Your accusation doesn't seem quite fair. I've seen families that were very tight and stuck together despite differences. I've also seen families where there was a fear of stepping out of the family tradition for whatever reason. But it's not our place to judge the relationship between Ted and his father or the reasons why Ted would continue to lend his name as a paper officer to his father's "family" foundation. Ted didn't make contributory decisions, his father did. In fact, if he became an independant in 2001, is it so hard to imagine that it might have been the Sizemore mess that was really coming to a head at that time and his father's support of it that drove him out of the Republican party? And wouldn't that be a good thing?

I'm sorry, but I really think that without any evidence that Ted is insincere about his views this is a red herring. I was very familiar with the fundraising efforts of Sizemore. I heard Sam's name numerous times. I never even knew he had a son, let alone that his name was Ted.

While my family doensn't have any kind of foundation, my parents are quite conservative. I keep up a dialogue on a variety of issues on which we disagree. Sometimes I feel like I even make headway. It would be interesting to see if staying associated with the foundation was not an effort to influence his family's giving patterns -- I'm interested to hear his explanation.

John,

I truly agree with you on "dont judge him on his 'family' political history".

If we do, then the progressives in Oregon should be jumping off of other "progressive" candidates current history.

I'm not judging him on his family. I'm judging him on staying an officer of the foundation until now. I'd have more respect for him if he said "I will stay on the foundation because I think I can steer some of the money to good causes." His saying he will QUIT the foundation once he officially becomes a candidate makes no sense. Part of it is, does the guy know his own mind? Either it's an OK thing to be on the foundation, or it isn't. It can't be "OK until you're a candidate."

Hmmm ... I may owe Mr. Wheeler an apology (and apparently he has a beef with Willamette Week). I just got a call from Liz Kaufman who says that Wheeler did NOT tell WW that he was quitting his post at the foundation because of his candidacy, he said in response to a different question that he was pretty much quitting everything he is doing as he starts campaigning. That IS different. I do wish he had quit the foundation given who it was giving money to (and Liz's other point, that the foundation was not a democracy, he didn't have a vote, is not relevant -- people resign as a matter of principle from organizations they don't agree with, vote or no vote), but the most bothersome thing about the article was the suggestion that he was 'quitting because he was running and got caught.'

It is surprising that someone as smart as Steve Novick didn't check his facts about Ted Wheeler before he launched an attack. Perhaps he chose to ignore the facts because he wants to drag Wheeler's name down in an effort to elevate his friend and candidate--Tom Chamberlain.

Oh good Lord. Yes I do support Tom Chamberlain but in spite of that I had not said a bad word about Wheeler until the Willamette Week thing. Trusting that a paper did not misquote someone is not the same as 'ignoring the facts.'

Steve - thanks for taking an interest in the race for County Chair (even if you are supporting one of my opponents, which I think you accidentally forgot to mention in your thread...). The facts: Like most family foundations, the Wheeler Foundation is not a democracy. My dad is the President, he runs it on a daily basis, and it is largely his money. My role has been to bring organizations that provide essential community services to the table and advocate for their funding. WW selectively wrote about just four organizations that the Wheeler Foundation donated to. There were 856 other charitable donations (making up 98% of the total dollars contributed) over the period that WW looked at. These other charitable contributions went to such right wing wacko organizations as the DePaul Treatment Center, the American Wilderness Foundation, SMART, the Nature Conservancy, the Doughy Center, New Avenues for Youth, PICA, Portland House of Umoja, Self Enhancement, Inc., Sisters of the Road Cafe, SOLV, the Library Foundation, Habitat for Humanity, Our House of Portland, Portand Parks Foundation, Waverly Children's Home, and on and on and on....you get the point. Please see me website for information on my personal charitable contributions http://www.wheelerforcountychair.com

This whole thread is very illustrative of the way selective presentation of information is used effectively to thwart the public's right to make an informed choice. Lack of complete information is in a way even more dangerous that misinformation because you can never peg any liars and often people don't look for the missing information that they do not know exists.

By the way, in my opinion selective information sharing is the primary cause of both right-wing and left-wing ideology and why so many today are so angry at those of the opposite political party.

Here's the most important piece of information...

2001 - Registered Republican. 2005 - Running for Democratic Party County Chair

...and not one word of explanation on Mr. Wheeler's web site for the 180 degree change in worldview.

I have a few friends that have changed their political viewpoint. They all have very interesting, very detailed stories about what led to their political conversion. For example, we are hearing a whole bunch of these stories coming out of the Gulf Coast right now.

I'd probably have fewer problems with Mr. Wheeler as a candidate for office than I have with him seeking such a purely partisan position. In Mr. Wheeler's introduction letter, I don't see a single word about building a stronger Democratic Party in the County. If you wish to call me a cynic, that's fine. Karl Rove and Ted Sizemore created a political environment which forces people to be cynical. I have a problem with someone going from Republican to a Democratic Party county chair in a 4 year period of time, and attempting to so with no explanation regarding the change of heart.

A couple of things bother me about this post, Steve.

1. You are friends with another candidate running for the race and you didn't admit that upfront. That tells me there may be something more to you posting than altruistic political debate or concern. You admitted your error late in the game and AFTER someone called you on it.

2. Throw the baby out with the bath water much? According to Wheeler 98% of the foundation's contributions go to causes that were not mentioned in the article. The causes he listed look good to me. By saying unequivocally that he should have abandoned ship, are you saying that being a positive influence for change inside an organization is not a good thing? That would should give up on things that could be good because they aren't perfect? Are you saying that he should have given up the opportunity to bring good organizations to the table? For every positive group brought to the table, that leaves less money on the table for the enemy.

P.S. For those that don't realize it, the position of County Chair is non-partisan (afs) and according to Willamette Week's article, Wheeler is not registered as a Democrat, he is registered "non-partisan" which I assume means he is registered as an Independent.

Jean, you are absolutely right that I should have stated up front my association with Tom. I wasn't trying to hide it but I should have stated it. As I said, I suck. (And I asked BlueOregon to state that fact, and the fact that I suck, in the body of the piece.) As to the 98% / 2% issue, however, any organization that gives 98% of its money to charity and 2% to Sizemore is on balance an evil organization. It takes Sizemore only a few hundred thousand dollars to get a measure on the ballot that costs public services billions of dollars -- which a few million in charitable contributions can never offset. A $15,000 contribution to Sizemore far, far outweighs $7 million (or whatever) to charity. Personally, I'd like to limit high political office in Oregon to people who gave money to fight Sizemore's Measure 47 in 1996 or his Measure 91 in 2000 (that second list would include John Calhoun, for example), but unfortunately neither Ted nor Tom nor Diane is on that list (although Tom could point out that fire fighters' organizations are, and I might snarkily argue that as a rich dude whose dad was backing Sizemore Wheeler had a greater obligation to give than either Tom or Diane).

I haven't decided who to support for County Chair. Generally the fact that Liz Kaufman is working for someone is a pretty good endorsement of a candidate's political philosophy.

I am nonetheless curious about Wheeler's change of registration. Its not like Oregon Republicans have taken a recent turn to the right. This is a party whose leaders in the early 1990's were publically praising anti-abortion terrorists after they were arrested for shooting doctors. That was when Kevin Mannix was still trying to sell himself as a "McGovern Democrat". It is hard to see what the Republicans have done recently that would make someone change registration now if that was acceptable to them then. In some ways, I would have less questions if he were still a Republican.

We all know how stuff gets into the Willamette Week (Mark Weiner where are you?). Its a bit disingenous to use WW as a reliable source for commentary.

Isn't Barbara Willer Ted Wheeler's campaign manager? Shouldn't she have said so while trying to "out" Steve Novick's candidate preference?

This has been one amusing discussion as was the Willmette Week article. I am sure the various candidates will entertain us for several more months with this kind of stuff.

But I hope at some point they start to address the real issue here. Multnomah County provides some very important services. Including some that are really life-saving for people. It can't do that with almost zero public credibility. The library is funded almost entirely by a special levy that the voters will need to approve in May. Its pretty clear that the county's image is going to make that a hard sell, even without the Oregonian's pounding away about jailbeds. The county is faced with a further reduction in its budget, but no real plan for providing services more efficiently. As the Sheriff reminds us at every chance, our expensive new jail at Wapato is still empty. There are people who are stealing to support a drug habit, while the county turns people away because it can't afford to provide drug treatment.

So perhaps we will eventually hear candidates talk about ending the bickering at the county, restoring its credibility and focusing the county staff on effectively providing basic services to the needy, maintaining our incredible library system, making sure public safety is adequately funded ... Right now, this kind of petty political squabbling doesn't really give much confidence that any of the candidates are capable of pulling that off. They seem to be practicing for another four years of commissioners' petty squabbling.

Back to the main point. This guy was part of a foundation that gave money to Sizemore. I agree with Novick. That makes the whole group corrupt. The other organizaitons I saw listed are generally non-political, so nice to give to, but doesn't make up for giving money to Sizemore.

I'm sure voters in Multnomah County will, by the time they vote, find out all about the needs of the county, as well as all the reasons (both true and untrue) why NOT to vote for each of the candidates. Why doesn't anyone ever get around to telling people why TO vote for one of them? Isn't this little discussion here just the perfect example of what is going on in our entire political system anymore? It's always focused on tearing others down, selectively disclosing information, pulling on heart-strings without offering real solutions, showing off endorsements, and finger pointing. Please tell us something good the person has done or some solid plan the person has to address the problems so we can feel like voting is a worthwile use of our time. I can't remember the last time I went to the polls and felt good about casting a vote for anyone.

Whether you like Ted or not - and I don't know him at all and am not a voter in Multnomah County - this idea that his personal influence, resulting in hundreds of thousands of dollars being funneled to worthy charities that actually help real people in need, is outweighed by the fact that his father, without any ability on Ted's part to do anything about it, gave a small percentage of his money to Sizemore, is RIDICULOUS partisan crap. It really disgusts me.

My hope and expectation is that this campaign will be clean, fair and issues-oriented. I also hope that it will be forward-looking in that our community is facing some very real, very serious problems that will take all of us working together to solve - that's why I'm building a broad coalition of supporters who want to bring positive change to County leadership. The stakes for our community are high. The services that Multnomah County provides including working with the mentally ill, the severely disabled and the elderly, are critical to many families - maybe even your own. How we deliver those services says a lot about who we are as a community. My only request is that people wait to hear from the candidates, in their own words, who they are and what they truly represent. Give us a chance to make our case - there's plenty of time to do that. I invite anyone who has an interest in learning more about me or my candidacy to get in touch with me directly or go to my campaign website (wheelerforcountychair.com) and lets start a meaningful dialog.

"Posted by: Joel Shapiro | Sep 9, 2005 11:15:47 AM

to afs -- As Emily Litella would say, "Never mind."

That about sums it up, Joel. ;-).

My apologies to Mr. Wheeler. Sorry about that everyone

Oh well... never let it be said I didn't show up to take my lumps when I was dead wrong.

I know about taking lumps. I'll be watching this race, and one of the questions I'll have, as I'm sure others will, is where does Wheeler stand on the issues that Sizemore pushes.

Does Wheeler oppose union members participating in the political process? Does Wheeler want to cap government spending for the services he rightly points out are important to our community? Does Wheeler channel the ideology of Grover Norquist?

I read Wheeler's statements. I appreciate how positive they are, but it does not answer these questions. His role as a funder of Sizemore make these relevant. Novick was correct to raise them.

"qui tacet consentire videtur," "he who is silent is understood to consent"

The bottom line is that Mr. Wheeler was an officer and a Board Member of a foundation that gave significant sums to the worst political elements in Oregon. Remaining on the Board, yet silent during the dole of Foundation funds that were objectionable to Mr. Wheeler, cannot be erased by the act of "bringing to the table" social service and humanitarian organizations that may seek to assuage his personal regret at any harm done. The personal ties of family do not require active participation in an enterprise that behaves in such a fashion, nor do familial obligations equate to a veil to hide behind in seeking to avoid the responsibility that comes with money and power. The excuse that it was his fathers money is a cop-out and seems somewhat adolescent in its tenor.

I hope this does turn out to be a clean campaign. I also hope that disclosure is both free and forthcoming. I would ask Mr. Wheeler if he had a vote as a Board Member, and if so (and I am sure Board Members have votes), how did he vote? If he did not, then how should we take that silence?

It is said that one's true character can most easily be seen in the action they take when they believe no one is watching. When money was being earmarked for anti-gay, anti-government and anti-democratic organizations, what did you do Mr. Wheeler?

I could have done without the latin lesson, but I think Bruce makes an important point. I guess I too am having a hard time digesting Mr. Wheeler's justification for his years of service on a foundation that supported such radically conservative organizations.

Justifying his participation by saying his role was to advocate for more palatable organizations is no more convincing than it would be if he sat on the Board of "Focus on the Family" and justified it by saying he just worked on the parts that fed hungary children. You cannot have a part of funding people like Sizemore, OIA, the Pacific Legal Foundation or anti-gay evangelical groups and stake any claim to a progressive high ground. And if there is any doubt about that, let us note that he apparently says he is stepping down not because of the indefensible donations, but because he will be too busy campaigning. That isn't just different, ITS WORSE! Finally, while declaring oneself a Democrat is certainly not the final word on progressivism, it is interesting to note that Wheeler's political journey as a lifelong Republican has traveled only as far as non-affiliation, and that step apparently only took place as he began planning to run for office in Multnomah County. Awfully convenient.

Again, I would encourage anyone with an interest to connect with my campaign so that we can plug you into a house party or other venue where we can meet and discuss all of these issues. I want to take this opportunity to answer a few of the specific questions which were asked above:

"Does Wheeler oppose union members participating in the political process?" NO. "Does Wheeler want to cap government spending for the services he rightly points out are important to our community?" NO. "Does Wheeler channel the ideology of Grover Norquist?" NO.

"not one word of explanation on Mr. Wheeler's web site for the 180 degree change in worldview." My worldview has not changed. Like most Oregonians, I support the candidate, not the party. My decision to be independent reflects my desire to elect pragmatic problem solvers - people with the knowledge, experience and passion for the issues who can craft workable solutions.

Does Ted Wheeler support anti-government, anti-environmental, or anti-gay efforts? No. Nor have I been "silent" on these issues. As for being anti-government, while earning my Master of Public Policy degree a the John F. Kennedy School of Government I wrote a book titled "Government That Works: Innovation in State and Local Government." It was well enough received that I was invited to teach government courses at Northeastern University in Boston. I taught a course in State and Local Government (Michael Dukakis was invited to teach the other section of the same course). My masters project at the KSG was to do the research for what became a nationally televised forum on health care reform. Upon returning to Oregon, I became involved in local government issues. The governor appointed me a Commissioner on the Oregon Commission on Voluntary Action and Service, Metro President David Bragdon appointed me to the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) and Mayor Tom Potter appointed me to work with him and the City Council to craft the city's last $2+ billion budget.

I am not anti-environment, either - I was an active co-founder of the Heron Pointe Wetlands Rehabilitation Project on the Willamette River. It is an exellent example of how citizens and government can work together to protect a critical wetlands habitat. I was the founder of the Walk for the Wildwood Trail in Forest Park which still serves as the largest fundraiser for the preservation and maintenance of Forest Park. I am on the Friends of Forest Park Advisory Committee. I am actively working on the Pacific Greenway Project. I have a public record (on MPAC) of supporting thoughtful land use planning.

I am definitely, unequivocally not anti-gay. Aside from having friends and associates (and now supporters) who happen to be gay, I have a record of making a difference. As someone who has a lifelong affiliation with the Scouts, I have worked to change the national organization's policy with regard to gay people. Liz Kaufman, who is guiding my campaign, has worked against every one of the 40 anti-gay measures in Oregon during the last 18 years.

Finally, with regard to why I didn't "walk away" from the foundation - its not just another "organization" - its my family. Families do not always agree. (If yours does, you are unusually fortunate.)

Again, thanks for the interest and the questions. I truly appreciate it. Ted.

Clearly if Ted Wheeler were really "anti-gay, anti-labor and anti-government," Liz Kaufman would not be working for him. And by the way his book on state and local government has some interesting stories about innovative government programs around the country. The question is whether "fierce fighter for progressive values" should be a prerequisite for the leadership of Multnomah County (in addition to credentials for being a competent executive) and, if so, how fierce does fierce have to be? Maybe I'm spoiled by Bev Stein (and for that matter by what Diane Linn looked like on paper, and still is in ideology whatever you think of her performance, four years ago). Wheeler has a lifelong affiliation with the anti-gay Boy Scouts; I trust him when he says he's trying to change their policies, but his lifelong effort has not succeeded, and a lot of progressive people and organizations (including, not incidentally, Multnomah County) who used to be involved in the Boy Scouts have decided to disaffiliate with them until they stop discriminating. Wheeler hasn't made that tough choice. Wheeler was a Republican until 2001; there still are progressive Republicans, but most of them had left the Party by 2001. (I have to say here that I cut some slack to Repubilcans in rural areas who want to run for office -- they sort of have no choice; Wheeler did.) Wheeler kept his role with a family foundation which gave to Sizemore; that doesn't mean he supports Sizemore, but he wasn't willing to make the tough choice of saying "Dad, if you're doing that, I'm getting off the board." Also, I can't help noting, since I happen to have the C&Es, that in 2000, no Ted Wheeler is listed as contributing money to oppose Sizemore's anti-government measures, Mabon's anti-gay measure, or Measure 7, the anti-land use measure. The state was in danger of being burned to the ground in several different ways; as a man with money he could have helped; he didn't. That doesn't make him a bad guy; most liberal rich people didn't give to those campaigns; but activists did. As Mr. Calhoun says, Mr. Wheeler just doesn't seem to have been a political activist until quite recently. He did the kind of things that nice rich people who aren't political do -- he gave to nonpolitical charities. I said before that his longtime Republicanism raised the possibility that his politics are not too different from his dad's; that's probably not quite fair; it seems more that he didn't have politics. But the County Chair will have to make lots of tough political choices, so I'd like to see someone there with more political background. Now, by the way, some of the same things could be said of John Edwards, largely apolitical until he ran for U.S. Senate ... and I now would be happy to see Edwards as President ... but if I'd been in North Carolina in 1998 I would have started out a bit suspicious of Edwards too, until he'd proved himself. And Edwards started out by using his money to self-finance a partisan campaign to take out a Republican Senator, which is a fine way to start out.

I think we're lucky to get a fresh face like Ted Wheeler involved in the race for County Commissioner - not somebody who has spent most of his career at the public trough, looking for a nice sinecure.

As for family foundations, give me a break!

Ted, your big mistake is to debate with some of these guys. Even though your arguments are compelling, they think enough space and time wins the day.

I am curious if Becky Miller who posted earlier in this thread defending Ted Wheeler is the same Becky Miller who worked side by side with Bill Sizemore as his second in command. If so, she would seem to have a vested interest in downplaying one's indefensible associations, wouldn't she?

As for the tone and content of Roman's recent post, I think it speaks volumes to the type of political agenda that Mr. Wheeler will find gravitating towards his campaign--anti-worker and oblivious to the plights of the working class families in this County.

Roman states that he is excited about Mr. Wheeler's campaign because Ted is "not somebody who has spent most of his career at the public trough"

I'm not sure who Roman is trying to degrade here--the hard working families of this County who qualify for critical health care programs and neccessary quality of life services, or the thousands of dedicated public sector workers who show up everyday to provide for the safety and well-being of the citizens of Multnomah County.

Either way, I think Roman's comments provide a revealing example of the anti-government/anti-worker agenda that will be attracted to Mr. Wheeler's efforts in the coming months.