Bonamici (if I had a vote in CD 1)
T.A. Barnhart
Sen Bonamici at work on Senate Education Ctte
I live in CD 3. That's Blumenauer Country. My vote for Congress is pretty easy, and one I make proudly. (The same was true when I lived in Corvallis and voted for DeFazio.) I don't think CD 3 has had a competitive race since about 1932 or so.
CD 1 is a different story. Dems have held that seat for a long time, but they've had to work to win and hold it. The quality of representation hasn't been all that Democrats and residents have hoped for, but that's about to change. In fact, the quality level is going to jump up pretty damn high. One of three Democrats will be elected to replace David Wu (sorry, Cornilles; even a million bucks won't win for an empty suit) and any of the three would be a great Representative. But:
That Democrat should be Suzanne Bonamici, and here is why.
The Two Brads are both terrific public servants. Either would be an excellent member of Congress. Brad Avakian is not only a really nice man and good person, he is, to borrow a phrase from Elizabeth Warren territory, wicked smart. He's passionate about progressive issues, and that fire and intellect would be terrific assets to the House Dems in DC. Brad Witt's personality is a step or two cooler than Avakian's, but the more I watch and listen to him, the more his own strengths assert themselves. His commitment to progressive issues, and his own skillset to make them happen, have become more evident to me. His performance at the Portland City Club last week showed me he would be a fine member of Congress.
Suzanne Bonamici is not better than either Brad. Like them, she's smart, she's passionate, and she's committed to the issues that matter most to the residents of CD 1. That's the beauty of this race: Three Dems of whom exactly that can be said. Three Dems who would serve the district wonderfully. Three Dems who deserve the vote of the residents.
So why Bonamici? Simple: We need more women in Congress. Period. Of course, I can only make that statement because I believe she is not only qualified to serve, she is every bit as qualified as the Brads. In short, when it comes to skills and qualifications, this race is a toss-up. I can find no issue to separate them on. A few people have tried to do so on trade, but it's been nit-picky stuff without substance (she wants trade pacts that protect Oregon jobs, trade unionists in other countries, the environment, etc; she just won't say she opposes pacts on which she'll have no vote anyway). If I lived in CD 1, I would be happy with any of the three in Congress.
But I would vote for Suzanne because, as I said, we need more women in Congress. (We need more ethnic minorities, more GLBTQ Americans, a lot fewer millionaires -- but this is the race we have.) She is more than qualified to serve in Congress, she can beat the guy who lost big to Wu in a "red tide" year, and she'll make Oregon proud.
I don't live in CD 1, but if you do and you're having trouble deciding which of the three to vote for, I hope you will cast your vote for Suzanne Bonamici. Not because Witt or Avakian isn't as good or qualified, but because Suzanne can represent what they cannot:
Oregon's commitment to full democracy.
 |
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
10:52 a.m.
Oct 12, '11
I also find it a little frustrating that for such a progressive state we have a dearth of female elected officials at the highest levels. We can do better this and I think this would be a prime opportunity.
Witt and Avakian would undoubtedly vote the correct way on women's issues, but only Bonamici would bring a female negotiating style to committee meetings and to the House floor. Having worked in environments that skewed mostly male, with similar ratios of men to women as seen in the House and Senate, I have seen how gender imbalance skews workplace interactions and negotiations.
My hope is that election of Bonamici would be one step closer towards establishing a better gender balance in the U.S. Congress.
11:49 a.m.
Oct 12, '11
T.a.: Bonamici is a free-trader, a Wyden-in-waiting. Avakian decidely is not.
And, how did the Iron Lady Thatcher do for representing that gender? Or Nancy Reagan? Or Marie Antointette?
Sure, more women in government. But some progressive women, please?
11:52 a.m.
Oct 12, '11
"Antoinette"
If you're going to say that being a woman is the reason to elect a person, I will reference any and all women!
12:12 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
ok, so you skimmed the article. if you'd read it, you'd have seen i said no such thing. i said it's a toss-up: i believe they are equally deserving to be elected. at no point did i say "vote for her JUST because she's a woman".
1:39 a.m.
Oct 14, '11
Faulty premise leads to faulty conclusion. I, like many folks, do not believe the three candidates are equally good choices. Avakian is clearly the best and therefore we shouldn't even default to your selection criteria.
12:00 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
TA, don't they differ on NCLB? I thought Avakian was for repealing it and Bonamici was for revising it. Since you're following this more closely than I (like you, I'm in CD3) maybe you can tell me.
12:14 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
6 of 1. it may be easier to revise appropriately than repeal; i don't know. i do know her commitment to public education is beyond doubt, and that's what matters. don't forget, as the newest member of Congress, and in the minority, her job will be to learn, develop relationships, and prepare for 2013 when Pelois is Speaker again.
1:04 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
So the answer is "yes". Thanks.
1:44 a.m.
Oct 14, '11
Those are only some of a new congressperson's responsibilities. Their first and most important is to provide leadership. Character is one of the most important building block of leadership and Avakian has shown that more than others. Bonamici by failing to speak out against a failing congressman for obvious and known sleeziness clearly failed in this most basic area.
12:26 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
I will vote for someone based on their leadership skills, policy decisions and positions, and willingness to take a stand when it is important, not based upon their gender. And I do not think the we must elect a woman crowd should get to say I am wrong if I decide that a male is the better candidate in this race. And YES I WILL VOTE FOR AVAKIAN, I do believe he is the BETTER candidate.
To me Bonamici cannot be the best candidate because she failed to demand a resignation of Congressman Wu when he again seriously stepped over the line of decency. As an elected I expect her to use her seat at the table, ability to access media, and any public forum that is appropriate to call for action when needed -- or get out of the way for someone who will do what is necessary. I believe in getting more women elected but not if I am unsure they will use the position to stand up and fight for women. As Bonamici likes to run as though she is a champion for women, expecting her to call for Wu to resign shouldn’t be a lot to ask. She is just too close a friend to Wu for my liking, and I do not understand her continued support well after it was time for him to go.
And as you point out TA, you are right that we do not need another millionaire that may not know what it is like to live in these tough times in congress. So then why doesn’t her financial status affect your decision to support Bonamici: http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2011/05/suzanne_bonamici_brings_financ.html
I see you trying to say the only difference is that Bonamici is refusing to take a position on trade. Avakian is also stronger on education, don’t forget he got the OEA endorsement. Prob because he will support a repeal of No Child Left Behind and all the work he did to get shop back in the schools. This is important in my book.
2:35 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
you mean, Sandy, as Co-chair of Redistricting, she should have gotten involved in a political argument that would have undermined her ability to be trusted by all parties?
she made the right choice to stay out of it. she got redistricting done IN THE LEG. a significant achievement. also, she said she would make no decision about any race while the Leg was in session; she kept her word on that while Avakian got a big head start. she proved she's a person of her word.
i am very proud of how she handled herself in the Leg. i got to see her up-close a lot, and she did her district proud.
something i can also say of the two Brads.
1:45 a.m.
Oct 14, '11
Yes, her handling of redistricting was so superb as to ensure her entire senate district was included in the new CD1 boundaries...
12:52 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
FWIW, OR-3 last had a competitive race in the 1996 special, when Earl Blumenauer defeated Shirley Gold. And before that, in 1980 when a young and brash upstart named Ron Wyden defeated the incumbent, Congressman Bob Duncan.
2:36 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
guess who didn't feel like googling this? thanks, Kari.
1:09 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
I don't have a dog in this race, and I think Avakian or Bonamici would be a fine representative.
However, the charge that Bonamici is not a "champion for women" because she failed to call for Wu's resignation on a timely basis was made in another thread, and I think it has no merit if you review the record.
The fact is, virtually NO ONE called for Wu's resignation up and until he actually resigned on July 28.
On Sunday, July 26, Pelosi and Steve Israel (NY), both recently burned by the Wiener scandal, called for Wu to resign.
On Tuesday morning, Senators Wyden and Merkley called for Wu to resign.
Avakian can rightly claim credit for being the ONLY local politician to call for Wu's resignation before Wu eventually resigned. He was the only declared candidate--declaring that he would run against Wu in the primary in fact if Wu chose to run again. In short, Avakian had almost nothing to lose in calling for Wu's resignation.
But to call this some sort of profile in courage for women's issues is a huge stretch, particularly since it means that virtually every single Democratic elected office holder fails the same test being applied to Bonamici.
2:49 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
The problem for Bonamici here isn't just that she didn't call for the resignation--its that she couched it as "grandstanding" to do so.
Btw, Brad Witt (to his credit) also called for Wu to step down, and was also a candidate for Congress:
http://www.blueoregon.com/2011/07/avakian-and-witt-call-wu-resign/
To ask a representative who clearly has a problem with inappropriate sexual behavior to step down isn't grandstanding. It's what we should EXPECT.
2:52 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
yes, Carla, i'm sure Bonamici was perfectly happy with Wu remaining in office after the charges came out.
Witt had not told people he would remain silent during the session, either, nor did he have any Co-chair responsibilities.
5:15 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
It isn't about whether or not she was happy with Wu. It's about leadership.
1:51 a.m.
Oct 14, '11
I'm with you Carla. It is about leadership and Bonamici's failure to call-out Wu was a failure of leadership.
1:49 a.m.
Oct 14, '11
Like the global warming deniers...holding on to a faulty idea in the face of incontrovertible evidence, best logic, and more persuasive arguments.
2:53 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
If you are interested in hearing the candidates speak for themselves, I'm posting the Pdx City Club debate in segments at the Video page for Hipfish Monthly, a news alternative out of Astoria. The 3 opening statements are there now (separate videos).
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Hipfish-Monthly/251118308264391?sk=videos
2:54 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
hm. i thought it would convert to a link.
Hipfish videos
2:55 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
here's the link: Hipfish videos
9:10 p.m.
Oct 12, '11
I agree with T.A. that any of the three leading Democrats would make a fine Congressperson. However, we should consider that Rob Cornilles, because he portrays himself as a moderate Republican, may be a strong candidate. Hence I believe we need to nominate the Democrat who will be the strongest campaigner. Because Brad Avakian is the only one of the three who has won an election in a Republican-leaning district, he is the one whom I will support.
9:09 p.m.
Oct 13, '11
That's an interesting point about electability, although Brad's district in 2002 had a GOP edge of only 90 voters. There must have been lots of Democratic-leaning independents, because by 2004, the Democrats had an edge in HD34 of more than 1,000.
12:42 p.m.
Oct 13, '11
With forty years of Democrats representing Oregon in the US House and I hope we can continue with the special election coming up in Jan. 2012. If you are not registered to vote, please do that. Primary election will be held November 8th. Ballots come out within days. We are fortunate to have three strong candidates and all three would do us proud. At this time we need the strongest, most experienced voice and I believe Brad Avakian will be our next Congressman. I am in the CD1 and he will get my vote.
6:34 p.m.
Oct 13, '11
It was obvious to anyone with a brain that Wu had a problem before he was re-elected. Where were those people then? They were busy apologizing for him and making excuses for him and misrepresenting his record to make it look like he wasn't the most ineffective congressman in the history of mankind. After trusting CD1 to the dems for as long as they have including the last 12 years being effectively unrepresented in congress, who in their right mind would even consider electing another democrat? Why would CD1 be better off electing someone who is destined to have zero clout, and zero seniority and whose party will be in the minority for a very long time? Haven't they been unrepresented by democrats long enough? Time for some hope and change for CD1. They need to send Cornilles to Congress and not just more of the same
9:06 p.m.
Oct 13, '11
By that logic, Oregon's shouldn't be electing any Republicans because of Wes Cooley. The GOP defended him with vigor for quite a while. I think candidates stand on their own, and I think most voters see it the same way.
9:40 p.m.
Oct 13, '11
I suppose that logic works if you think lying to voters is the same as sexually assaulting woman after woman, driving drunk and hitting parked cars, buying narcotics, abusing narcotics AND being a liar. Is that what you are saying wayne? That's not my logic wayne that's yours.
I see Obama defended here all the time and no one has told more lies to more people on this planet than he has, what should we do with him? Hopefully no one will be surprised when he isn't reelected.
1:56 a.m.
Oct 14, '11
The only lies out there with Obama's name attached is the garabage being spewed by Fox News, the right-wing bloggers, and the tea party people. Obama has led this country through its worst economy since the Great Depression and kept us from falling into another one despite the R's in Congress whose stated mission is stop Obama. That's right, their mission is not to get America back to work and keep this country great. The R's in Congress would rather trash this country for the sake of transient political power. It will be a sad day for America if Obama isn't reelected.
10:52 a.m.
Oct 14, '11
"No one has told more lies to more people on this planet than he has"
Really?????????
You are an unserious person.
9:10 p.m.
Oct 14, '11
Actually, Obama is in the midst of propagating a BIG LIE right now, but all of the GOP (and practically all of the Dems) are going along with it:
http://www.juancole.com/2011/10/wagging-the-dog-with-irans-maxwell-smart.html
Prof. Juan Cole knows of which he speaks as regards the ME and S Asia, and he's 100% sure that practically all of the US gov (Obama & Holder leading) are lying about this grave matter. And so, the US gov tries to lie us into yet another war!
9:18 p.m.
Oct 14, '11
And this: http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=105458
Just another FBI sting-set up, with the DEA informant himself going state's evidence in order to beat a rap they had on him.
5:16 a.m.
Oct 16, '11
Come on David no one really believes that the GOP wants to 'trash this country' nor are they trying to make the economy worse just so Obama won't get re-elected. Even assuming for a minute that really was their plan, what could they possibly do to wreck the economy Obama hasn't already done?
And Rob, (and David this next part is for you too) Let's just start with Baracchio's most recent flurry of made up and false facts (a.k.a. lies) on his jobs bill. Remember the man Obama talked at length about meeting in person ...a teacher ... 3 pink slips in 3 years ...a man named Robert Baroz? Well it never happened, never! Obama has never met the guy and didn't even have his story straight. Here is a link to the National Review article telling you all about it along with numerous other jobs bill related whoppers!
Here is a link to a website that lists about 150 of Obama's biggest lies so far http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/fashion-shows/
I am still looking for the king of all Obama lies websites that has chronicled over 4000 lies since he started running for President. Please note that all of these lies are followed by the truth along with the source that proves it was a lie. How many do you need to read before you realize that NOTHING about Obama is true and nothing he says is true? These are lies Obama has told, NOT lies anyone has put in his mouth, how could they? His mouth is always so full of lies he intends to tell there wouldn't be room
5:21 a.m.
Oct 16, '11
Here is that Nationa Review link sorry
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/279841/obama-s-teachable-truthiness-moment-michelle-malkin
6:49 a.m.
Oct 16, '11
@Chester Vanderbilt: the GOP (every one of them) will resist all efforts to re-regulate the banks- will resist all effort to reinstate Glass-Steagall or the Volcker rule (which has elements of Glass-Steagall). And so, when the banks' stupid gambling bets go bad again, which they will, the next crash will ensue.
Obama is not strong enough in his calling for regulation, but the GOP is worse than he is.
6:49 a.m.
Oct 16, '11
FDR saved capitalism in the USA
6:52 a.m.
Oct 16, '11
And you should have seen all the GOP US congresspeople frothing at the mouth over the ridiculous lies and entrapment of Mansoor Arbabsiar that I posted about! Again, the Dem reaction was deplorable, but the GOP reaction was worse (as always).