Tag: Oregon

The following is a brief summary of whom the Oregon Republican delegates are that are supposedly going to Minneapolis/St. Paul this week for their convention.  Obviously, I send along my most fervent prayers (even though I’m a Unitarian) for the victims of Hurricane Gustav not only those in the US who are yet to be hit but those throughout the Caribbean.  Still, they should at least nominate McSame and I thought it would be fun to discover who these people are.

Cross-Posted from Loaded Orygun: http://www.loadedorygun.net/sh…

I will admit that I know more about the McCain delegates than the Ron Paul ones so bear with me.  Where I don’t know much and can’t find much I write “political activist”.  These profiles ARE slanted and so I am a bit aggressive perhaps (like calling people xenophobes) in the name of fun….

Statewide McCain:

Bob Avery — Junction City-Legislative Assistant to State House Minority Leader Bruce Hanna (R).

Russ Walker — Keizer-Head of Oregon FreedomWatch, Oregon’s own Grover Norquist spinoff.

Tim Nashif — Portland-Leader of the yes on Measure 36 (Gay Marriage Ban) campaign in 2004.

Gregory Wooldridge — Portland-Former Naval Officer and head of OR Veterans for McCain.  You may remember him because he was a front person for McSame in the Wesley Clark response.

Donna Cain — Rogue River-Republican party fundraiser and fake PUMA (she gave $225 to HRC early this year according to Open Secrets).

Kevin Mannix — Salem-Former multiple-statewide loser and mandatory minimum activist.

Marylin Shannon — Brooks-Former State Senator, current leader of an organization that just tried to overturn Oregon’s new domestic partnership and equal rights for GLBT laws…

Jeffery A. Grossman — Beaverton-Drill, drill drill activist and software security specialist.

Ron Paul At Large Delegates

Elaine Smith — Prairie City-Attorney.

Ivan Cermak — Selma-Political Activist.

Keith Kaiser — Wilsonville-Political activist.

Marc Lucca — Stayton-Former state rep candidate and legislative aide.  (Personal Note: When I worked in the legislature I worked next to the office he was then working for, he’s a good guy if really conservative).

Congressional District 1 Delegates

James L. Ellison — Portland-Political Activist.

Sherri L. Grossman — Beaverton-Schools activist, believes strongly that modern society is breaking down the “family unit”.

Barbara Tennent Anderson — Portland-Political Activist.

Congressional District 2 Delegates

Jeannetta Garner — Nyssa-2nd District OR GOP Leader.

Ron Maurer — Grants Pass-State Rep.

Dennis Tooley — Redmond-Member of Board of Directors for Dorchester (OR GOP annual conference).

Congressional District 3 Delegates

Linda Flores — Clackamas-St. Rep/Anti-immigrant activist.

Jay Kushner — Portland-Multiple time loser candidate in deep blue Portland.

James Anderson — Troutdale-GOP Fundraier.

Congressional District 4 Delegates

Nina Avery — Junction City-Former Campaign Worker for Jim Feldkamp (who lost OR-4 to DeFazio in 2004 and 2006).

Jeff Osanka — Eugene-Neighborhood Activist in the Fairmont neighborhood in Eugene.

Melyssa Swartz-Baxter — Eugene-Wife of a soldier who was injured by an IED in Iraq.

Congressional District 5 Delegates

Wayne Brady — Salem-Retired Aerospace Engineer and regular contributor to multiple OR conservative blogs….

Greg Leo — Aurora-Parks activist (as in actually pro-Parks).

Andrea Hofmann — Keizer-Oregon Federation of Republican Women Leader.

Automatic Delegates

Vance Day — Salem-State Party Chair.

June Hartley — Nyssa-Committeewoman.

Solomon Yue — Salem-Committeeman.

Yesterday was the deadline for submitting minor party candidates and replacing withdrawn major party candidates for the Oregon ballot this fall.  Below you will find my review of the races from the statewide elections to ballot measures and all the way down to state legislative races.  Take a break from convention coverage and read on!

Cross-Posted from Loaded Orygun: http://www.loadedorygun.net/sh…

Data Sources:

The Most Recent Voter Registration Data is at: http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/votreg/jul08.pdf

Candidate information comes from ORESTAR: https://secure.sos.state.or.us/eim/jsp/CEMainPage.jsp?CONTENT_PAGE=cf/CFSearchPage.jsp

The Statewide Layout:

Total Registered Voters: About 2.05 Million.

Democrats: 42% (+210k vs. Republicans)

Republicans: 33%.

Nonpartisan/Others: 25%.

Key:

Size of Districts:

State House: Aprox. 55k.

State Senate: Aprox. 110k.

The incumbent is always listed first, or failing that, the incumbent party.  All minor parties are listed after the two major parties.

Party Key:

D=Democratic

R=Republican

G=Pacific Green

C=Constitution

L=Libertarian

I=Independent Party (This IS a political party, NOT those running as independents).

Other Notes:

There is currently a lawsuit pending to require the SOS to list if candidates have been nominated by multiple parties.  For example, Jeff Merkley would appear as (D,I) since he has been nominated by both the Dems and the Independent Party.  I list any cross-nominations as they are posted in ORESTAR.

Ratings:

Tossup-Margin less than 3%.

Lean-3-10% margin.

Likely-11-20% margin.

Safe-More than 20% margin.

Inc=Incumbent, Int=Interim Incumbent (Someone appointed to fill a seat until the next election due typically to resignation of the previous holder.  State law allows the party which held the seat to essentially appoint the replacement.  For example, when my State Senator resigned to take a job as the leader of a moderate Business Lobbying group, as a Precinct Committee Person I was entitled to vote for his replacement, which was then ratified by the County Commission).

Statewide Races:

US President

Candidates: Sen. John McCain (R) vs. Sen. Barack Obama (D), Ralph Nader (P), Cynthia McKinney (G), Bob Barr (L) and Chuck Baldwin (C).

Summary: The fact that McCain isn’t even trying to contest Oregon says a lot.  It would be a reach for him at best.  Obama, on the other hand, sent a bunch of the Obama fellows here a few weeks ago and is ramping up for the fall.  I really don’t think Nader, who snuck on the Oregon ballot through the back door, will have much impact.

Rating: Leans to Likely Obama.

US Senate

Candidates: Sen. Gordon Smith (R-inc) vs. Speaker of the OR House Jeff Merkley (D/I) and David Brownlow (C).

Summary: Smith is at best slightly ahead but is clearly struggling.  Forced already to blow A LOT of cash on what I refer to as “Furnituregate”, I don’t know if he made that much of an impact.  Merkley is running about the best campaign I’ve ever seen anyone run in this state.

Rating: Tossup.

Secretary of State

Candidates: State Senate Majority Leader Kate Brown (D) vs. Eugene TV Reporter Rick Dancer (R) and Seth Allan Wooley (G).

Summary: Kate Brown is going to absolutely kick the crap out of Dancer.  Dancer isn’t even that good of a candidate.  On an early appearance on Lars Larson’s talk radio program (he’s a well known conservative for those who don’t know), he seemed unaware of much of what the SOS actually does.

Rating: Likely to Safe Brown.

Attorney General

John Kroger (D) faces only minor party candidates and should cruise.

State Treasurer

Candidates: State Senator Ben Westlund (D/I) vs. former Kulongoski staffer Allan Alley (R) and Michael Marsh (C)

Summary: It is always so fan to see the Republicans go after Westlund, who used to be one of them until he saw the light.  Ben has the support of those on both sides of the aisle and should cruise to an easy victory here.  Not to mention Alley’s own problems as well…

Rating: Likely to Safe Westlund.

Labor Commissioner (Technically a nonpartisan race, 2 year vacancy filling election)

Candidates: Former State Senator Brad Avakian (D-inc.) vs. Founder, Instructor/Provider of a physical and mental fitness program Pavel Goberman (D) and Losing CD1 Candidate Mark Welzycko (D).

Summary: Avakian should have little trouble, given his status as a well known figure in state politics.

Rating: Safe Avakian.

Ballot Measures:

Measure Type:

C-Constitutional.

S-Statutory.

Legislative Referrals:

Measure 54 (C):

Summary: This corrects a bizarre flaw in the state constitution that prohibits citizens under 21 from voting in school board elections (a provision which is, of course, not in effect but should be removed anyways).

Known Opposition: None.

Outlook: Safe Yes.

Measure 55 (C):

Summary: Minor fixes to the state’s redistricting process.

Known Opposition: None.

Outlook: Safe Yes.

Measure 56 (S):

Summary: Partially repeals the Double Majority law requiring that 50% of registered voters cast ballots in an election for a bond measure to pass for May and November votes.

Known Opposition: Taxpayer Association of Oregon (Far Right), Bill Sizemore (Sponsor of all things extremely libertarian).

Outlook: Likely Yes, the legislature’s approval should allow this one to win pretty easily.  The game is clearly on over this measure but I doubt it’ll have trouble.

Measure 57 (S):

Summary: Proposes an alternative to Kevin Mannix’s (R-Of Course) property crime sentence minimum initiative.  Focuses state policy on treatment rather than prison for low level drug and property crimes.

Known Opposition: Kevin Mannix and his crew.

Outlook: Leans Yes, my guess is that with both on the ballot, Mannix’s extreme measure will fail when compared to this one.

Citizen Constitutional and Statutory Measures:

Measure 58 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Bill Sizemore.

Summary: This measure would require English immersion rather than ESL for children for whom English is not their primary language.

Known Opposition: I would think a lot of progressive groups will mobilize against this one.

Outlook: Leans to Likely No, I think the racist anti-immigrant folks will discover that they have limited political power after this one fails.  However, it is impossible to know exactly how this will turn out because this is the first immigration measure to make the ballot here.

Measure 59 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Bill Sizemore

Summary: This is at least the third time that Sizemore and his gang have proposed this measure, which makes federal income taxes fully deductible on state returns.  This measure largely benefits high wage earners and would blow a huge hole in the state’s budget.

Known Opposition: A leading coalition of progressive groups will once again mobilize against this one.

Outlook: Likely No, the good news is that although Sizemore can qualify measures, he can’t pass them.  This proposal has failed by increasingly wider margins every time it’s been proposed.

Measure 60 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Bill Sizemore

Summary: This would require “merit-pay” for teachers in public schools.

Known Opposition: The Oregon Education Association will doubtless go all out against this measure.

Outlook: Leans to Likely No, in 2000 a similar measure was rejected with 65% of the vote.  Given the more favorable political climate for education since then, this one will likely fail.

Measure 61 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Kevin Mannix

Summary: This is Kevin Mannix’s draconian sentencing measure for property and low-level drug crimes.

Known Opposition: Most of the Legislature for one (See Measure 57) as well as most of the moderate and progressive groups in the state.

Outlook: Leans No, with the competing measure by the legislature, this one may go down, which is good because without the legislative measure it would likely pass.

Measure 62 (C):

Chief Sponsor: Kevin Mannix.

Summary: Dedicates 15% of Oregon Lottery proceeds to crime fighting/prevention efforts.

Known Opposition: The current groups that receive lottery funds, schools and parks, have opposed this.

Outlook: Tossup, IMHO a bad idea but measures like this have fared pretty well in the past.

Measure 63 (S):

Chief Sponsor; Bill Sizemore

Summary: This measure would allow minor building changes without a permit.

Known Opposition: None but anything Sizemore proposes won’t stay without opposition for long.

Outlook: Leans to Likely No, I don’t get this one but Sizemore’s name on the measure should be good enough to kill it.

Measure 64 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Bill Sizemore

Summary: Sizemore brings back an old and twice-failed idea to ban public-employee unions from using dues for political purposes.

Known Opposition: The progressive movement in this state will mobilize to kill this one.

Outlook: Likely No, Sizemore=without power, Public Employee Unions=Powerful, enough said.  

Measure 65 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Former SOS Phil Keisling (D)

Summary: Creates a Top-Two Open Primary in which all parties run their candidates on the same ballot and the top two, regardless of party affiliation, advance to the general election.

Known Opposition: Both the Oregon D’s and R’s oppose this strongly.

Outlook: Leans No, the state parties will spend a lot of $ to kill it, so I’ll list it as leans no for now.  Also the Oregonian is endorsing it, which typically means it’ll lose (the Oregonian has a history of endorsing losing candidates/propositions).

Congressional Races:

District 1: Wu (D-inc) will cruise.

District 2: Walden (R-inc) will have little trouble.  If the margin is under 10% that’s a victory for the Ds.

District 3: Blumenauer (D-inc) is well-loved in this district and for good reason.

District 4: DeFazio (D-inc) is unopposed.

District 5

Candidates: State Senator Kurt Schrader (D) vs. Businessman and 2006 R Nominee Mike Erickson (R).

Registration Info: 165k Ds, 144k Rs, 88k NP/Others.

Summary: Time was this was considered one of the most contentious house races in the country.  Then three things happened.  First, the Obama registration boost changed this district from one with a very slight D edge to a somewhat substantial one.  Second, Kevin Mannix, who lost the R primary to Erickson, accused Erickson, who had claimed he was pro-life, of paying for a former girlfriend’s abortion.  This assertion was proven to be at least somewhat true and the resulting turmoil, along with some other recent discoveries has knocked Erickson well behind the pace. Then, to add to Erickson’s pain came the discovery that he had made a trip to Cuba that appears to be nothing more than a glorified vacation.  If this were Florida he’d be done but it’s not and he can self-finance enough to make this competitive, meaning I’ll leave it in the “Lean” category for now.

Rating: Leans Schrader.  

Oregon Legislature:

Oregon Senate

Current Composition: 18D, 11R, 1 I.

Projected Composition: 18D, 12R (1 I to D and one D to R).

Ratings changes since last update:

Dist 9 and 12 from Likely/Lean R to Lean R.

Dist. 14 to noncompetitive because this is my district and I have yet to see any campaign by the Repub.

Safe Races:

1 (Roseburg)-Kruse (R).

2 (Central Point)-Atkinston (R).

5 (Lincoln City)-Verger (D).

14 (West Slope/Beaverton)-Hass (D).

18 (Tigard/SW Portland)-Burdick (D).

21 (SE Portland)-Rosenbaum (D).

22 (Portland)-Carter (D).

23 (NE Portland)-Dingfelder (D), this is technically a net pickup of 1, as Avel Gordly is an I.

25 (Gresham)-Monnes Anderson (D).

28 (Klamath Falls)-Whitsett (R).

29 (Pendleton)-Nelson (R).

30 (Ontario)-Ferriolli (R).

The following districts are competitive, or at least potentially competitive.

9 (Stayton)

Candidates: Fred Girod (R-int) vs. Bob McDonald (D).

Registration: R+4k.

Summary: The fact that this race is even competitive ought to really scare the Rs.  Girod still has the edge though.

Outlook: Leans Girod.

12 (McMinnville)

Candidates: Brian Boquist (R) vs. Kevin Nortness (D).

Registration: R+2.5k

Summary: The Rs had to scramble to get Boquist to run for this fairly safe seat.  This district is certainly changing but I don’t know if it is changing fast enough or if Nortness is a good enough candidate to replace the well-known Boquist.

Outlook: Leans Boquist.

27 (Bend)

Candidates: Marien Lundgren (D) vs. Chris Telfer (R).

Registration: R+3k

Summary: This is Ben Westlund’s seat and it would be a huge accomplishment to hold it (he won it twice running as a Republican).  That being said, I think its far more possible that a hold could occur now given the blue trend of Deschutes County, the center of this district.

Outlook: Leans Telfer.

Oregon House:

Current Composition: 31 D, 29 R.

Projected Composition: 32 D, 20 R, 8 Tossups (all Rs) and it could be a lot worse for the Rs.

Ratings Changes since last update:

District 29 (Riley) moved to noncompetitive due to disqualification of his Republican opponent on the grounds he did not actually live in the district.

District 35 (Galizio) moved to noncompetitive because his Republican opponent has turned out to be a complete loser.

District 38 (Garrett) moved to noncompetitive because although Steve Griffith is a personal friend of mine and in a normal year might have a shot in this blue district running as a moderate to liberal R, the registration disadvantage he faces is simply too big for him to overcome.

District 51 (Flores) moved from Lean R to tossup because of her Democratic opponent’s fundraising advantage…

The following seats are rated either safe or likely:

1 (Gold Beach)-Krieger (R).

2 (Myrtle Creek)-Freeman (R).

3 (Grants Pass)-Maurer (R).

4 (Central Point)-Richardson (R).

5 (Ashland)-Buckley (D).

8 (Eugene)-Holvey (D).

10 (Newport)-Cowan (D)-She won this seat by all of 750 votes two years ago and the Rs couldn’t find an opponent for her.

11 (Eugene)-Barnhart (D).

12 (Springfield)-Beyer (D).

13 (Eugene)-Nathanson (D).

14 (Eugene)-Edwards (D).

16 (Corvallis)-Gelser (D).

21 (Salem)-Clem (D).

25 (Keizer)-Thatcher (R).

27 (West Slope, my district!)-Read (D).

28 (Beaverton)-Barker (D).

29 (Hillsboro)-Riley (D).

31 (Clatskanie)-Witt (D).

32 (Cannon Beach)-Boone (D).

33 (Portland)-Greenlick (D).

34 (Beaverton)-Harker (D).

35 (Tigard)-Galizio (D).

36 (Portland)-Nolan (D).

38 (Lake Oswego)-Garrett (D).

40 (Oregon City)-Hunt (D).

41 (Milwaukie)-Tomei (D).

42 (Portland)-Koppel-Bailey (D).

43 (Portland)-Shields (D).

44 (Portland)-Kotek (D).

45 (Portland)-Dembrow (D).

46 (Portland)-Cannon (D).

47 (Portland)-J. Smith (D).

48 (Happy Valley)-Schaufler (D).

53 (Sunriver)-Whisnant (R).

55 (Medford)-Gilliam (R).

56 (Klamath Falls)-Garrard (R).

57 (Heppner)-G. Smith (R).

58 (Pendleton)-Jenson (R).

60 (Ontario)-Benz (R).

The following seats are competitive:

6 (Medford)

Candidates: Sal Esquivel (R-inc.) vs. Lynn Howe (D).

Registration: R+3k

Summary: No one believed me two years ago when I said this seat would be competitive, and then Esquivel barely eked out a win.  My guess is that he won’t be caught napping this time, though.

Outlook: Leans Esquivel.

7 (Roseburg)

Candidates: Bruce Hanna (R-inc) vs. Donald Nordin (D).

Registration: R+1.4k

Summary: This would be my shocker of the year if an upset happened.  This district, which has been solidly red for decades, or so it seems, has seen a huge drop in the Republican registration edge.  Hanna is also not the greatest politician in the world to begin with but still has an edge here.  He also has a huge cash edge as the minority leader from the OR House.

Outlook: Leans Hanna.

9 (Coos Bay)

Candidates: Arnie Roblan (D-inc.) vs. Al Pearn (R).

Registration: D+3k

Summary: This 2006 rematch should not be any different than the last one.  Roblan has a good read on this district and should win his easiest battle yet.  

Outlook: Leans Roblan.

15 (Albany)

Candidates: Andy Olson (R-inc.) vs. Dick Olsen (D).

Registration: D and R even

Summary: This district was not on anyone’s list but mine two years ago as potentially competitive.  Now with an even registration mix, a chance for an upset is there.  Olson, a former State Policeman, has the edge at this point though.

Outlook: Leans Olson.

17 (Scio)

Candidates: Sherrie Sprenger (R-int.) vs. Dale Thackaberry (D).

Registration: R+2k

Summary: Following a bloody and divisive R primary, Thackaberry has a real chance to pull an upset.  Add to that the fact that Sprenger has never won a general election here.  Still, this is definitely a district with an R tilt, so it’ll be an uphill battle.

Outlook: Leans Sprenger.

18 (Silverton)

Candidates: Vic Gilliam (R-int.) vs. Jim Gilbert (D/I).

Registration: R+2.2k

Summary: Jim Gilbert is back for another attempt at an upset here.  This is clearly his best chance yet but it won’t be easy.  If the Repubs lose this district, it will have been a big night.

Outlook: Leans Gilliam.

19 (Salem)

Candidates: Kevin Cameron (R-inc.) vs. Hanten (HD) Day (D).

Registration: R+ less than 1k

Summary: This is a district that should be more competitive than it has in the past.  With a lack of need to defend their own seats, this may become a democratic target, making an upset possible.

Outlook: Leans Cameron.

20 (Independence/Monmouth)

Candidates: Vicki Berger (R-inc./I) vs. Richard Riggs (D).

Registration: D+1k

Summary: Berger is one of the last remaining liberal Republicans that Oregon used to develop like crazy.  She’s in for fight for her life this time due much more to both the state of the Republican party and the slight D registration edge though.

Outlook: Tossup.

22 (Woodburn)

Candidates: Betty Komp (D-inc.) vs. Tom Chereck (R).

Registration: D+2k.

Summary: I have to put this as competitive because its Woodburn.  However, Komp has really done a great job in this district and should win pretty easily.  Interestingly, this district has the lowest number of registered voters in the state, likely due to the large number of undocumented workers living here.

Outlook: Leans Komp.

23 (Dallas)

Candidates: Jim Thompson (R) vs. Jason Brown (D).

Registration: R+2k

Summary: This open seat battle could be one for the books.  That being said, I have to give the edge to Thompson for now because it is an R-leaning district.

Outlook: Leans Thompson.

24 (McMinnville)

Candidates: Jim Wiedner (R) vs. Bernt Hansen (D).

Registration: D and R even.

Summary: This was the seat that Kossack Sal Peralta almost won in 2006.  If Hansen can run a good campaign, a win is definitely possible here.  Call it a tossup.

Outlook: Tossup.

26 (Wilsonville)

Candidates: Matt Wingard (R-int.) vs. Jessica Adamson (D).

Registration: R+2k

Summary: Sometimes the opportunities just fall into your lap.  In this case, it turns out that Wingard has been arrested for hitting his children before.  The Repubs were panicked enough that incumbent Jerry Krummel resigned so that Wingard could go in as the “incumbent”.  This is still Wilsonville though, so it’s an R lean for now.

Outlook: Leans Wingard.

30 (Hillsboro)

Candidates: David Edwards (D-inc.) vs. Andy Duyck (R).

Registration: D+2k

Summary: The Republicans are all excited that Duyck is going to be their candidate here.  The well-known Washington County Commissioner is a solid candidate but this is not the Hillsboro that existed ten or even five years ago.  It has taken a solid blue turn and add to that the fact that Edwards survived some of the most vicious smears of any candidate in 2006 and still won to give him a slight edge.

Outlook: Leans Edwards.

37 (West Linn)

Candidates: Scott Bruun (R-inc.) vs. Michele Eberle (D).

Registration: D+ less than 1k.

Summary: Bruun is a well-known figure in this district; his family has run a construction business for over 100 years in the area.  Still, this year he will have to fight hard to keep this swing district, which now has a very slight D edge.

Outlook: Tossup.

39 (Canby)

Candidates: Bill Kennemer (R) vs. Tony Forsberg (D).

Registration: D+ 1k

Summary: Kossack Mike Caudle almost pulled off a major upset here in 2006 against the then R-leader Wayne Scott. As an open seat race, this one is too close to call.  Both candidates are well known and respected in the community.

Outlook: Tossup.

49 (Gresham)

Candidates: John Nelsen (R) vs. Nick Kahl (D).

Registration: D+4.5k

Summary: Two years ago about the only major disappointment I had was Minnis winning this district.  Republicans think Kahl is a lightweight because he’s young and relatively inexperienced.  They’re wrong, he’s a great candidate, especially with the youth voter empowerment machine known as the Oregon Bus Project (http://busproject.org/) on his side.  With Mannix out of the picture, this should be a D pickup, especially with the substantial D edge in this district.

Outlook: Leans Kahl.

50 (Fairview)

Candidates: John Lim (R-inc.) vs. Greg Matthews (D).

Registration: D+3k

Summary: How Lim keeps winning here is a mystery.  He should be in for the fight of his life this year with this district clearly trending blue.

Outlook: Tossup.

51 (Clackamas)

Candidates: Linda Flores (R-inc.) vs. Brent Barton (D).

Registration: D+1k

Summary: How I would love to get rid of the racist Flores.  Barton has as good a chance as anyone and has huge financial backing.  I’m moving this race to tossup for that reason alone.

Outlook: Tossup.

52 (Corbett)

Candidates: Matt Lindland (R) vs. Suzanne VanOrman (D).

Registration: D+2k

Summary: In case you’re wondering, yes Matt Lindland is indeed otherwise known as UFC fighter Matt “The Law” Lindland.  This is a dead tossup district this year and should be fun to watch.

Outlook: Tossup.

54 (Bend)

Candidates: Chuck Burley (R-inc.) vs. Judy Stiegler (D).

Registration: D+1.5k

Summary: This district has been trending blue over the past several years.  This could well be the year Stiegler, who barely lost to Burley in an open seat race here four years ago, breaks through and wins it.

Outlook: Tossup.

59 (The Dalles)

Candidates: John Huffman (R-int.) vs. Mike Ahern (D).

Registration: R+1k

Summary: This was the district that shocked everyone in 2006 as it was almost a D pickup.  However, I think Huffman will not be caught unaware as a result, though an upset is possible.

Outlook: Leans Huffman.

Well that’s it, let me know what you think.

I had been hearing rumors from friends who work for the Oregonian that a major story was about to break concerning Mike Erickson.  I do not know if this story is it but it’s a fun one anyways.  Simply put, Mike Erickson claimed that he had taken a trip to Cuba in 2004 as an attempt to work with humanitarian organizations.  Instead, it appears that instead he used it as an excuse to have a good time, smoke a lot of Cuban cigars and have some fun cock fighting.

Major h/t to the Oregonian for this story: http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2008/08/mike_ericksons_trip_to_cuba.html#comments

Cross-Posted from Loaded Orygun: http://www.loadedorygun.net/sh…

According to the Oregonian:

Mike Erickson, Republican candidate for the U.S. House, made a six-day visit to Cuba in 2004 that he described as a “humanitarian trip” to help disabled Cubans oppressed by Fidel Castro. But the visit was actually a vacation that included marlin fishing, nightclub visits and Cuban cigars.

, Link is above in the intro.

In a letter released to the Press, Erickson claims that he undertook this trip as a means to bring needed medical supplies to impoverished Cubans and that he observed first hand “just how horrific Castro’s stronghold on the nation had oppressed and mistreated people.”

Link to the letter here: http://blog.oregonlive.com/politics_impact/2008/08/IMAGE0001.pdf

His itinerary tells a far different story, however.  Instead of a humanitarian mission, it appears Erickson went down to Cuba to attend a cigar convention and have a good time living the life of luxury.  In fact, the itinerary seems to indicate that the company which sponsored his trip even provided some in his group (if not Erickson himself) with papers showing they never actually visited Cuba but Mexico.  I don’t know enough about the embargo to know whether this is any sort of problem but it sounds wrong at least.

Link to the itinerary here: http://blog.oregonlive.com/politics_impact/2008/08/IMAGE0002.pdf

What’s Next:

This is yet another blow to Erickson’s fast-fading chance to win this once thought to be tossup seat in Oregon.  I don’t know this will force Erickson out of the race but he has until August 26 if he wishes to do so, at which point the Republicans can name a replacement.

Let me know what you think.

Today has been proof that election news need not stop when the Olympics happen.  Instead, there have been several fairly important stories to come out today, four of which will be covered here.

Cross-Posted from Loaded Orygun: http://www.loadedorygun.net/sh…

Nader tries to sneak in the back door:

Link: http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2008/08/nader_trying_to_slip_onto_the.html#more

I had been saying for a while that I didn’t see how Nader was going to make the ballot in Oregon this fall given that I had not seen any apparent effort by his supporters to mount a signature campaign.  That maybe changing as last week a new political party (the “Peace” party) emerged from the shadows and submitted 25,000 signatures to qualify their party for the ballot.  Assuming they have sufficient signatures (they need between 20-21,000 valid ones, which is far from certain), this would grant them automatic ballot access.  According to Jeff Mapes of the Oregonian, they are then likely to nominate Nader.  I don’t think it’ll have much of an impact because people love Obama, it’s not likely to be that close and Nader has lost a lot of power here, but it’s worth watching.

Whither fusion voting?:

Link: http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2008/08/independent_party_goes_to_cour.html

The Independent Party of Oregon, now the third-largest party in the state, filed a lawsuit Wednesday to force the state to allow fusion-voting.  For those of you not from the Northeast, fusion voting is where multiple parties are allowed to nominate the same candidate.   The votes for that candidate are combined among all the parties they are nominated by.

For example:

Candidate A is nominated only by the Republican Party and gets 45% of the vote.

Candidate B is nominated by the Democratic Party and the Independent Party, they got 40% of the vote as a Democrat and 15% as an Independent Party member for a total of 55% of the vote, meaning candidate B wins.

Except action on this soon as the ballot deadline is August 26.

Gordon Smith ducks the McCain campaign:

Link: http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2008/08/gordon_smith_wont_be_a_mccain.html

Gordon Smith continued to run away from the State GOP today as he announced that he will not be on John McCain’s Oregon steering committee.  Smith, who would otherwise prefer that no one remember he is really a Bush Republican, had already announced that he will not go to the Republican Convention next month.  Interesting to see what kind of impact this will have with a GOP electorate that was not his biggest fan to begin with.

Craig Robinson, Obama’s brother-in-law and Oregon State Basketball Coach, will speak in Denver:

Link: http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2008/08/osu_basketball_coach_will_spea.html

In the fun category, it has been announced that Obama’s brother-in-law, Craig Robinson, will introduce his sister Michelle on the first night of the Democratic Convention in Denver.  Should be fun to watch.

Let me know what you think.

This diary discusses a just announced major campaign by FreedomWorks Oregon to try and fool people into thinking that drilling is the only way to secure a sustainable energy future.  Major h/t to the Oregonian on this one (http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/08/energy_campaign.html).

Cross-Posted from Loaded Orygun: http://www.loadedorygun.net/sh…

According to an article published on the Oregonian’s website (link above), FreedomWorks Oregon announced today that it will launch a more than $1M campaign that intends to:

expose “how anti-energy radicals are opposed not just to energy development but to our modern way of life.”

 As evidence of this they cite a poll conducted by Republican pollster Moore Information services that shows that

solid majorities of Oregonians said they favored energy independence, construction of large wave energy farms in marine reserves off the coast and development of large wind energy farms “in scenic or wildlife sensitive areas in Oregon.”  More than two-thirds of poll respondents also said they believe that environmental groups “can be unfair and unreasonable in their efforts to stop energy development” and that they are unwilling to pay $6 a gallon or more for gas to protect the environment

.

Now you might be asking who FreedomWorks and Moore Information are, so see below for more:

FreedomWorks Oregon:

Founded by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) in 2004, FreedomWorks is a libertarian organization in the model of the Club for Growth.  They are well known for their efforts to propose the flat tax, curb lawsuit damages and school voucher programs.  They are also opposed to Net Neutrality.  The Oregon chapter is headed by Russ Walker, a longtime conservative activist in the state.

Moore Information:

Founded by Bob Moore in 1981, Moore Information is a Portland-based polling firm that works almost exclusively for Republican candidates (including Gordon Smith of Oregon and Don Young of AK).  They are well known for their biased polling questions, such as the following:

Q: “Why do you say things are on the wrong track?”

A (separated by commas): Too many liberals/democrats, education/schools, Condition of government/decision-making process, Irresponsible spending, Taxes, Economy/Business Development, Irresponsible/Unqualified Politicians, Gay Civil Rights, Health Care Concerns, Environmental Issues. See this question on page 2 of the document linked here: http://www.moore-info.com/MI_ORClimateDec07.pdf

His full client list is here: http://www.moore-info.com/clients.html.

So What should we do about it:

If this pisses you off, donate to a good Oregon progressive ASAP to counteract this BS.

Here are some good candidates to donate to:

Jeff Merkley (OR Senate): http://www.jeffmerkley.com/

OR House Democrats (OR Legislature): http://www.oregonhousedemocrats.com/

OR Senate Democrats (OR Legislature): http://www.sdlf.net/

Or if you don’t want to donate locally, there is always that Barack Obama guy: http://www.barackobama.com/index.php

Let me know what you think.

21st Century Democrats is excited about the extraordinary amount of enthusiasm Barack Obama’s nomination has generated. The Pew Research Center is suggesting increased voter turnout in the general election bodes well for Democrats. However, some stats from the primary season show that increased turnout for the presidential election doesn’t always help down-ballot races.

In fact, assuming a strong Presidential ticket will pull Democratic candidates in the House, the Senate, and local offices to victory is dangerous. This assumption is not in line with electoral empirics or America’s personality. Splitting tickets will always occur in our nation which prides itself on having a “maverick spirit” and values competence over loyalty. More importantly, many Americans will rightfully not vote for candidates they are unfamiliar with. Why would anyone put someone they know nothing about in a tremendous position of power? In the midst of all the excitement generated by the Obama campaign, we cannot forget that voters need to have face to face contact with canvassers for all our candidates, not just our candidate for President.

Looking at this year’s primaries, there is a substantial discrepancy between the number of people who voted for Democratic Presidential Candidates and the number of people who voted for other Democrats. Across the board, significantly less people voted for other Democratic candidates than voted for Democratic Presidential Candidates.

In Pennsylvania there was a stark disparity between votes accumulated by Democratic Presidential Candidates and Democrats running for other state-wide offices. There were only two contested statewide primaries in Pennsylvania this cycle. Below are two charts comparing the number of votes for Democratic Presidential candidates in April’s Primary with votes for Democrats running for State Treasurer in PA.

Candidate	Votes	Percent
CLINTON, HILLARY	1,275,039	54.6%
OBAMA, BARACK	1,061,441	45.4%

Total votes for Obama and Clinton in Pennsylvania = 2,336,480

*Obama and Clinton were the only Democrats on the ballot in PA

Candidate	Votes	Percent
MCCORD, ROBERT	783,675	43.2%
CORDISCO, JOHN F.	472,027	26.0%
MANN, JENNIFER L.	441,745	24.3%
MORRISON-WESLEY, DENNIS	118,696	6.5%

Total Votes for Democrats running for PA State Treasurer 1,661,549

There was a 674,931 vote or 29% disparity between Democrats who voted for our party’s candidates for State Treasurer and our parties candidates for President in Pennsylvania. That means nearly 3 out of every 10 people who voted in the presidential primary, gave the State Treasurer a pass.

In Ohio, two 21st Century Democrats’ endorsed candidates also were victims of down-ballot drop off. In the 1st Congressional District, there were a total of  115, 387 votes for Obama , Edwards and Clinton. Steve Dreihaus ran an uncontested and only got 60,454 votes, a 57,840 vote difference.  Nearly 1 out of every two voters who cast a vote for the Democratic nominee decided to not cast a vote for their Congressman.

In the 15th CD, Mary Jo Kilroy was also uncontested and received 85,840 votes. All the Presidential Candidates received 91,233 votes in total. That’s a 5, 393 vote drop off. Given Mary Jo’s 2006 election results, she can’t afford to have that sort of drop off.

Out in Oregon,  remember those Obama crowds? All that excitement generated 641, 499 total votes in the Democratic Presidential Primary. One would think that the heated primary for the Democratic Senatorial nominee would have little drop off. In spite of intense competition between two well funded campaigns less people voted for our Senatorial candidates than voted for our Presidential Candidates. In fact there was an almost 14% or 91,523 vote difference between total votes for Democratic Presidential Nominees and total votes for Democratic Senatorial Candidates in Oregon. How will Merkley beat Smith if he has to get 115% of Obama’s take in Oregon?

Why am I telling you this? Because at 21st Century Democrats, we believe that in order to have a true progressive revolution in America we’ll need a bottom up, not a top down, approach to elections and campaigns. We have been training and placing field organizers for two decades now. We know that many down-ballot races cannot depend on Obama’s team. They have a big enough task ahead.

21st Century Democrats is endorsing over fifty down-ballot candidates all over the country. For example Jim Roth is running for Corporate Commissioner in Oklahoma, and Andy Meisner is running for Oakland County Treasurer in Michigan. These candidates need resources to get field organizers hitting the doors, and cannot rely on Barack Obama’s field team to do it for them. The nation will not be changed without your help. We already have organizers in critical races across the country, but we need you to partner with us to get down-ballot candidates like Darcy Burner (WA-08), Dan Maffei (NY-25), Jim Himes (CT-4), Judy Baker (MO -9) and other progressives near you elected.

——-

Big thanks to Corey Goldiner, 21st Century Fellow, for doing most of the legwork and tracking down all these statistics.

With the final signature verification complete. Oregon’s ballot measure slate is set for this year.  Below I review each ballot measure and discuss its chances of passing as well as its impact on the candidate elections this fall.

Cross-posted from Loaded Orygun: http://www.loadedorygun.net/sh…

Some Oregon Initiative Basics:

Although commonly thought only as an Initiative process, the actual truth is that there are four major types of ballot measures (of which the first two are by far the most common):

Legislative Referrals-Typically these are constitutional modifications but they can be statutory as well (See 2007’s Measure 49, which modified the state’s land use laws as an example).  Depending on the specific measure, they require either a simple majority or, in some cases, a 3/5 majority to get on the ballot.

Citizen Statutory Initiatives-Change or create state law.  They require 82,679 signatures.

Citizen Constitutional Initiatives-Change the Oregon Constitution.  They require 110,358 signatures.

Citizen Referrals-Refer a recently passed law, by the legislature, to the people for a vote, most recently seen in the failed attempts to get votes on the state’s new domestic partnership (civil unions) and GLBT civil rights laws.  They require 55,179 signatures, which must be turned in within 90 days after the law is signed by the Governor.

Ballot Measures are listed by ballot measure number.  Measure numbers are sequential and the first measure this year will be Measure 54.  This summary does not include any local ballot measures.

Key:

Measure Type:

C-Constitutional.

S-Statutory.

Race Ratings:

Tossup-Less than 3% margin projected.

Lean-3 to 10% margin.

Likely-11 to 20% margin.

Safe-Greater than 20% margin.

Note: Ratings assume the measure will qualify.

Progress-O-Meter:

How progressive is this initiative, on a 1-10 scale, with 1 being very much not progressive and 10 highly progressive.

Campaign Impact:

What impact will this initiative have on candidate elections this fall, 1 being low and 10 being high.

Legislative Referrals:

Measure 54 (C):

Summary: This corrects a bizarre flaw in the state constitution that prohibits citizens under 21 from voting in school board elections (a provision which is, of course, not in effect but should be removed anyways).

Known Opposition: None.

Progress-O-Meter: N/A, technical measure.

Campaign Impact: 1, no impact.

Outlook: Safe Yes.

Measure 55 (C):

Summary: Minor fixes to the state’s redistricting process.

Known Opposition: None.

Progress-O-Meter: N/A, technical measure.

Campaign Impact: 1, no impact.

Outlook: Safe Yes.

Measure 56 (S):

Summary: Partially repeals the Double Majority law requiring that 50% of registered voters cast ballots in an election for a bond measure to pass for May and November votes.

Known Opposition: Taxpayer Association of Oregon (Far Right), Bill Sizemore (Sponsor of all things extremely libertarian).

Progress-O-Meter: 10, gets rid of a really stupid law.

Campaign Impact: 3, this will get some play on the far right but I doubt it’ll have much of a real impact.

Outlook: Likely Yes, the legislature’s approval should allow this one to win pretty easily.

Measure 57 (S):

Summary: Proposes an alternative to Kevin Mannix’s (R-Of Course) property crime sentence minimum initiative.  Focuses state policy on treatment rather than prison for low level drug and property crimes.

Known Opposition: Kevin Mannix and his crew.

Progress-O-Meter: 7, its not a great law but its a damn sight better than Mannix’s proposal.

Campaign Impact: 7, this will probably, along with Mannix’s measure, be the main focus of many campaigns this fall.  It will have an impact for sure.

Outlook: Leans Yes, my guess is that with both on the ballot, Mannix’s extreme measure will fail when compared to this one.

Citizen Constitutional and Statutory Measures:

Measure 58 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Bill Sizemore.

Summary: This measure would require English immersion rather than ESL for children for whom English is not their primary language.

Known Opposition: I would think a lot of progressive groups will mobilize against this one.

Progress-O-Meter: 2, progressives don’t like race-baiting measures like this one.

Campaign Impact: 4, this might get some wingnuts out to vote but I don’t think it’s much of a real issue.

Outlook: Leans to Likely No, I think the racist anti-immigrant folks will discover that they have limited political power after this one fails.  However, it is impossible to know exactly how this will turn out because this is the first immigration measure to make the ballot here.

Measure 59 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Bill Sizemore

Summary: This is at least the third time that Sizemore and his gang have proposed this measure, which makes federal income taxes fully deductible on state returns.  This measure largely benefits high wage earners and would blow a huge hole in the state’s budget.

Known Opposition: A leading coalition of progressive groups will once again mobilize against this one.

Progress-O-Meter: 1, really really bad.

Campaign Impact: 3, yawn.  This ain’t new so this isn’t giong to swing many votes.

Outlook: Likely No, the good news is that although Sizemore can qualify measures, he can’t pass them.  This proposal has failed by increasingly wider margins every time it’s been proposed.

Measure 60 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Bill Sizemore

Summary: This would require “merit-pay” for teachers in public schools.

Known Opposition: The Oregon Education Association will doubtless go all out against this measure.

Progress-O-Meter: 2, merit pay simply doesn’t work.

Campaign Impact: 5, the Repubs will definitely try to make this an issue this fall.

Outlook: Leans to Likely No, in 2000 a similar measure was rejected with 65% of the vote.  Given the more favorable political climate for education since then, this one will likely fail.

Measure 61 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Kevin Mannix

Summary: This is Kevin Mannix’s draconian sentencing measure for property and low-level drug crimes.

Known Opposition: Most of the Legislature for one (See Measure 57) as well as most of the moderate and progressive groups in the state.

Progress-O-Meter: 1, oh Kevin, your ideas suck so much.

Campaign Impact: 8, this is probably going to be the most closely contested ballot measure this fall except for perhaps the primary initiative.

Outlook: Leans No, with the competing measure by the legislature, this one may go down, which is good because withotu the competiting measure it would likely pass.

Measure 62 (C):

Chief Sponsor: Kevin Mannix.

Summary: Dedicates 15% of Oregon Lottery proceeds to crime fighting/prevention efforts.

Known Opposition: The current groups that receive lottery funds, schools and parks, have opposed this.

Progress-O-Meter: 4, not horrible but not great either.

Campaign Impact: 5, although closely contested I can’t imagine this one will get too much play either way in the campaigns this fall.

Outlook: Tossup, IMHO a bad idea but measures like this have fared pretty well in the past.

Measure 63 (S):

Chief Sponsor; Bill Sizemore

Summary: This measure would allow minor building changes without a permit.

Known Opposition: None but anything Sizemore proposes won’t stay without opposition for long.

Progress-O-Meter: 5, I honestly don’t know what Sizemore is up to here but I bet it’s no good.

Campaign Impact: 2, I don’t know what this is but it doesn’t look like it will have to much of an impact.

Outlook: Leans to Likely No, I don’t get this one but Sizemore’s name on the measure should be good enough to kill it.

Measure 64 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Bill Sizemore

Summary: Sizemore brings back an old and twice-failed idea to ban public-employee unions from using dues for political purposes.

Known Opposition: The progressive movement in this state will mobilize to kill this one.

Progress-O-Meter: 1, strikes right at the heart of the progressive movement.

Campaign Impact: 8, In the current political climate, this measure will certainly get some play and will clearly have an impact.  We are already getting the misleading “Democrats hate the Secret Union Ballot” ads from some right-wing interest groups.

Outlook: Likely No, Sizemore=without power, Public Employee Unions=Powerful, enough said.

Measure 65 (S):

Chief Sponsor: Former SOS Phil Keisling (D)

Summary: Creates a Top-Two Open Primary in which all parties run their candidates on the same ballot and the top two, regardless of party affiliation, advance to the general election.

Known Opposition: Both the Oregon D’s and R’s oppose this strongly.

Progress-O-Meter: I’m not even going to try to rate this one because I know I will get slammed if I do but I personally oppose it.

Campaign Impact: 7, This will get a fair amount of play on the left for sure, but I don’t think this measure will break through to independent voters.

Outlook: Leans No, if this qualifies, the state parties will spend a lot of $ to kill it, so I’ll list it as leans no for now.

Let me know what you think.

 

Cross-posted at Election Inspection

 Before looking at whether or not the Democrats can expect to get the magic sixty, lets review the seats which have the potential to flip, starting from the ones most likely to flip to the ones least likely to flip (anything not listed here means that we consider the seats to be completely safe). (Note, these are all Election Inspection's ratings) 

Solid Democratic (Pick-up)

• Virginia (Warner)
• New Mexico (Domenici)

• Sununu (New Hampshire)
• Landrieu (Lousiana)
• Colorado (Allard)
• Stevens (Alaska)

Leans Republican

• Smith (Oregon)
• Coleman (Minnesota)
• Collins (Maine)
• Wicker (Mississippi-B)
• McConnell (Kentucky)

Likely Republican (Open Seat retention)

• Idaho (Craig)

Possible Darkhorse Races (Republican Incumbent)

• Dole (North Carolina)
• Cornyn (Texas)
• Inhofe (Oklahoma)
• Roberts (Kansas)

First of all, I think we can safely assume that Democrats will win in New Mexico and Virginia, so we can start off with a net gain of two seats for the Democrats. So, to start off with in the second session, the Democrats are basically guaranteed to start from a vantage point of 50 seats. With the way the Leans Democratic races have been playing out (including the newly added AK-Sen), I'm pretty confident that the Democrats will win at least three and probably all four (Pollster shows Democrats leading by at least 5 points in Colorado, New Hampshire, and Alaska) and while it seems like it's close in Louisiana, with the exception of Zogby, Landrieu has shown to have a consistent lead of no less than 3 points (with the most recent Rasmussen poll giving Landrieu a 5 point edge). So, we'll give the Democrats three more seats and put them up to 53 seats (by the way, this doesn't include Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman who caucus with the Democrats). Alright, so the score now should be at Democrats 53 guaranteed seats and Republicans with 34 guaranteed seats. Now then, let's assume that Republicans win all of the seats which I consider to be either Likely or a potential Dark-horse (which, realistically, is more likely to happen than not), Republicans will have 38 seats (from now on, I'm going to consider Sanders to be a Democrat, for the purposes of voting, which gives the Democrats 54 seats and I'm going to consider Lieberman a wild-card as far as voting in concerned since, even though Lieberman has taken a more Conservative position on several issues, he is still considered to be more likely to support Democratic domestic agendas than Republican ones). So we have a score of 54-39-1, which means that for Democrats to win a filibuster-proof Senate which doesn't rely on Lieberman, they'll have to win 6 additional seats on top of the 5 which I'm projecting for them to win already, now how realistic a shot to Democrats have at this? 

I believe that more likely than not, Democrats will win in Louisiana, so we'll give the Democrats that extra seat which puts the score at 55-39-1 (5 undecided). I also think that Republicans should win in Kentucky. so the score now stands at 55-40-1 (4 undecided), which also basically eliminates any reasonable possibility of Democrats getting to the magic 60 number without Lieberman (which, might not be as bad as people think). So, that means that whether or not the Democrats can get to a filibuster proof senate rests on Minnesota, Maine, Oregon, and Mississippi-B. Mississippi-B and Oregon look to be within striking distance but Maine and Minnesota, seem to be moving away from us, so right now, I'd say that, at most, Democrats will probably end up with 57 seats (including Sanders) Republicans with 42 seats, and Joe Lieberman as a wild-card in the Senate.

Doesn't look like we're going to get our filibuster-proof majority this time around, but we'll do well enough that it's possible we can set 2010 up to get there.

With the end of July nearing and the election now only 99 days away, I thought it was appropriate to publish a review of the last month’s action in Oregon politics.  In addition, I preview what lies ahead in August and give updates on previous race ratings or other information I have talked about in my earlier diaries.

Cross-posted from Loaded Orygun: http://www.loadedorygun.net/sh…

Stock Watch:

Who is up and down in Oregon politics this month:

Up: Jeff Merkley.  Fresh off his best fund-raising quarter ever, Merkley erased a 9% deficit to Gordon Smith during the past month, even though Smith was on the air and Merkley largely was not.

Down: Gordon Smith.  Already flailing about, Smith appears desperate to show that he is really a centrist, despite all the evidence to the contrary.  His recent decision not to attend the RNC Convention proves he knows that John McCain is an anchor on his campaign.

Up: Oregon Democrats.  As you will see below, the Oregon Democratic Party has seen rating upgrades in a number of races and has not lost ground anywhere.  With a strong group of candidates at all levels, this could be a banner year for the DPO.

Down: Oregon Republicans.  Down, with no money and with rapidly fading chances at all levels, Oregon Republicans are flailing out wildly.  With the demise of a number of their prized legislative recruits for a number of reasons (Jeff Duyck violating residency requirements, Tony Marino turning out to be crazy) and with a huge cash disadvantage to the Oregon Ds, they are in trouble.

Up: Bill Sizemore.  As much as it pains me to say this, Sizemore had a good month in July.  He qualified all his initiatives and although most, if not all, are unlikely to pass, he still thumbed our noses in it again.

Down: Bill Bradbury.  Long one of my favorite Oregon politicians, Bill Bradbury has fallen hard in the last month.  With the revelation that Bradbury did not investigate potential signature fraud by conservative groups (info here: http://www.blueoregon.com/2008/07/citizens-begin.html) I honestly won’t be too disappointed when Kate Brown replaces him in January.  One of his most visible jobs is to enforce the signature laws and he appears he may not have done so, according to our dear friends at Our Oregon and other wonderful liberal interest groups.

Upcoming Deadlines and Interesting Dates:

August 2-All signature verification must be completed (already done), and ballot measure numbers are assigned.  See below for more.

August 26-Voter’s Pamphlet Statements Due.  A rough version will be posted soon after.

August 29-Last day to withdraw/replace a candidate.  All candidates on the ballot at that point are considered the final candidates.  The only exception is if a candidate dies in a non-federal race, under the state constitution the SOS may elect to postpone the election for a short period of time if necessary.

August 30-The seven day rule for campaign finance reporting goes into effect, requiring all contributions and expenditures made from this date to election day be reported within 7 days.  Currently, candidates have 30 days to report.  Violations are subject to progressively harsher penalties.

Measure by Measure, a Ballot Measure Update:

Assuming that Our Oregon is not successful in its lawsuit over possibly fraudulent signatures on Sizemore’s initiatives, here are the current initiatives for this year’s ballot, numbers to be assigned early next week:

Key:

S-Statutory

C-Constitutional

Numbers listed are initiative petition numbers.  Ballot measure numbers this year will begin with #54 and go sequentially from there.  The four legislative referrals will be first, followed by all the qualified citizen initiatives.

Qualified:

Legislative Referrals:

405-C-Corrects a bizarre flaw in the state constitution that prohibits citizens under 21 from voting in school board elections (a provision which is, of course, not in effect but should be removed anyways).

406-C-Minor fixes to the state’s redistricting process.

407-C-Repeals the Double Majority law requiring that 50% of registered voters cast ballots in an election for a bond measure to pass.

408-S-Proposes an alternative to Kevin Mannix’s (R-Of Course) property crime sentence minimum initiative.  Focuses state policy on treatment rather than prison for low level drug and property crimes.

Citizen Constitutional and Statutory Measures:

3-S-Makes federal income taxes fully deductible on state returns.  This measure largely benefits high wage earners and would blow a huge hole in the state’s budget.

19-S-This measure would require English immersion rather than ESL for children for whom English is not their primary language.

20-S-This would require “merit-pay” for teachers in public schools.

21-S-This measure would allow minor building changes without a permit.

25-S-Sizemore brings back an old and twice-failed idea to ban public-employee unions from using dues for political purposes.

40-S-This is Kevin Mannix’s draconian sentencing measure for property and low-level drug crimes.

41-C-Dedicates 15% of Oregon Lottery proceeds to crime fighting/prevention efforts.

109-S-Creates a Top-Two Open Primary in which all parties run their candidates on the same ballot and the top two, regardless of party affiliation, advance to the general election.

Failed to Qualify:

51-S-Limits contingency fee awards in lawsuits.  Your classic “lawsuit reform” measure.

53-S-Establishes penalties for “frivolous lawsuits.”

Race Rating Changes:

From my last update, posted here on July 10: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/10/12954/7313/791/549408.

US Senate: Upgraded from Lean Smith to Tossup.  With the new polling showing Merkley with a small lead, up from 9% down last month, this race has clearly moved to tossup territory.  GAME ON!

Oregon Legislature:

Oregon Senate: OR-14 (West Slope, my home district!), Mark Hass (R), upgrade from Likely Hass to Safe Hass.  Time was this was a competitive district, not anymore.  When last this seat was up, the registration gap was 3k, now its 10k.  With Michaels not raising nearly enough cash to make this competitive, this race goes off the competitive races board.

Oregon House:

OR-29 (Hillsboro), Riley (D) upgrade from Lean Riley to Likely Riley.  Jeff Duyck was the only real chance the OR GOP had in this district.  With him out of the way since it was revealed he didn’t actually live in the district, it’s hard to believe this one will be too close, especially with former GOOPer Terry Rilling running as an independent.

OR-35 (Tigard), Galizio (D) upgrade from Leans Galizio to Likely Galizio.  With Marino becoming more and more of a laughing stock every day, Galizio looks poised to win by far his biggest win of his three races here.

OR-38 (Lake Oswego), Garrett (D) upgrade from Lean Garrett to Likely Garrett.  I know Steve Griffith (R) personally, he’s a nice guy and I respect him a lot.  That being said, he’s going to get his ass kicked in this district as he has been seemingly unable to raise nearly the amount of $ required to be competitive.

OR-51 (Clackamas), Flores (R), upgrade from Lean Flores to Tossup.  With the large amount of cash Flores’s opponent Brent Barton (D) has managed to raise in this district, he has certainly made this one a close race.  It should be fun to watch.

Let me know what you think.

Whatever the make-up of the 111th Congress, no one will be able to say that Democrats didn’t try everything in their power to reach a 60-seat majority. As of the spring of 2008, there already were eight highly competitive seats that no one would be surprised to see turn-over: With Virginia and New Mexico all but lost for Republicans (and Senator Ensign acknowledging just as much), the GOP is in grave danger in New Hampshire, Colorado, Alaska, Mississippi, Oregon and Minnesota. On the other hand, Republican attempts to go on the offensive have been disastrous, with only Louisiana looking competitive.

Among these nine initial seats – eight of which are held by Republicans – the rating of four has changed this month. New Mexico has moved from lean Democrat to likely Democrat, Colorado from toss-up to lean Democrat, and Oregon from lean Republican to toss-up. Only Minnesota has moved in the opposite direction, from toss-up to Lean Republican.

9 competitive seats is already a large number – comparable to the field of play two years ago. But with 2008 shaping up to be as good a Democratic year as 2006, the DSCC is aware that it has to do the most of this opportunity and is eager to put even more seats in play. As a result, we have seen a lot  of actions since my previous Senate rankings in the second and third-tier of GOP-held seats: In North Carolina, strong polling by Kay Hagan forced Elizabeth Dole to air a round of advertisements, but the DSCC has reserved up to $6 million of air time in the fall. This race is the most likely candidate to join the “initial nine.”

In Maine, Democrats have still not been able to tie Susan Collins to her party label, but the $5 million the DSCC is budgeting for the fall campaign is a huge amount of money for this inexpensive state. In Kentucky, Bruce Lunsford’s primary victory certainly exasperated progressives, but the first slate of polls suggests all hope is not lost for Democrats. As for Texas, Kansas and even Idaho, Democrats would need titanic shifts that for now remain unimaginable, but the mere fact that these races are being discussed is horrendous news for the GOP.

Will Democrats be able to go beyond eight serious targets and seriously contest one of these long-shot races? How close will they come to a sweep of their initial eight targets and will they save Louisiana? These are the obvious questions to ask out of these new rankings and I will be closely monitoring any signs of further shifts in the electoral map. More precise questions that will come to determine the make-up of the next Senate include: Will John Sununu be able to take advantage of McCain’s good name in New Hampshire to appeal to independents? How much will Obama boost black turnout in Louisiana and in Mississippi? Will Al Franken be able to put his personal controversies behind him? And is the Maine electorate already over Bush?

The full new rankings are available here, with this accompanying map:

Outlook: Democratic pick-up a net 5-9 Senate seats.

Prediction: Democrats pick-up a net 7 seats, for a 58-42 majority.

Likely Takeover (2 Republican seats, 0 Democratic seat)

1. Virginia (Open seat; Previous Ranking: 1)

It is hard to believe that Jim Gilmore’s situation has worsened over the past two months given how much of an underdog the former Republican Governor was to start with. It is never a good sign when a presumptive nominee wins his party’s nod with 50.3% of the vote, but that is what happened to Gilmore at his party’s nominating convention. As if this proof of an unenergized conservative base was not enough, the state GOP’s moderate wing is also backing away from Gilmore: incumbent Senator John Warner, the Republican whom Gilmore is seeking to replace, is refusing to endorse his own party’s nominee! The only hope for Republicans to retain this seat is for Barack Obama to tap Mark Warner as his running-mate. Warner might very well have been the favorite in the veepstakes… if he were not favored to win this Senate race.

2. New Mexico (Open; Last ranking: 2 and lean take-over)

Three giants of New Mexico politics entered this race after Senator Domenici announced his retirement back in October. The political career of one of them has already been cut short: Rep. Heather Wilson lost a heated and narrow GOP primary to Rep. Steve Pearce, leaving him in a difficult match-up against Democratic Rep. Tom Udall. Pearce is much more conservative than Wilson, making it more difficult for him to appeal to independents in this blue-leaning year, but Wilson had her own ethical issues.

This is an open seat in a swing-state in a Democratic year — that by itself is a recipe for success Democrats, just as it was in Minnesota in 2006. In a very similar situation, Amy Klochubar opened a large lead against Rep. Kennedy in what was supposed to be a competitive open seat. Now, Udall is leading Pearce by 2:1 in recent polls and has 6 times more cash on hand than his Republican rival. That means Pearce is dependent on the help of the NRSC, help that is unlikely to come. In mid-June, Sen. Ensign, the NRSC chairman, implied that his committee was giving up on the Virginia and New Mexico races. That just about seals the deal in this race.

Lean Takeover (2 R, 0 D)

3. New Hampshire (Incumbent: John Sununu; Last ranking: 3)

The parallels between this race and Pennsylvania’s 2006 Senate race continue. Despite predictions that the race is bound to tighten and that John Sununu is too good a politician to go down without a fight, polls are showing no sign of a competitive race – with the latest numbers finding Shaheen leading by 22%. But Republicans are hoping that the more accurate parallel for the Sununu-Shaheen race will be North Carolina’s 2004 race, when Rep. Burr had stockpiled his cash to launch an ad blitzkrieg starting in September and had turned a consistent deficit into a narrow victory on Election Day. Now, it is Sununu who is saving up for a big push in the fall; as of the end of the second quarter, he has $5 million in the bank versus $2 million for Jeanne Shaheen. Will a late wave of advertisements be enough?

4. Colorado (Open; Last Ranking: 4 and toss-up)

For the first time since the November rankings, Colorado is not rated a “toss-up.” As had been expected from the day the match-up between Mark Udall and Bob Schaffer was set up, the Democrat has pull ahead and is now consistently ahead by 9-10% in recent polls. A combination of factors explains why Udall finally jumped up to his first lead. First, this year’s Democratic bent gives Democrats an edge in any open seat race that should have been tight. Second, Bob Schaffer had a bad few months, in particular over stories broken by the Denver Post about his association with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Third, Udall fundraising advantage has allowed his campaign to spend more aggressively on ads. Udall outspent Shaffer 3:1 in the second quarter, and the DSCC jumped in with an attack ad of its own.

Meanwhile, we are starting to get a better idea of the campaign arguments Udall and Schaffer will use in the months ahead, and the first debate that opposed the two men in mid-July set some battle lines: Energy is already a hot topic in the campaign, with the two candidates exchanging barbs on the subject and Udall has devoted the entirety of one of his first ads to energy. Schaffer is determined to paint Udall as weak and unable to make much of a decision, while Udall is casting himself as a bipartisan with a commitment to consensus. It does look like Mark Udall is running as more of a moderate than his cousin Tom in New Mexico; beyond his insistence on bipartisanship, Mark voted for the FISA bill and Tom voted against it.

Toss-up (3 R, 1 D)

5. Alaska (Incumbent: Ted Stevens; Last Ranking: 5)

Ted Stevens is suffering from the corruption scandal that has ensnared him and the state’s Republican Party and it is even affecting his fundraising abilities, as Mark Begich outraised the entrenched incumbent in the second quarter. Contrary to Rep. Young in the at-large House race, Stevens does not face a credible primary challenge, a relief for Democrats as the state’s red leaning would kick in to help a Republican not plagued by ethical controversies.

Begich has been at worst tied with Stevens for months now. He went up on TV in early July, with one ad introducing himself and the other devoted to energy issues (with a joint pledge to develop alternative energies and to fight to “open ANWR”). Perhaps boosted by his increased media exposure and his advertisement efforts, Begich has jumped to a 9% lead in the latest poll, though we will naturally need confirmation of that number before drawing any conclusion.

The Democrat’s efforts will be boosted by those of the Obama campaign, which has unexpectedly decided to make Alaska into a battleground state at the presidential level. Alaska polls have shown a tight presidential race, a sharp departure from past cycles in which Bush crushed his opponents by more than 20%. That means that  contrary to Knowles in the 2004 Senate race, Begich will not have to swim counter-current and that he might benefit from Obama’s organizational efforts.

6. Mississippi (Incumbent: Roger Wicker; Last Ranking: 8 )

Ronnie Musgrove and Roger Wicker were once roommates, but they are quickly becoming bitter rivals. Polls confirm that the race is a pure toss-up. The Republican incumbent has a clear advantage on the financial front ($3 million of cash on hand versus less than $800K for Musgrove at the end of the second quarter), but the DSCC has already rushed in to help Musgrove respond to Wicker’s ads, demonstrating how seriously it took this contest. The DSCC’s move triggered further controversy: Republicans are charging that the ads break campaign finance rules. Democrats answered by filing their own complaint about Wicker’s fundraising.

It is true that Musgrove would have had a better chance had this special election been held in March, as it should have. Now, Wicker has more time to introduce himself to voters and blunt Musgrove’s high name recognition; the GOP believes November’s turnout will be more uniform than it was in MS-01 in May and that a more conservative electorate will give Wicker victory. But Democrats remain confident: First, there will be no party labels next to the candidates’ names. Second, this is one down-the-ballot race in which the Obama candidacy could have a very clear effect: If there is a significant boost in black turnout, it could prove all Musgrove needs to pick-up this seat. The African-American vote is more than ever the key metric of this senatorial race, and one polls are unlikely to capture accurately.

7. Louisiana (Incumbent: Mary Landrieu; Last Ranking: 6)

Not much has changed in this race since the end of May. For one, Louisiana remains the one credible pick-up opportunity for Republicans, and as such will remain a high priority for the NRSC. Second, the two candidates remain on par financially, with Kennedy keeping up with Landrieu’s fundraising for the second quarter in a row, though the incumbent retains a 2:1 advantage in the cash on hand department. As for polls, they show  Landrieu ahead but the race has tightened a bit, with the  Democrat ahead mid-single digits and under 50% in a number of recent polls. This is one state in which the presidential race is likely to help the Republican, as Louisiana is not a state Obama will do much of a dent. He might increase black turnout a bit, but the African-American vote’s decrease since Katrina will be an advantage to Kennedy. One strong argument Democrats hold is statements made by Kennedy in 2004 when he was running as a Democrat for Senate.

8. Oregon (Incumbent: Gordon Smith; Last Ranking: 9 and lean retention)

Democrats have targeted Gordon Smith since the very first days of the cycle. But a disappointing recruitment process followed by primary difficulties for Jeff Merkley made Democrats anxious that they could be wasting an opportunity here. Since the May 20th primary, however, Merkley has grown stronger and is consistently polling within a few points of Smith. In fact, Merkley led in a poll for the first time just a few days ago. News that Merkley had outraised Smith in the second quarter hardened his position as a strong challenger.

Smith has been aware of the target he has on his back and has been preparing since the start of the cycle. Despite being distanced in second quarter fundraising, he still has a 8:1 in cash on hand and so much of Merkley’s money was spent in the primary that his campaign is now in financial difficulty. Furthermore, Smith has been rapidly moving to the center, aware that he is at danger of becoming this cycle’s Lincoln Chaffee: a Republican incumbent in a Democratic state who drowns in the blue tsunami, heightened by the probability that Obama scores a large victory in Oregon.

Smith’s solution has been to throw his party label overboard and run as a consensus candidate ready to embrace both side. And he is going very far in that direction. Not only did he run an ad featuring a Democratic state representative and a state Senator endorsing him, but he followed that up with a spot embracing… Barack Obama, in a desperate-seeming effort to show his willingness to work across the aisle. This strategy does not come without risk: Smith, after all, is supporting John McCain and his positioning could confuse voters. And it will make Smith that much more vulnerable to Obama campaigning on Merkley’s side (the Illinois Senator wasted no time issuing a statement reiterating his support for Merkley).

Lean Retention (2 R, 0 D)

9. Minnesota (Incumbent: Norm Coleman; Last Ranking: 7 and toss-up)

This is the first time in six Senate rankings that Minnesota is not rated as a toss-up. After a wild two months in which Al Franken was undermined by a succession of controversies, polls have clearly shifted away from the former comedian. Except for Rasmussen, which continues to show a toss-up race, other pollsters (including SUSA and Quinnipiac) find Coleman leading by double-digits.

Facing a shrewd incumbent with the reputation of a solid campaigner, Franken had no room for error. Yet, his campaign started tanking with revelations of Franken’s tax problems and with the controversy over his 2000 allegedly-pornographic essay in Playboy; this led a Democratic congresswoman state that she was not sure she could support Franken’s campaign and led Planned Parenthood to blast Franken’s “misogynist remarks.” Next came another firestorm over a rape joke Franken helped write on SNL in 1995. Now, the Coleman campaign is airing a personal attack ad blasting Franken for not paying taxes and writing “juicy porn.”

Franken and Coleman’s strategies are clear. The Democrat wants to make this a referendum about the incumbent and about the Republican Party. Franken denounces the “Bush-Coleman recession” and emphasizes Coleman’s proximity to his party’s leadership. The Republican wants to make this a referendum about what he believes is Franken’s polarizing persona. Whoever manages to frame the debate best is likely to win the election – and both candidates have millions of dollars in the bank to define their opponent.

As if all of this agitation was not sufficient, there was the Jesse Ventura question mark. The former Governor only announced he would not run for Senate on July 14th, and his decision was a relief for Franken’s campaign who had far more to lose from a Ventura candidacy. Now, Franken faces trouble within the DFL. Despite some intra-party rumblings back in May, Franken easily won the DFL’s endorsement. Yet, a well-connected attorney recently announced she would run against Franken in the Democratic primary. She is unlikely to threaten Franken’s nomination, but her late run could prevent the former comedian from turning his attention to Coleman.

10. North Carolina (Incumbent: Elizabeth Dole; Last Ranking: 10)

Minnesota concludes the list of the eight obvious Democratic targets. The DSCC has been looking for more seats to contest, and has made a clear choice that North Carolina has the most potential. Chuck Schumer has been including the state in the list of top targets for many weeks now and the DSCC has reserved up air time for up to $6 million in advertising starting mid-September. Think about that number for a minute: Democrats are committing to invest $6 million in their 9th target in a Republican-leaning state in a presidential year. What better sign of confidence could the DSCC send?

Yet, Republicans have reason to feel confident about this race as well. As of my last rankings, a

series of polls had just found Kay Hagan enjoying a stunning post-primary bounce to almost tie Elizabeth Dole. But the Republican incumbent then unleashed a big advertisement campaign. Combined with the fading of Hagan’s primary victory bounce, Dole has recovered a low-double digit  lead in all institutes, including SUSA, Rasmussen, PPP and Civitas.

But it is too late for Dole to make herself look strong. She still hovers around the 50% threshold of vulnerability, and the quick drop in her numbers in May shows that her support is weak. And Hagan will benefit from the Obama campaign’s decision to contest North Carolina, particularly since the McCain campaign is doing little to counter. It will help Hagan overcome North Carolina red leaning and it will allow her to rely on Obama’s turnout efforts. North Carolina might look less promising for Democrats than it did late May, but it retains unexpected potential.

Rankings continue here.