po

Speaker Politics: Minnis Out?

The conventional knowledge seems to be that unless the R's pick up a few seats in the House, and assuming she wins her seat, Karen Minnis is doomed to defeat as Speaker and destined to be dethroned so to speak.  These rumors have only been fueled in recent days by the departure of key staff in her office.

This leaves loads of conjecture about who is jockeying to replace her.  Of course Wayne Scott's name comes up, but maybe he's telling the truth- he's happy where he is...content to rule the campaigns and the purse strings, the real power behind the throne, or maybe the iron fist is coming down as we write.

Flores' name has been thrown around as one who covets the spot.  But what got us thinking about speaker politics was the letter sent to representatives last week written by the energetic and progressive Peter Buckley and Sal Esquivel, equally energetic, not a progressive.  Their intentions, they say are a "sincere attempt to address the exact points of contention in the process and suggest solutions."

Interestingly, what they propose is that each member gets two priority bills heard and voted on in committee.  This is huge to legislators too long in the minority.  It's the equivalent to a tall cool drink of water on a hot day, to a cup of cocoa on a cold afternoon, it's the holy grail- getting bills heard is the perogative of the majority.  It's the heart of control.

So what does Sal want?  Why is a guy in the majority "passing out" priority bill hearings and votes like candy?  Could it be that he wants to make new friends to sit with at lunch.  Or is something more sinister occuring- Is Sal trying to build bridges with the democrats to win a coalition speakership?

If so, pretty smart, nothing like offering the now and future minority legislators a voice.  But it raises a more interesting question D's probably aren't ready to consider in their courageous quest to 31- If the D's can't take back the House, who would they most like as Speaker?  Is there a progressive Republican in the House that can bring a few votes and shake up the leadership?  Do we have a second bite at the apple if Merkley and crew fail to bring home the bacon?   

Westlund Out of Race

Vacations are overrated. A person travels to California for a few days, and when they get back, their favorite candidate for governor is no longer a candidate for governor.

Obviously, we've all heard about Westlund's exit from the race for governor. It was picked up yesterday by BlueOregon and LoadedOrygun and the more substantive discussions will no doubt be found there.

Westlund spent plenty of money on signature-gathering. Dozens of green-shirted canvassers on the streets... that's not just persuasion. When they're paid and got clipboards, I count that towards signature-gathering costs. Seems like money was a factor... and HB 2614 simply made that process more expensive.

But then there's been a lot of speculation about Westlund's ulterior motives... suggestions that he's made a deal with Kulongoski or that he aims to springboard to another position. But here's the facts that we all know:

1. Westlund got into the race promising Oregon that he was "in it to win it" and that he would not be a spoiler.

2. Westlund exited the race, saying that he was headed for a spoiler role and had promised not to play that role.

Perhaps amidst all of the innuendo, conspiracy theories, random guesses, conjecture, and accusations... something more simple and more amazing happened: A politician kept his word.

Is it possible?

A tale of two polls

It's poll-time again, although, (yawn) one wonders why?  All we really want is a great few weeks to end the summer in style. 

But, since the crosstabs for the new Rasmussen poll for Oregon gov was in my inbox, curiosity overcame me.  Especially after reading the wonderful questions posed by Loaded Oregon on the union-backed poll claiming Ted is in a strong position.  LO asked, "the question distinguishes between strong and weak support, but the results combine the two. For all we know, Ted has 10% strong support and 30% weak support, meaning his numbers are soft." 

Since their article wasn't updated, we don't know if they answered you LO. So here's what we know

Rasmussen:

How do voters feel about the job Teddy k is doing?

11% strongly approve

45% somewhat approve

19% somewhat disapprove

23% strongly disapprove

2% not sure

Looks very squishy in the middle...

Do people like the candidates?

	Kulongoski	Saxton
Very favorable	13%	12%
Somewhat favorable	43%	31%
Somewhat unfavorable	26%	31%
Very unfavorable	18%	21%
Not sure	1%	6%

Still a majority don't feel strongly. And where's Westlund?   

35% Saxton, 45% Kulongoski, 12% some other candidate, 8% not sure

Why are votes going to Saxton 10% lower in Grove's poll (25%), and undecideds so much higher in hers (+15)?  Is it because Westlund, et al, were named in the Grove poll and not Rasmussen?   Does that mean Saxton's voters move to undecided when Westlund enters. TK doesn't seem as affected (-3).   Is Westlund hurting Saxton more?

clarification: Rasmussen asked, "thinking about the election for Governor, if the election for governor were held today, would you vote for Republican Ron Saxton or Democrat Ted Kulongoski?"

"Other candidate" is +4 from May survey