Stupid, stupid move.

A ridiculous waste of money on a primary that should be spend defeating a Republican next November.

And a career killer for Jesse Cornett.

Dumb, dumb, dumb.

Agree with Pete.

I know both men, and have agreed with both on one issue or another. They represent diff. constituencies and generations, and it will be interesting to see if they can engage in an intelligent debate over issues important to their districts----or just get into attacks on each other.

I'm guessing that this might be a primary where shoe leather could be as important as money. Jesse is young, the weather is still nice, he could start walking as soon as he files for office. An old friend of mine who once lost a general election in a recount (that he supposedly "didn't have a chance of winning" but won 2 years later) still wished over 2 decades later that he wishes he could have gotten to those last 60 houses--maybe he might have won that year.

Jesse is young. If he runs an honorable campaign--even if he loses---going up against an established legislator who alienated some people to the point of "is he really a Democrat?" (yes, I think Mike is, but perhaps more in line with some Democrats many years ago than 21st century Democrats) is no sin.

By an honorable campaign I mean one on the issues, not personal attacks.

One of my all time favorite campaign ads, which did better than expected against an entrenched incumbent had a picture at the top of the page and the headline, WHY IS THIS MAN RUNNING? Not a nasty attack ad, but just that the candidate was running because he disagreed with the incumbent on SB this and HB that---a long list of votes the challenger thought were wrong.

There is a whole group of young state reps. They see issues differntly than the folks who might have been in Mike's high school graduating class. I see no reason with pointing that out. Esp. if there were young legislators from districts in that area of the state whose voting records were closer to Jesse's views than to Mike's record.

Does Jesse believe we need kicker reform? What are his views on tax reform? On what the Public Comm. on the Legislature proposed on several issues, including campaign finance reform? If he doesn't like Mike's voting record, specifically what would he have done differently?

I believe such a campaign would really stand out and be something ordinary folks might find interesting. Happy Valley has been in the news for some local issues--where does Mike stand on those issues and where does Jesse stand?

Anyone has the right to run for any office if they live in the district---this is not a parliamentary system where someone needs permission to run.

Is Jesse also calling for a progressive to challenge Wyden? I wonder what conclusion we should draw if he is or isn't?

Since your only quote about Cornett indicates he thinks Shaufler is not progressive enough based on the frame of environmentalism, it is not clear that Jesse is even a progressive. I wonder if he has the brain power to engage the issues raised in articles such as this:

Green Grows Grassroots http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060731/hertsgaard

And engaging it means exhibiting a entire set of values congruent with a true challenge to the glaring class privilege that the environmental movement still largely embodies.

To the anonymous commenters who are saying that this is "a career killer" for Jesse, or who hate the idea of contested primaries...

Personally, I agree 100% with Sal. EVERY partisan primary should be aggressively contested to keep candidates humble and the party focused on staying true to core values. (That's exactly why it's imperative Wyden also be challenged by someone who is actually a true Democrat this cycle.)

As I already noted, the real question is whether Jesse really has the depth to make a challenge what it needs to be. Given the comment Kari choose to showpiece about him, off the bat there is no reason at all to assume so, and some reason to at least entertain exactly the opposite belief.

Why doesn't somebody dig up statements and issue positions Jesse issued in his last campaign? Unless he is willing to define himself for this campaign right now, that's one of the few legitimate ways we have to evaluate his quality of character, values, and intellect.

Otherwise, if Kari has picked an representative statement of his views and reason for running, he appears to be just another example of that empty, uninspired, bankrupt, Oregon caricature of true progressivism and Democratic values that we already see holding back our state legislature. If Kari hasn't, he owes Jesse an apology for picking a quote to introduce him this cycle that is such an empty, stereotyped representation of that bankrupt caricature.

A ridiculous waste of money on a primary that should be spend defeating a Republican next November.

Thank you Pat! If that is how Mike campaigned (and I knew some old line Democrats from that area who believed that was the smartest way to campaign), Jesse should too.

Narrow thinkers use a walking list and only go to Democratic households---as if everyone in this state is a registered lifetime registered voter.

But you know what? I'm guessing Obama isn't the first candidate to attract voters who didn't vote straight party line their whole lives and won't be the last. Anyone challenging an incumbent in a primary should be looking for people to register as Democrats, not just talking to those who are already registered that way.

MS, I hope you and To Early are working together to find a challenger to your liking.

"Real Democrat" does not convince everyone, to the point of some having the reaction "them's fighting words".

There was a time when (25-19 vote, not exactly a landslide) anyone on State Central Comm. who voted in the minority on a resolution was "not a real Democrat"---even by people who had not been at the meeting, but by golly they were ideologically pure and the 19 of us who voted in the minority were guilty of heresy. Most of those 19 took the attitude "well, if that is all that defines a real Democrat, why should I volunteer my time", and left party politics.

I know there are those who don't want to hear this but I will say it anyway.

Once upon a time there was a multi-candidate primary race. I knew and respected all the candidates EXCEPT the one recruited from oblivion by the DSCC. There were 2 of those candidates I wished I could have campaigned for, but one can only be in one place at one time--geographically and politically. The DSCC candidate won. People like me were told to forget we had ever been friends with the other candidates we had known for a long time, salute, and give unquestioning support to the nominee.

NONSENSE! I didn't give thousands of hours of my time to the Democratic Party just to be told I was not allowed to associate with close friends once a primary was over with.

I registered NAV. There were Democrats who treated me like a pariah or heretic, and it was a year when I learned what my true friends were.

Ron Wyden still greeted me like an old friend, even though I had registered NAV.

The Republican nominee won that general election.

So, I am looking forward to finding out who this mystery challenger is to Wyden and what makes this person a "real Democrat" to the point it would be OK for Merkley to be the Senior Senator shortly after his election. 2 Senators in their first terms would be great for Oregon because...?

If nothing else matters to you except a narrow view of the health care bill everyone should support without question, be my guest. Statewide challenger campaigns can be a real education. I have worked on some of them.

I hope Jesse talks issues and doesn't descend into this "Real Democrat" nonsense.

As to whether Mike properly represents his Democratic constituents

This is an interesting statement. Does an elected official ONLY represent the constituents of HIS party or does he represent all people? I know it seems that both sides seem to do this, but is it right? Doesn't that leave half of the population in a position of 'taxation without representation?'

Nobody has yet addressed the environmental angle Jesse has brought up. The environment may not be a deciding issue in H-48 but Schaufler has demonstrated, with incredible regularity, a substantial distaste for the environmental movement and on this issue sounds far more like an R than a D. Schauf is not a pro-environment Dem, not even close. He voted yes on the Metolius bill, but near as I can tell, that's about it. When the D advantage was 31 in 2007 he was the single biggest thorn in environmentalists sides.

I think it's simply because of his strong pro-worker labor views that he doesn't run and likely win big as a Republican. For pro-enviro Ds, a Schaufler win is a loss, so it makes sense to mix it up in the primaries. But that's just one issue.

Jesse Cornett would be great in the legislature. If Happy Valley wants someone who consistently votes with Republicans on budget matters, then Schaufler's their guy. Thanks to Jesse for putting his name out there and considering fighting this battle.

Kari, let us know where we can send money once Jesse's campaign gets going.

So far, this is just a WW murmur.

Yeah, right. I love how you feign not to have any additional info beyond what you read in WW. Like murmurs is really WW just repeating what someone overheard. Jesse has taken some obvious steps to making this happen, you should report them.

For those who want to know more on the issues, I'm sure all you have to do is read his two most recent posts here on BO. They're likely to be full of substantive, relative issues.

No one deserves a free pass, saith the proofreader. Nick Kahl represents Dist. 49.

That said, I agree with the rest of what Sal said.

Nobody has yet addressed the environmental angle Jesse has brought up.

Um, not sure what you meant, but at least the question was asked:

Since your only quote about Cornett indicates he thinks Shaufler is not progressive enough based on the frame of environmentalism, it is not clear that Jesse is even a progressive. I wonder if he has the brain power to engage the issues raised in articles such as this: Green Grows Grassroots http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060731/hertsgaard And engaging it means exhibiting a entire set of values congruent with a true challenge to the glaring class privilege that the environmental movement still largely embodies.

And to mp97303: Does an elected official ONLY represent the constituents of HIS party or does he represent all people?

With the caveat the role of Senator is to be deliberative, and a Representative is to be representative (notice how that is in the name): An elected official is elected to act on the values on which the majority elected him or her to lead. Period. That means your question is irrelevant and meaningless. Nothing in our representative democracy says each individual is entitled to representation, only that the people collectively are the government (ie. are collectively the decision makers at the national/state/county/city level).

However, and I'm not referring to you here since your question appears to be more of the spirit of Socratic inquiry rather than a contention, there seems to be a true level of ignorance around this fundamental point that is both generational and regional around this point.

As a resident of the district, I would welcome a challenger in the primary. I've been disappointed that some other leaders and emerging leaders in the district haven't stepped forward. Hope Cornett puts his hat in the ring.

Schuafler saved the METOLIUS. Schaufler is green enough. He was the deciding vote on protecting the Metolius. Target the 3 or 4 Democrats that voted against this bill. Corbett is a tool. FULL DISCLOSURE - I wrote this article to help promote by web service and I will not write anymore articles on this website about my "boss" even if it costs my business money (or makes me look slimmer).

I'm very excited about Jesse getting into the race. He's well spoken, engaged, and will be a fresh perspective for the House. Schaufler has gotten off with his industry and conservative buddies for too long and deserves a serious challenge. Cheers Jesse!

Run, Jesse, run. From the minimum wage, to environmental protection to ending the $10 minimum tax and balancing the budget with responsible revenue measures, Schaufler's been a disaster -- a Democrat In Name Only (DINO).

I think it's simply because of his strong pro-worker labor views that he doesn't run and likely win big as a Republican. For pro-enviro Ds, a Schaufler win is a loss, so it makes sense to mix it up in the primaries. But that's just one issue.

Mike Schauffler aligned himself with the Oregonians Against Job Killing Taxes and voted against both of the tax bills that will keep thousands of Oregonians working and keep devistating cuts from the programs that serve the most needy. These things are particularly important now because so many people are out of work and need help. Mike Schuffler is a Democrat In Name Only and has been lording his position as a swing vote over the caucus for much too long. We need someone in this district who will represent true Democratic values and not be afraid to take a stand on issues that are important to all working people not just the ones that can afford to donate to Rep. Schauffler's campaign war chest.

Good luck Jesse, I am sure you will have a lot of support to take out a legislator who is a bully and not representative of the district.

Observer 2: It has been my suspicion that many legislators hope that Sept. 25 comes and goes without enough signatures turned in for the referrals to land on the ballot. If we learned anything from Measure 30 it is that there should be intense pressure on all 90 legislators to publicly state where they stand if the measures qualify.

Majority caucuses should recruit AND SUPPORT candidates for any district where an incumbent Republicans supports the tax referral measures.

And any Democrat who does not loudly and actively support the work of the legislature deserves to be challenged in a primary. Period.

Clearly you know something the rest of us don't....so rather than castigating people for not reporting something..report it here yourself.

Carla, you have childish (as in simplistic and not fully matured) way of looking at the world: As in striking out first at the "other" who is critical of those in "your" group who exhibit the same undeveloped moral, intellectual, and character qualities.

The issue is that Kari chose that particular quote, out of everything he could have chosen, to float the idea of one those in "your" group, and not the "other", running again. When the values questions raised by that quote Kari --- not anyone raising a red flag --- chose, instead of displaying the maturity and integrity to engage those issues, Kari and now you have started to make asking the question the issue.

Personally, I don't believe it is for much more reason than you and Kari simply lack the mental and moral skills to address the question rather than for purely propagandistic purposes. This is of course why the blogosphere, or at least vast swaths of it, are moral and intellectual deserts in which our public dialog starves, not the fertile birthing place of new, productive, communications that will revive our moribund, diseased political process.

To put a finer point on it: While we've seen a few campaign bullet points about Cornett's supposed views, I have yet to see anymore depth in Jesse than you and Kari have demonstrated.

Now in the May 2006 primary, Cornett lost to Monroe by about 2.5%. That is a margin that is not nearly so close as it seems because many, many elections are decided by that percent. It looms as a quantum of inertia in competitive contests where one candidate just fails to resonate with the voters compared to the other. Jesse has not demonstrated so far that he is a credible Democratic advocate to voters, and this inauspicious exploration has suggested why this might be the case.

Personally I'm struck by why a lobbyist for the business of higher ed (which is completely apart from being an advocate for the mission of public higher ed in this state and in the arena of political debate) would be dumb enough to even offer a statement about his focus on the environment for a primary race in which the incumbent voted to save the Metolious in a close, and hotly debated, vote that was emblematic of the fight over land use in Oregon. Is he going to argue he would have "saved it even more"? One can't help but wonder fit this inartful trial balloon isn't just that some individuals and groups urging him to run, essentially just playing to his ego and with the real motive of using him as a pawn in their own agenda.

He definitely should run if he wants to. But no one who whines if and when he is criticized as being unworthy or incapable in the rough and tumble of the political process.

I've been in Rep. Schauffler's office and his M.O. is to ask who's for and who's against, and then make comments as to who supported him or not. Don't expect any discussion of the Merits of any particular bill or issue. This Rep. has turned into the ultimate hack politician and a Blue Dog drag on anything progressive.

Go Jesse Go!

I wish Jesse would challenge Kurt BluedogSellout Schrader.

Jesse Cornett doesn't even LIVE in HD 48. In order to run, he would have to move from NE Portland out to HD 48 in the next two months.

Jeff, Dems are more likely to have a short majority tenure IF these crazy purity tests are applied each election. Not the other way around. We are far better off with a "big tent" approach to governing.

We only have to look at recent lessons from Oregon House Republicans, who have spent the past several years focusing their time, energy, and money on defeating their own incumbents in primaries because they weren't "pure" enough (Dennis Richardson over Cheryl Walker, Kim Thatcher over Vic Backlund, Larry George over Charles Starr, Linda Flores over Jan Lee, Suzanne Gallagher over Phil Yount, and now Republicans recruiting primary challengers to take on both Greg Smith and Bob Jenson). As a result, the R's completely lost some of these seats to D's and lost precious time, energy, and money on all the others.

We are smarter than that. At least I hope we are.

Jesse Cornett's decision will help decide whether we will continue this strong progressive majority in Salem - or whether we will waste our time, energy, and resources in fruitless primaries that let our majority slip away.

Sal,

Peter Buckley did not run against an incumbent Democratic legislator. Judy Uherbelau had been out of office for several years. Peter ran in the open House seat left by Alan Bates running for the Senate.

I agree with Jeff over Kari. The Howard Dean view was "show up everywhere, contest everything" and I believe that is smarter than "we have limited resources and some staffers who are always 100% right about where those resources should go" (Rahm's view of the world).

Backbeat, I would vote for Kurt over Jesse for Congress any day of the week. What exactly does Jesse know about the 5th Cong. Dist.?

For the record, the MS in this conversation is not Mike Schaufler.

Roadster, I understand your point about House Rs, but no one is saying (unlike with Walker and Backlund) that anyone must be ideologically pure. If Jesse runs and more residents of the district like Mike, Mike will win the primary.

But there is another thing which hurts the political fabric and makes people get disgusted and find a use for their time other than politics. That is the "should not be allowed to run" syndrome.

Repeat after me: residents of a district deserve to be the ones making a decision on who represents them.

I live in a district where my state rep. was once someone who won an open seat primary against a candidate recruited by the Majority Leader.

I still think that was a worthwhile primary. I knew all 3 candidates. Some people in the primary (not the candidates, some supporters) got really nasty. But others remained on friendly terms with multiple candidates--a measure of maturity. The top 2 candidates in that primary were friends before the primary, during the primary, and after the primary.

Yes, that was a darned good state rep. we had---and he was elected back in the days before there was any caucus campaign arm making decisions.

Backbeat, I would vote for Kurt over Jesse for Congress any day of the week. What exactly does Jesse know about the 5th Cong. Dist.?

I have no idea, just blowing it out my ear. All I know is that hearing Schrader on KPOJ last week put me in a nasty funk. He scoffed at single payer, and would not commit even to suppoting a strong public option, saying "I've had a number of town hall meetings and people don't want a government plan." DUDE, THOSE WERE RIGHTWING CRAZY PLANTS AT YOUR TOWN HALL MEETING YOU IDIOT!!! DAMN!