COVER STORY SMELLS LIKE POLITICS WW's GUIDE TO THE 2000 ELECTION

Measures: STATEWIDE 83 Expands veterans' loans-- YES 84 Extends state-mandate law-- YES 85 Allows new counties-- NO 86 Kicker in constitution-- NO 87 Zoning of sex shops-- NO 88 Legislature's tax deduction-- NO 89 Legislature's tobacco $ plan-- NO 90 Consumers pay Trojan costs-- NO 91 Sizemore's tax deduction-- NO 92 Restricts payroll deduction-- NO 93 Voters approve all fees-- NO 94 Measure 11 repeal-- NO 95 Teacher merit pay-- NO 96 Initiative protection-- NO 97 Bans leghold traps-- NO 98 No public $ on politics-- NO 99 Ensures quality home care-- NO 1 Equitable school funding-- NO 2 Legislature reviews rules-- NO 3 Conviction before forfeiture-- NO 4 Hospitals' tobacco $ plan-- NO 5 Gun-show background checks-- YES 6 Public campaign finance-- YES 7 Landowner compensation-- NO 8 Limits state spending-- NO 9 Keeps gays from schools-- NO LOCAL MEASURES 26-6,8,9 Amend City Charter-- YES 26-10 Amends Metro Charter-- YES 26-7 PCC Bond-- YES Candidates: FEDERAL President -- Al Gore Congress 1st District -- David Wu Congress 3rd District -- Earl Blumenauer STATEWIDE Secretary of State -- Bill Bradbury Treasurer -- Randall Edwards Attorney General -- Hardy Myers Supreme Court -- Paul DeMuniz COUNTY COMMISION Frank Shields STATE SENATE Ryan Deckert Kate Brown Margaret Carter Avel Gordly Chris Gorsek STATE HOUSE Bruce Starr Jim Hill Charlie Ringo Mitch Greenlick Mark Hass Max Williams Jan Lee Mary Nolan Chris Beck Diane Rosenbaum Steve March Jeff Merkley Greg Hansen Deborah Kafoury JoAnn Bowman Karen Minnis Laurie Monnes Anderson Richard Devlin Carolyn Tomei Kathy Lowe We're disgusted. And we're delighted. We're disgusted by the odor coming from Volume 1 of the Voters' Pamphlet two-pack. That's the one dealing with ballot measures. Do you smell it too? It's the stench of Oregon's initiative system in the early stages of decay. Over the years, this paper has been a strong defender of Oregon's dance with direct democracy. We still are, but this election tested our allegiance. We've spent the past seven weeks listening to friends and foes of 31 state and local ballot measures. Never before have we met so many people who've cluttered up the ballot to take on problems that don't seem to exist: --Taxpayers oppressed by out-of-control fee hikes? We didn't see them. --Innocent victims of power-hungry drug cops who've seized and sold their homes? Non-existent. --The legions of union members upset about payroll deductions spent on politics? Ghosts in Sizemore's closet. --Legislators so addicted to tax dollars that they're outspending state resources? A myth of McIntire. --Parents of kids who've been brainwashed by the public-school teachers' pro-gay propaganda? Only in Lon's dreams. We suggest that you wait until Halloween to mail in your ballot, to pay tribute to all the political phantoms that need to be buried. There was a time, not that long ago, when the fall election season brought spirited debates over real issues: bear-baiting, nuclear safety, rising property taxes, adoptee rights, streamside protection, assisted suicide and wasteful packaging. We didn't always agree with the proposed remedies, but at least there was substance to the debate. This year, with a couple of notable exceptions, it's a ballot stuffed full of solutions in search of problems. The mugging of the initiative process, in part, reflects a lack of leadership in Salem. Which brings us to our second sentiment. We're delighted. That's because this is the best crop of candidates we've seen in a long time. From Earl Blumenauer and David Wu, our two up-and-coming metro-area congressmen, to Paul DeMuniz, a near-perfect fit for the state Supreme Court, the ballot is crammed full of bright, hard-working folks who are trying to make this state even better. But we're most excited by the legislative candidates. Incumbent lawmakers, from right-wingers like Bruce Starr and Karen Minnis to bleeding hearts like Jeff Merkley and Kate Brown, seem eager to get past the divisive partisanship that has soured the public. And, thanks to a variety of factors, some of the most disruptive members of the state Legislature--like Rep. Ron Sunseri and Sens. Thomas Wilde, Marylin Shannon and (voters willing) Eileen Qutub--won't be back. Hoping to take their place are newcomers, like Steve March, Jan Lee, Mary Nolan and Carolyn Tomei, who could provide a much-needed breath of fresh air to the political process. CRIME AND JUSTICE MEASURE 94 STATUTORY MEASURE Repeals Oregon's mandatory minimum sentencing law PERCEIVED PROBLEM: Measure 11 has handcuffed judges while giving prosecutors a sledgehammer and putting too many people, particularly teens, in jail for too long. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Repeal Measure 11. HOW IT WOULD WORK: Measure 11, which voters passed in 1994, transformed the state's treatment of those convicted of violent crimes by setting mandatory minimum prison sentences, allowing no time off for good behavior and no possibility of parole. Before M11, for example, judges could sentence convicted murderers to anywhere from 10 to 22 years in prison. Now they serve 25 years, and not a day less, regardless of whether they're a first-time offender or a career thug. Also under Measure 11, kids ages 15 to 17 face adult time if they're convicted of a violent crime. Again, judges can't consider mitigating factors. Like a time-machine, Measure 94 would transport Oregon back to early 1995. Measure 11 would disappear. M94 would also be retroactive, meaning that 3,300 convicts who are now serving time for violent crimes would have to be resentenced within 90 days of the election. BOTTOM LINE: Unlike many of the initiatives voters face this election, this measure attempts to address a real problem. Measure 11 was passed when crime rates were high and jail space was short. People were fed up with the perception that judges were letting criminals get away with near-murder, a perception fueled by some isolated, but very disturbing, examples. The increased uniformity and toughening of violent-crime sentences has been valuable. But proponents of Measure 94 argue that applying one-size-fits-all justice is like using a Cuisinart to file your nails. We agree. Measure 11 has given too much power to prosecutors, who regularly use the threat of mandatory sentences to force plea bargains that previously would have been rejected. Judges, meanwhile, are able to issue only one type of sentence, and that's prison time; forget about treatment programs and counseling. Forget about time off for good behavior. Even first-time offenders can find themselves locked away for a very long time, with no chance of rehabilitation or incentive to change their attitude. As one of the few newspapers that opposed Measure 11, we would love to see it reformed. This measure, however, has a huge flaw: its retroactivity. We understand the motivation of M94's key backers, a desperate group of mothers trying to free their convicted children, but we can't support it. Halting all business in our overworked courts in order to resentence thousands of convicts in the span of a few months strikes us as bad policy. Measure 11 critics such as state Rep. Jo Ann Bowman have tried, unsuccessfully, to reform the law in the Legislature. Next session, they will have an ally in Gov. John Kitzhaber. The governor opposes this measure but has pledged to work for Measure 11 reform in 2001. That, to our mind, is the wisest course of action. QUOTE: "I think there are some people who do deserve a very long sentence. I've represented some of them.... [But] I think most people had no concept how bad Ballot Measure 11 was going to be." --Defense lawyer Emily Simon MEASURE 3 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT Makes it harder to sell seized property PERCEIVED PROBLEM: Greedy cops and overzealous prosecutors are selling the cars, houses and other property of people who've not been convicted of any crime. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Require a criminal conviction before forfeiture. HOW IT WOULD WORK: Few people realize that the concept of innocent-until-proven-guilty does not extend to your personal property. That is, property seized in connection with a suspected crime can be sold even if you're never convicted. Police use so-called "civil forfeitures" all across the nation, mainly in drug cases, but also against drunk drivers and johns. On the federal level, there needs to be "clear and convincing" evidence that the property was used in the commission of the crime before it is forfeited. In Oregon, however, police need to meet a less stringent legal standard of "probable cause," the same as for an arrest. Measure 3 would continue to allow police to seize property with "probable cause" but would require a criminal conviction before police could take ownership, thus raising the bar for Oregon above that of the federal government. BOTTOM LINE: This sounds outrageous: Some guy is suspected of soliciting a prostitute and, even if his case never goes to trial, the cops can sell his car? This political battle seems like a cause tailor-made for the anecdote, yet proponents of M3 couldn't offer a single compelling story to demonstrate that Oregon cops or prosecutors are abusing their vast civil-forfeiture powers. That's frustrating, because we've talked to enough defense lawyers and police officers to be convinced that the current law is routinely used in small ways that compromise civil liberties. It's also troubling that law-enforcement agencies have come to rely on the cash they raise from civil forfeiture--estimated to be $2 million across the state--causing police in some jurisdictions to make decisions based on monetary gain. It's probably no accident that cops seem more aggressive at busting dope growers than car thieves. In fact, although its backers are reluctant to admit it, M3 is primarily aimed at slowing down the War on Drugs (which explains why its financial backing comes from the crowd that wants to legalize pot). We agree that the nation's drug-law policy is way out of whack, but mucking up the constitution with this clumsy proposal isn't the right solution. By wiping out the state's animal forfeiture law, this measure would create a logistical nightmare for animal shelters: What to do with the hundreds of animals seized each year in animal-cruelty cases if they must be held until the conclusion of trial? Critics of Oregon's civil forfeiture laws have a legitimate concern. But the situation calls for a more careful response than Measure 3. QUOTE: "You would never find a lot big enough." --Portland cop Pat Kelly, on how this measure would make it harder to dispose of seized cars. MEASURE 5 Requires background checks for all gun sales at gun shows PERCEIVED PROBLEM: Gun shows provide one-stop shopping for felons, stalkers and the mentally unstable, who can't buy their weapons from licensed dealers. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Put a "closed for business" sign on illegal gun trafficking at the shows. HOW IT WOULD WORK: If you want to buy a gun from a federally licensed dealer in Oregon, you have to submit to an instant background check. Walk into a gun show, however, and a "collector" can sell you a 9mm Glock without even asking your name. This measure expands the background checks to all transactions made at locations where 25 or more guns are for sale. In addition, it would log all gun sales into the Oregon State Police database, where they would be kept for five years but not subject to public-record laws. (Currently, there is a record-keeping split. Handguns are kept in the state database for five years. Long guns are kept for only six months in the federal system.) The measure also allows private sellers to run a background check, thereby protecting themselves from liability if the gun is later used in a crime. BOTTOM LINE: It's no accident that Oregon and Colorado are the only two states in the country with gun-control measures on the ballot. Why? Remember Kip Kinkel? Remember Columbine? This measure is part of the emotional million-mom-march-fueled backlash against gun violence in this country. M5 will not guarantee that there will be no future schoolyard massacres, and it won't prevent all gun violence in Oregon. It will not stop all gun-aided crimes. People will still be able to avoid a background check by selling guns via classified ads and the Internet. But M5 does sensibly address a real problem by shutting down an open marketplace where it is too easy for people who shouldn't have guns to plunk down their money and walk out with a weapon. There is no reason not to fold gun shows into the current law. We are equally excited about sending a message to Charlton Heston and his cronies in Oregon. M5 is on the ballot only because the gun lobby shot down a similar bill in the state Legislature last year. It is time to show them what Oregonians consider reasonable. Opponents say that the OSP databases are nothing more than a gun-owner registry. We can't argue with that, but it doesn't bother us, as it would be closed to the public. They also claim that the computer file will leave owners vulnerable to hackers or even profiling by the state police. We don't buy it. The state database has been secure until now, and M5 won't change that. THE QUOTE: "I can't argue that they can use a record to solve a crime. I can't. But are we willing to make the trade-off of our civil liberties to get it?" --John Hellen, Oregon Gun Owners HEALTH MEASURE 4 STATUTORY AMENDMENT Creates a trust fund for tobacco-settlement money; dedicates interest to Oregon Health Plan PERCEIVED PROBLEM: The Oregon Health Plan is going broke. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Save it with a trust fund. HOW IT WOULD WORK: Stashes the state's tobacco windfall in an iron-clad lockbox where legislators can't spend it (unless they really want to), then dedicates the interest to the Oregon Health Plan. BOTTOM LINE: See below.   MEASURE 89 STATUTORY AMENDMENT Creates a trust fund for tobacco-settlement money; dedicates interest to specific health, housing, and transportation programs. PERCEIVED PROBLEM: There's never enough money for public health, mental health, low-income housing and transportation for elderly and disabled folks. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Hmmm... how about a trust fund? HOW IT WOULD WORK: Stashes the state's tobacco windfall in an iron-clad lockbox where legislators can't spend it (unless they really want to), then dedicates the interest to a smorgasbord of programs. BOTTOM LINE: In a saner world, neither of these measures would darken your mailbox. Both are the result of a complicated political deal that blew up at the last moment, dumping an unholy mess in voters' laps. The drama began in November 1998, when states extracted a gigantic settlement from Big Tobacco for past and future tobacco-related health-care costs. Oregon's share of the deal is roughly $48 million this year, rising to $80 million next year and averaging $100 million a year thereafter, payable as long as people keep puffing away. Both M4 and M89 propose stashing that money in a trust fund (the infamous "lockbox") and dedicating the interest to specific programs. At first, the interest would be small potatoes: a paltry $9 million in 2001, $11 million in 2002. But eventually the principal will swell to gargantuan proportions, blotting out the sun and generating ever-larger payouts. There is something very appealing about showing some fiscal restraint now to plan for the future. Unfortunately, these proposals are flawed. M89 would dedicate the interest to a grab-bag of orphaned programs: 40 percent for public health and mental health; 20 percent for transportation for elderly and disabled; 20 percent for housing for the poor and disabled; 10 percent for tobacco prevention; 3 percent for women's shelters; and 7 percent for OHSU for research. While these are all noble causes, most of them have nothing to do with tobacco-related illness and none qualifies for federal matching funds. Most vexing, M89 provides nothing for the Oregon Health Plan, a worthy and innovative state program that provides health insurance to the working poor. Which brings us to M4, which would dedicate all the interest to the Oregon Health Plan. There's more logic to this, since tobacco-related illness costs the Plan a bundle. But M4's major backers, the hospitals and HMOs, inexplicably failed to toss in any money for nursing homes (which also bear the huge burden of tobacco-related illness) or prevention programs (the only long-term way to cut tobacco-related health-care costs). M4's backers say this will save the Oregon Health Plan. But it will be a long time (possibly not until 2017) before the interest from M4 hits $100 million a year. Meanwhile, the Plan needs cash--now--if it's going to survive. Saving the plan will take a lot more than M4. THE QUOTE: "If Sizemore's or McIntire's, or some combination of those measures passes, we won't have the luxury of putting this money in a rainy day fund, folks, 'cause it will be raining cats and dogs." --nursing home lobbyist Jim Carlson HEALTH MEASURE 99 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT Creates commission on home health-care services PERCEIVED PROBLEM: Grandma can't find anyone to go pick up her prescriptions or give her a bath. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Create a commission. HOW IT WOULD WORK: While you were sleeping, an entire cottage industry sprang up in Oregon: home health care. The state now boasts about 10,000 home health-care workers who help the elderly and disabled maintain their independence in their own home--a noble goal that also happens to be a lot cheaper than nursing homes or adult foster care. HHC workers help with the nuts and bolts of daily life: shopping, cooking, housekeeping, transportation, personal care and medication. Unfortunately, HHC workers are typically paid worse than pizza boys--about $8 an hour--and some of them have less training and fewer qualifications. That means there's a chronic shortage of workers, especially good ones. M99 would create a nine-member Home Health Care Commission, appointed by the governor, to establish qualifications, create a statewide registry and enable workers to unionize. BOTTOM LINE: Proponents of the measure made a convincing case that home health-care workers need a raise. Given that market forces don't apply to reimbursed care, some government intervention is needed. And given that home care keeps people out of expensive hospitals and adult foster care, it's a wise investment. But where will the initial money come from? The Voters' Pamphlet estimate of financial impact--less than $1 million--is misleading, to say the least. That's the cost of actually setting up a commission, not the cost of paying HHC workers a decent wage. We support higher wages and better qualifications for HHC workers, but this measure looks suspiciously like a back-door effort to unionize a workforce in an industry where money is notoriously difficult to find. We are also troubled by the commission's lopsided makeup--a majority would be current or past recipients of services. But the fatal flaw in the measure is that it is a constitutional amendment, meaning legislators would be unable to make the minor changes that we think this measure needs. We urge voters to defeat this measure but pressure the Legislature to deal with what is clearly a problem for some of our neediest residents. LOCAL GOVERNMENT MEASURE 85 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT Makes it easier to form new counties PERCEIVED PROBLEM: Gresham is being screwed by Multnomah County but can't form its own county because of state laws. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Let Gresham secede from the People's Republic of Multnomah. HOW IT WOULD WORK: Oregon's law governing county boundaries, written when a day's horse ride was the standard, only allows formation of new counties if they stretch at least 400 square miles. Measure 85 would drop the square-mile requirement and allow new counties of 100,000 people to be formed by a majority vote of the proposed county's residents. BOTTOM LINE: For the last few decades, much of unincorporated east county has been swallowed by Portland, deepening a cultural divide between Portland and east Multnomah County. In addition to their emotional frustration with the county, many Greshamites say the county doesn't adequately maintain or upgrade busy roads like the county's portion of Burnside Street, which is a commuter's nightmare. Supporters of this legislative referral have a legitimate point. Portland-oriented county commissioners often ignore east county, passing resolutions such as the recent smoking ban. But the Balkanization that M85 prescribes is no cure. Counties, like all geopolitical units, are made up of diverse populations that need to coexist. We imagine there are plenty of folks in Lake Oswego who'd like to shed some of their Clackamas County neighbors. On a more practical level, imagine how insanely expensive and redundant it would be for Gresham County to fund its own jails and health systems at a time when the political winds blow toward smaller government. So, while we urge voters to reject this measure, we also urge the County Commission to heed its message: Multnomah County doesn't stop at 181st Avenue. THE QUOTE: "When a 900-pound gorilla like Portland gets a sniffle and rolls over, we get squashed." --former Gresham mayor Gussie McRobert   MEASURE 87 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT Allows regulation of location of sexually oriented businesses through zoning PERCEIVED PROBLEM: That wacky free-speech-friendly Oregon Constitution lets strip clubs and porno stores abut elementary schools and uproot civic common sense! PROPOSED SOLUTION: Let local jurisdictions zone sex emporia into combat zones. HOW IT WOULD WORK: Any establishment whose "principal business" is nude dancing, nude entertainment or the production, distribution or display of representations of sexual activity could be ordered by its city or county to pick up and move. BOTTOM LINE: This is yet another installment in the moral hygiene campaign by the city of Portland and other jurisdictions. Call this the old-wine-in-new-bottles measure, because it's little more than a replay of measures 19 and 31, which in 1994 and 1996 sought to explicitly ban pornography. To their credit, a number of feminists such as former Supreme Court Justice Betty Roberts have come out in opposition to this measure, due to their belief that you shouldn't be able to regulate a business based on its content. If a part of town allows businesses, it allows businesses. If the business creates harm (crime or sex offenders hanging around outside, for example), it already can be shut down. But if some people are offended by the very nature of the business, that is no reason to muck with the constitution. M87 could create problems for art galleries or theaters that feature nudity. Should the City of Portland be able to push Triangle Productions! out onto Northeast Columbia Boulevard? Plus: Imagine the battle that will erupt if this measure passes and city councilors have to decide where to allow strip clubs and porn stores to set up shop. That war will be won by the rich. THE QUOTE: "Why does a Christian bookstore deserve different protection than a porn store?" --David Fidanque, executive director of the Oregon chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union MEASURE 84 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT Continues to make the state pay local governments for mandated programs PERCEIVED PROBLEM: The bossy state government pushes new rules onto local governments without giving them the means to pay for it. PROPOSED SOLUTION: If they want it, they have to pay for it. HOW IT WOULD WORK: No need to spend a whole lot of time thinking about this one. Measure 84 is on the ballot because the 1996 measure we overwhelmingly passed, which made this constitutional change, included a revisit clause in case the new law wasn't working. It is working. Under the law, the state cannot require the cities and counties to implement programs without providing the funds. That's fair and is especially important to smaller, rural counties with small tax bases. They can't afford to pay the administrative costs of land-use planning or property assessment and taxation out of their own sparsely populated pockets. LOCAL MEASURES MEASURES 26-6, 26-8, 26-9 CITY CHARTER AMENDMENTS The Portland City Charter is essentially the city's constitution. Every so often, the City Council needs to get voters to approve some housekeeping changes. This time, none of the amendments is earth-shattering--unless you are a city bureau director or a cop or a firefighter--and all three deserve voters' support. Measure 26-6 is known as "the Sherrill Whittemore measure" after the under-performing director of the city's 911 office, whom Commissioner Dan Salzman has been unable to fire. It would make all new bureau directors at-will employees (as they are at Multnomah County). We believe there's still a place for civil service protection, but it shouldn't extend to top managers who report to elected commissioners. Measure 26-8 is a response to what some saw as a questionable stress-disability claim awarded to former Sgt. Richard Barton, who eight years ago was involved in a shooting. Last year, after he became a key figure in the Central precinct overtime scandal, Barton applied for disability, saying he was unable to work due to residual stress from the 1992 shooting. The board of the Fire and Police Disability Retirement Fund approved his claim. This measure would restructure the board by diluting its union membership. Measure 26-9 would prevent cops and firefighters who belong to the Fire and Police Disability Retirement Fund from receiving benefits if they're convicted of a crime and incarcerated. This measure is in response to the payments that are now being made to convicted sex abuser and former police officer Lloyd Grundmeyer. It won't affect Grundmeyer's claim but would thwart similar claims in the future.   MEASURE 26-10 METRO PERCEIVED PROBLEM: Years of bickering at our regional government. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Get rid of the executive officer position, leaving only a council in charge. HOW IT WOULD WORK: We take it for granted (if we take it at all), but Metro is a pretty remarkable political beast. It's the country's first elected regional government, overseeing planning efforts such as stream protection and the urban growth boundary, as well as recycling, garbage, the Oregon Zoo, Convention Center and Expo Center. Currently its government is set up kind of like our federal one: Executive Mike Burton is like the president, running the bureaucracy, while the seven-member Metro Council is Congress, passing laws under a presiding officer chosen by a majority vote each year. The big difference is that unlike Bill Clinton, Burton has no veto. So in theory he's supposed to meekly implement policies even when he doesn't agree with them. Fat chance--hence the years of bickering. This measure gets rid of Burton's position (he's term-limited anyway) and creates a new council president who is elected region-wide, to run a six-member council. The council would oversee a manager who runs the staff. BOTTOM LINE: Billed as a streamlining measure, this is less a money-saving move than it is self-preservation. Metro insiders worry that years of bad press have made the agency vulnerable to attacks from right-wingers who'd like to abolish it. This is not a very compelling reason to vote, as public debate is supposed to be a healthy thing. But proponents are correct that the Metro charter needs fixing. Asking an elected official like Burton not to be political is like asking a wolf to give up meat: It just won't happen. One way to deal with the problem could have been to give the executive more power, namely a veto. That would give the two sides a reason to negotiate rather than just feud. Instead, this version gives councilors more power, including the ability to directly influence staff. In theory, this could lead to a more accountable bureaucracy, but it also holds the danger of parochialism and a politicized bureaucracy. Critics of this measure are right when they say the public process in this charter reform was minimal. And we like their idea that the Metro Council needs more district-based councilors, not fewer. That said, the proposed charter reform lays out a workable system of government, unlike the one Metro has now. SCHOOLS MEASURE 26-7 Raises $144 million for Portland Community College PERCEIVED PROBLEM: Community-college students are stuck with junior-high facilities. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Sell bonds that will be paid back over 20 years. HOW IT WOULD WORK: PCC will spend 44 percent of the money on technology, a third to repair buildings and a quarter for new construction. The bond would cost the owner of a $150,000 home $16.50 per year. BOTTOM LINE: Community colleges are the Cinderella of Oregon education, toiling away in obscurity while their more attractive sisters K-12 and higher ed get the attention--and the money. But PCC provides an essential lifeline for job-seekers and students trying to better themselves. The college's enrollment has increased 16 terms in a row, jumping more than 8 percent last year to nearly 100,000 students. Still, one of three campuses lacks a library, and many labs and computers are badly out of date. YOU OUGHTA KNOW: This is the third time PCC has put this measure on the ballot. In May, the college received 57.3 percent "yes" votes but, thanks to Bill Sizemore, because slightly fewer than half of the eligible voters turned out, the measure didn't pass. THE QUOTE: "We're at the end of our rope here. Only the local community can help us. This help can't come from the Legislature." --PCC President Daniel Moriarty MEASURE 1 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT: Requires the Legislature to fund schools adequately or explain why it did not PERCEIVED PROBLEM: Stingy Republican legislators refuse to allocate enough money for schools. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Define "enough money" and then shame lawmakers into shelling it out. HOW IT WOULD WORK: Gov. John Kitzhaber, who sponsored this measure, wants to use something called the "Quality Education Model," developed during the last legislative session as a device to make the debate over adequate school funding more definite. The initial model would set a dollar figure for the Legislature to meet; if it failed, legislative leaders would have to issue a report explaining why. BOTTOM LINE: This is a toothless, feel-good measure that solves nothing and demonstrates the lack of leadership coming from the governor's office. Whether the number comes from the Quality Education Model or out from under Kitzhaber's cowboy hat, trying to create a definition of "adequate funding" is like trying to draw a line in water--and would be about as effective. And what legislator in her right mind would ever admit to not funding education adequately? Moreover, it is unclear why educational funding should enjoy constitutional protection that other essential services don't get. Worse yet, this measure actually exacerbates one of the problems it attempts to solve. Oregon's Education Act for the 21st Century, which places vast and unfunded demands on schools, is at the root of Kitzhaber's and school advocates' frustration. Yet a second component of this measure, which forces lawmakers to provide cash for districts left behind when richer districts raise local taxes for schools, is itself just another unfunded mandate. THE QUOTE: "This measure is an attempt to tie expectations to cost." --Jean Thorne, the governor's education adviser   MEASURE 95 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT: Requires that public-school teachers get paid based solely on student performance. PERCEIVED PROBLEM: Bad old teachers get paid more than good new teachers. PROPOSED SOLUTION: Link pay to results. HOW IT WOULD WORK: Currently, Oregon public-school instructors--from kindergarten teachers to grad-school professors--are paid almost exclusively on years of experience and the level of their educations. This measure, sponsored by Bill Sizemore's lieutenant Becky Miller, would scrap those criteria and pay instructors instead based entirely on students' increase in "appropriate knowledge." BOTTOM LINE: The current teacher pay system can frustrate good performers. In almost every school, there are both exceptional instructors and burned-out benchwarmers. And the lousy teachers may get paid more than the good teachers simply because they've put in more time. That's ridiculous and wrong. Opponents of M95, who offer nothing in the way of alternatives to the current system, are lucky the measure is such a dud. As written, M95 gives no guidance on what such "appropriate knowledge" is and is completely silent on how to deal with teachers whose subjects--such as art or special education--are unquantifiable. Furthermore, basing pay entirely on "merit" could create a disincentive to work with difficult students, pit colleagues against each other and magnify the importance of the state's flawed standardized-testing regime. Supporters of merit pay point to its importance in the private sector. But bonuses there are usually paid on top of base salaries and reward profits above and beyond a target. No amount of good teaching brings additional revenues into the educational system, and basing an instructor's entire compensation on some ill-defined measure is excessive. Still, Sizemore and company have raised an issue that deserves further attention. THE QUOTE: "Even if we don't win, if we can make people realize that time is the only criteria for pay, we'll have accomplished a great thing." --Bill Sizemore   MEASURE 9 STATUTORY AMENDMENT: Prohibits public schools from promoting homosexual or bisexual behavior. PERCEIVED PROBLEM: Godless public schools are turning our kids into sexual deviants! PROPOSED SOLUTION: If teachers--or prison health counselors for that matter--don't talk about homosexuality, it might go away. HOW IT WOULD WORK: Any institution that "encourages, promotes or sanctions" homosexuality could lose part or all of its state funding. BOTTOM LINE: The supporters of Measure 9 could be written off as pathetic cranks if this deceptively worded "child protection" measure weren't so damaging--and far-reaching. This warmed-up leftover from Lon Mabon's pantry of intolerance is long past its expiration date. It stinks up the political process and threatens our schools. It's not bad enough that M9 would declare open season on already-vulnerable sexual minorities and crap all over the First Amendment rights of teachers and schools. No, the measure's ambiguous language hides consequences that are far broader. For a clue about the petitioners' mind-set, here are some highlights from the OCA's "Checklist to Assess Your School's Risk for Encouraging HOMOSEXUALITY" (emphasis theirs): For one thing, watch out for a school's "non-harassment program"; for another, beware of "AIDS and safe sex education programs." That's right, AIDS education is dangerous behavior in the OCA's book--and remember, colleges and prisons are included in that book. That means, for instance, that prospective nurses couldn't be taught about HIV, nor could high-school students or even prisoners. This is yet another measure that has cooked up an illusory problem so that its backers can promote their own agenda. Don't believe us? How about state Rep. Bruce Starr, who last session voted with the Christian Coalition 95 percent of the time but isn't backing this measure? "I haven't heard one single complaint about this issue from any parent, teacher or school administrator in my district," Starr told WW. "And, if this becomes a problem in my district, I believe the school boards could deal with it on their own." Amen. THE QUOTE: "Tolerance is a code-word for the homosexual agenda." --Lou Beres, executive director of the Christian Coalition of Oregon and a key M9 supporter, as quoted in The Oregonian.   FEDERAL CANDIDATES PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES Al Gore DEMOCRAT Have you really not made up your mind yet? Frankly, we find it a bit hard to believe. But for those of you in that category of undecideds, listen up. Get over the fact that everyone who runs for president is flawed. Yes, Al Gore has the warmth of a hubcap and has been singed by fund-raising shenanigans. Yes, George W. Bush is walking evidence that genetics and good schooling are no match for intellect. But that's no reason to approach this election with cynicism. There is a choice to be made. And its not just between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. It's easy to be charmed by George Bush. It's also easy to see that a Bush presidency would pursue an agenda that directly contradicts the values this newspaper and this state have long held dear. The Texas governor's environmental record is laughable. His position on choice is worrisome. His inexperience in foreign affairs is frightening. His opposition to meaningful campaign-finance reform is indefensible. If you believe Al Gore on no other issue, believe this: George W's tax relief is as regressive as the vice president claims. The vice president, for his part, has an environmental record that is among the most impressive of any presidential candidate--ever. His committment to civil rights is unquestioned. And as one of the budget hawks in the Clinton administration, he simply cannot be tagged as a liberal who never saw a program he wouldn't fund. Gore is no John Muir, and he is no Ghandi. But that's not what national politics in the year 2000 is about. Of course, for many of you undecideds, the choice is less between Gore and Bush than between Al and Ralph. We understand. Four years ago, we endorsed Ralph Nader, partly out of our growing disgust for Clinton. It was also, as we said at the time, a safe way to lodge a protest, as Clinton was on his way to a certain victory. Four years later, it's a different story. This is the closest presidential election in decades. There are Nader supporters who say there is no difference between Bush and Gore. To them we say: Get real. Just think about what's going on in the Middle East right now--which do you want running our foreign policy? There are Nader supporters who think that a Bush presidency will be so heinous it will reenergize the left. To them we say: Wake up. History suggests such a strategy has never worked. In Oregon, one of the few swing states left in America, your vote will make a huge difference. Make it count. U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1ST DISTRICT David Wu DEMOCRAT Last year, as a freshman congressman from a marginal district, David Wu made a remarkable stand of conscience: Despite enormous pressure from powerful interests in his district, he led opposition to normalizing trade relations with China. Although Wu's effort to promote human rights over "cash-register engagement" ultimately failed, the prospect of America's only Chinese-American congressman defying the Chinese government was a powerful symbol of what's right with American politics and a telling example of Wu's independence. "Once you realize that the worst that can happen is that you get tossed out of office, you have a lot of freedom," he told WW shortly before the vote. Wu's stand has cost him support from towering Silicon Forest giants such as Intel, but it certainly won him our admiration, and our endorsement. He is perhaps the best example of a politician who stood up to corporate interests in the name of freedom for oppressed workers overseas--we wish we saw it more often. Wu's Republican challenger, state Sen. Charles Starr, a former school teacher, gentleman farmer and roofer, is a starchy, principled conservative with a courtly manner and a piercing gaze. But Starr's shopworn shibboleths--cutting taxes, privatizing Social Security, overturning Roe vs. Wade--and lackluster record in Salem hardly make a convincing argument for pitching Wu. The Libertarian candidate, Beth King, has staked out the classic Libertarian platform: cut taxes, legalize drugs, support abortion, and get your hands off my guns--but she demonstrates a troubling vagueness when confronted with the nitty-gritty. Asked how she would apply her philosophy to specific issues, her response was: "OK, specific issues, oh, let me think of some specific issues." We remain unconvinced. U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 3RD DISTRICT Earl Blumenauer DEMOCRAT Earl Blumenauer is as constant and predictable as the wet chill that passes through Portland this time of year. He wears a bow tie, bicycles to Capitol Hill, is obsessed with better living through urban planning--and is about as cuddly as a Pioneer Courthouse Square brick. But you can be that way when your seat is as safely Democrat as any this side of San Francisco. That's not to say Congressman Bow Tie hasn't done much to earn our endorsement. Over the past four years, this former state rep, county commissioner and city commissioner has slowly figured out the congressional maze and branched out from his incrementalist agenda. He brought home, for example, $40 million in federal funds for the Interstate MAX and, recently, pulled down another $40 million for estuaries in the lower Columbia River and Tillamook Bay. Blumenauer is one of the few house Democrats on whom no one can hang the "spendocrat" label; he's fiscally conservative and, if the Dems capture the House, likely to end up on the Ways and Means Committee, which gives birth to federal spending. His opponents are a motley crew, each relying on little more than empty rhetoric to assail the incumbent. While we can easily dispense with Republican Jeffery Pollock's "government as business" pablum, we almost admire Pacific Green Tre Arrow's ability to come down off his ledge and run for office. If the bare-footed one had something more encompassing than saving old-growth forests and a vague suspicion of all elected representatives to run on, he might be a real alternative. This time out, we'll remain thoroughly predictable and endorse Blumenauer for his third full term in the House of Representatives STATEWIDE SECRETARY OF STATE Bill Bradbury DEMOCRAT The secretary of state is Oregon's top multi-tasker--overseeing elections, auditing state agencies and helping manage state lands. We know women are supposed to be better at juggling jobs, but there's no way we can endorse Lynn Snodgrass. In fact, the Republican House Speaker is so ill-suited for this important job that she finishes a distant third on our scorecard. Beyond her partisanship, beyond her poor management skills, beyond her unpreparedness for the job, our biggest problem with Snodgrass is that she's little more than a talking doll. Pull her string and she'll say, "Government waste." Pull it again: "Accountability." One more time: "I'm a fiscal conservative." She's clearly spent the last six months working on slogans rather than doing her homework. During her campaign, Snodgrass has failed to give a single example of government waste that was turned up using the secretary of state's audit function. Nor can she provide even the broadest example of where she would take a stand on the state land board. For us, this race came down to a choice between Democrat Bill Bradbury, a proven, progressive insider, and Pacific Green Party activist Lloyd Marbet, a feisty, bright outsider. Marbet is by far the best third-party candidate on Oregon's ballot (and we include Ralph Nader on that list). A master of Oregon's initiative system, he knows the state's elections process. His background in environmental activism would shake things up on the state lands board. And if he went after wasteful public agencies with the tenacity he's used to attack private utilities, the state auditors would be very busy. Finally, we applaud his serious candidacy, which should serve as a model for his fellow Greens. One of the most moving moments of Campaign 2000 was when Marbet got a standing ovation in the Memorial Coliseum during the Nader rally in August. We'd be tempted to back Marbet, if not for Bradbury's strong qualifications. Since Gov. John Kitzhaber appointed Bradbury last November to replace Phil Keisling, he has proven more than up to the job. In his role as Oregon's top elections officer, for example, he's stumped around the state giving school kids a powerful presentation to show them that when they don't vote, the minority rules. Bradbury will do well on the state land board. Bradbury was the president of For the Sake of the Salmon before taking the SOS job, and he's in synch with the governor's ideas for managing state lands. As a former state senator representing the rural south coast, he understands how decisions in Salem affect people on the ground. As auditor, Bradbury has already found rampant abuse in the state lottery agency. But if you need one single reason to keep Bradbury in office, consider this: Every 10 years, the secretary of state gets stuck with redrawing legislative districts after partisan gridlock prevents the Legislature from doing the job. As Senate president, Bradbury earned the respect of Republicans for treating them fairly. On the other hand, as House Speaker, Snodgrass presided over one of the most partisan sessions in decades. STATE TREASURER Randall Edwards DEMOCRAT If Dr. Frankenstein worked in Salem, we'd ask him to do some cutting and pasting with the candidates for state treasurer. We'd start with the brains and poise of Mitch Shults, the Libertarian candidate from Intel. Then we'd extract Republican Jon Kvistad's sense of humor. After steadying his hand with a shot of Jägermeister, we'd ask Franky to graft these qualities onto Randall Edwards, a Democrat bubbling over with energy and ideas but lacking some of the maturity desirable in the state's highest financial post. Oregon's treasurer serves as the state's banker. He (and for 157 years it's always been a "he") manages $50 billion in retirement and other funds; he also manages the state's debt and, along with the governor and secretary of state, Oregon's public lands. Shults may be the brightest candidate in the running to succeed incumbent Jim Hill. A former accountant who helped build a large systems-development company before joining Intel, he offers impressive experience. But Shults, a former Republican, falls into the shortsighted thinking typical of his new Libertarian creed. He favors selling state lands and privatizing every government function. His endorsement of measures 8 and 91 raise further questions about whether he's simply a me-firster with no interest in funding essential services. After three lackluster terms as a Metro councilor and a failed congressional bid, Kvistad is running a campaign based almost entirely on trash-talking Edwards. He's vague about his reasons for seeking the state's third-highest post and short on relevant experience (he cites Metro's oversight of the Expo Center and Oregon Zoo as examples of his financial skills). More troubling is that colleagues say he's often disruptive and difficult to work with. Edwards is also unloved by his peers. His campaign reported more contributions from Republican state legislators than Democrats. On the campaign trail, he rises to Kvistad's baiting with Pavlovian predictability. Despite these shortcomings, Edwards remains the best candidate. In his two House terms, he led the charge for K-12 funding, backed legislation that lowered school districts' borrowing costs and established a college savings program. Even his detractors admit he's smart and experienced; he spent four years at the treasury as an aide to Hill. In the absence of a Frankensteinian hybrid, Edwards is the candidate who best combines an understanding of the treasury with a track record and a desire to enhance the treasurer's role. We hope he'll grow into the job. ATTORNEY GENERAL Hardy Myers If this were a contest for the president of the debate team or the chairman of the pep squad, Kevin Mannix would get our vote. But this is an election to decide who should be the state's top law-enforcement official, overseeing 190 lawyers and 900 other employees of the state Department of Justice. It's a post that could use some of Mannix's high-octane energy, but mainly it's a job where state law must be enforced impartially. And under that test, incumbent Hardy Myers comes out on top. Myers, 60, who served 10 years in the Legislature before taking this job, has performed effectively, albeit without the fireworks that might have made his re-election bid easier. He supports his lawyers and lets them enforce the law, rather than overriding them for political purposes. Mannix, meanwhile, is a politician who happens to be a lawyer. His shoot-from-the-lip style of problem solving and his boundless energy have made him a talented and productive legislator. But his cavalier attitude--typical of some legislators--could not be less suited to an office where you're supposed to follow the law, rather than your political instincts. Both candidates, for example, have stated their personal opposition to doctor-assisted suicide. Myers has made clear that under him, the Department of Justice will enforce the law. Mannix has said his personal objection to legal suicide would make it difficult for him to do so. Mannix has gotten a good deal of mileage promoting himself as the brains behind Measure 11, the initiative that created mandatory minimum sentences for a number of violent crimes in Oregon. And his television ads freely paint him as an Eliot Ness-type crime fighter while portraying Myers as a wimp on violent-crime issues. This is misleading, as the attorney general has little to do with battling violent crime. Our only hesitation in endorsing Myers is his less-than-vigorous fulfillment of the consumer-protection role of his office. But this is a small concern compared with the idea of a cowboy like Kevin Mannix serving as Oregon's chief lawyer. SUPREME COURT Paul DeMuniz This choice is among the easiest this election. Paul DeMuniz is one of the most qualified candidates we've seen for Oregon's highest court in quite some time. One of the most prolific judges on Oregon's Court of Appeals, DeMuniz has a reputation as smart, hard-working and judicial in temperament. Raised in Northeast Portland, DeMuniz served in the Air Force in Vietnam, then threw freight on Swan Island while working his way through PSU. He graduated from Willamette University and represented low-income defendants and death-row appeals. Gov. Neil Goldschmidt appointed him to Oregon's appeals court in 1990. DeMuniz has the support of judges, legal groups and, as far as we can tell, every single newspaper in the state. In addition, last April the Oregon State Bar polled lawyers and found that DeMuniz was preferred over his opponent Greg Byrne by a margin of 15 to 1. Byrne is a Portland lawyer whose campaign has been fueled by TV ads financed by, among others, Loren Parks, the millionaire who made part of his fortune manufacturing a penile plethysmograph. Among Byrne's clients has been Bill Sizemore. Byrne is running as a conservative who would balance what he views as a liberal state Supreme Court. It's not his politics that bother us, however, but his lack of experience as a judge and his temperament, demonstrated by his willingness to comment on legal issues and specific cases that could come before the state Supreme Court. Normally, we expect challengers to state how they would vote on key issues, but this is one race where candidates should show restraint. DeMuniz stood high above a large field in the primary. In this run-off, the gulf between him and his remaining challenger is even greater. COUNTY MULTNOMAH COUNTY COMMISSION DISTRICT 4 Frank Shields During the May primary, we gave Frank Shields such a tepid endorsement for the open County Commission post that you could have floated an iceberg in it. We'd been frustrated by his role in the battle over a homeless feeding program at Sunnyside Methodist Church, where he used to be pastor. We were also nonplused by the Democratic state senator's 1999 legislative performance, in which his key bill banning auto title loans didn't clear the Senate. But we're in more of a giving mood these days. Shields admits that he screwed up at Sunnyside. And prior to his rookie year in the Senate, he'd had a solid string of sessions in the House, where he was an impassioned advocate for kids, senior citizens and the poor. That's why we're endorsing the progressive pastor to replace the termed-out Sharron Kelley for this district, which stretches from 122nd Avenue to the Bonneville Dam. Besides, he's running against former state Rep. Lonnie Roberts, whose nine terms representing east county in Salem established that he'd make a fine lobbyist for the trucking industry. In WW's biennial ratings of metro lawmakers, you could always count on Lonnie to be sitting contentedly in the basement. Now, they both want to step up to the Multnomah County Commission. You know the county: It's that ignored $900 million-a-year behemoth that administers the local jails, parole and probation, as well as a host of social-service programs. It's a key election for District 4 residents, furious with the remainder of the county commissioners who seem to travel east of 122nd Street only when flying eastbound out of PDX. Each candidate promises to ensure that attention is paid to east county's needs. Roberts argues that Shields can't possibly serve east county because he only recently moved into the district (into a house he owned but had rented out) from his previous residence a half-mile away. While we're not thrilled with Shields' politically expedient change of address, we're even less thrilled with Roberts' track record on issues that are central to the commission. Consider three votes from their legislative careers. Shields supported efforts to require employers to participate in the Oregon Health Plan. Shields supported legislation to guarantee farmworkers the right to organize. Shields supported the state's family leave bill, which guarantees workers unpaid leave to care for newborns and ailing family members. All three issues are along the lines of what a county commissioner deals with each day. Lonnie Roberts opposed each bill. If east county residents want a commissioner who'll be able to get his colleagues to listen, Shields is far better suited, in temperament and politics, to negotiate with the People's Republic of Multnomah. STATE SENATE STATE SENATE DISTRICT 4 TIGARD, KING CITY, RALEIGH HILLS, BITS O' BEAVERTON Ryan Deckert DEMOCRAT It is time to retire Eileen Qutub from the Oregon Legislature. For three sessions we have disagreed with just about everything the senator has done in Salem, from her effort to make abortions inaccessible to her attack on the Oregon Health Plan. It's not her voting record, however, that prompts us to call for her ouster. In the pages that follow we've endorsed several lawmakers who don't match up with us on key issues. But they all have something Qutub doesn't: a respect for the process. We've been appalled at Qutub's methods. She misleads other lawmakers and her constituents, berates witnesses, attacks those who don't agree with her and, as both legislator and candidate, has played fast and loose with the facts. In 1997, for example, Qutub led the fight to repeal the state's physician-assisted suicide law, citing a report from the Netherlands that depicted slow, gruesome deaths from a similar law in that country. It was later discovered she had not read the report and had grossly mischaracterized the findings. That same year, her venomous opposition to Michael Powell's reappointment to the Port of Portland Commission took a normally routine vote and made it a partisan bomb. Last summer, she voted against the gun-show bill. This fall she's campaigning as a gun-safety advocate. Last session, she tried to lowball K-12 funding. Now she's a pro-education candidate. Going into this campaign, we knew Qutub's poor reputation in Salem. We soon learned that she's also alienated her constituents in the suburbs. In the past several weeks we've talked to parents and school board members--even the Washington County Sheriff--who say they've been unable to meet with her to talk about key issues. We're left to conclude that Eileen Qutub views her job as representing just one person--herself. Voters in the district deserve a better voice in Salem--and they've got one. State Rep. Ryan Deckert is the Democrat who is trying to unseat Qutub. His background is in program development, both at ARC and with an education program tied to Hewlett-Packard. He is a much better fit, both philosophically and stylistically, for the westside suburbs. It's true that he hasn't always shown bold leadership in his two House terms, but he has managed to carve out some niches that show a broad range of interest. He put through a bill to crack down on direct-mail sweepstakes scams and did the heavy lifting for the house Democrats on the energy restructuring and telecommunications deregulation bills. He also worked to form the state Internet Commission and will represent the district's strong interest in high tech. Most important, Deckert has earned a reputation for listening to voters and putting their concerns before rigid ideology. That will be a good change both for this district and for the state. Say good night, Eileen. STATE SENATE DISTRICT 7 SOUTHEAST PORTLAND Kate Brown DEMOCRAT For five sessions--three in the House and two in the Senate--Kate Brown has set the standard for lawmaking in Salem. The former family-law attorney is smart, compassionate and political enough to get things done but real enough to be trusted. Last session, as Senate minority leader, she was up against Republican leaders who refused to show their budget numbers until the last minute. Still, she pushed through a women's health-care bill that extends insurance coverage of preventive health-care screenings, such as mammograms, and made it legal to breastfeed in public. On the Senate judiciary committee, she often quelled the outbursts of GOP Sen. Eileen Qutub. This year, Brown is leading the Senate Democrats to their most successful election in a session, pushing to raise $800,000 and take back the Senate. If successful, she would be the next Senate president. Her opponent, Charley Nims, is a pleasant punk-rock bass player running in hopes of keeping the Socialists' official minority-party status. STATE SENATE DISTRICT 8 NORTH/NORTHEAST PORTLAND Margaret L. Carter DEMOCRAT The term-limit pit bulls will snarl, but after watching the freshman-dominated free-for-all of the '99 Legislature, we're backing a veteran in this race. Margaret Carter, who's getting good reviews as the new president of the Urban League, was elected to the state House back when Teddy Roosevelt was in the White House (actually, it was Ronald Reagan) and served admirably until term limits forced her out in 1997. She was known for looking out for her Northeast Portland constituents while forging alliances with the rural folks. We expect she'd continue that in the Senate. Her opponent, Pacific Green Party candidate Whitney Smith, an asbestos remover, is one of the few candidates with a specific plan that outlines tax relief for low-income people, and we're glad to see him involved in politics. Carter says she's taking his campaign seriously, although she didn't even file a Voters' Pamphlet statement. Still, her experience outweighs that oversight. STATE SENATE DISTRICT 10 NORTH PORTLAND Avel Louise Gordly DEMOCRAT Avel Gordly has been called the conscience of the Senate. We're relieved that after five sessions, she hasn't given up on the system. Last session's GOP-fest was a tough one for an urban liberal, but Gordly handled it well. As a member of the minority party, she couldn't push forth much, but she forged an alliance with eastside Sen. Ted Ferrioli and the two made a show of the senator delivering timber to be used to build low-income housing in her district. We predict the next session will be more satisfying. The budget, as always, will rule, but there's a growing coalition of sharp, experienced women in the Senate driven to battle for social justice: Portland Democrats Kate Brown, Ginny Burdick and Gordly will be joined by Margaret Carter. Eugene's Susan Castillo and Astoria's Joan Dukes round out a lineup that will be tough to ignore. Gordly's opponent, Roy Burkett, is a pastor and hearing-aid consultant running on the Constitution Party ticket. He advocates small government, home-schooling and privatizing social services. STATE SENATE DISTRICT 11 GRESHAM Chris Gorsek DEMOCRAT The question in this race is, "Which John Minnis is running for the state Senate?" Minnis, a homicide detective for the Portland Police Bureau, had a roller-coaster tenure in the state House, ending up where he started--down in the dumps. During his first several sessions he was arrogant, homophobic and childish. Then, after Republicans took control, he stopped whining and started working. In WW's biannual survey on lawmakers, the Republican rep went from awful to very good to excellent--largely because of his solid work on the budget committee. In 1993, he emerged as the unlikely champion of social services, a cop who understood that keeping toddlers out of poverty is often the best way to keep juveniles out of jail. He won high marks for being fair and straightforward. There were whispers about a bid for Speaker. Unfortunately for Minnis, Bev Clarno got the job, and after he led an ill-fated challenge, she stripped him of his commmittee powers. He spent the rest of his final two sessions sulking. His ratings dropped to average. If we could be guaranteed to get the John Minnis of 1993, we'd endorse him (as we did in 1994 and 1996). But a couple of factors prevent us from doing that. First, Minnis is unwilling to consider needed changes to Oregon's mandatory minimum sentencing law. Gov. John Kitzhaber has said he will make this a priority in the 2001 session, and Minnis' blind adherence to such a flawed law would be a major obstacle. Second, Minnis' Democratic opponent is a good match for this East County district. Like Minnis, Gorsek has spent time on the Portland police force (from 1980 to 1987); he now teaches criminal justice and geography at Mount Hood Community College. He has an obvious passion for social justice and was one of the few candidates we met who pointed out the high poverty level in the state, particularly among Latinos. In addition to his inexperience, we're a bit worried by Gorsek's thin skin. During our endorsement session he let Minnis get to him and flew off the handle in a way that was, well, Minnisish. But, in the end, given his expertise in geography, we think he can find his way around Salem. STATE HOUSE STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 3 RURAL WASHINGTON COUNTY Bruce Starr REPUBLICAN   "Judge not, that ye be not judged." --Matthew 7:1 Clearly Matthew didn't work on an editorial board. Endorsement interviews are in fact Judgment Day, when we have the audacity to proclaim who is and who isn't fit for public office. Sometimes we bloweth it. Such was the case two years ago, when we trashed Bruce Starr based on his right-wing rhetoric and his father's abysmal performance representing this largely rural district (Charles Starr, now a state senator, is running for Congress; see page 31). Starr the younger proved to be just as conservative as we predicted--he got a 95 percent rating from the Christian Coalition--but far more effective than his dad. He was a key player within the GOP caucus in the fight for more money for schools and was willing to tick off some of the Christian Coalition crowd by working on a bill to ensure that believers in faith healing don't endanger the lives of their children. On top of that, he had enough guts to walk through our door and make the case for his endorsement. He's got it. Democrat Cathy Lamb-Mullin would provide a far more progressive vote for the environment and civil liberties. But we get the impression this is a trial run. When asked what she'd focus on if elected, she replied, "It's something I haven't thought much about." We figure she'll have another couple of years to get around to it. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 5 HILLSBORO, CORNELIUS, FOREST GROVE Jim Hill REPUBLICAN Give James Draznin credit. As a Democrat trying to unseat a popular incumbent in a traditionally Republican district, he's running hard. Draznin's background as a fund-raiser for colleges and nonprofits has spurred his interest in education and social services. He gets solid reviews for his tenure on the Forest Grove City Council. And he's got the endorsement of several prominent Democrats, including the state treasurer, who just happens to share his opponent's name. Our vote, nonetheless, goes to the other Jim Hill. Hill was a key voice of moderation within the GOP during the '97 session. He moved closer to the Republican Party line under Speaker Lynn Snodgrass in '99, yet still got some credit for brokering the middle road on the telecommunications deregulation bill. The rap against Hill is that he's rude. It's true that if he doesn't think a bill is worth his committee's time, he'll shoot it down with little ceremony. He explains that he's often abrupt because he doesn't want to waste time, his or others', by talking about proposals that aren't even going to be debated, let alone passed. That style may turn some people off, but it's no reason to oust a productive legislator. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 6 BEAVERTON, ALOHA, HILLSBORO Charlie Ringo DEMOCRAT Voters in this suburban district have been mugged by term limits. Three-term Republican Ken Strobeck has done a great job in Salem but is being forced into early retirement. Luckily, voters have a chance to build on Strobeck's solid record by electing one of the best first-time candidates we've seen--Charlie Ringo. Like everywhere in Oregon, education is priority number one on the west side of the zoo. But the elephant sitting on the Sunset Highway is growth--how to manage it and how to pay for it. Ringo is clearly the best candidate for handling this task. The Beaverton lawyer is the former head of the Oregon Sierra Club, and his heart obviously bleeds green. But the Air Force veteran is not the militant car-hating, owl-hugging, big-government radical that his GOP opponent claims he is. (After all, Ringo supports widening the Sunset Highway.) In fact, at the core of Ringo's approach to growth is a very Republican idea: Require that those who put demands on government services pay part of their costs. He says developers, whose houses bring families into already-crowded school districts, should pay extra fees to offset the costs of school construction. Ringo also opposes the tax breaks given to corporations such as Intel whose expanding business operations are straining public services. We liked Ringo's Republican opponent a lot more before last week. John Scruggs, a Portland cop, has a solid record of public service and co-authored Portland's anti-prostitution-zone ordinance. He has come out against Lon Mabon's Ballot Measure 9 and Bill Sizemore's federal tax-deductibility measure. We are, however, a bit nervous about Scruggs' casual use of statistics. He told us, for example, that Oregonians are suffering under the third-highest tax burden in the country (a statement that is flat-out wrong), but couldn't cite his source. We're also troubled by his stated willingness to bust the urban growth boundary. But our main concern about Scruggs surfaced after our interview. During a Sept. 18 public forum, Ringo responded to a question about global warming by joking that the solution is to increase registration fees on sport utility vehicles to $5,000. He got the desired laugh, but just to ensure there was no confusion, he went up to Scruggs after the forum and made it clear he was kidding. Last week, Scruggs twisted the incident in a hit-mail piece, adding SUVs to the list of taxes Ringo wants to raise (the mailer also misstates Ringo's stance on the personal income tax kicker). It's the kind of dirty garbage that turns voters off of politics. Scruggs defended his sophomoric cheap shot by telling WW he "believes" Ringo's statement is in keeping with his philosophy. As a cop, Scruggs ought to understand the importance of proof, rather than suspicion, when claiming to state the facts. For fiscal conservatives who find Ringo's politics unpalatable, there's a better choice than the integrity-challenged Scruggs. Kevin Schaumleffle is the most impressive Libertarian candidate we've seen this election. His shoulder is free of the nasty chip that weighs down many third-party candidates. The cheerful professional hypnotist walked into our interview prepared, carrying a list of the ballot measures and his positions on each one with a thoughtful explanation of each. He followed up by sending us his proposed state budget. Schaumleffle has bucked his party on the teacher merit-pay initiative because he finds it poorly written, although he supports the concept. His primary passion is fighting for the rights of non-custodial parents, and he's worked to that end on a ballot measure and at the Legislature. He's a good second choice, but he can't match Ringo in this race. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 7 WEST PORTLAND, CEDAR MILL, SAUVIE ISLAND Mitch Greenlick DEMOCRAT We cringed two years ago when Bill Witt, a small-business owner from Cedar Mills, unseated fellow Republican Chuck Carpenter. We knew Witt from two nasty and unsuccessful congressional bids and found him too socially conservative for this district and too volatile to be effective. We were half-right. Witt is a founding board member of the Christian Coalition in Oregon, and he stubbornly pushed his social agenda in Salem. Midway through the session he worked--and failed--to pass a bill that would define marriage as a hetero union in the Oregon Constitution. Then, in the final days of last session, Witt told Speaker of the House Lynn Snodgrass she shouldn't count on his vote on the education budget because she hadn't scheduled a floor vote on a bill to ban late-term abortions. His grandstanding slowed down negotiations and increased partisanship in the Legislature at the worst possible moment. At the same time, that willingness to clash with party leaders and political heavyweights was sometimes admirable. He fought for more education funding than most members of his caucus wanted, supported the right-to-know bill on pesticides and thumbed his nose at the biggest employer in his district, Intel, by putting forth a bill to eliminate the corporate tax break known as the strategic investment program. While Witt has earned our grudging respect, he still isn't getting our endorsement. That's because of his voting record on social and environmental issues. He notes that he got a better rating from the Oregon League of Conservation Voters than any other Republican. But his score (58 percent) was still lower than any Democrat's. We'd be more inclined to give Witt another chance if it weren't for the potential we see in his opponent. As the Oregon Health Plan again lurches toward life support, Mitch Greenlick is needed in Salem. He headed the Kaiser Center for Health Research for more than 30 years and has spent his career studying the way health care and systems interact to serve the people. He says when he goes to Salem, Job One for him is to make sure every uninsured kid in Oregon gets covered. That is important work, and Greenlick is ready to jump in. He's worked in Salem enough to understand the system, making it easy to put aside Witt's single term. Our biggest concern with Mitch Greenlick is that the guy can come off as a pompous elitist. But that doesn't change the fact that he's the best choice for this seat. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 8 BEAVERTON Mark Hass DEMOCRAT Chuck: Good evening. Our top political story tonight involves a journalist who, after years of reporting on state legislators, has decided to become one. For more, we go to our Capitol correspondent, Anita Newk-Lishay. Anita: That's right, Chuck. Veteran KATU reporter Mark Hass is hoping to succeed Ryan Deckert in this west suburban district. The Tigard High graduate is running on a traditional Democratic platform of funding schools and protecting Oregon's vaunted quality of life. Chuck: That's fascinating, Anita. What do we know about his Republican opponent? Anita. Well, Chuck, Lisa Michaels is a self-described "soccer mom from Beaverton" who herself has a link to local television. She's an account executive at cable station KXPG-TV. Ironically, this media-savvy gal is shunning the spotlight, refusing to talk to editorial boards, so we don't really know where she stands on the issues. Still, Hass is the clear front-runner in this horse race. Chuck: Thanks, Anita, for that in-depth analysis. Of course, as Mark well knows, should he win this race, television news personalities like us will completely ignore him unless he submits a silly bill or dresses up in buckskin on the House floor. And speaking of Bucks, the Blazers travel to Milwaukee tonight. Here to tell us more is our own Jacques Strapp.... STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 9 TIGARD Max Williams REPUBLICAN (With apologies to Maurice Sendak.) The year Max was elected, his fellow Republicans made mischief of one kind and another and the right-wingers called him "MILD THING!" and Max said, "I'LL STAND MY GROUND!" so he was sent out of the caucus room without a chairmanship. That very year within the caucus a coalition grew...and grew...and grew until it came to the place where the mild things are. And the mild things are now ready to roar their moderate roars and gnash their moderate teeth and roll their moderate eyes and show their moderate claws and say to their party's right-wingers "BE STILL." And they will be frightened and make Max king of all mild things. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 10 HAPPY VALLEY, DAMASCUS, BORING Jan Lee REPUBLICAN After three years of rule by Lynn Snodgrass, voters in this Clackamas County district will get an upgrade no matter who is elected in November. In a close contest between two impressive candidates, our vote goes to the Republican. Jan Lee is a completely different kind of Republican than Snodgrass. She calls herself pro-choice (although she is against late-term abortion and says she could support parental notification bills) and is against Bill Sizemore and Don McIntire's anti-government initiatives. We were most impressed by Lee's work as the executive director of the Oregon Water Resources Council, which works on water-rights issues for farmers, irrigation districts and the like. Water is the oil of the West, and everyone is fighting to get a piece. Lee says she takes the moderate's approach, trying to balance water use for agriculture with keeping water in the streams where it belongs for fish and wildlife. Her work with state natural-resource agencies gives her a solid understanding of the rule-making and budgeting process. Finally, her service on the board of the Clackamas Women's Shelter gives her valuable insight into domestic-abuse issues. It was difficult, however, to turn down Mike Smith. This easy-going civil engineer is proof that the campaign trail offers a good education to those who seek it. Two years ago, running against Snodgrass, Smith was tentative and subdued. Now, he speaks with confidence and conviction. His work on the North Clackamas School District's budget committee has convinced him that we need to find a way to ensure that school districts don't suffer from either too much growth or too little. And he understands that his district is a microcosm of the urban-rural split that plagues Oregon's policy making. We're confident Smith would do a fine job in Salem, but Lee's government experience on social and water issues gives her the edge. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 11 SOUTHWEST PORTLAND Mary Nolan DEMOCRAT Eight long months from now, WW will rate local legislators on their brains, diligence, integrity and clout. We have a hunch Mary Nolan will do better than most rookies. As manager of the city's Bureau of Environmental Services, Nolan took some heat for management lapses but was praised for her ability to understand complex problems and seek creative solutions. As head of the state's leading abortion-rights group, she led the charge against Lon Mabon. And during this campaign, she's shown a willingness to take a principled stand that could cost her votes. Most folks in District 11 aren't thrilled by the prospect of adult video stores in their neighborhoods, yet Nolan is opposing a city-backed effort (Measure 87) that would allow sex businesses to be zoned into X-rated ghettos and open the door to censorship. "I have a 5-year-old daughter, and I don't want her to walk past a smut shop," says Nolan. "But it scares me more that someone else will decide what's in her library." Nolan is being challenged by Joan Gardner, a somewhat prickly fund-raiser for the University of Oregon. Gardner's "progressive, non-partisan" agenda would be a nice addition to the GOP caucus in Salem, but she can't match Nolan's experience or potential. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 12 SOUTHWEST PORTLAND Chris Beck DEMOCRAT Maybe we've been too hard on Chris Beck. In our endorsement two years ago we accused him of "limousine liberalism" and of having a "pompous personality." Maybe it's because the tousle-haired Democrat, who works as a project manager for the Trust for Public Land, was burdened with high expectations when first elected in 1996. He's struggled to find a niche in the Legislature, where his expertise in land-use planning went begging under the Republican agenda. Beck, however, knows where he's fallen short and promises to return to Salem and find a way to advance more of his causes. During our interview, he even got the de facto endorsement of his GOP rival, Jeanne Schoel. "I'm not altogether sure you should unseat him," said the first-time candidate, who had not bothered to study Beck's voting record. A scheduling screw-up prevented us from meeting Libertarian challenger Joe Tabor, which we regret. Based on his polite persistence and straightforward campaign literature, we suspect he's an able spokesman for the causes of free enterprise and civil liberties. He's certainly the the only candidate who's touting the virtues of the bus system in Curitiba, Brazil, while running for the Oregon statehouse. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 14 INNER SOUTHEAST PORTLAND Diane Rosenbaum DEMOCRAT Talking to Diane Rosenbaum, it's easy to forget that 1999 was her first session. A keen observer of the Salem sausage-stuffing machine, Rosenbaum got a front-row seat in the House Revenue Committee, where she watched business lobbyists slip corporate tax breaks into bills last session, then turn around and write checks to supportive lawmakers this fall. It's no surprise, then, that she is a champion of this year's public campaign-finance initiative, Ballot Measure 6. She's also continuing the fight to eliminate the much-abused pollution tax credit. We support both efforts. In last year's WW survey of lawmakers, Rosenbaum, a former lobbyist for the Communication Workers of America, scored very high on integrity, brains and diligence, but she bottomed out on the clout score because she stayed on the sidelines. This year, we encourage her to speak out. She has something to say. Her opponent, Libertarian John McEnroe, is a jovial bartender at the Tugboat. He seemed to get a kick out of the endorsement interview, and we hope he continues to advance his ideas about private schooling and constitutional sanctity--from behind the bar. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 15 SOUTHEAST PORTLAND Steve March DEMOCRAT It's too bad Steve March doesn't have a serious challenger--it would justify more space to gush. Here's all you really need to know about the former senior Multnomah County auditor who wants to succeed fellow Democrat Randall Edwards: Even though he's not yet been elected, March already has two bills being drafted in Salem. One would ensure that registered domestic partners could make health-care decisions for their mates; the other would expand the state's Healthy Start program to all counties. With a long record of civic involvement--from the Laurelhurst PTA and the Hollywood Senior Center to the board of Citizens for Sensible Transportation--March is up to speed on the major issues facing the state. He's being opposed by Scott Lutz, a pleasant but politically unprepared Warner Pacific College student. Lutz's work experience as a janitor, home health aide and Domino's pizza delivery technician would bring a unique perspective to Salem, but he can't keep pace with March. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 16 SOUTHEAST PORTLAND Jeff Merkley DEMOCRAT Jeff Merkley made an impression his first year in Salem last session as a smart, direct and thoughtful lawmaker. No wonder. Look at the résumé: Executive Director, World Affairs Council of Oregon. Undergrad at Stanford. Master's in public policy at Princeton. But he's also an East Portland native, a David Douglas High School alum, with a clear understanding of who he represents in Salem. Last session Merkley fought for the underdog. He tried to pass legislation to regulate the mobile and manufactured home industry, stop lottery advertising and boost the affordable-housing trust fund. He bonked heads frequently with GOP lawmakers who do not share his passion for consumer protection, but he managed to prevail. Working with Republican Bill Witt, he got through a bill that puts a "this is not an investment" warning on lottery advertisements. He also helped set up a statewide system for an individual development account program, which helps low-income families buy homes or attend college. Merkley also has a delightfully wry sense of humor and maverick streak. Last January he earned a disapproving raise of the eyebrow from Mayor Vera Katz, a fellow Democrat, during a City Council meeting for dumping out on a table 1,600 postcards from eastside residents fed up with high sewage rates. Pacific Green Party candidate David Tillemans, a no-show for the interview, is advocating better school funding, affordable health care and campaign finance reform. Merkley is already working on those issues--and a whole lot more. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 17 NORTH PORTLAND Gary Hansen DEMOCRAT There once was a plumber named Gary Who served with some cranks like Sunseri He suffered the fools And fought for the schools So send him on back, do not tarry. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 19 NORTH PORTLAND Jo Ann Bowman DEMOCRAT Ode to Jo Ann Bowman With deeply felt apologies to John Keats Oh, Queen of North Portland, Oh lady justice fair Your mighty sword is much needed in the capital to the south. Stand ye alone among the wretches there As impassioned speeches fly from your mouth. You champion the jailed, the hungry, the oppressed and the poor; We endorse you, salute you and send you back for more. Your rival, Ivars Bitans, rests in the bosom of the pro-lifers. We desire him not. Flame on, oh deep fire of justice! May your embers never dim. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 18 NORTHEAST PORTLAND Deborah Kafoury DEMOCRAT Our favorite line from the 1999 legislative session: "Transportation, schmansportation. People's lives are at stake. I'm changing my vote." That was Deborah Kafoury. Her flippant remark came from the House floor on the last day of the session, during the angry back-and-forth on the transportation-tax bill. Republicans were frantically trying to cut a deal: If the Democrats supported the Defense of Marriage Act (which would prohibit gay marriage), some Republicans would back the Ds on a bill to boost the gas tax. When Kafoury, who had voted for the bill, heard about the deal over gay rights, she changed her vote on the gas tax--undercutting her own party's chances. DOMA went down, and Kafoury ultimately supported the gas tax, but her determination to put conviction before partisanship was impressive. Kafoury is a solid Portland liberal who works well with the moderate Republicans in the House. She's smart and knows the system. We see no reason to replace her. We must admit that opponent Victoria Guillebeau is one of the most impressive Socialist Party candidates we've met (and we've met more than we wanted to). Guillebeau is smart and informed and has a clear agenda that includes raising Oregon's minimum wage to a living wage. We liked this homemaker, social activist and PTA president. Constitution Party candidate Roger Shipman was a no-show, and Pacific Green Party candidate Barry Joe Stull left in a huff after being pressed on his qualifications to serve in Salem. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 20 EAST COUNTY, WOOD VILLAGE, TROUTDALE Karen Minnis REPUBLICAN Every politician in the country wants a little bit of what East County incumbent Karen Minnis has. Al Gore doesn't have it. George W. only pretends he has it. Lynn Snodgrass thinks she has it--but she doesn't. We're not even sure what to call this personality trait--it's more subtle than charisma, more substantive than charm. All we know is that Minnis has the kind of confidence, credibility and practicality that goes a long way in Salem. Part of it comes from more than a decade of legislative experience working with her husband, John Minnis, during his seven sessions in the House. But during her first session as his replacement (he was pushed out by term limits), she made it clear she is her own Minnis. In her work on the joint Ways and Means Committee she won kudos for her in-depth understanding of the budget process. She reached across the aisle to help Democrat Kathy Lowe with a bill that would grant unemployment benefits to victims of domestic abuse who leave their jobs to escape further violence. She also earned praise from the public employees union after she walked a picket line for a corrections-officer safety measure. Make no mistake, Minnis is no moderate. She is against the gun-show background check measure and will not take a public position on Lon Mabon's Measure 9. Want a hint? She was one of only seven House members to get a 100 percent rating from the Christian Coalition. She is an environmental disaster--only two metro-area representatives scored lower than her 9 percent rating on the Oregon League of Conservation Voters' scorecard. We confess, Democrat Mike Weatherby is tempting. A 12-year member of the Reynolds School Board and an instructor at Mount Hood Community College, his education background would be helpful to the Legislature. He served three years on the Fairview City Council. He also has a criminal justice background from the Oregon Parole Board. Minnis, however, has proven that you can be a social conservative in Salem and play a positive role. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 22 GRESHAM Laurie Monnes Anderson DEMOCRAT For two years Laurie Monnes Anderson has been waiting to strip this Gresham House seat from the clutches of Ron Sunseri. Her time has come. In 1998 she lost to Sunseri by less than 250 votes. This year, Sunseri is sitting out the race in hopes of taking a run at the Senate in 2002, thus clearing a path to Salem for Anderson. Anderson lets her passions show but grounds them in real-life experience. This public health nurse, who served 10 years on the Gresham-Barlow School Board, looks at education on a continuum--kids have to be healthy when they enter school and reading by the third grade to have a good shot at graduating. And, when they do graduate, their skills should match what's needed. Living in the shadow of Fujitsu, Anderson says it's outrageous that high-tech companies hire 80 percent of their engineers from out of state, and she says she'll work with businesses to push private-public partnerships for engineering schools. Monnes, a 1964 graduate of Gresham High, says she's ready to help with the tough decisions that need to be made in slicing up the budget pie. Based on her experience, we believe her. She is in charge of a $3 million public health budget for Clackamas County. In addition to the local school board, she's served on the Oregon School Board Association and numerous health-care task forces. Ed Golobay is also a local graduate (Centennial High School class of '66) who's paid his civic dues (Centennial School Board). Against a lesser candidate, he'd get a serious look from us, but he can't match Anderson's passion or record of public service. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 24 SOUTHWEST SUBURBS Richard Devlin DEMOCRAT Citizens of Lake Oswego, Tualatin and points near, pay us heed. Please do not send Jim Hansen to the Legislature. Richard Devlin has done this district proud. He could steal a line from Al Gore and say that he may not be the most exciting politician in town, but he has done the job, and well. The quiet, studious, hard-working two-term Democrat has been a refreshing change from the man he ousted, Bob Tiernan, who often led with his gums flapping. Devlin served last session on committees in charge of transportation, legislative rules, and water and environment. He worked on bills that covered everything from how the state transportation officials might recover some of the costs of new road construction to the details of voter registration. He also wrote a bill to defer property taxes for seniors with household incomes less than $27,500 and co-sponsored the much-hailed ODOT accountability bill. Sexy? No. Important? You bet. Devlin has taken some heat for bucking the party line on issues such as the kicker referral, but he's a good match for his district, where registered Republicans outnumber Democrats. His opponent, on the other hand, is a good candidate for Insensitive Hyperactive MultiTaskers Anonymous. During their joint endorsement interview with WW, Hansen noisily signed fundraising letters while Devlin was speaking. When the Republican candidate heard enough from his opponent, he jumped up, slapped down a report in front of the interviewers and said, "My turn." Those kind of antics would wear thin quickly in Salem, where even a perceived snub can kill a legislator's bill. Hansen's biggest problem, however, is that he doesn't know what he's doing. We're all for mavericks. We love new ideas. We could even get used to his Tigger-like enthusiasm. But Hansen, who's largely bankrolling his own campaign, is trying to paint the Mona Lisa before he learns how to draw. The former investment banker wants to tackle tax reform--but would rather misquote Emerson (it was Thoreau who said "Build your castles in the air") than provide any details about his "secret" plan. If he loses this race, we encourage him to hone his ideas and spend some time in Salem watching how the process really works. Then he'd have a chance to shake things up, rather than play the role of annoying court jester. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 25 MILWAUKIE Carolyn Tomei DEMOCRAT Clackamas County isn't exactly seen as a training ground for political heavyweights, but District 25 voters have a contender in this race. Carolyn Tomei is one of the best-prepared first-time legislative candidates ever to step into our endorsement ring. The mayor of Milwaukie, she served a year on the City Council after a seven-year stint on the city planning commission. Before answering the siren song of government service, she spent 30 years in education, working on child development and mental health and with troubled teens. She is also smart, warm and driven to serve. Her opponent, Dick "Bulldog" Jones, spent 35 years in the finance office of Teledyne Wah Chang. He he ran a lackluster losing campaign for the state Senate two years ago and is seemingly obsessed with state roads and solid waste. He's got a better nickname than Tomei, but he can't match her Golden Glove résumé. STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 26 OREGON CITY Kathy Lowe DEMOCRAT As we come to our final endorsement, we've run out of time, space and coffee. So it's a good thing that we end with one of our favorite legislators: Kathy Lowe. After all, no other candidate called us to make sure we were inviting her opponent. And no other candidate helped her rival down the stairs after meeting with us. Of course, it helps that Al Ritter (who is blind) has as much of a chance of winning as Pat Buchanan. But the compassionate respect Lowe extended to Ritter is typical of the way she works in Salem. The freshman Democrat got solid reviews in 1999, in part because she was able to work with Republicans. With the help of Republican Rep. Bruce Starr, for example, she passed a bill to protect kids whose parents' religious beliefs deprive them of medical treatment--a very contentious issue in her district. The Oregon City lawyer says she's ready to take up where she left off, looking to find areas where she can reach out to Republicans and get things done. We've got a hunch that, if he weren't running himself, even Al Ritter would endorse that idea.