Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in March 2006

Pressed out

Eventually, the piling on got to be serious enough to get results.

So anyway would read the logical conclusion of Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski's reversal on debates. At first, it sounded as if he wouldn't be debating at all through this year's election cycle (though he probably never said that explicitly). Then came the slithered-out word that he would, yes, participate in one multi-candidate gathering. Now comes word that he will appear in two of them, and April 6 and April 11.

His staff made the point that these will be more visible and widely-seen debates which will held closer to voting time, when voters will be paying more attention. Okay. But the word previously was that he wouldn't be participating in primary debates, which means something changed.

The story coming out of the recent debates, as much as anything, has been the governor's absence from them (and in a couple of cases, the loss of what might have been endorsements from significant organizations). That's a persistent negative story, and it behooved the governor to cut his losses.

So they don't show up for debates? This is how you get them to show up for debates . . .

Protest capital?

Could be that no other city in the country outdid Portland last weekend in protesting the war in Iraq. Maybe.

Police in Portland figured the crowd size at close to 10,000 - a fairly large group, even by Portland standards.

That contrasts with the New York Times report of other protests around the country: "The administration could take heart this weekend from the relatively small antiwar protests around the country, compared with protests held on the previous anniversaries of the invasion. An estimated 7,000 people demonstrated in Chicago on Saturday and smaller protests were held over the weekend in Boston, San Francisco and other cities. In Times Square, the figure was about 1,000."

Something seems not quite right here. Was Portland that much an anomaly, or were turnouts elsewhere seriously underestimated?

The bounds of open and secret

Article III Section 12 of the Idaho Constitution says, in simple and direct language, the following: "The business of each house, and
of the committee of the whole shall be transacted openly and not in secret
session." That is all it says on the subject of openness in the Idaho Legislature.

Now let's imagine a hypothetical bill: HB001, which follows the usual path to adoption. It surfaces in a House committee, which votes to recommend it be introduced by the full House. Sent to the House floor, it is formally introduced and read for the first time, and then - this is what happened to almost all bills - it is sent to a committee, which reviews it. The committee may decide to "hold" - kill - it, or suggest amendments, or send it as is back to the House floor for a vote there. In this case, the bill is given a "do pass" recommendation, returned to the House floor, where it is read (in very abbreviated form) for a second time, and then, a day or two later, for a third time. It then is voted on and, if passed, it is sent to the Senate, where the same process more or less repeats. If the Senate, too, passes it, it goes to the governor for signature or veto.

From the moment of its introduction until it either dies or is sent to the governor, the bill has a continuous history in the House and Senate. When the bill is sent from the House floor to a committee for further review, that is an action of - part of "the business of" - the House; and what happens to it there is surely also a part of the business of the House. One would think. (more…)

Timber split

forestGood perspective in an Oregonian piece on a tectonic change in the timber industry. "Tectonic" may be the wrong adjective since it connotes glacial speed; but we'll stock with it in suggesting a fundamental realignment.

The core point in the piece was this: "Historically, giant timber companies managed vast empires that included both mills and forestland. At their peak, International Paper Co., Louisiana-Pacific Corp., Georgia-Pacific Corp. and Boise Cascade Corp. owned more than 25 million acres. But tax and business changes over the past decade encouraged specialization, and companies increasingly split ownership of the trees from production in the mills."

Now, privately-held partnerships, like the Obsidian Finance Group, Forest Capital Partners and the Campbell Group, increasingly are buying and holding the timber lands.

Why the change? The article doesn't spell it out, but one suggestion is this: Management of timber lands properly should be considered a long-term investment proposition, not something you can turn into big profits in the next quarter. But what they lack in immediate returns they gain in solid, long-term value, something concrete and real that will have value, and likely not lose value, years from now. (The Campbell Groups likes to say that "Over the past 35 years, timberland has outperformed common stocks and long-term corporate bonds.") In other words, sounds like a job for a privately-held company: One less concerned with the hot analysis from Wall Street next week than it is in building value deep into the future.

Something to think about as we consider the structure of resource industries, and of business in general, in this country.

Stay of execution

migrating salmon - FPC pictureWonder if this will get as much attention?

A few months back, Idaho Senator Larry Craig inserted language into a bill which aimed to de-fund the Fish Passage Center at Portland, it being the organization that actually counts the number of fish (of certain types) passing through the Columbia River system. Craig said the small agency duplicated efforts elsewhere; advocates said that was not true, and the real issue was that the FPC was collecting data inconvenient to Craig's position on salmon recovery. Most directly, the Center has been paid for by the Bonneville Power Administration.

That story was the last most Northwesterners heard of the situation. Quietly, however, Indian tribes and environmental groups challenged the action legally, and on Friday their efforts paid off. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the measure into which Craig inserted his de-funding language was not actually a bill which was made into law - that technically, it amounted to a statement of intent and nothing more. And ordered the Center re-funded.

Next move?

A growth in Hillsboro

Oregon officials have been debating for some time whether they will practically be able - as Seattle has started to do - to get in on the next generation of high-tech activity: biotechnology. The signs have looked good, but the results haven't been there.

Till Friday. That was when the California biotech firm Genentech said it would set up a substantial shop at Hillsboro, eventually hiring 200 to 300 people to staff it. Specifically, the company "announced its decision to acquire land in Hillsboro, Oregon for the construction and development of a biotherapeutic fill/finish manufacturing facility, which is expected to be licensed and operational in 2010."

Those jobs, which likely will pay well, are significant, but much the smaller part of the importance of this. (Though Fortune mangazine has named Genetech number 1 on its list of best American companies to work for.) The Beaverton-Hillsoboro area already has many of the components you'd need to make biotech go: It has Intel, loads of other tech development, and major medial research and provision organizations (notably the Oregon Health & Sciences University) in the immediate vicinity, and all the big-city resources that could be needed right over the mountain in Portland.

Now, with the arrival of a major corporate biotech presence - and Genetech is a major operator in the field - the engine may have what it needed to start turning.

Idaho’s score card

Filing time is over, and it's time for a quick overview of where parties and candidates stand as campaign season formally kicks in.

You can check the full and final candidate list as well - it's just been posted - and various points will be worth dwelling upon. For now, consider these . . .

Vacancies. Before reviewing the Idaho vacancy rate, let's place it in context. Ten days ago candidate filing ended in Oregon; there, with 75 legislative seats up for election, Republicans failed to fill nine ballot spots (a miss rate of 12%) and Democrats failed to fill four (5.3%). Now, in Idaho? Of 105 legislative seats up for election, Republicans filed to fill 11 (10.5%) while Democrats failed to fill 36 (34.3%). (Three of the seats unchallenged by Democrats are actually open seats, including those of retiring Speaker Bruce Newcomb and congressional candidate Bill Sali). The blank rate is much higher in Idaho, and we can easily see to whose advantage.

Having said that, the surprise here isn't the number of vacancies allowed by the Democrats - 36 isn't especially unusual, and better than in some years - but rather those allowed by the Republicans. After all, there are only 20 Democrats in the whole legislature, and more than half of them have been given a pass.

At least for now. Slots can still be filled at the primary election through write-in. But ordinarily, only a few slots per cycle are filled that way. Mostly, what we see now is what we get.

Among major and statewide offices, just one - secretary of state - lacks a major-party contest. Even if some others are placeholders, that's a better record than usual. (more…)

“She called me a bitch”

Lest you forget, there's still an Idaho legislative session going on. Brandi Swindell, pro-life activist and former Boise city council candidate, has not forgotten, nor has she forgotten that the current favorite congressional candidate of the pro-life community, Bill Sali, still has a piece of pro-life legislation floating around the House. So she held a press conference, attended by reporters on the steps of the statehouse to announce that she was going to schedule a meeting to, uh, presuambly, get that bill moving. Of course reporters showed up, an announcement of intent to schedule a meeting being such important news.

All of which did in fact lead to a meeting, of Swindell with House Speaker Bruce Newcomb, to which the speaker didn't admit reporters but after which he probably wished he had. The usually amiable speaker reported to the Lewiston Morning Tribune: "She called me a bitch. I didn't know the speaker of the House could be a bitch."

Swindell's version of events at the meeting is at odds with Newcomb's. (The story is in the March 17 Tribune; no free link available.) The speaker is undoubtedly right, though, that Swindell was after not a meeting or a negotiation or an effort at compromise, but rather a confrontation and a media event. The intended beneficiary, presumably (whether Swindell acknowledges it or not) would be Sali - the narrative being that his efforts to champion pro-life legislation are being squashed again by those squishies in the legislative leadership. (Never mind that similar legislation has been repeatedly thrown out by courts, and that Sali hasn't yet come up with a version of it that even he's willing to stand by.)

That's how politics is played these days - as the news media, which will tomorrow be blasted once again by conservatives as "liberal," gets used like their child's plaything once again. Or, in the language of pro-life meetings these days, like their bitch.

Risch takes a pass

The frustration must be immense. Jim Risch will (very likely) become governor of Idaho in a few weeks, replacing Interior Secretary-designate Dirk Kempthorne, only to relinquish the job at the end of the year. A job for which, not so long ago, he was set to run this year. And then go back to being the light-gov, the fill-in, the understudy.

Jim RischThis is the last day of candidate filing in Idaho (and we'll file on that later today too), and Risch still had barely enough time to have withdrawn his candidacy for a second term as lieutenant governor and filed for governor. His announcement this morning that he will not do that, but seek re-election instead, may end some overnight suspense in Boise, but in spite of it all doesn't come as a surprise.

Risch is a pragmatic guy, no tilter at windmills. By saying, as he did in November, that he would not run for governor, he effectively released all his supporters to run over to the camp of C.L. "Butch" Otter, whose campaign juggernaut is extremely well funded and organized at this point. With two months left until the primary election, the odds against success had to be overwhelming, even with the incumbency advantage. Risch, one of the smarter political analysts in the state, must understand that as well as anyone.

There is another factor, though, that follows from a thread running through Risch's many years in and around public office: His respect for institutions. His regard for the institution of the state Senate, as an institution, surfaced often in his years of debate, observation and voting there. Risch has been one of the leading voices in support of preserving the old Ada County courthouse - again, a regard for tradition and institution. Many of Risch's predecessors as lieutenant governor have spoken, at some point or another, of abolishing the office; Risch (to our knowledge) never has, but does seem to have some regard for the office as such. Looking across the hallway to the governor's office, the same thought processes probably carry through: That the office itself is something worthy of treating with high respect, and not casually.

In explaining his decision for a re-elect campaign, Risch was quoted as saying this morning, "The decision comes down to this: Do I want to engage in a difficult campaign or do I want to discharge the duties of governor? I've chosen the latter." Risch's personal history suggests that framing had to do with more than lofty rhetoric, and it may speak well of his prospects as he prepares for his new, albeit temporary, job.