I wouldn't have submitted the questions. Told them to be ready for whatever. How else do you get authenticity?

This is almost as thriling as your breathless account of Jeff Merkley saying all those intelligent things whne he campaigned.

HOw you can even get excited about a previous governor who said the state was ungovernable and is a one-issue guy with no clue on budget, a state employee lifer with no clue on budget and a guy out of left filed with no clue at all is fascinating.

Keep it up though - I enjoy the spectacle.

a guy out of left filed with no clue at all is fascinating.

Are you saying that, as a matter of fact, SS doesn't have a clue, or that being from left field means you don't have a clue?

Have to disagree with both.

Let's have an intelligent discussion of education. Think Out Loud on OPB talked about class sizes today. As I recall, Shields (D-high tech) has said technology plays a role. Some say teacher quality is more important than class size. But certain things are the same whether one is a struggling first year teacher or Oregon's teacher of the year.

Someone has to correct homework and other assignments. If it takes 4 minutes to grade a particular homework assignment, it will take an hour more to grade papers from 40 students than to grade papers from 25 students. Anyone suggesting that is no big deal should volunteer to help a local teacher grade papers and find out what that workload is like.

Some people think that the teachers unions should be the issue (but let's not talk about job evaluation and pay packages for administrators, esp. those working in the central district office).

Here are some meaty education questions:

Some districts have K-8 and high school. Some have K-5, 6-8, 9-12 in high school. Some have K-3, 4-6, 7-8 (or 7-9) and high school. Is one of those systems better than another, or does that depend on what the local community is like?

Technology is great for grading systems, for online learning, for word processing and other activities. But can it really make up for school overcrowding?

How would it be used, for instance, in a 4th grade self-contained classroom, middle school academic classes, high school academic classes? Can it really help students understand things like corresponding angles and alternate angles in geometry better than individual help from a teacher or group discussions with a whiteboard to help explain? Can technology proofread student writing and explain the suggested corrections better than a trained person can?

Should every student aspire to at least 1 or 2 years of college? What programs help achieve that goal?

Others worry about dropouts. Should dropout prevention start in middle school or wait until high school?

It is time to elevate discussion of education above the same old same old debates we have had for too long.

"Are you saying that, as a matter of fact, SS doesn't have a clue, or that being from left field means you don't have a clue?"

OK, I'll go slow:

Kitzhaber was governor and I am unaware of any breakthrus or new jobs and he thought the state was ungovernable.

Bradbury really hasn't made any suggestions to make this better than continue Teddy's nap time another 4 years.

Mr Shields, what is his thrust?

The point being, we have some pressing issues, like no job growth (outside of govt), a need to keep increasing taxes with no commensurate return in services to taxpayers.

If by being in left field means I have no clue how any of this trio will make Oregon better - You're right.

none of the democrats are doing anything about and refuse to talk about making oregon more business friendly and reducing our unemployment rate.none of these liberals wow anyone

Gee I see Kitzhaber isn't touting his role as Senate President and Governor in the CIMCAM assault on public education which remains today because of his fellow Oregon Democrats.

Yet he's now touting the need for school reform with nearly the exact same rhetoric that preceeded CIMCAM.

"He seems to be articulating an entirely new way of governing the state."

Honestly, Kari, even without the disclosure, no one would surmise from such gushing that you're being paid by Kitzhaber.

But your suggestion that folks not pay attention to Kitzhaber's statement that the state of Oregon is "ungovernable" (made when he was a sitting governor) just doesn't fly. It can't be glossed over. It raises troubling questions about this candidate's character, his will, and his leadership. And fears that if put in office again we may see a repeat breakdown.

And your notion that Kitzhaber is articulating an entirely new way of governing the state doesn't really fly either. One simple test: if the Republicans still controlled both chambers of the legislature, would Kitzhaber be running for governor again?

We all know the answer: No. He's running again because a whole lot of Dems worked their asses off in his absence to retake the legislature. After jumping ship, he's suddenly found, in 2009, that he wants to jump back on the ship and take the wheel. He wants a better legacy than he left, and figures that's possible now that Dems have done the tough work of retaking the legislature.

No doubt he's a capable politician who has shown a knack in the past for when to jump in (and push Barbara Roberts aside). And he may bring some interesting proposals to the race. But let's not kid ourselves with the "post-partisan" rhetoric and "new" ways of governing spin.

We govern by countering the partisan and profitable rantings of the Rush Limbaughs of this world, and electing Dems in large majorities. There is nothing new under the sun, and Kitzhaber has not re-invented the wheel.

Actually, Matthew, they are. They are discussing how to improve the education system. Having a well-educated populace ready to go to work is one of the main ways to attract and retain businesses.

What would you like to see them discuss regarding this issue?

we dont need to give schools any more money ms mel harmon because they are very well funded now at 10,000 bucks a kid.what needs to be reformed is school spending.schools need to quit wasting millions of dollars on consultants and nonsense like last year portland public schools wasted 5,000 dollars on a consulting contract with steve novick to study how to be stimulated.a well educated workforce mr,mrs harmon in case you have not noticed big deal it dont gurantee anything in this economy because their are thousands and millions of educated workers across america now who are having a very difficult time finding jobs now.you liberals need to get off this we must have a quality educatted workforce baloney trip.how about the people with college degrees who cant find jobs now?what did all that high education get them?i have shot liberal politicians mark numerous emails over the years and they dont listen to the average private sector citizen,they only listen to the state workers and their public employee union pals.

Matthew,

I tried to read your comment replying to mine, really I did. But I can only conclude that you either type as you talk in which case you must be REALLY upset and talking in total, nonstop, run-on sentences OR no one ever told you about typing etiquette on a blog/website. So here's a primer:

Spacebars are your friends. So are Capital letters. **So are putting spaces between sentences.

Retype the above comment and I'll read it. Giving people a headache when they are trying to converse with you is not a good thing. So try again and stop typing like a 9-year-old kid with ADD texting his best friend or prepare to be ignored.

Kari -- how about the question, if the Republicans still controlled the legislature, would Kitzhaber be running for governor? You know he wouldn't be.

Whatever you think he's articulated so far, it's been awfully fuzzy. To say he has articulated a new way to govern is an opinion, not a factual statement. (His website has been awfully thin on content.) Unless you can make sense of whatever post-partisan blah blah blah stuff he's issued to date.

Governing still requires budgets and legislation, and votes in the House and the Senate. I think the new way to govern that Kitzhaber has discovered is to govern with significant majorities of Democrats in the state legislature. What a find.

On his "ungovernable" declaration. That was in 2002, and not followed by any proposals or action to make Oregon governable. He checked out. I took it as an admission that for him, as governor, Oregon was ungovernable, and that he was done trying.

His threat to run in 2006 and challenge Kulongoski did nothing constructive. Kulongoski and others have governed, and much good legislation has been passed in the last two legislative sessions entirely in Kitzhaber's absence.

Oregon's predicament doesn't seem to me to be something that can be pinned on our present Dems in office. We had a national economic meltdown in which our major banks collapsed. Stable funding problems for schools in Oregon go back a long way.

There's no magic hoodoo to a newfangled way to govern here. We just need someone who won't quit, and will build coalitions to get more done with the Dems now in office, and work to get more Dems elected. Kitzhaber's just not that guy.

You want clarity? OK.

Let's demand that all candidates for Gov. (regardless of party) and all legislators (but esp. those on Ways and Means and the Measure 66 & 67 Comm.) and any announced legislative candidates discuss the substance behind the remark Pat McCormick was quoted on the radio as making---that it is unfair for the ballot titles for the measures to say there will be budget cuts if the taxes are rejected.

As I understand it, there will be at least a $733 million dollar hole in the budget if the taxes go down. OK, folks, how do you mean to fill that hole? Layoffs? Requiring public employees to pay for their own health insurance---and how much exactly of their health insurance do legislators and other elected officials pay?

Sunsetting all tax breaks early rather than the schedule that I believe the legislature set up in the regular session? Shorter school year? Give up on 24/7 state police coverage? Cut the Oregon Health Plan?

If the tax measures go down then whatever passes the legislature will need at least 31 votes in the House and 31 votes in the Senate. If the tax measures pass but there is a revenue shortfall, the resulting budget fix will require at least 31 votes in the House and 16 in the Senate.

Some people think smaller ending fund balances are the answer. Why not have a debate between those who agree with that statement and those who believe ending fund balances are a cushion against revenue shortfalls or emergencies? Is this election about which article of faith one believes, or might the general public welcome intelligent debate rather than just having commercials inflicted on them?

Can we have an honest debate where people propose ideas with some sense of whether they even have anywhere near even 29 votes in the House or 14 votes in the Senate? A few people with a good idea can't alone pass anything unless they get enough other votes.

"We have a great idea, therefore it will pass and work well" is an attitude I suspect many people are tired of.

Can this work? is the next question. Sounds good to say state employees should be forced to pay more of their health care premiums. Was that negotiated as part of an employment contract? If memory serves, the Supreme Court negotiated into a contract (a Tiernan and Sizemore measure had been about public employee pay packages). Anyone who believes in contract law should support that court decision.

Which funds can be tapped by the legislature and which would end up like the SAIF funds in the 1980s (court ruled later that the state had to pay back the funds with interest because they had been collected for insurance purposes, not part of the general fund)?

And finally, most importantly, which ideas add up to at least $733 million? I don't care if someone thinks they have the greatest ideas in the world. If they only add up to $700 million, or there might be legal problems with some of the ideas, or if there are nowhere near enough votes to pass those ideas, they are not a solution.

Don't forget: just as people have the right to say the taxes are bad and they are voting no, people have the right to say "Unless I see a valid alternative, I am voting yes".

“As usual, the internet is your friend.”

Well, it’s nice that John actually hired you to write a hagiography for him. However, reading this, I’d have to take issue with a few things:

• Reducing welfare rolls, to be honest this was a Bill Clinton invention and it wouldn’t have mattered if we had an arch-conservative as governor at the time.
• Expanded the Oregon Health Plan – Well, I guess it’s nice John gave away more stuff. Unfortunately, like Bush’s unfunded mandates, he seemed to forget how to pay for all of this largess in a reasonable manner. I think OHP may have a couple of funding issues.
• Job creation – Well, that’s kind of cool he got Vestas (he may have to fight Vera for credit.) Anything else? This message that we want clean energy, clothing designer, creative jobs kind of falls on its face for a couple of reasons: 1 – 98% of the state governors are saying the same thing, EXCEPT there is a reason all of those jobs besides Vestas went there instead of here and I don’t think John is a deep enough thinker to figure out why 2 – When he says we want these jobs, it comes across as we want ONLY these jobs. I’ve been involved in the high-tech business and know a few people who have looked at locating here and this is their feedback (FWIW – Some stayed in Cali, some moved to Austin, TX and one went to FL – Like OHSU’s biotech biz.)

In short, what has really John done for the state that helps the ordinary working taxpaying and non-public employee Oregon citizen?

<h2>I guess I am asking what is best for Oregon, not the Democrats or John Kitzhaber who is running out of original ideas.</h2>