April 28, 2004
A Quick Interjecting Interlude For Some Politics
As one of those who have made some hay over the various candidates' 1st Pre-Election campaign finance reports, we would be remiss if we didn't note Phil Busse's appearance as a Rogue of the Week in today's Willamette Week. To wit:
Next up, we have Portland Mercury managing editor and occasional mayoral candidate Phil Busse, who has been ripping into fellow mayoral contender Jim Francesconi for weeks about his failure to disclose the free use of office space in a downtown law firm in his Contributions and Expenditures report.
What Busse didn't mention in his tirade is that he's guilty of the very same crime; aside from being paid to write columns plugging his own campaign, Busse uses the work of Merc contributors and the paper's phone system in his mayoral bid without reporting them on his C&E report. (When questioned, Busse copped to his errors during WW's mayoral endorsement meeting last week.)
At a candidates forum earlier this evening, Busse seemed a little rankled at the "guilty of the very same crime" remark, since technically such an omission isn't a violation of the law as long as it's reported by the deadline for amended reports. But of course such a phrase is as easily rhetorical as literal. And of course fair is fair: Such an omission by one candidates is just as stupid as such an omission by another candidate. So being rankled seems a bit much.
Speaking of all this, the Busse campaign does not appear to have yet launched their "immdiate campaign disclosure" process, which had been announced with an intended start date which would have been last week.
Keeping with the Mayoral race, also check the email exchange in tomorrow's Portland Mercury between the paper's Wm. Steven Humphrey and Ed Grosswiler from the Francesconi campaign, in which Grosswiler informs the paper that his boss will not be participating in their endorsement interview. Why?
(You remember Grosswiler. He showed up in comments here to smear the Potter campaign and than ran away when we challenged his assertions. Of course, now we can't seem to get a proper response out of the Potter campaign about that entire mini-controversy either. Perhaps everyone is running away from us in the last month of the campaign.)
We are cancelling Jim's appointment for an endorsement interview with the Mercury. While we understand Phil Busse has recused himself, it appears to the campaign staff here that it would be a futile gesture for Jim to appear. Thanks for the invitation.
We of all people are especially amused by this rationale, since it seems like every other time we run into Francesconi somewhere, he makes a point of wondering when our endorsement interview with him is going to happen -- even though he knows we already endorsed Busse and there's no chance we'd endorse him.
C'mon, guys. Let's at least be consistent.
Finally, appropriately enough, a brief note about our endorsement schedule. It had been our intention to get our endorsements completed this weekend, since ballots are mailed out beginning this Friday. While we will absolutely have our endorsement for the Commissioner No. 1 position ready to go within that timeframe, our pick in the Commissioner No. 4 race is going to have to wait until after the upcoming May 7 forum sponsored by Southeast Uplift (as well as for some other random pieces of that race to come together).
Since all of our readers surely are waiting to see our full endorsements before filling out their ballots (you are, aren't you?), we figured we should make mention of our timeframe for them to be completed.
Disclosure: PORTLAND COMMUNIQUE accepts political advertisements, and currently runs ads from the Busse and Francesconi campaigns.
Comments (12)
John on 29 Apr 2004
I'm no Francesconi fan, but his statement re the Mercury's endorsement seems pretty reasonable to me.
BTW, what does it mean to "recuse" oneself from an endorsement interview? (Or perhaps I should be asking what it means for the Mercury to endorse anyone, when it's been a blatant vehicle for one candidate all along?)
Arya on 29 Apr 2004
As interesting as this injunction hearing may be, I look forward to a full SE Uplift report at some point.
I attended the Pacific Green Party forum, and took some good notes but I don't think I could do it quite the justice you do things.
Especially of interest was the sparring between Frank Dixon and Commissioner Leonard. At the very least, they would be the most entertaining run off possibility!
The One True b!X on 29 Apr 2004
Could you be more specific about thet sparring? I am getting close to not making any endorsement at all in the Commissioner No. 4 race because I have not been especially compelled by any of the candidates, and most of them (on both sides) have had a nasty habit of acting like children.
Arya on 29 Apr 2004
I'll try to be a little bit more specific, but it will probably sound like par for the course for most of the interactions between the candidates in this race.
Frank mentioned Randy by name in harsh comments on a couple of occasions and also took time to warn against believing a lot of what Randy said during the course of his comments about "fighting for you" and what not. Randy was visibly distraught and red in the face almost every time Frank spoke.
Frank went so far as to accuse of Randy of playing the "race card" because of Randy's rationalizing for the shake up of the neighborhood associations being "diversification" of the associations.
Having even been a past donor to Randy's campaigns, I think Frank has the most anger in this race (a lot of it healthy) and seems to be running against Randy like a lover scorned(hell hath no fury like!).
I almost felt sorry for Randy and learned of many admirable accomplishments he has done last night but I find his acquiescence to developers and "big" business interests and the special favors he seems to be making very distasteful. He also doesn't seem to understand the measured manner in which an administrator must govern.
Of the other candidates who were there last night, I think Mark is very idealistic but rather vague and not particularly coherent. I don't think his time has come yet.
Scott is very fair minded but he can seem a bit scattered.
All in all, I honestly think Paul would be the best person for the job. He offers the most positive and eloquent vision for what he would do and how he would do it.
That's just my two cents.
The One True b!X on 29 Apr 2004
Well that's disappointing. Until now, what I had seen had shown Dixon to be often above the direct Leonard-griping fray, and I had thought from things I had heard that he was going to try to focus on positives about what he would do if elected. And, oddly, it's been Leistner who has often grated on my nerves the most, because in appearances I've seen he's been nearly-relentless in bashing Leonard to the point of being shrill about it.
This all puts me another 10% of the way towards deciding there will be no endorsement in this race from me.
Arya on 29 Apr 2004
Wow. Maybe they switch off on biting Randy from event to event?
I'm sorry to hear you won't consider making an endorsement, though 'no endorsement' is pretty fair. Looking forward to your Commissionar #1 endorsement...there was a forum of them on KBOO this morning, which even included the candidates who'd ostensibly stopped campaigning entirely, like Woody Broadnax.
For the record, I'm volunteering on the Adams campaign, but I was once again extremely annoyed with Nick Fish's showboating and sympathy mongering this morning. If I hear him say the words "great tragedy" in that slick east coast accent I'm going to break something...
I'm also interested to see who the willy week endorses and I was, frankly, pissed they didnt release their endorsements issue this week. What's a political junkie to do ?
Brian Smith on 29 Apr 2004
Well I'm still running and have gone to every candidates forum. Look at what I'm involved in and what I'm actually doing verses the other candidates. Hope I could get alittle notice talking about issues rather than lip service.
Brian Smith on 29 Apr 2004
Well I'm still running and have gone to every candidates forum. Look at what I'm involved in and what I'm actually doing verses the other candidates. Hope I could get alittle notice talking about issues rather than lip service.
Arya on 29 Apr 2004
I don't want to sound condescending since I'm probably only a few years younger than Brian, but I really admire him for running, and I think he has some excellent positions on a lot of issues. I would sooner vote for Brian than Jason Newell!
Attending the PGP event last night, and listening to the candidates for Council Seat 1 on KBOO this morning really boiled down the realities of politics which apply even at a city level. The so called "fringe" mayoral candidates all had admirable passions for Portland, and very specific ideas and positions, but...The three things which seem to make a candidate most credible are, for better or worse
1) name recognition- people vote for who they know
2) the ability to get your message out so you actually have a chance to win(aka money or the ability to get it)
3) believeability- Who can you really picture in office? Who has the ideas and approaches that seem most plausible? Who seems to have the most coherent management style?
And I say all this as a Kucinich supporter who cheers heartily his argument against the myth of his unelectabilty being "Well, if you vote for me I'm electable."
Anyway...
Brian Smith on 29 Apr 2004
Any feedback is wonderful, so no worries.
I actually wrote Kucinich to encourage him to run for President and voting for in the Primary.
After this election, I'm going to work on starting a progressive public advocacy group on Portland politics that considers everyone in elections and possibly help candidates like me get started. Also review measures and policies. Not just covering the candidates with the most money, instead focus on what the candidates have done and issues.
Brian Smith on 29 Apr 2004
Any feedback is wonderful, so no worries.
I actually wrote Kucinich to encourage him to run for President and voting for in the Primary.
After this election, I'm going to work on starting a progressive public advocacy group on Portland politics that considers everyone in elections and possibly help candidates like me get started. Also review measures and policies. Not just covering the candidates with the most money, instead focus on what the candidates have done and issues.
Arya on 29 Apr 2004
That progressive public adovacy group for Portland sounds like a good idea.
Would you be thinking of putting together some kind of a voter's guide that you don't have to pay a fee to get into, that has answers to a questionarie sent out to the candidates but that was focused on progressive issues like a p.u.d, and other livablity and sustainability issues likes ones addressed in the pgp forum last night ?