Merkley and Novick Interviewed in Street Roots
Tomorrow's edition of local Portland newspaper Street Roots features an interview with Democratic US Senate candidates Jeff Merkley and Steve Novick. The paper, a local non-profit newspaper that deals with homelessness and poverty issues, partnered with organizations such as Oregon Action, Jobs with Justice, the ACLU of Oregon, the Rural Organizing Project and Affordable Housing Now for the interview. The various groups ask the candidates questions on issues such as homelessness, affordable housing, civil liberties, labor, immigrant rights, and police accountability:
Oregon Action: What will you do to eliminate police violence against people of color and low-income communities?Jeff Merkley:
The key to reducing and eliminating excessive force by police officers is prevention. In most cases, police violence can be significantly reduced through proper training and oversight from superiors. Studies show that officers who are trained to confront their own racial biases make better decisions in threatening situations. Early intervention among officers who are prone to excessive force will drastically reduce instances of police violence.Police departments must make sure that all of their front-line officers are properly trained to recognize symptoms of mental illness the same way they are trained to recognize intoxication and other threatening conditions.
In addition, local communities have a role to play in preventing violence. Oversight by community boards can prevent departments or superiors from shielding offending officers from scrutiny.
Steve Novick:
First, we have to protect and enhance community policing and police accountability. Bush has repeatedly tried to slash community policing programs — which, when managed properly, can help break down barriers between law enforcement and people of color and low-income communities. State and local police programs for community and diversity sensitivity training have been repeatedly slashed in recent years, creating a higher risk for violence during police interactions. I would use a seat in the U.S. Senate to work for federal funding to support these important efforts.In addition, the role of the U.S. Department of Justice (where I served for almost a decade) can make an important difference. The federal government should not stray from strict enforcement of civil rights statutes, including Section 1983, to address police brutality. The Bush administration’s hamstringing of the civil rights division at the Department of Justice is an outrage. Executive appointments to the Justice Department, and the rest of the executive branch, should demonstrate a genuine commitment to enforce our civil rights law or they do not deserve confirmation.
Another question deals with affordable housing:
Affordable Housing Now!: The federal government primary housing subsidy program is homeowner tax deductions, which is more than four times the total HUD budget. Three decades ago, the HUD budget was twice the size of the homeownership tax deductions. Considering that most new jobs created in Oregon pay nowhere near the level necessary to purchase a home, what will you do to redirect housing resources to those left out of the opportunity of homeownership?Jeff Merkley:
Before I joined the Oregon Legislature, I worked as an advocate for affordable housing. I was executive director of Portland Habitat for Humanity, and later developed affordable housing at Human Solutions.I am a huge advocate for home ownership because it is one of the best ways to move people out of poverty and into the middle class. In addition to a college education or job training, and starting a business, owning a home creates financial opportunities for individuals that they wouldn’t have otherwise.
I support direct down-payment grants to increase home ownership for low-income families. Consider for a moment that President Bush has asked Congress for an additional $200 billion to fund the war in Iraq. For just a quarter of the price tag, the U.S. could provide 10 million direct down-payment grants of $5,000. That would help 10 million families in this country purchase homes, stabilize their families, and give them a stake in the American dream.
I have helped encourage home ownership in Oregon by starting Project Downpayment in 1994, and I started the first Individual Development Accounts in the state in 1996. Those IDAs help low-income families save to buy a house, return to school, or start a business.
I will be a fierce advocate for programs like these that help all Americans get their own piece of the American dream.Steve Novick:
Over the long term we need to get back to an economy that works for everyone and gives working families an opportunity for a better life, and we have to change direction immediately to achieve that. We must make the tax system much more equitable, so that low- and middle-income families can actually save for a home. We must enact national health care, so that medical bills stop being the leading cause of bankruptcy. And we need to crack down on predatory home lenders who have gamed the sub-prime housing market to trap working families into exploitive and unworkable mortgages.In terms of making the tax system more fair, it is important to remember that the current mortgage interest deduction is worth more to richer people. I pledge to protect that deduction for middle-income Americans living in normal homes. But it is worth considering a phase-out (a restoration of a form of the “Pease provision”) for people with million-dollar incomes and multimillion-dollar homes. That would let us dedicate assistance to low and middle-income families that truly need it.
There was a time in the country where, when the economy was doing well, everyone was doing well. We need to fight to get back to that principle today.
To read the other nine questions, and the candidates' responses, you can buy tomorrow's edition of Street Roots in the Portland area.
|
Nov. 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
Nov 29, '07
Steve's supporters may not like me for saying this, but Jeff sounds more specific than Steve in this interview.
An old friend called this morning and we got to talking about various races. I said he should make sure to see the AG candidates in person because they set the standard for the way a primary should be run, the level of specifics of policy details when speaking to an audience which asks about such things, and just because their rhetoric is refreshing after so much partisanship. This is a friend who has worked in the legislature and says some in the legislature are hard working good people, but for others it is all about power (no, not a dig at Merkley). Others in both parties--that was not a partisn remark.
I said with such bright guys as Steve and Jeff, I had expected a more substantial campaign from them, but the AG candidates so far have outshown them.
Just now I happened on this online story
http://159.54.226.83/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071129/UPDATE/71129033
Smith says Oregon vote not an argument against S-CHIP expansion
which is an AP story on a crack by Gordon Smith about Speaker Merkley. It is the sort of thing the nominee is likely to encounter on a regular basis. Here is a quote from the story:
President Bush, who vetoed the S-CHIP bill, referred to the Oregon vote in speeches and in a call to U.S. Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., the only member of the Oregon delegation to vote against the bill. Smith said Thursday he thought Bush misunderstood the Oregon vote. Oregonians were impatient that legislators hadn’t handled the matter themselves, rather than putting it to a statewide vote, Smith said. Smith is running for re-election. One of the Democrats vying to take him on is Oregon House Speaker Jeff Merkley of Portland, who failed to round up the 36 votes necessary to pass a tobacco tax increase outright. Getting a tax increase through the Oregon Legislature requires 60 percent votes, but simple majorities can put a constitutional amendment on the ballot. Russ Kelley, a spokesman for Merkley, said it was Republicans in Salem who refused to compromise and Smith hadn’t helped matters. “You’d think if he really supported it, he would have picked up the phone, called one of his Republican legislator friends and asked them to pass this bill,” Kelley said. “He comes out publicly for things, but when it comes to actually doing the hard work of getting legislation passed, he is nowhere to be found.”
I am impressed by that comeback from Merkley's campaign.
What I am NOT impressed with is what leads the candidate websites at the moment. Steve has something about a conference going on at Portland State, and a link to find out how to call the DSCC about picking favorites and giving money to Merkley.
At the top of Merkley's website is "Have a tap with Tester". Yes, money is important in a statewide race, but so are issues.
Nov 29, '07
"What I am NOT impressed with is what leads the candidate websites at the moment."
That, and the tedium of in-party bickering around the 'net.
Nov 29, '07
AMEN, aboyd!
9:40 p.m.
Nov 29, '07
Y'know, that struck me too as I was reading the post, particularly in their answers to the first question. Although I wasn't going to mention it.
I liked Steve's answer too. His point about funding for community policing hits on a very important issue. It's just that his answer was very political while Jeff's was more nuts & bolts. His answer to the second question was more political. But again, it seemed more nuts & bolts specific compared to that of Steve, who again hit on some important general issues like tax fairness.
11:32 p.m.
Nov 29, '07
I thought the community policing answer from Mr. Merkley WAS more nuts and bolts--which seemed too local for a Senate campaign answer. It was perhaps a fair answer to the question, but I preferred hearing what was possible and doable from a US Senator's perspective.
Steve was just as specific as Merkley on housing (eg restoration of Pease), but his focus was more long term and forward looking IMO.
In any case, great kudos to Street Roots for getting both candidates to answer questions from this particular group of advocates, who often are not heard from in campaigns. And thanks to the candidates for participating!
11:33 p.m.
Nov 29, '07
and LT, Novick's supporters aren't the hothouse flowers of the bunch...!
11:40 p.m.
Nov 29, '07
At the top of Merkley's website is "Have a tap with Tester". Yes, money is important in a statewide race, but so are issues.
LT, perhaps you should check out the new issues section of Merkley's website. It's been up for a few weeks now.
(Disclosure: My company hosts Merkley's website, but I speak only for myself.)
Nov 30, '07
Kari, congratulations--Jeff finally has an issue section worthy of the candidate I knew he could be.
But the point still stands--go to jeffmerkley.com and what you see is "have a tap with Tester" which is probably not appealing to people who live more than an hour from Portland.
1:08 a.m.
Nov 30, '07
And the Baker County Democrats blues night probably wasn't appealing to people who live in Portland. Jeff Merkley can't be in every zip code in the state every single night. He's not Santa Claus.
(But if anyone knows how we might recruit the old guy for some canvassing work, we've got an off-season gig for him and his reindeer.)
5:47 a.m.
Nov 30, '07
(fade in, ominous music)
Jeff Merkley--He's no Santa Claus
(fade out, ominous music)
Nov 30, '07
LT, perhaps you should check out the new issues section of Merkley's website. It's been up for a few weeks now.
Yea, Merkley finally proves substantively why he's wrong on health care, and why he got the DSCC nod. He's one of those kind of Democrats, like Wyden, who really don't uphold the honorable historical legacy of the Democratic Party. (Sadly, at this moment Novick seems to only better by a shade.) I think that also speaks volumes about aggressive Merkley advocates, and why it really is an embarrassment to even consider they are fellow Democrats. As you can see:
One of Jeff’s first acts as Oregon’s next US Senator will be to sign on as a co-sponsor of Oregon Senator Ron Wyden’s health care bill, the Healthy Americans Act.
he's for Wyden's "Corporate Welfare for Private Insurance Companies" plan that forces everyone to buy private insurance, rather than backing a national health insurance plan like HR-676. Read a critique of what's wrong with Wyden's plan and the truly flawed premises of the Lewin Group analysis here:
Lewin Group analysis of Sen. Wyden's plan http://www.pnhp.org/news/2006/december/lewin_group_analysis.php
Wyden’s plan falls apart since it depends on price competition of health plans, which in turn depends on shifting more unaffordable costs directly to those who need care.
Sanders was a sponsor of HR-676 in the House, and now that he is in the Senate he is still looking for a true Democrat to join him in sponsoring a Senate version of a national health insurance plan. At least we know now with certainty that a vote for Merkley will be nothing more than a vote to send one poor excuse for a Democrat to join the other poor excuse for a Democrat in the Oregon delegation.
Nov 30, '07
i enjoyed reading the excerpt from the interview; thanks for posting it! my initial reaction from the two was - i think they both had good, effective, correct answers to both questions, but that they did differ in range and scope. that's an observation, not a criticism, by the way.
for example, you can see jeff's experience with HfH showing up in the affordable housing question. he's used to working at the detail level on these programs, and knows a lot about the specifics. but....steve's answer about tax fairness made a good point too. it would be great if we could have both solutions implemented, honestly.
and furthermore, i think this sort of interaction (like a debate would as well) serves to strengthen the democrats. each candidate can hear what the other has to say, and the eventual winner could maybe take something away, issues-wise, into the general that he wouldn't have come up with on his own.
i did like steve's focus on what can be done at the federal level, the sort of action that a senator can influence. i'm not sure, for example, how jeff's solution of housing down payment grants would get implemented by the legislative branch. right now, all these type grants (that i know of) are provided by HUD and administered by the municipalities. while the senate can vote to approve a budget that would allocate moneys to HUD to do this, would they be the ones who would instigate the program to begin with?
that part i'm not so clear on.
9:57 a.m.
Nov 30, '07
LT,
After reading your post, I thought, "That can't be right!" So I jumped to both candidates' websites, hoping to prove you wrong. I made it halfway.
You're right, Merkley's entire front page is plastered with Tap with Tester plugs. But Novick's Portland State event was where he "outlined several of his top priorities for restoring fiscal responsibility." After clicking the Read More link, I found a press release about the event that explained Steve's plans for fiscal responsibility very comprehensively.
While that's not a video from Steve about the FISA bill or something as substantive as that, it was not a plea for money.
Nov 30, '07
Kari,
You seem to be missing LT's main point, which pretty plainly is that the content of the section he praises ought to be on the top level of the website. Or at any rate, that the most prominent features on the top level should be direct links into the News section items, if I understand LT correctly.
If the specific issues are buried even one layer down without prominent direct links, and worse, under a generic heading of "news", which does not even clearly identify the fact of issue content, this web design is not doing any favors either to interested potential voters or Jeff Merkley himself.
As one potential user, campaign events like Tap with Tester would be what I'd look for under a label like News, because I'd think (campaign) News.
That might be why LT needed you to point him there to find what Merkley has provided.
A good design shouldn't require a reader to get tips from the guy whose company hosts the site (not sure if Mandate has a role in design?) to find the key stuff. ;->
Nov 30, '07
Oops, sorry, bad hasty reading on my part, "new issues" is a good label, though still generic.
11:50 a.m.
Nov 30, '07
Would "Looking for a real democrat" have the courage to use a real name? It's wonderfully ironic when someone hides behind a psuedonym--on a blog, for god's sake--and charges some politician or another with lacking courage.
I look forward to more content like this--it shows how, even in a race where the candidates hold substantially the same positions, the way they approach issues does differ.
Incidentally, Torrid, I wonder why you think "nuts and bolts" aren't "doable from a Senate perspective"?
Nov 30, '07
i don't speak for torrid, but, as i posted above, i would like to know how the u.s. senate would go about providing down payment grants for qualified low income home buyers.
i think it's a great idea, and i understand that there is something similar already in place, at least in limited amounts, from HUD.
but how does the senate direct what program HUD enacts? or would some other entity besides HUD be responsible? and wouldn't that be even more confusing then the already heavily beaureaucratic process we have now?
(note: i serve on my city's housing & community development commission, and we oversee the awarding of these HUD grants. is how come i know about them.)
2:06 p.m.
Nov 30, '07
Well, I'll keep the strategic reasons for particular design choices to myself - but I'll share this tidbit: Most people who visit a candidates' website are NOT undecided voters - at least not until ballots arrive. Most people visiting the site right now are already supporters of the candidate.
After all, undecided voters know that a candidate's website is loaded with the "best" view of the candidate - it's hardly an unbiased or neutral source of information. So, undecided voters don't generally bother. Certainly, not six months out.
LT is an excellent counter-example. An exception that proves the rule.
2:53 p.m.
Nov 30, '07
Trishka, if I may.
Since I'm the one who introduced the "nuts and bolts" phrase here... Here's my take, which will hopefully better explain what I liked about Merkley's answers.
I don't think that how the Senate might go about micromanaging loans is overly relevant. Merkley was giving a specific answer to a specific question. By so doing he demonstrated two things:
Respect for the questioner.
A sub-surface grasp of the issue.
How good a job of legislating could we reasonably expect to get from a Senator who may not really understand the issue very well?
Don't get me wrong here! That's NOT a veiled slap at Novick. I'm just saying that displaying wonkish knowledge is reassuring evidence to many voters that the guy/gal they intend to vote for won't just rubberstamp someone else's legislation out of ignorance. I should think we're all sick and tired of having to point out facts to our representatives in Congress AFTER they've cast a heinous vote. A quick example would be my own Congressman, David Wu, and his heinous vote on bankruptcy "reform" a few years ago.
Nov 30, '07
kevin, i see your point and don't disagree with it. at the same time, i think it is important that our candidates display an understanding of what tools they will have at their disposal as a US senator to effect whatever change they want to see.
but it's not that big of a deal; like i said i generally liked merkley's response.
Nov 30, '07
At the cost of giving SRs some shameless self-promotion and without saying who I personally like better, I think people should read the entire interview before coming to a conclusion that one candidate was more specific on different issues.
3:31 p.m.
Nov 30, '07
Triska, I can understand that. And I don't disagree. However I do think it's more important for Novick to demonstrate that type of knowledge since he's the one with no direct legislative experience. Which may well be why he took that tact. And really... the premise of such an approach would likewise be reassuring to prospective voters that he knows enough about how the system works to navigate it successfully.
I think we can all safely assume that both men are intelligent and savvy enough to know what their respective strengths and weaknesses are and address them accordingly in their answers to political questions meant for public consumption.
Nov 30, '07
Great job, Israel and Street Roots!
They both sound great on the issue of trade (both oppose the Peru Free Trade Agreement--something Earl Blumenauer continues to mislead people about--check out the "Labor supports the deal" implications on his website).
But on immigration they both sound pretty mushy, with Merkley the mushier. He did not even the answer the question: "I will support a smart immigration policy that will honor all people and restore the rule of law. It will be tough on border enforcement, fair to taxpayers and practical for all involved."
Nov 30, '07
I read the interview earlier today and I thought that both candidates seemed great, but on several questions I think Steve took Jeff to task, the immigration questions being one of them. The homeless vets question being the other.
7:39 p.m.
Nov 30, '07
I hope I didn't miss it, but here's the pair of answers on immigration:
There's definitely a difference there.
Dec 1, '07
Would "Looking for a real democrat" have the courage to use a real name?
The have the courage is to solely stick to the issues and call out false Democrats who so far haven't earned my vote, rather than get involved in the empty ego preening here.
As far as immigration policy, I think the following provides the kind of perspective needed to see why Merkley, who throws out empty words but has little real to say, and Novick have a ways to go to before they can even pretend to be the kind of leaders we need:
(and Jew and Muslim) to our elected officials GUEST OPINION TALK CHRISTIAN On the cusp of another lethal summer for illegal migrants, we need to By ROBIN HOOVER http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/opinion/45974.php
http://www.humaneborders.com
And by the way Jeff, I didn't accuse Merkley of lacking courage. I call him out for failing to stand for the values that made the Democratic Party great at one time.
Since I give you the credit of having the intelligence to understand the distinction, I think you have just betrayed your (subconscious?) belief that the reason he doesn't uphold those values must be because he lacks courage. Lack of courage gives him too much credit for having values he hasn't demonstrated he actually has. I just think he is a sold-out, self-serving politician.
Dec 1, '07
The lead article and comments that followed are not enough to make a final decisions as to who is the better candidate, but this thread should be used as a format for future discussions focusing on one issue at a time with both candidates leading off with their positions.
7:38 p.m.
Dec 2, '07
I'm looking forward to the debates between these two great candidates.
9:50 p.m.
Dec 2, '07
An excellent suggestion, Bill.
Dec 3, '07
i would love to read the entire SR article, but don't live in portland and don't have access to a copy. (not everyone does...)
so there's that.
Dec 3, '07
It's on the web now at www.streetroots.org
<hr/>