It's a common complaint of legislators: any criticism of them is brazen, uncalled for, not nice, etc. But what was really brazen is how Minnis stuck it to Oregonians last session. She's going down.

Hey Chucky-A,

You saying people shouldn't beat people up personally in politics is kind of like Wayne Scott saying Karen Minnis should lose a little weight. POT...KETTLE...ring a bell?

Let’s see who has twice been sued for slander? Oh yeah, Chuck Adams.

Who has ran the most vicious personal attack adds in the state? Oh yeah, Chuck Adams.

Who has a losing record over the last two elections cycles? Oh yeah, Chuck Adams.

Your BS isn't working anymore you goofball...try a new line next time like, "Well I'm glad to see that Democrats have finally sunk to our level."

At least that would have some truth behind it!

I'm very proud to say strong women do NOT frighten me.

Except this one.

It's all irrelevant unless a strong challenger steps up. When is that going to happen?

I think Minnis has a point. Most of the House Republican caucus is just as bad as she is. Of course, as fearless leader, she should expect to be a lightening rod.

Chuck Adams is clearly laying the groundwork for Minnis's campaign: Don't let outsiders' heavy-handed tactics defeat OUR cherished legislator, blah, blah, blah.

Hey Tom,

You're right that Chuck is laying that framework. But then again that is exactly what portland, left-wingers are doing. How do you think the "Anyone but Minnis Campaign" plays to the people who live in Gresham?

You have to make the Minnis election about the Democrats vision of the future as much as getting rid of Minnis!

Karen M. is right!

I take her down right mean agenda to gut the public education of our children very personally. Shame on Karen Minis for what she has done to the future of Oregon.

Where can I contribute to her defeat?

Pedro

"Their focus is to take the House," Minnis told The Oregonian. "It's going to be a tough case for them to make. However, we never take it for granted. We work hard; we make our case. If voters want to do something different, that's their prerogative."

If Karen Minnis doesn't think of herself as the Red Queen, then why does she refer to herself in the third person?

Uh, sjp, that quote from Minnis is in the second person, not third. Third person is how people like Rickey Henderson (baseball player) and Bob Dole speak.

Despite Rep. Minnis dismissive remark about Dems' need to demonize her, when it is her own actions that condemn her.

The justification she cited for refusing bring the civil unions bill to the floor was the upset it would cause her constituency. You can understand how it would upset them to have to openly deny civil rights to a class of people they need to demonize.

What would you say of someone giving moral cover for such hypocrisy?

If the money is there, a series of cable TV ads about the hard-hearted speaker beating up on the poor, old, and defenseless; subverting democracy with dictatorial decrees; and condemning Oregon's children to the deadend of mediocre education ought to do the job. It needs to be sprinkled liberally with "she's out of touch" criticism from in-district folk.

It'll be like a pail of water on a wicked witch.

Don't be fooled by the rocks that I got... I'm still Jenni from the block. I used to have little political sense but now i have a lot, 'cause I'm DFA from the block.

The day DFA and the Bus Project make a difference is the day that Ds finally gain the drivers' seat. Which is to say no time soon. Want proof? Just look at the Senate Dems. Feel free to push your quixotic quest, but Minnis won't be beat. The people that actually pay attention to campaign messages will vote for her. We'll have a better chance with Burley, Dalto, Brown or Farr.

I'm still not convinced, however, that sending PDX progressives to districts around the state has any effect other than to distribute materials for free. It's easy for the Bus Project to take credit for well run D campaigns in districts where the Rs couldn't win, their candidates sucked, or they dropped the ball.

Feel free to push your quixotic quest, but Minnis won't be beat. The people that actually pay attention to campaign messages will vote for her. We'll have a better chance with Burley, Dalto, Brown or Farr.

I'm still not convinced, however, that sending PDX progressives to districts around the state has any effect other than to distribute materials for free. It's easy for the Bus Project to take credit for well run D campaigns in districts where the Rs couldn't win, their candidates sucked, or they dropped the ball.

In 2002, the Oregon Bus Project came very close to electing Betty Komp to a Republican state rep. district--she was one of their 14 candidates that year. She lost by 92 votes. In 2004, she won by 1750 votes. Minnis won in 2004 by 1524 votes.

By all means there should be emphasis on every district where a Democrat lost a close recent election. But for a Republican Speaker to win by fewer votes than a freshman Democrat in a rural district sounds to me like the description of a vulnerable Speaker.

Personal nature? Minnis is the one taking this personal. It's not a personal attack. If we want to get personal, let's talk about her inability to be an effective speaker because she needs to focus her time on being a better grandmother and that her colleagues oticed a decline in her ability once she became a grandma during session. This attack is professional and has nothing to do about whether she is a nice person, good parent, or anything else personal.

I am not involved in this effort at all but wonder about its effectiveness. Why are we spending so much time working against someone without a candidate in the race against her? That seems goofy as does gunning so hard this far in advance. Voters have short attention spans, people, and for goodness' sake you expect Wood Villagians to remember this stuff in 14 MONTHS! That's 14 overdue trailer payments and countless episodes of Jerry Springer. Seriously, folks, voters everywhere have bigger things in their lives to remember. Unless you are back next October and have a good candidate, why waste your time?

Minnis? Not allowing a vote?

Over at the Draft Kitzbhaber thread someone asked, "Why haven't our D's thrown it (CIMCAM) off a bridge?"

They are too busy fighting o keep it.

The Democratic Senate killed a CIMCAM repeal bill passed in the Republican House.

Every house Democrat voted to keep CIMCAM and Senate Democrats would not even allow a vote.

"Would not even allow a vote"

Sound familiar?

I'm chiming in to second the suggestion that Rob Brading should have everyone's support, if he decides to get into the race. He did a great job last time. And this time around, he would have lots of things to remind Gresham voters about, with respect to Minnis's dismal leadership.

Don't be fooled by the rocks that I got... I'm still Jenni from the block. I used to have little political sense but now i have a lot, 'cause I'm DFA from the block.

Comments like the one snipped above are a dismal and unfortunate reminder of just how petty some of the folks on "our team" can be. Here we have Jenni Simonis, a 20-something year old mom who lives in Minnis' district -- Jenni is a woman who has done nothing but volunteer her time to help make a difference in this state, and all you can think to do is take needless pot-shots because she has managed to help raise the profile of a race that she cares about.

She deserves kudos for her work not half-assed invective from a person who lacks the courage to put their real name to their comments.

As for the comments about DFA and the Bus ... DFO sent more than 100 people to Seattle for the Peace March last week and have helped to give the Democratic Party in Oregon a badly needed spinal infusion. By my count, the Bus' network has registered close to 1000 voters this year; trained several dozen emerging political leaders last summer, and are already hard at work softening up targeted districts.

The Democratic Senate killed a CIMCAM repeal bill passed in the Republican House.

Sound familiar?

The difference is that the Senate Dems simply killed a bill in committee that had no chance of passing their body whereas Minnis shredded house rules to get the parliamentary outcomes that she wanted.

To whit:

1. Minnis broke 150 years of tradition to change rules so that changes to house rules would happen by a simple majority rather than a 2/3rds majority.

2. Minnis broke 150 years of tradition to make the clerk, the person who interprets the rules, a partisan office.

3. Minnis broke 150 years of tradition which allowed any house member to make a motion to bring a bill bottled up in committee to a floor vote.

4. Minnis broke up the joint ways and means committee -- which made it possible for all budget negotiations to take place in an open public forum - effectively ending public debate on the budget.

5. Minnis implemented rolling recesses to enforce discipline among members of her caucus.

The difference between what you are complaining about in the Senate, and what Queen Karen did is this: Karen Minnis abused her authority to gain an absolute veto power over the legislative process of this state and to artificially create a discpline to her will that simply did not exist in her caucus. If she wants veto power, she should run for governor, not subvert Oregon's legislative process for her own personal agenda.

"The difference is that the Senate Dems simply killed a bill"

Who the heck cares about the difference.

That is so inside baseball it's fricking meaningless.

We still have CIMCAM because Democrats have killed every effort to get rid of it.

Apparently they enjoy politicizing the education of our children.

Are any of you proud of that.

So, school funding doesn't matter, nothing else matters, if CIM/ CAM had been eliminated all school problems would be solved?

Anyone saying that should specify which tests schools should use to comply with NCLB. Or are you saying that there is no connection at all between CIM tests and NCLB tests in this state?

Is NCLB perfect, or should it be modified?

Sounds like a political slogan. Go find yourself a candidate who runs on "all school problems will be solved if CIM/CAM is eliminated", and see if that person gets elected. Most people I know think school problems are more complicated than that (esp. in areas where not all students are well nourished, buildings are overcrowded, text books are old, and other such concerns).

LT, You don't know what you are talking about.

If Democrats want to continue supporting failed education programs such as CIMCAM then they will never get the public support we all want.

CIMCAM is far worse than whatever narrow misunderstanding you have.

The state assessments are unreliable and have no correlation to any national tests, the Certificates of Initial Mastery are useless, the process to get them does more harm than good, the diverted focus has caused a slump in our perpetually mediocre SAT scores, and the failed reform wastes time effort and resources.

Countless parents and students have witnessed this debacle for years now. It isn't a partisan thing with them.

The only thing that makes it partisan is Democrats refusing to act on a known failure which is wasting education dollars.

The bill which passed the house would have replaced the state assessment with a simpler, independent, reliable and less costly system. Full compliance with NCLB would have been maintained. In fact schools would have had more time and money to bring about genuine progress without the CIM beast in the classrooms.

Will "all school problems will be solved if CIM/CAM is eliminated"?

Not hardly, but it would be a great start and send a strong message.

School problems are more complicated than they need to be. Take out much of the phoney BS and focus on the fundementals (till we do them well) and it's things would be less more manageable. (esp. in areas where not all students are well nourished, buildings are overcrowded, text books are old, and other such concerns).

I can't figure out what other motives Democrats have and what they gain by defending and keeping this BS school reform.

They don't seem to be concered that the public is learning who is keeping this nonsense around.

Here goes another screwed up school year.

The bill which passed the house would have replaced the state assessment with a simpler, independent, reliable and less costly system.

And what was that bill number?

The bill which passed the house would have replaced the state assessment with a simpler, independent, reliable and less costly system.

And what was that bill number?

I hope no one is surprised by Minnis’s response. The “Oh they’re picking on me” response is a standard in campaigning. It is an effective way to turn your opponent’s attacks against themselves. It redirects the focus of the argument away from matters of policy, where Minnis is vulnerable, and calls her attacker’s integrity into question.

We need to understand most people do not vote based on policy. People vote for candidates that they can relate to, at some level. This is a perfect example, no one likes to get picked on, people can relate to that. This dynamic at play is why some districts elect candidates who do not effectively represent their interests.

Alan Brown used this strategy in his last campaign. What I found interesting was that Brown came out of the gate throwing punches and eventually his opponent swung back. He played the “She’s picking on me” card and effectively redirected the debate to the way his opponent ran her campaign.

He won by something like 400 votes, a couple percent. He is a Republican that continues to represent a county with a Democratic registration edge of 8%.

That is why we must be very cognizant that our attacks on Minnis are always matters of policy and never entertain the cries from Minnis about it being personal. She knows as well as you or I, nothing about campaigning is personal, it is all business.

Just to provide the bill number.

The CIM repeal bill, HB 3162, passed the house with every Democrat voting against it and to keep CIMCAM. It was killed in Senate, by Democrats wanting to keep CIMCAM.

It should be clear enough that Democrats are the party of CIMCAM.

Be proud, face it, explain it, brag about it, don't spin it.

HB 3162 has a very interesting history, including ammendments and a minority report. I was amazed--I thought Minnis had clamped down on minority reports by May when the bill was debated. There was a majority report and a minority report and so both were voted on before the bill was voted on. It was a committee bill, not one sponsored by a member.

The bill which passed the house would have replaced the state assessment with a simpler, independent, reliable and less costly system. Full compliance with NCLB would have been maintained progress without the CIM beast in the classrooms.

Troll was right in that there was language which said "Prior to July 1, 2006, the Department of Education shall report to the legislative interim committees on education on the progress of the department in contracting with an independent educational assessment organization to develop and implement a statewide assessment system as required by ORS 329.485, as amended by section 11 of this 2005 Act. + } ' ."
but that looked to me to be in ammendments, not in the bill as introduced. And how do we know that this language would have provided a simpler more reliable system--because a poster on a blog said so? Why weren't those like Troll trying to get publicity for this bill during the session? Did they welcome open public debate? Were there just too many other competing issues?

Whether that ammendment language would have qualified as full compliance with NCLB (or for that matter if NCLB is good for classrooms) is beyond the scope of this topic and the understanding of most who are not experts.

Someone who has lots of time can look at the legislative website and can spin all kinds of theories about all sorts of bills.

The bill was sent to Senate rules, and it was in committe upon adjournment. If someone wants to say that all Republicans opposed any bill that was in House committee upon adjournment and all Democrats opposed any bill that was in Senate committee upon adjournment, that is one thing. But to use that one bill to broad brush all Democrats is to say no Republican wanted the S. Coast airport to be upgraded because they stood behind their Majority Leader and Speaker trying to "teach a lesson" to Rep. Roblan. Many voters and many legislators don't follow the party line at all times (note the comment on the Environmental Scorecard topic by someone who would prefer one courageous vote against one's party to a high score on a lobby group scorecard)

Or maybe Troll is trying to distract us because Minnis is about as popular in Oregon as DeLay is in DC at the moment?

I'm not trying to do anything but clarify this abhorrent CIMCAM position by Democrats.

And yes full NCLB was assured.

"Why weren't those like Troll trying to get publicity for this bill during the session?"

They were.

"Did they welcome open public debate?"

Of course. The public wants CIMCAM gone. Public testimony, nonpartisan and a full cross section of interests, was overwhelmingly in favor of the bill. The ODE, it's usual allies and Democrat legislators ganged up to save keep CIMCAM.

"Were there just too many other competing issues?"

What is it that competes with a failed and wasteful education program?

Most people couldn't care less who gets rid of it but the reality is that CIMCAM is now a party issue with Democrats supporting it.

Why?

In the mean time, what's wrong with making it clear to the public who is sustaining our failed school reform?

I get the feeling Democrats want to keep it while keeping it quiet that they do. Why? If they think it is worth keeping why hide from that position?

As a side note, the hell with Minnis. I want a sound school system.

Don't you?

I hope no one is surprised by Minnis’s response. The “Oh they’re picking on me” response is a standard in campaigning. It is an effective way to turn your opponent’s attacks against themselves. It redirects the focus of the argument away from matters of policy, where Minnis is vulnerable, and calls her attacker’s integrity into question.

What I find ironic is that no one in the Democratic establishment has yet to figure out a way to convey the fact that Jenni Simonis, a 20-something year old mom from Gresham, is the person throwing some of the most potent haymakers at Karen Minnis. Isn't there some smart consultant out there who can do some spinning about the fact that the most powerful republican in Oregon is whining about getting the crap beaten out of her by a house mom who is sick of seeing her family wrecked by Minnis' crappy policies and bad behaviour in the legislature?

Jenni said,

"She doesn't care about her constituents, and she doesn't care about Oregon."

Well aren't you the little judge.

Why don't you prod your peers into answering why Democrat legislators uniformly protect CIMCAM.

They refuse to answer. Preferring to hide and avoid answering.

Are you not a little bit curious yourself?

Or do YOU "care" about Oregon?

This is a topic about Minnis, yet while Troll says "the public" agrees with him on HB 3162, insulting remarks are made about Jenni "She doesn't care about her constituents, and she doesn't care about Oregon." Well aren't you the little judge. Are snippy remarks the key to political success? Is there no individual thought among "the public"?

If Rob Kremer's views are so popular, why didn't he win election as St. Supt.? Could the tone of the campaign have been a factor? I recall more attack than "vote Kremer to get rid of CIM/CAM".

Truth be told, many members of "the public" never read blogs, don't like a stranger telling them what they believe, belong to no organized groups, and don't pay attention to politics more than a month or so before an election. And in Minnis's district about 8000 refuse to register with a major party. Minnis won last time by something like 1524 votes--were all of those votes straight party? Talk all you want about "the Democrats" or "the Republicans", those of us who are or ever were registered NAV will vote on the candidates and issues as WE see them, not as we are told to see them.

"insulting remarks are made about Jenni" What? That was a quote of Jenni insulting Minnis.

Having a hard time being positive said, "will vote on the candidates and issues as WE see them, not as we are told to see them." Good for you. Who suggested otherwise?

You might want to improve your vision on who supports failed progams though. So you can see who to vote for.

The blue denial around here is something. CIMCAM is a wasteful failed program and should be replaced.

I guess all of the smart people here just don't like answering queitons.

I find it rather gutless and hypocritical.

Too snippy for you?

Nice excuse.

It's not because it is off toipic that no one will explain the Democrat support for CIMCAM. It's because this is the standard MO for you blue people. You ignore and seek to silence that which you do not want to be public knowledge.

The shameless support of CIMCAM by every Democrat legislator is the perfect model of Oregon Democratic hypocrisy.

Off topic? What a spineless excuse.

More like off your group message, group thinking, and group betrayal of our schools.

I don't know if giving her a hot shot consultant will help matters. It could actually hurt her public perception, which needs to stay in tact if we want her story to resonate with voters. In this case, part of her appeal is that she is the little guy going up against the big bad Minnis.

At best, she should work with the Democratic candidate that runs against Minnis. Possibly a picture or quote on the campaign literature, maybe a direct mailer to all Non-affiliated female voters and Republican females without a Republican male in the household.

She can canvass for the Democratic challenger, time consuming...yes, but effective. Aside from that, letters to the editor, and not just the Oregonian, all the small papers too. And her friends should send some in as well. It sounds like she has already been talking with the press, but this is a potential human interest story.

I remember an article during the session about a citizen lobbyist that was running into road blocks in getting some bill passed. She got an excellent write up that took up something like half a page in the Oregonian. A citizen going up against the big bad legislature parallels a citizen going up against one of the leaders of the big bad legislature.

There is definitely potential here, but we need to wait till a Democrat files. If we don't wait, the best case scenario is we get someone’s attention, convince them Minnis is not effectively representing their interests, but can offer no remedy. And we can't tell them to blindly support whatever Democrat that enters the race, at least not without sacrificing our credibility.

The way to win it is not about Democrat or Republican, it is about better goals bringing about a better Oregon. And how can we say that a candidate to be named later has better goals than Minnis. We can't, so we should wait patiently, do our homework, and strategize.