portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts portland metro

government oregon elections 2006

Public financing of Portland elections

Some interesting commentary on Blue Oregon following on the recent Oregonian article.
 http://www.blueoregon.com/2006/02/gard_gerbers_ti.html#comments

I hope that indymedia readers have been paying attention to local politics as well as outrages at the national level. I for one am glad that the publicly financed elections are going to at least be tried out.

Comments 20.Feb.2006 03:29

here they are

Posted by: sarah | Feb 18, 2006 1:00:39 PM

Isn't Gard & Gerber, Multnomah Co / Diane Linn's PR firm too?

Posted by: LT | Feb 18, 2006 1:13:24 PM

"I'm thinking this is sabotage," said Jason Williams of the Taxpayers Association of Oregon, which collected about 2,000 signatures for the repeal effort.

Perhaps TAO is upset that "the people" think for themselves.
Isn't this McIntire's outfit?
When was the last time they successfully passed a ballot measure? In this century?
A friend who stood up to McIntire's 2000 ballot measure is still regarded as a hero---"we the people" DOES include those who belong to no organization. Some of us just wish there were more proposed solutions to actual problems, not just some company complaining that it is someone else's fault they didn't do quality control before handing in signature sheets.

The term initiativemeisters shows the low level of regard many of us have for those who think making a living on ballot measures is honorable work.
Try living in the real world where most people don't have an ideology or political label or the names of all the movers and shakers on the tips of their tongues because they are more concerned about everyday life of work, family, friends.

Posted by: Jon Isaacs | Feb 18, 2006 1:23:51 PM

I can speak personally to this campaign's incompetence since I had the pleasure of rejecting a request to sign this petition to two different signature gatherers at my door on the same evening. I remembered thinking:

A. Whomever cut their turf really sucks at their job.
B. Neither of the gatherers could have been older than 18.
C. Neither of the gatherers knew anything about the measure they were gathering signatures for. I nearly talked one of them into quitting her job once I explained the details to her.

Posted by: Charlie in Gresham | Feb 18, 2006 1:29:00 PM

"the League of Women Voters and other reformers"

The League of Womens Voters is a reform organization?

That was 40 years ago. Nobody can really tell me what their mission is today but atleast I can be thankful they are left wing and bright blue.

Posted by: LT | Feb 18, 2006 1:40:09 PM

Charlie G,
Visit these websites and let us know what you find "lefty and bright blue" about them:

 http://www.lwv.org

 http://www.lwvor.org

Or are you saying that anyone who disagrees with you is a lefty?

Posted by: blue | Feb 18, 2006 1:49:16 PM

I'm pretty shocked that Ginny Burdick would align herself with the Taxpayers Association of Oregon. Bad enough that she's fronting for PGE, Qwest, and the rest of that gang. Now she's allies with Don McIntyre as well?

Posted by: Charlie in Gresham | Feb 18, 2006 1:49:53 PM

Good afternoon LT...I knew I'd hear from you darlin.

I hope you have the good sense not to insult anyone's intelligence and claim that the League is anything but solidly liberal.

Posted by: Charlie in Gresham | Feb 18, 2006 1:54:13 PM

Don McIntire is YOUR ally too Blue....you just haven't grown up enough yet to realize it.

Posted by: The One True b!X | Feb 18, 2006 1:54:33 PM

Notice that despite Williams' assertion of sabotage, today's Theo also says (as I pointed out today on FURIOUS nads!):

[Marvin] Prestwood fears that he received two petitions in the mail from the Taxpayers Association of Oregon or another anti-tax group -- and signed them both. His wife's signature appears twice, too. Williams, of the Taxpayer Association, says his organization sent two mailings to the same list but sent the second copy only to people who had failed to respond to the first.

So maybe Williams should be looking closer to home for the problems they encountered with duplicate signatures.

As for G&G, it's the same old thing from them. Not that it's not worth pointing out, of course. But the real news will be if the day over comes that they are not a slime machine.

Posted by: blue | Feb 18, 2006 2:07:32 PM

Don McIntire is YOUR ally too Blue....you just haven't grown up enough yet to realize it.

I pay the same taxes that you do, Charlie. The difference is that unlike you, McIntyre, and that pontificating blowhard that he pimps on his web site, I realized a long time ago that you can't get something for nothing from government and that the taxes that we pay are a price of citizenship.

Grownups understand that you can't get something for nothing. It's the kids, even greyhaired ones like yourself, who think that you can get services from government without paying a cost.

Posted by: LT | Feb 18, 2006 2:37:07 PM

Thanks, blue.

I would add one other thing. Think of the kids who were in elementary school when Measure 5 (and then 47/ 50) passed.
As I recall, Measure 47 was passed 10 years ago, so anyone who was 10 that year would be 20 now.
Kids born in the late 1970s-early 1980s are now young adults. Some are college graduates with good jobs. Does McInitire do well in front of such audiences? Not what I have heard. Where are the young volunteers willing to go door to door on behalf of McIntire and his anti-tax, anti-union, anti-government crusade?

There was a great test of anti-tax strength in 2002 when Tiernan ran against Devlin and Witt ran against Ringo. If anti-taxers are everyone's favorite politicians, why did those races go to the Democrats?
Could it have been all the excesses of certain state senators?(The ceramic pig and the message "only raise taxes when pigs fly" may have been the last straw from people expecting serious behavior out of the state senators.)

McIntire, as I understand him, is not only a rude old guy (some friends saw him swear when his position was challenged in a debate) but also someone who wants the state (except, of course, the Sec. of State elections Division because they are needed to put measures on the ballot) to fall down around our ears because that is better than raising taxes.

The honest thing for his supporters to do is to run campaigns based on the idea
RESOLVED: Taxes in this state are too high and we will defeat anyone who advocates health care, schools or public safety funding or any other government program.

and see how far they get.

My suspicion is that McIntire and his cronies have a tough time stating what they are FOR. It is so much easier just to rail on about being anti-tax and anyone who asks detailed questions must be one of them pro-tax liberals.

Posted by: Charlie Burr | Feb 18, 2006 2:52:49 PM

Sarah, I don't know if Gard & Gerber is doing Diane Linn's campaign. I do know that they were the media firm that managed to defeat a loose coalition of underfunded Pacific Green Party activists in the public power campaign while armed with only $3.5 million dollars. Say what you will about that effort's electoral skill and effectiveness - but at least they made it to the ballot.

I don't have any problem with Gard & Gerber being on the wrong side (in my view) of this issue. Nothing wrong with that. What bothers me is that they aren't debating the merits, they're accusing opponents of a vast criminal conspiracy and electoral fraud without offering a single shred of proof.

Further, let's be honest: this isn't going to change the 624 signatures they need, and Gard & Gerber knows it. It's just simply CYA for Gard & Gerber, not for the sake of the FTF's interests, but for their own reputation.

Posted by: Charlie Burr | Feb 18, 2006 3:02:32 PM

Brother Isaacs, good to see you here on blueoregon and as always, I appreciate all of the important - and highly competent - work you guys are doing over there. Keep up the good work; we'll change this state yet!

Posted by: The One True b!X | Feb 18, 2006 3:23:40 PM

I don't have any problem with Gard & Gerber being on the wrong side (in my view) of this issue. Nothing wrong with that. What bothers me is that they aren't debating the merits, they're accusing opponents of a vast criminal conspiracy and electoral fraud without offering a single shred of proof.

Well, that's what they do. It's why they exist. They sign up for the wrong side of an issue, most usually that means the side of the city's power-brokers, and then proceed to deceive the public rather than engage in a debate on the merits of the public policy in question.

Posted by: paulie | Feb 18, 2006 3:53:41 PM

Ginny Burdick is a very liberal democrat who is known for her thoughtful independent positions. Having said that, it seems the petition effort was very mismanaged or there is a deep conspiracy that radical lefties messed with the petition drive. I choose the former.

Posted by: LT | Feb 18, 2006 6:06:14 PM

Terms like liberal and conservative don't cover lots of areas.

If someone cares about public meetings and politician dialogue with the public---and says Ted Ferrioli and Peter Courtney did that better than Kate Brown---which label applies to them?

Sounds to me like Burdick's friends/ fellow G & G folks refuse to take responsibility for their own actions.
Blaming an unproven "conspiracy" sounds like the old saying "when they act like that, you know they know they are losing".

Posted by: Charlie in Gresham | Feb 18, 2006 6:42:52 PM

Blue....you have no idea what taxes I pay. To say that you say the pay the same taxes as I do is laughable.

As for Don McIntire....he obviously has been EXTREMELY effective in achieving his goals if he has this much notoriety among liberals, moderates, and conservatives. It appears his legacy is secure.
You might want to begin working on yours Blue.

Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Feb 18, 2006 6:48:59 PM

Charlie--

You're right, since we live in Gresham-- which has one of the lowest tax burdens in the state-- and the lowest amongst cities that offer full services.

Posted by: LT | Feb 18, 2006 6:58:05 PM

As for Don McIntire....he obviously has been EXTREMELY effective in achieving his goals if he has this much notoriety among liberals, moderates, and conservatives. It appears his legacy is secure.

So, you know that from the days of Measure 5 McIntire's main goal has been to annoy people?
McIntire's legacy is secure, all right---as a 20th century initiativemeister. But what has he accomplished in this century?

Young people I know see him as the guy who cut spending while they were in public school, and were thrilled to see someone of their generation stand up to him at a 2000 debate.

Charlie G, if you believe in more than insults, you should try to find out some information about Max Rafferty. He died before most people had online access, so I don't know how much you could find about him online. He had McIntire's love of insults and about as much to show for all his actions, except he was a government official in California in the 1960s.
He won the nomination for US Senate (defeating an incumbent) in 1968 and a lot of people who were not fans of Alan Cranston decided Cranston was the better of the two and sent him to DC so Max Rafferty would not be inflicted on the whole country.

As I recall, Rafferty died in a car accident (went off the road into some water or something) and it was barely a blip on the news.
No memorials.
My guess is that Sizemore & McIntire are headed in that direction--no more "legacy" than being disruptive, and famous for namecalling (Sizemore saying parents in a march for school funding were "dupes of the teachers union" likely did not win friends and influence people).

But you don't care as long as you can make sarcastic remarks, is that it?

Posted by: The One True b!X | Feb 18, 2006 7:12:02 PM

Ginny Burdick is a very liberal democrat who is known for her thoughtful independent positions.

Which is completely irrelevant if she's letting herself be the stalking horse for the city's power-brokers, who previously failed to get Jim Francesconi into office and now have another shot.

Posted by: Charlie Burr | Feb 18, 2006 8:14:30 PM

Ginny Burdick is a very liberal democrat who is known for her thoughtful independent positions.

Nor is there anything "thoughtful" or "independent" about her public relations firm going after the League of Women Voters and repeal opponents - accusing them of criminal activity and voter fraud - without having a single shred of proof.

I have nothing against Ginny personally - I like her actually. I worked with her in the Senate and have spent hours upon hours organizing on behalf of her Legislative priorities. But I sincerely hope she doen't file for this ill-considered race and am deeply disappointed by this unsubstantiated and inflamatory attack coming from her pr firm.

Posted by: torridjoe | Feb 18, 2006 10:13:01 PM

This scenario of "we wuz robbed!" being intentionally spread as rumor without the first shred of evidence, reminds me quite a bit of the failed Washington goobernor's contest by Dino Rossi and the flacks of the WA GOP/BIAW. Except at least in that case the mistakes made were by the putative defendants, rather than the plaintiffs.

It's not so far fetched--the same national figures who pump money into Oregon's conservative front organizations (like OTA) do the same thing in Washington. And they expect the same fealty of purpose--win by any means necessary.

It's disappointing to see otherwise rational Ginny Burdick take such a traditionally right-wing tack on this.

Posted by: Tom Civiletti | Feb 18, 2006 10:36:51 PM

Having survived two years of battling Gard&Gerber in the PGE service area PUD campaigns, I know that "slime" is an apropos word for Charlie Burr to use in this post's title. Anyone approaching the vicinity of these public relations professionals should wear well-sharpened golf spikes to assure firm footing.

Although Senator Burdick deserves copious chiding for going to work for these purveyors of the Big Lie, the list of civic-minded persons of note who were either bought-off, co-opted, or fooled by G&G and PGE into misleading the voters on the merits of public ownership is quite long. It includes Ellen Lowe, Kurt Schrader, Greg MacPherson, Rick Metsger, Judie Hammerstad, Jay Formick, and Martha Schrader. Then there are all those influential folks scared into silence by PGE's political clout. I won't name those who told me that was just the reason they remained silent on the PUD issue.

Posted by: Robert Ted Hinds | Feb 19, 2006 10:57:18 AM

That's a pretty big strategic blunder, as Ginny has the most to gain by aligning herself with the League of Women Voters. My personal experience has been that the LWV is one of the most above board and respectable organizations in local politics.

Just a pet peeve and I know most other progressives will disagree with me, but Ginny's stance on gun control has rankled me as well as gunowner conservatives. The right to keep and bear arms is right there in the US Constitution's Second Amendment. Leave it alone. Same goes for George Bush and the Fourth Amendment and Fifth Amendments. The common denominator here is that Ginny has shown a Federalist tilt to her governance which is underscored by her Gard & Gerber alliance.

Posted by: Lelo | Feb 19, 2006 11:42:28 AM

I'm glad to not have been the only person who experienced the idiotic petition gatherers for this initiative: mine actually told me she was there representing the City of Portland when I asked her who was behind the petition she was gathering signatures for. Nice.

Posted by: Jesse O | Feb 19, 2006 11:46:49 AM

There's a very interesting ongoing link of Ginny Burdick with everything G&G has ever done.

Nor is there anything "thoughtful" or "independent" about her public relations firm

Perhaps she could speak for herself on what G&G does, and whether she believes the conspiracy theories ... perhaps G&G should take a lesson from Dick Cheney and take responsibility for once.

Last I heard, it was Gard and Gerber, not Gard and Burdick. Does Randy Leonard have to be held responsible for everything the City does? After all, he works for that entity. Does every City maintenance person get held responsible for the reservoir capping?

Ginny needs to distance herself from G&G publicly, or at least from some of their campaigns. Until she does that, they'll continue to be an anchor to her campaign.

Just because she's against local public financing doesn't mean she believes everything anyone from G&G says about this campaign.


Posted by: Tom Civiletti | Feb 19, 2006 1:14:48 PM

I'm not happy with Burdick, but her ballot initiative did nothing but mandate background checks at gun shows. I think that is a common sense step that does not infringe on the second ammendment, unless one supports an absolutist reading of the Constitution, an approach that the Supreme Court has not taken with any part of the document.

Posted by: bluelurker | Feb 19, 2006 1:38:20 PM

G&G:"What I do know is that something is fishy here. Unfortunately, we're going to run out of time before we can get real answers."

Here's a real answer: you ran an incompetent campaign.

Posted by: carla | Feb 19, 2006 2:46:03 PM

Something is fishy for G&G? Maybe its the fact that their signature gatherers came across as bullying, incompetent boobs.

Posted by: The One True b!X | Feb 19, 2006 3:49:28 PM

Ginny needs to distance herself from G&G publicly, or at least from some of their campaigns. Until she does that, they'll continue to be an anchor to her campaign.

Just because she's against local public financing doesn't mean she believes everything anyone from G&G says about this campaign.

Well, you know, she is "a vice president with Gard & Gerber, a Portland advertising and public relations firm."

So, I guess she could, you know, resign if she disagrees with the slimeball tactics of her own company.

Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Feb 19, 2006 3:57:13 PM

Jesse O wrote: There's a very interesting ongoing link of Ginny Burdick with everything G&G has ever done. ...Perhaps she could speak for herself on what G&G does...

For what it's worth, Ginny Burdick has been invited to submit a guest column here at BlueOregon on any topic she would like -- either to respond to the many attacks here, or to discuss something else altogether.

Gathering signatures 20.Feb.2006 04:49

Tired of harassment

I have had too many signature gatherers bold face lie to me about the issue I am being asked to sign. The organizers behind the canvassers lie to the canvassers telling them they will make $15 an hour. Then they require 15 signatures an hour. If you don't make your quota you get fired. Canvasseres end up having to under report the hours they work and greed drives them to push people into signing.

They start using slogans that are false out of desparation and greed when they are only making $5 - $7 an hour and have to lie to do it. Problem is they end up screwing themselves after they have confused the public into signing the same measure twice. Often people do not understand the issues they are signing for. The gatherers do a poor job of honest communication of proposed issues.

I've had gathereers follow me down the block repeatedly begging me to sign petitions I don't beleive in. These petitions take money and are usually funded by and for the radicle right.

The gatherers rely on the compassion and ignorance of the public to eek out a living. The people behind the petitions depend on the desparation of the poor people to work for causes not in thier best interrest.


The corporate masters need us poor and greedy that they might continue to take advantage of us

Try on Amanda Fritz for City Council 20.Feb.2006 17:17

Show that Public Financing works

Amanda Fritz is a neighborhood activist running against dan saltzman for city council. she is one of those real people neighborhood activist mom part time nurse union leader types who has volunteered at many of those boring but important city landuse watchdog positions.

A reason to get registered and vote in May-- Amanda Fritz.

www.amandafritzforcouncil.org i think