With all due respect to the previous post - it is very much about money.

Grab your old O'Jay's vinyl album and play the song, "For the Love of Money" as a reminder of its import in Oregon politics. Let's see if I can remember one particular part of the song....oh yes, it goes like this: "Money, money, money, money, Money, MONEY!; Money, money, money money, money, money, MONEY! Some people, got to have it, hey hey, some people really need it (The Dems) hey hey." ....for a small piece of paper, it carries a lot of weight.....for that mean, mean, mean, mean green." Sorry, got carried away.

True, doorknocking and volunteers are critical, however empirical data supports the conclusion that money is a significant factor in state races. It may not be a sufficient condition, but it is a necessary condition for victory in November.

Minnis' big bucks means that Dems in House races throughout Oregon need our help.

By all means, volunteer in the most important races and get out there! Additionally, dig into that piggy bank and make contributions to the most important races in the state.

"Talking bout' cash, money. Talking bout' cash money, dollar bills y'all...... Give me a nickel, brother can you spare a dime?"

SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!

Hey Gresham Voter; A vote for Karen Minnis is a vote to promote a non-existent corporate tax base to be replaced by an exploding personal income tax, and sales tax that the smug Karen may later help her cronies use as a "Tax and Spender" campaign at election time.

    By spending the $350,000.00 on swaying 1500 voters to get one House Representative Seat she is telling the state, and all of her constituents that her representation has nothing to do with them until the last months before the election. The media blitz to tell a tale of half truths that cannot be rebutted until the election is over and the deed is done.

    Welcome to Republican Politics that insists that smaller government is their cornerstone, all the while government cost explodes, service diminish, and our government is sold to the highest corporate donors.

    So when you send your child to a Reynolds School District school like say Hartley Elementary, remember they will be supervised, but not really educated. They'll do what work is needed to pass a math and reading test, and that's about it. Ask yourself why they never send home homework?? The vote for this Ideologue will cost you, but their corporate sponsor will make out very well in this trade off.

    What is your tax dollar meant for Republican? Karen intends to privatize government services, or deprive them for the sake of a private corporation in the name of smaller government that inevitablely cost us many times more than if we had representation that wanted only to govern well. A Democrat.

A. Good Governance = A Democrat. B. Bankrupt-Inept Governance = A Republican.

    Our resent history of Republican government by a party whom does not believe in government has been a complete failure, can anyone argue otherwise,that is sober!

Happy Thoughts;

Dan Grady

As I pointed out in a thread below, it looks like the R's are going to target Jeff Merkley for leading the effort to topple Minnis. Jeff passed through most of his money to FuturePAC and other Dem's, not knowing the R's had their candidate lying in wait to file on March 7, and seeded with $20,000 of Minnis-Scott money. That doesn't look like the nominal, token opponent Jeff has rolled over before.

As Jenni noted in another post, every Multnomah County house district east of I-205 is vulnerable to a Republican win, including Merkley's.

Look for a good chunk of that Minnis money to flow into the District 47 race to unseat or at least rattle the House Democratic Leader.

• Wes

Wayne,

Seriously? Who do you think you are? Targetting Merkley, why? With whom? The speaker's district has a democratic registration edge, and should be winnable or at least move Minnis away from her hard right agenda. That is the pupose of running at her.

Merkley, though he is a partisan as well, is also in a seat that he very well represents. I do wonder if the same can be said for Karen Minnis.

So, really, try to spread that elsewhere...

Jon:

Thanks. So, even though Merkley's opponent once represented the OCA (early 1990's?) as an attorney, do you think Merkley's close association with BRO will hurt him in a district that actually passed M36?

Also, that Republican video that folks are talking about certainly morphs Merkley into a BRO-Dianne Linn-MultCo conspirator.

Well, at least someone realizes that Merkley is in fact a target this time. The fact that 47 and 49 are literally next to each other with the Speaker in one and House Democratic Leader in the other, makes for an interesting battlezone. I can see these two campaigns getting intertwined early and often as FuturePAC and Majority 2006 hurl their caucus resources at each other.

And Jenni is spot on about Mult Co east of I-205. Just look at election results in 47, 48, 49 and 50 on tax issues and Measures 36 and 37. That part of Mult Co is not as progressive as the Democratic registration edge would lead one to believe.

• Wes

A little off topic but replying to the first few posts about volunteering. I went to rob brady's website and said I would like to help but it has been a week now and I have not been contacted. Anybody know another way to get ahold of him so I can help out?

Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Apr 11, 2006 7:41:06 PM

Tell me Jenni, is this a prevailing attitude that their pride is extended to their better developed property, and more affluent voter at the tangible expense of Gresham & Portland Police Bureau attentions? Landlords whom are free to behave like the worst slum lords in the Rockwood neighborhoods, with abandon cars on the streets with addicts, and drunks living in them at the consent of the Landlords & Police.

Teens that are free to terrorize these neighborhoods of Sect 8 housing, immigrant populations that seem oblivious to a police presence until a shooting happens. The Gresham Police Department working on a shoe string the way the Chief and her commanders tell it, with as little as 8 police officers on patrol on a weekend?? To keep property taxes low, and services sparse.

I was told by the day commander when we had the misfortune of being in the Hartley Elementary neighborhood that we had to be crazy to move into that neighborhood with children. We live next to a city park, three blocks from the school, and within walking distance of shopping.

I will participate in a vigorous grassroots effort to sway the vote; I will not participate in the battle for campaign money. I believe the donations needed to run that kind of campaign is so divisive, that it will work against the candidate this coming election.

Mayor Potter is a good example of a candidate elected by its constituents. I would like to project this form of grass roots campaigning into this kind of Representative Race.

Happy Thoughts;

Dan Grady

As one of the chief petitioner of Initiative Petition #8 (Consititutional Amendment to allow campaign finance limitations), I must note that the answer to this question of Karen Minnis and her big buck corporate sponsors is effective limitations on campaign contributions in candidate elections. Go back to the original writers piece and look at the corporate names backing Karen. It is time get to corporations out of our election process. It is time for each one of you who has posted comment here to activitly support the two campaign finance reform initiatives being circulated, #8 and #37. How do you do this? Gather some signatures and/or contribute to the effort. Go to www.fairelections.net to learn more and to help.

Measure 8 is a constitutional amendment to allow limitations on campaign contributions. When Oregon had limitations a decade ago, voters in Lake Oswego got rid of Bob Tierman (R) and replaced him with Richard Devlin (D) because Tierman couldn't get the big corporate donations. For those of you who were not in Oregon then, Tierman was a very conservate, corporate Republican who no one could beat as long as money flowed freely. Hoever, following that election the Oregon Supreme Court threw the limitations out and we went backward again. So this constitutional amendment is required to get around that Oregon Supreme Court decision.

The other initiative, #37, is a stature which bans all corporate contributions and limits how much individuals can give. Unlike federal level limitations, the limitations in #37 are not filled with holes and money will not go around the limitations. This is a very detailed and effective measure.

Until we can control money in the political process, we can expect to continue to fight these same fights over and over again. And in most cases, losing them.

Support effective limits. Support Initiative Petition 8 and 37. Endorsed by Clackamas County Democrats, Alliance for Democracy, Sierra Club, Osprig and others.

A couple things: As I recall, Tiernan took on Devlin again--for state sen. in 2002. No limits, but the active Oregon Bus Project. And as I recall, Devlin won that one by a bit under 1400 votes.

With regard to this: And Jenni is spot on about Mult Co east of I-205. Just look at election results in 47, 48, 49 and 50 on tax issues and Measures 36 and 37. That part of Mult Co is not as progressive as the Democratic registration edge would lead one to believe.

Don't know about up there, but down here in the valley there will be issues many consider more pressing than generalized taxes, 36, 37. I'm talking about incumbents talking one way and voting another. I'm talking about how things get paid for. Progressive is just another label, and labels don't solve anything.

"Taxes are bad and we need spending discipline" doesn't explain how we can get more state troopers, fund DD services (there was a forum on that here locally with legislators promising support to an audience of 400 people--but where do they get the money to keep promises made when Fairview closed, not to mention the Staley settlement?), even discuss funding Jessica's law just with soundbites. And when was the last time you went to any gathering of hundreds of people with legislators in the front of the room?

I hope there are no incumbents out there who believe details can't be discussed in an election year--they couldn't be discussed during the session either.

I sense a real hunger for open debate and solutions. Not to mention that attacks by the "do nothing in public but extend the session all summer" crowd may fall on deaf ears as just more politicians playing political games. These ordinary folks I know are not ideologues, they are people who want to know what legislators on the public payroll are doing with their time. As in "gee, if I pulled something like that at work...".