There is a shock, since The Oregonian said the Commissioners should appoint her to the seat even before Chip Shields had been selected to fill in Margaret Carter's seat. In essence, even before there was technically a vacancy to fill.

And that before having never even bothered to contact any other candidates (including Lew Frederick of Eddie Lincoln, the latter whom the Oregonian still hadn't even bothered, as of last Thursday, to do a courtesy call) much less any others that announced they would try for the seat.

It's not shocking, but is interesting. Clearly even after previous criticism about endorsing her before, the O believes she's the best fit.

I'm not convinced that newspaper endorsements do much to move the electorate or will do anything to move the Commissioners either. But I do find it interesting that knowing the other two candidates, they still chose Karol.

whoever wrote that endorsement appears to have very little knowledge of Lew's 30-year background. what a surprise.

THis is a good one, from the O's potempkin endorsement:

...a decade of real experience in local and state politics and policymaking. She spent years as a campaign worker and bills analyst in New Mexico before moving in 2003 to Portland...

So didn't even live in the state more than 6 years and therefore has a decade of real experience in "state politics" and "policymaking" (sic). Must be some of that GOP math left over from their endorsement of Bush.

Also not sure how volunteering with NARAL and the Gore campaign back in New Mexico translates into state politics and policy-making experience. But given that they already said she should get the seat before even talking to anyone else, hell even before Karol lost the Senate seat appointment to Chip Shields... this is about par for the course with the Oregonian.

Mm...Todd..I'm not so sure that's the case. Lew has a great record, to be sure. But so does Karol. Perhaps there is a quality or two that they are seeing in her that deserves the opportunity to shine in the Oregon House.

This district would be extremely well-served by any of these individuals. I'm a little surprised at how some commenting here are so quick to dismiss the amazing things Karol brings to the table.

"Posted by: Carla Axtman | Oct 20, 2009 5:57:17 PM

It's not shocking, but is interesting. Clearly even after previous criticism about endorsing her before, the O believes she's the best fit."

When did they endorse her before?

The Oregonian endorsed Chip Shields for the Senate seat, and in the same endorsement said that Chip's old seat should go to Karol, without even having talked to, or knew who would put their hat into that ring.

I guess it is interesting in so much as it is a bankrupt endorsement and to be expected from the hacks at The Oregonian.

"Posted by: Carla Axtman | Oct 20, 2009 6:04:59 PM

Mm...Todd..I'm not so sure that's the case. Lew has a great record, to be sure. But so does Karol."

What record?

Claiming credit for stuff that Jeff Cogan (her employer), who is one of the 5 votes on the Commission has done?

She didn't even live in the state 6 years ago.

They endorsed her (essentially) in the Shields piece you cite, Mitch.

They were roundly criticized for doing so, as you also note.

Is the endorsement empty? Perhaps. But I suspect had they endorsed Frederick you would be here singing a different tune. That's generally how these things go.

As I noted in another thread, I think Lew would be a very good representative for this seat. But frankly, Karol would be just as good. This defacto disparaging of her does nothing to make me want to give Lew another look.

Someone is required to live in the state longer than six years in order to be qualified to serve in the Oregon House? That's what you're going to go with?

Sheesh.

Seriously, if you can't be bothered to give Karol any due at all, that's ridiculous. All that does is demonstrate that you can't be bothered to look outside where you've placed your marker. That sucks, IMO.

"Posted by: Carla Axtman | Oct 20, 2009 6:04:59 PM This district would be extremely well-served by any of these individuals. I'm a little surprised at how some commenting here are so quick to dismiss the amazing things Karol brings to the table."

Because compared to what Lew legitimately brings to the table for the district there is no comparison Carla. The fact that her boss is 1/5th of the vote in this appointment alone is enough to call it into question even if the hype surrounding Karol were warranted (which I don't think it is warrented BTW).

Karol might be a good Rep. down the road, but she is not even close to ready for prime-time policy wise, or rooted in the district in any substantive way.

Her shoot form the hip answer last week in a comment here on Blue Oregon about school lottery was stunning in its lack of thought and would be a disaster of epic proportions were it to actually be seriously entertained both politically and more critically, legally or substantively.

We can't afford that sort of naivete and lack of substance in Salem in this coming session.

"Posted by: Carla Axtman | Oct 20, 2009 6:14:08 PM Someone is required to live in the state longer than six years in order to be qualified to serve in the Oregon House? That's what you're going to go with?"

If the arugment is that they know state poltics and policy as the basis for choosing them over someoen with real exprience, conenction to the district and policy knowledge, yes that is what I am going with.

This isn't in a vaccum Carla, and if there was not another candiate vastly more qualifed this would be a very different conversation.

Competence, knowledge and experience counts Carla. Particularly in the dire situation our state faces in the coming leg. session.

I would also add Carla, that I have repeatedly said that Karol may become a great choice down the road, and has a lot going for her. And when given the chance to have her tires gently kicked a little, failed and failed badly.

Then pulled the victim card.

I want her to become someone I can support down the road, but as of right now, she doesn't have the policy depth, experience or connection to the history of the district as it pertains to what has and hasn't worked from a policy perspective in the district. From the PDC, to education, etc. etc.

Has she worked for years on education and understands intimately the problems of how we allocate resources towards education, what works, what doesn't? Has she the depth of knowledge about the positive and negative impact of the PDC on the district?

Lew has. As I said many times now, I want her to grow and become someone I can support whole-heartedly down the road. But she is being oversold, and by people with very different motives than that of what we need in the leg. and what the district needs as their Representation in Salem.

Because compared to what Lew legitimately brings to the table for the district there is no comparison Carla. The fact that her boss is 1/5th of the vote in this appointment alone is enough to call it into question even if the hype surrounding Karol were warranted (which I don't think it is warrented BTW).

This part is especially weird. It's not as if Cogen is the only vote that counts here, Mitch. There are four other people that have to be convinced. She has to convince at least two more folks that she's the better fit. So unless you think all of them are somehow in the bag because Cogen has something on them, this doesn't make sense.

I understand that you are ardent about Lew and I think that's great. I am absolutely sure he deserves that kind of passion. But Karol has a lot of passionate supporters too, and I've spoken with a number of them who sincerely believe she'll be amazing. I know both of these people--and I believe that you do both Lew and Karol a disservice by your dismissal and disparagement of her.

Living and working in Oregon in politics and policy for the last six years is more than enough time to gain a working understanding of how things roll here. Yes, Lew has done it longer...he's also quite a bit older than Karol. That's fine--but there are some that aren't convinced that being older and "more experience" is better. Some of them elected people like Ben Cannon and Jules Bailey to the House. From what I've seen of Karol, she could very well fit in their mold.

I have a great respect for Lew and his work. If he goes to the House, I will be thrilled for him and for the people of Oregon, who will be well-served by his presence. But knowing Karol...I will be no-less thrilled if she's appointed.

You should drop your sword and give her a chance.

Isn't Brent Barton younger than 29? They didn't even bother to check that detail in the endorsement? Is anyone minding the store at the Oregonian?

Seriously, Mapes, let the dinosaurs die and take the buyout.

Of course I meant, "Isn't Brent Barton around 29?" Meaning younger than Karol.

Golly, I should write for the Oregonian....

Yeah, I believe Barton is younger.

Ryan, fyi: Lew is none of those things. he's somewhat every bit as representative as Karol, and having been involved in local & state politics for years, far more qualified -- in terms of experience. he also understands how politics is changing, having been a deaniac in 2003 and an early Obama supporter. he's also on the State Board of Education, so he might have some background in policy ... not sure that counts for the Big O. my gripe here isn't that they endorsed Karol; as Carla said, that isn't going to make any difference to the Board. it's the lack of journalism being practiced. but what else do we expect from their editorial board?

lestatdelc - I'm confused as to how you feel about this appointment. Could you please make your opinion more obvious for everyone? Thanks.

"Posted by: Carla Axtman | Oct 20, 2009 6:34:00 PM This part is especially weird. It's not as if Cogen is the only vote that counts here, Mitch"

Not weird at all. That one of the commisoners has a horse in this race puts the entire process in a akward light. Because his staffer is in front of the commission, it introduces a whole other level of possible motives that have nothing to who would be serve and represent the district in Salem. Even if everyone of them was 100% scrupulously objective and forthright, it taints the process because it opens up the obvious doubts about the process.

Add to that, that the other candidate with more votes at the nominating convention actually beat Cogan within the district when they faced off for the commissioners seat, the Oregonian preemptively putting her name in for the seat, and so on, it adds another level what is going on here?

All that on top of the fact we have a candidate who has the depth of knowledge on all the relevant aspects of being an outstanding rep. to the district, vs. a promising but too green candidate, not to mention yet another candidate (Eddie Lincoln) who also well immersed in the community but doesn't have the same level of policy chops... it honestly calls into question on what the endorsements, the claimed "record" being based on?

Furthermore, when questioned on some obvious shoot-from-the-hip replies from Karol on serious, vastly complex issues like the aforementioned school lottery placement system, with statements that are truly stunning in their disastrous policy (not to mention political) implications... then when asked to explain or mitigate the why that impacts a whole raft of policies, laws, form Obama's carter school initiatives on down to equal opportunity court rulings... the response by Karol is to play the victim card... and as I am naturally inclined to just go WTF?

Because I honestly don't see how there is any question about who is better prepared and suited to hold that seat at this time.

Posted by: Nick Wirth | Oct 20, 2009 7:24:58 PM

If that's is snark... well played sir. ;-)

Not weird at all. That one of the commisoners has a horse in this race puts the entire process in a akward light. Because his staffer is in front of the commission, it introduces a whole other level of possible motives that have nothing to who would be serve and represent the district in Salem. Even if everyone of them was 100% scrupulously objective and forthright, it taints the process because it opens up the obvious doubts about the process.

I guess I'm missing it. I'm not seeing how Karol being a staffer is somehow making the process awkward. It's out in the open. Unless there's some kind of evidence that there's been some undue influence exerted on Commissioners because of it--I don't understand the problem.

Obviously, some people (like Roey) believe differently than you in terms of Karol's abilities on policy. I hope you'll reconsider and be more open to giving her a chance.

"This part is especially weird. It's not as if Cogen is the only vote that counts here, Mitch. "

It's as if she's the only one whose boss has a vote, though. Surely you see the validity of the difference between 1 and 0. Or to put another way, it may take three--but I sure would like someone to put one in my pocket before I got there. (Which is not to accuse anyone of anything, but anyone would have to admit the potential conflict of interests).

To step into the middle of the Carla-Mitch debate, I understand the point that it's odd for TheO to use her experience as a way to characterize her strengths in the race, both relative to her other qualities and to the comparative experience of the rest of the field.

To put it another way, if you're going to sell Karol Collymore to the Commissioners, as a campaign manager I wouldn't necessarily go with "deep experience in the district;" I'd more likely go with "fresh face, and a good bet on the unknown because she's sharp as a tack and is no virgin to politics". The O does cite some of that, but I have to agree with Mitch that it's curious to endorse Karol on the basis of her experience, when Lew Fredrick is in the race. If that's what you're looking for, all else being equal (and ideologically speaking it is) Lew is probably your man.

I'm not stating a preference for either in this race; I think both will serve their districts well, and it wouldn't surprise me for either if HD23 wasn't the last rung they climbed in politics. It's a tough choice.

43, sorry...

Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 20, 2009 7:47:26 PM

Add to that, that the dynamic of having to live on the board with another commissioner on the board who you are in essence voting for or against their interest as being one possible calculus that intrudes on voting who would best serve to represent HD 43. Not that such awkward situations don;t occur in politics in many other ways as well, but it is there none-the-less which, if one of the commissioners didn't have a horse in the race (to use the unfortunate metaphor) wouldn't be there in this case otherwise.

It's as if she's the only one whose boss has a vote, though. Surely you see the validity of the difference between 1 and 0. Or to put another way, it may take three--but I sure would like someone to put one in my pocket before I got there. (Which is not to accuse anyone of anything, but anyone would have to admit the potential conflict of interests).

I think this is a highly naive point of view, frankly.

I'm sure Lew has at least one or two very good friends in this process. Maybe even some of them are sitting Mult Co Commissioners. Perhaps he's offered them financial or shoe leather support in the past. Are they somehow compromised in their vote because of Lew's work and support for them?

It's essentially the same thing.

I don't believe that the Commissioners are somehow compromised or awkward because one of them is Karol's boss any more than they are by Lew's good friendships and strong past support.

If you sincerely believe that Lew is the best guy for the job, then that's one thing. But the rest of this just comes across as goofy, IMO.

I have to second Roey's questioning the vitriol here. From the perspective of the typical BlueOregon blogger (which obviously excludes me) do you really have a bad choice among the three?

Second, the notion that Commissioner Cogen has a conflict is silly. Karol works for him, he doesn't work for Karol. He has no vested interest in her getting the appointment. If he is biased toward her because he knows her, likes her and respects her, that is no different than if one of the candidtes is a personal friend, former campaign associate, donor or simply supporter of one of the commissioners.

Finally, why do any of you take the Oregonian's endorsements seriously? They obviously don't or they'd do a lot more research and fact-checking before they made them.

Three things:

1. Mr. Conflict wrote, "An elected representative in one level of government is barred from employment in a different level of government."

Unless something has changed dramatically in the very recent past, that's not true, at least in this case. Rep. Jo Ann Bowman was an aide to Multnomah County Chair Bev Stein.

1. As Jack notes, the idea that Cogen has a conflict of interest is silly. If Cogen were choosing whether or not to appoint his boss, rather than his employee, that would be a conflict. In fact, if Cogen thinks she's absolutely fabulous, the relationship would suggest he might lean against appointing her - in order to retain her full-time services.

2. Barton is 29. I think Kahl is under 31 too. The O's cuts in the copy editing staff have recently started to show lately.

Mr. Conflict wrote, "An elected representative in one level of government is barred from employment in a different level of government."

No, the prohibition is on people who serve in one branch of state government (i.e., ODOT) also serving in another branch of state government (i.e., the legislature). The only exception is for education, so that teachers can serve in the legislature.

There is no restriction on city or county employees serving in the state legislature. I know there have been examples in the past, and there probably are in this legsilature if anyone wanted to dig.

After having heard Lew talk about jobs at the Oregon Summit last week in the jobs creation breakout session, I have no doubt his level of understanding and experience stand head and shoulders above the other two candidates.
-Mark

LBB - You sure do have an overdeveloped conspiracy gland, eh? I have just one question regarding your final sentence: Jesse who?!

Jack noted: "There is no restriction on city or county employees serving in the state legislature. I know there have been examples in the past, and there probably are in this legislature if anyone wanted to dig."

If I'm not mistaken Jo Ann Bowman served in the House while she was working for then Multnomah County Commission chair Beverly Stein. Pretty close parallel I'd say.

LBB, Karol is so much more qualified for the seat than i am. no question. i think Lew is more qualified than she is, but i don't have a vote in it. if she does get selected, HD 43 will have a good representative, no doubt at all.

gl:

You mean besides my ongoing and vocal efforts to say how great I think that Frederick is and would be great in the job?

"Posted by: Carlos | Oct 21, 2009 9:04:56 AM

Mitch - drop the racist attacks on Collymore."

That must be some attempt at bizarro-world performance art, Carlos.

If you think having serious misgivings about things like the position that we should override the courts about school lottery, and circumvent local school boards across the state as good policy and good politics, is a "racist" attack, then you have lost all sense of reality.

Likewise, being impolitic enough to point out the uncomfortable fact that some aspects of this appointment process gives some doubt about the deliberative process of it all, not make such an observation a "racist attack".

FYI, last time I checked Lew Frederick, whom I support without reservation, is a black man.

That said, as inconvenient as my opinions may have been about some of the issues that people dare not touch in the room (conflict of interest because of who she works for, and her lack of solid policy understanding and experience at this time) I actually don't dislike Carol. As I have said numerous times, I think she has great potential, and hope to support her whole-heartedly in the future as she continues to grow and as she gets more policy substance under her belt compared to others running for this seat.

After reading your comment responses to other people's comments - I think you should re-title this post:

HD 43: The O endorses Collymore...and so do I

Seriously, don't make this look like an "In the News" sorta post if it isn't.

I feel like Blue O bloggers will endorse Carol and regular Mult. Dems will endorse Lew. Everyone will stick with their clique in the end and let that favor their choices more than honest debate.

Uh...okay. Did you actually read the post itself or are you just pissy about the fact that I dared to have an opinion in comments?

I'm not unbiased and I don't play that way on this blog. That said, I've been abundantly clear that I think Lew and Karol would both be phenomenal (I really don't know much about the third candidate so I'm not giving an opinion there).

Point of order:

Let's not forget that the commissioners don't necessarily have to choose from the list given by the county party. If they deem none of the candidates capable, they can choose someone else.

My prediction is a unanimous appointment of Pavel Goberman.

"Posted by: Andrew Plambeck | Oct 21, 2009 11:03:16 AM

Point of order:

Let's not forget that the commissioners don't necessarily have to choose from the list given by the county party. If they deem none of the candidates capable, they can choose someone else."

Not true. They can only go off-list if the party nominating candidates provides a slate of less than three.

I thought this was a news item when I first saw it and instead it was a personal endorsement. That's my only issue.

Then frankly, you didn't read the post or my comments especially carefully.

I've loved the idea of Karol Collymore since her eairliest snarks on The Blue, and I'm also on record for wanting to shuffle Boomers out in favor Xers whenever possible, but.............

When you're "the kid" you always hate to hear this, but Lew has been paying dues for a long time, He's great on a variety of policy issues so he gets the edge in this one for me anyway.

<hr/>

That said, when Karol responded to questions for which she had insufficient information she came with an answer both rare and precious, paraphrased:

"I don't know enough about that to provide an athoritative answer."

Every danged elected official should have that one engraved on their foreheads. Knowing what you don't know and admitting it is a signature mark of thoughtful competence.

I guess I appreciate a political candidate who is honest enough to say "I don't know" rather than make up a bull shit answer. And she has lots of time to learn; the next session is quite a ways away.

I don't have a horse in this race, although I know Karol and would be thrilled to have her in the seat. I don't know Lew.

I am concerned about the anonymous posters attacking candidates. It would be nice to know who you are, since it is very easy to be an anonymous stalking horse for one or another candidate.

At least Karol's supporters have the courage to post their names. Other than T.A., I don't see any other candidate supporters doing so.

At least Karol's supporters have the courage to post their names. Other than T.A., I don't see any other candidate supporters doing so.

Paul,

My name is Pat Ryan and I've been supporting Lew for a while now.