to receive the biggest benefits. The [Eugene] enterprise zone primarily benefited Hynix. I was one of the no votes [on the County Commission] because of my concern over the tremendous shift in taxation. This tax shift [concern] rises above such things as a Republican/Democrat issue, a liberal/conservative issue, the way that we often talk about Oregon politics. It gets to an issue of fairness. People can recognize fairness or unfairness when they see it. I will continue talking about this massive tax shift because I think it does separate me and clarify my public interest orientation towards the job of governor.
The governor recently said he wouldn't push the lottery commission to dedicate more video poker revenue to schools. What do you think he should have done? I don't think the lottery commission rates were set fairly. It was too heavily favoring the bars and taverns at the expense of school children. In the case of the Lane Transit District board, the people the governor appointed basically forced a strike over having the employees eat the health insurance costs. Both are examples of where the governor should have spoken out. I would reduce the size of the lottery. Kulongoski opposed expanding the lottery as attorney general and now promotes the most addictive forms of gambling.
A growing chunk of the state budget is going to prisons. What do you think of talk of reforming Measure 11's long mandatory sentences? We need to have much more balance in the criminal justice system. By that I mean flexible sentencing by judges. We need to have prevention programs to keep children from getting involved in criminal conduct early in life. We need to have rehabilitation so that people that have gotten involved in the criminal justice system that have gotten involved in drug and alcohol abuse can in fact get rehabilitation. Simply putting people into expensive facilities for a longer period of time and not dealing with their underlying addictions isn't working. A governor could slow the rate of construction of high-cost prisons and put that money into rehabilitation. Consistent with Measure 11, we could have much more extended programs for work release, such as the forest work camp in Lane County, and such as the electronic bracelet program. All of that would comply with Measure 11 that people would be "in custody," but it would be significantly less expensive. It would free up money that could be used for rehabilitation, especially drug and alcohol rehabilitation. Over 90 percent of the inmates in the Oregon penal system have drug and alcohol problems. The governor has proposed a 30 percent increase in the Department of Corrections budget. I don't think that's necessary. Certainly I don't think it should be done at the expense of the public education budget.
Kulongoski came to Eugene recently and lauded Wayne Morse's focus on education and called for a Marshall Plan of sorts to make Americans the best educated, best trained people in the world. But should we wait for Bush and Congress? Gov. Kulongoski has proposed cuts in Oregon's education budget. Cuts to pre- kindergarten, public schools, community colleges, state universities and the Oregon Health and Sciences University are intolerable. And no, we should not wait for the federal government on education. Under the Bush administration, the states have received unfunded mandates for testing and less money for instruction, buildings, research and scholarship assistance.
What is Kulongoski doing or not doing that's within his capacity regarding the environment in Oregon and the Northwest? I think he is missing the boat on the tremendous work that could be done on the environment and economic development. We should be investing in solar energy and wind energy. We should be investing in micro and small businesses. We should not be subsidizing multinational corporations.
What would you do regarding forest practices, air quality, Willamette River, Measure 37, etc. On forest practices, we should invest in planting trees, cutting the brush and thinning the trees. This creates jobs for rural communities and helps the forests and all that depend upon them. The state could lead in this effort. We should be doing this on both private and public lands. On air toxics, the Kulongoski administration has blocked efforts in Turner, Coburg and Klamath Falls to involve local governments in decision-making on facilities that will pollute the air. I would reverse that. Finally, Kulongoski said a year ago that cleanup of the Willamette river is his number one priority. He didn't even mention this in his State of the State message. He has not supported legislative efforts to phase out polluting zones in the Willamette River. He hasn't done anything but had a press conference a year ago to show his concern. I would work for the bill to phase out the polluting zones. I would make polluters pay to clean up the river.
How would you raise the $3 million or so it would take to run a gubernatorial campaign? I don't know where you got the $3 million dollar amount. Under current circumstances, it does not take $3 million to win the Democratic nomination for governor of Oregon. It takes leadership and vision, and it takes more votes than your opponent. I don't think our elections should go to those who raise the most money. If that were the case, the Republicans would win all of the elections. After the primary, I would get the same level of support any Democratic nominee would get.
Are you known in Portland? No, but I would like to be better known. I will be in the near future. I have supporters and good friends in Portland and the neighboring communities. They have been helpful getting out the word about my work, my ideas and our campaign. I've been to Portland a number of times already and have been on more than 20 media interviews there. I'll be taking this campaign all over the state.
Why would Kulongoski's big donors back you instead of him, assuming he chooses to run again? I think the big money will back Gov. Kulongoski and Kevin Mannix. After all, they both back the big guys. I will have substantial support from small donors. This is how Democrats normally win primary elections. If you check the secretary of state website, you will see that I have more individual donors than either Gov. Kulongoski or Kevin Mannix.
Progressives are always on the defensive when it comes to ballot measures and the Legislature. What can a governor do to put conservatives on the defensive? The governor of Oregon should be active, always proposing good ideas, always promoting good ideas. The governor should be working for sustainability, fairness, good jobs, and be willing to veto bad bills. The governor's job is to include diverse people in making good decisions for the state, not to put anyone on the defensive.
Do you think other candidates will enter the race for the Democratic nomination? I had asked around prior to making this decision to see if someone else had the courage to do what I felt needed to be done, namely to have a progressive, strong Democrat run against this governor all out, not in some effort to push him a nanometer to the left, but rather to have a wholesale house cleaning and take back the governorship for the people of Oregon. That's what this is about.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
