Nothing would give me greater pleasure than to see Macpherson go down in flames in the primary. I want an AG with law enforcement experience, not pension experience.

I really don't find these endorsements persuasive. The fact that Kroger is so conservative on issues of crime doesn't sit well with me. The more I hear about his position on Measure 11 and the death penalty, the more I dislike him. Having the DAs coming to his rescue only solidifies my dislike for his candidacy.

I am glad to see that John Kroger is picking up the support of Oregon's law enforcement community, along with the broad support he has already received. Congratulations John!

I understand concerns over John's position on the Death Penalty and Measure 11. However, I found Greg Macpherson's answer to those questions very disturbing. Greg equated the death penalty with assisted suicide as a reason he is not that concerned with Oregon's death penalty law. He then chose to dodge the issue of Measure 11, not answering the question in order not to offend any interest group. I respect Kroger for stating his opinion and standing by his convictions.

I also admire Kroger's emphasis on drug treatment and dealing with the cause of crime instead of its result. From what I heard, Trumbo admired Kroger's emphasis on drug treatment. I want an attorney general who is listened to and has the respect of law enforcement and can encourage our state to be smart on crime.

I am glad Kroger is picking up support from law enforcement. That, plus the earlier support from environmental groups indicates that his message is getting through.

As for the attacks...

Macpherson supports Measure 11, he is not a super booster (but nether is Kroger) but he still supports it. Nothing Macpherson has done as Chair of Judiciary and nothing he has said on the trail indicates otherwise.

Similarly, Macpherson is to Kroger's right on the death penalty. Kroger supported creating a group to study changes to the death penalty (including if we need it or not) but Macpherson has said that he would not support changes (he would only leave it to voters). That, plus Macpherson's truly tasteless joke about death with dignity makes me think that he is not exactly the second coming of Blackmun.

While I do not put too much stock in endorsements, these are unique, because they come from people supremely qualified to judge the AG candidates. I believe that Kroger has a more comprehensive plan for the Meth epidemic and for the enforcement of environmental laws. We need an A.G. with real experience in enforcement, not a corporate lawyer whose firm defended Enron.

We need an A.G. with real experience in enforcement, not a corporate lawyer whose firm defended Enron.

Justin, do you have any idea how big Stoel Rives is? Also, it is my understanding that as Enron's lawyers, Stoel Rives kept telling them to stop what they were doing.

Furthermore, why does Kroger want to fight all the big cases himself? Does he not trust the talent at the DOJ. The DOJ needs a mentor, not a glory hog. Macpherson brings that element, along with a real understanding of what the Oregon AGs job really is, to the table. Kroger just wants his name in lights while Macpherson wants to continue serving the state.

I'll take a modest results driven motivator over an arrogant "Eliot Spitzer" wannabe any day.

And! You all call Macpherson a pension lawyer, lest we forget he is a sitting three term legislator in this state. While you peg Kroger a prosecutor, last time I checked he has been teaching law and not so much prosecuting. Let's not confuse the facts here.

Kari, The WW article proves my point. Kroger supports the death penalty but is willing to change or end it. Macpherson does not support changing or ending capital punishment; he would leave it to “Oregon voters.” At the debate Macpherson expressed his support for how the system is used in Oregon. Macpherson can draw a distinction between what he believes and what policies he supports or will enact, but for purposes of evaluating him for office, only the later is relevant. As such, Macpherson is pro-capital punishment.

I am not a politically involved or connected person and I live in the valley. Some here and elsewhere have said that Macpherson will not have an advantage in terms of name recognition or support from democratic party activists. I doubt this. I recognized Macphersons name but, until recently, had heard little about Kroger. And what I hear about Kroger emphasizes law enforcement. Personally, I feel Kroger is somewhat one dimensional right now but understand the reason why this may be occurring. Hopefully, both candidates will get more press and coverage after super tueday. At this point, I am opposed to Macpherson because I believe that he is more of a politician than an attorney. I do not think we need a partisan politician in the AG position.

Is this even a debate? John Kroger just passed the Bar is September 2007

Oregon Bar Examination — July 2007

Congrats, John. I just think Oregon's looking for someone who has, I don't know, been a lawyer for longer than 6 months to be Attorney General.

BCM, Throw around the “not from Oregon meme” all you want, but this election is about who is best qualified to lead the state forward, and in that regard Kroger is the clear winner. The endorsements from environmental leaders, unions, and law enforcement just reinforce this point.

However, FYI, Kroger passed the CT. bar back in the 90’s and he has been teaching law in Oregon for most of the decade. The recent bar exam is from Oregon not requiring law professors to be licensed in this state. As anybody who has taken any bar will tell you, you don’t take a bar exam unless there is a good reason, and Kroger only decided to run for office recently.

"I'm certainly not going to attack Mr. Macphearson for holding down a day job in a law firm, no matter who they defended. If lawyers can defend murderers without censure, then certainly they should be able to defend Enron."

A wise statement. We had a mayoral contest some years ago (in a city-manager form of city government where the mayor also has another occupation--lawyer, dentist, business owner, etc.). The city council member running against an incumbent mayor sent out attack mailers of the "HOW DARE HE!" variety. The basic idea was we should throw out the incumbent in favor of the challenger because the challenger didn't like one of the clients of the incumbent. Not only did the challenger lose the race for mayor, but after the election was no longer in the council majority--people voted for council candidates who agreed with the incumbent mayor.

That said, I'd like to see the discussion expanded. AG is an office which deals with a number of areas, incl. campaign finance/election law.

The Oregon Department of Justice is responsible for general counsel and supervision of all civil actions and legal proceedings in which the state is a party or has an interest. The Department, through the Attorney General, also has full charge and control of all the state's legal business that requires the services of an attorney or legal counsel. The Department is further responsible for the operation of a number of program areas designated by the legislature, such as child support, district attorney assistance, crime victim compensation, charitable activity enforcement and consumer protection services. The Department has a biennial budget of approximately $280 million and a staffing authorization of approximately 1200 employees, most of whom are located in Salem.

This is taken word for word from the Attorney General website...note the word prosecution...not mentioned, not once...

The AG position is quite broad in this state and Macpherson has the knowledge of Oregon's laws and legislative process needed to conduct the DOJ's business. If you want someone who is going to flip the DOJ on its side, fire everyone and turn the DOJ into a prison filling factory, then by all means vote for Kroger. If you want an advocate for the people, your vote is for Macpherson.

Ben- As the AG's website states, and you cut and paste, the AG supervises all state legal proceedings in which the state is a party or has an interest. The state is the prosecutor in criminal trials, in case you didn't know. The word, prosecution is not mentioned because it is implicit in what you cut and paste.

Second, how is promoting drug treatment in any way encouraging filling our prisons with criminals? Kroger is pushing our state to be "smart on crime", which means to deal with root of crime. That means, encouraging drug treatment to deal with the meth crisis. Do you have anything to support your statements? Do you have any positive policy positions to point to that Macpherson has proposed? What legal experience in Oregon does Macpherson have that makes him suited to be the next AG? How much court room experience does Macpherson even have?

In addition, Kroger has never made any mention of firing anyone at the DOJ. Kroger has advocated focusing its resources in some new areas, especially environmental protection , protecting consumers and collecting unpaid child support.

Kari- Macpherson clearly compared the death penalty in Oregon to assisted suicide. As someone who opposes the death penalty, that sincerely offends me. Macpherson at the bus project debate did not take a strong position on the death penalty. Instead he took the politically neutral position of deferring the issue to Oregon voters. Macpherson has been in the Oregon house for six years, if he really opposed Measure 11 or the Death Penalty, why did he do nothing to attempt to change Oregon's policies? I admire Kroger for clearly stating his position on the death penalty, even if I disagree with him.

"Throw around the “not from Oregon meme” all you want, but this election is about who is best qualified to lead the state forward, and in that regard Kroger is the clear winner. The endorsements from environmental leaders, unions, and law enforcement just reinforce this point."

That's great if you enjoy being told how to vote. Personally, I don't. I see a mysterious traveler whose shown up in Oregon and wants to be AG. I have some reservations about that.

A few points -

Having taken both the Oregon bar exam and an exam from another state, I can tell you that they're 90% identical. Which bar exam you took really has little to do with whether you know much about that particular state's law, since very little of the bar covers current state law.

We can talk about the death penalty all we want, but it won't make a difference. 65% of the electorate still supports it. Death penalty litigation is a minuscule part of the AG's job. This is, of course, the problem with the death penalty - it distorts the conversation here and resources of the system disproportionately.

The DA endorsements are important for this reason - the AG has very little influence over the DAs, who are elected by county and do not take orders from him. The AG sets policy for the criminal justice system to a certain degree, and controls the appeals process, but he'll get very little done without the support of the DAs.

Where's the conversation about management experience? The AG's job is essentially to run a large law firm/public agency. Personal political philosophy matters, of course, but most of the AG's job is related to management of the DOJ. Who cares if either of them is (for instance) a good litigator? It's totally irrelevant to the job.

Folks, the AG needs to understand and manage litigation, not be a litigator. They are completely different skill sets. Sure, the AG should understand the rules of evidence and the challenges of litigation, but he ain't gonna be doing any cross-examination or jury selection himself. Management experience is much more relevant.

As for how much criminal litigation the AG's Office does, the answer is "not much". They take the lead on certain narrow areas of law, like racketeering, and the DA Assistance Section assists in large, complex cases.

They do much of the civil litigation for the state, of course.

Some of it will take budget increases he cannot promise

Hammer, meet nail head...

Can someone ask Kroger where he plans to get the money to make all these changes he thinks the DOJ needs?

You would be surprised at what happens with just changes to priorities and organization. A great example of this was Mike Moore in Mississippi. A lot of what Kroger talks about is using the resources in a new way. Arguably the drug treatment is the exception, but I think we would all be worried if a candidate ran promising to ignore our state's staggeringly underfunded drug treatment programs.

That said, Macpherson has some odd promises. His plan for fighting meth is getting the entire country to adopt Oregon's laws on cold medication. In all honesty I have no idea how he can deliver on this, or what he would do if it fails to happen.

And herein lies the problem:

Some of it will take budget increases he cannot promise

Hammer, meet nail head...

Can someone ask Kroger where he plans to get the money to make all these changes he thinks the DOJ needs?

Kroger can give a very effective public presentation, has a campaign manager who is willing to engage in dialogue with ordinary voters, and has some good ideas.

But as the outsider who doesn't know the Oregon legislative process as well as a legislator, he needs to be more Oregon-specific more often. Maybe there are legislators who don't want to come out against a fellow member, but what about Oregonians running for other offices, running for the legislature, that sort of thing?

And this is why I think Kroger would be smart to start talking about issues unique to Oregon, including Oregon's election laws.