Portland Considered for Presidential Debate
Four presidential debates are being planned for 2008, and 18 cities, including Portland, are in the running to host one of them. So reported Nick Budnick in Tuesday's Trib:
“This would be, arguably, the largest, single-day international media event in Portland’s history,” said [Mark] Kirchmeier, who now is affiliated with Gary Hansen Strategic Communications....
Kirchmeier hopes that Portland’s near-miss of hosting the 1980 debate will actually help the Portland-Vancouver bid in that Memorial Coliseum, expected to be the actual debate site, already has passed muster once.
The debate itself would have small audience of perhaps only 400 to 800 people, Kirchmeier said, while the reporters would watch from a special viewing area at the Oregon Convention Center. Clark College, meanwhile, could host events both before and after the debate, making for a “debate week.”
The other 17 cities being consided are Tempe, Ariz.; Nashville, Tenn.; Danville, Ky.; Wayne County, Ind.; Hempstead, N.Y.; Bloomington, Ind.; Chicago; Conway, Ark.; Cincinnati; Miami; Oxford, Miss.; Pittsburgh; Winston-Salem, N.C.; Spokane, Wash.; St. Louis; Middletown, Conn.; and New Orleans.
Discuss.
|
June 29, 2007
Posted in in the news 2007. |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Jun 29, '07
I read that we'd have to pay a 1.3 million dollar fee. To whom and why?
Jun 29, '07
I don't see why it matters where the debate is held, or how there's any benefit to Portland. The only thing the rest of the world sees is two candidates inside a building answering softball questions pitched by an fawning Washington press corps anchormodel. Actually, that's the only thing any of us will see if we aren't one of the three or four hundred chosen to watch in person. It doesn't really matter what city the room is in; it could be broadcast from pretty much anywhere.
Jun 29, '07
no major league baseball in Portland, dammit!
oh.. sorry, I heard "softball questions..."
anyway, yeah, really - I can see that it would be cool to have this here, but it's not that important to me. might get a question about national forests being logged and oceans being polluted and spotted owls, and dams being removed on the Snake and Klamath rivers - test their NW geography skills, eat some salmon. but no, not real crucial to have this here.
3:17 p.m.
Jun 29, '07
Do you know the apparatus that comes along with a Presidential debate? Reporters from around the world, political advance people, volunteers from out of state, the federal security apparatus, etc.
They all have to stay somewhere, and they all have to eat. If they don't put at least 1.3mil into the local economy I'd be surprised.
Jun 29, '07
If they don't put at least 1.3mil into the local economy I'd be surprised.
Sounds like trickle down economics to me. All taxpayers foot the bill so that Hilton and Ruth's Chris can profit more? How many press people are gonna be shopping at the co-op? Just asking.
3:32 p.m.
Jun 29, '07
East Bank Thom makes the point more succinctly than I think I've ever seen before.
All taxpayers foot the bill so that Hilton and Ruth's Chris can profit more?
I'm often annoyed when I see a pitch for a tax break or subsidy that essentially trades $X million in public budget money for $X million in private economic impact.
Sorry, but that's a loser for the taxpayers on the financial side. Now, it's true that often the public benefit is something intangible, so we shouldn't exclusively rely on the numbers - but trading budget money for an equivalent amount of private economic development is an expenditure, not a break-even.
3:41 p.m.
Jun 29, '07
I didn't say it would be equivalent. And I wonder who you think runs Ruth's Chris and the Hilton--the government? My guess is they're taxpayers, as are the people who take the tips when they clean the rooms and wipe the tables--tips that otherwise would not be there. The MLK Burgerville suddenly gets busier for a week, so they order an extra-sized shipment of Oregon Country Beef. The TV vans sitting on idle all day need gasoline. The Plaid Pantries will see bigger runs on smokes, coffee and chewing gum. And let's not forget that every newcomer to Portland gets the opportunity to see the city where they might not have otherwise before--and may have the seed planted that results in a new arrival, a new business or just a return trip with the family.
Let's not confuse a narrowly targeted tax incentive for one company or industry, with an across-the-board opportunity for economic enhancement.
4:11 p.m.
Jun 29, '07
I can see some reasons for not wanting this--none of them particularly strong--but the price tag? A million for a city isn't going to break the bank. We have expenses all the time that cost the city money; the question is whether participating in the democratic process is worth the money. 1.3 mil? Yeah, seems fine.
Jun 29, '07
To add to what Torrid said, we would have the two presidental candidates in town and I am sure that they would be hosting thier own events around the debate.
7:45 p.m.
Jun 29, '07
I'm unclear why the debate would only have 400 to 800 in-person spectators... but it would be held at Memorial Coliseum. What's that about?
8:25 p.m.
Jun 29, '07
Kari:
I was wondering the same thing, especially since the press would be watching from another location.
I understand that there would need to be room for all the photographers, but there's still a lot more room.
8:28 p.m.
Jun 29, '07
I'm unclear why the debate would only have 400 to 800 in-person spectators... but it would be held at Memorial Coliseum. What's that about?
Yeah, I wondered about that, too. Why not have it at the Schnitz or something. Or have 7500 people there.
Jun 29, '07
wonder if they want a small crowd in order to make sure it doesnt get to nosiy during the debate but enought people to make it seem like a large crowd on TV. No idea if that could even be close to the reason but the only thing I was able to think of right now.
9:40 p.m.
Jun 29, '07
17yearold....
Yea, that's the only possible reason I could come up with as well.
However, when handled correctly, you can have a really big crowd and still keep it in control. I went to a big roundtable discussion in Houston in the late 90s where President Clinton was speaking. There were a lot of people there, and it was televised. They did a real good job of keeping things under control and quiet while we were "on the air."
The only other thing I could think of was security.
10:23 p.m.
Jun 29, '07
easy to control in- and egress, perhaps. It's in a relatively isolated part of the city, generally speaking.
Jun 30, '07
I wonder who you think runs Ruth's Chris and the Hilton--the government? My guess is they're taxpayers, as are the people who take the tips
This is the type of Reaganomics i referenced before. Break down the 1.3 million dollar "investment" in order to bring the debate here. Why does the moneyed class always seem to profit more? Perhaps i could be convinced that the trickle down theory works, but back to my original question... Who get the million buck fee and why? Couldn't the same 1000 extra consumers be attracted to the City for less cash?
P.S. I don't know who runs Ruth's Chris. I just know that i would go there when i worked in the corporate world and wanted to spend other people's money.
8:28 p.m.
Jul 1, '07
The economic aspect reminds me of a discussion I had with someone who worked for PDC. She told me it was part of her job to court national retail chains to locate their stores here - not in a targeted manner, but as a value in itself.
My question to her was this: "Huh?"
She told me the theory was that it would create a handful of local retail jobs.
Never mind the real money flowing from Portland wallets to Texas/Delaware/Dubai, I guess.
Seriously - we pay tax dollars to pursue that kind of strategy??
12:28 p.m.
Jul 2, '07
The title of this article should be changed. We wouldn't be paying 1.3 million for a debate. I don't know what you call those over hyped free media appearances Bush and Kerry took part in '04, but they certainly weren't debates.
Jul 2, '07