Word flying around national news media, via unnamed sources, is that two things are about to happen. One is that, at 10:30 Saturday morning, at a press conference (which we do know has been called), Idaho Senator Larry Craig will resign. The other is that, sometime later but in the near future, Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter will appoint Lieutenant Governor Jim Risch to the job.
Both may be right; not having heard from sources claiming to know, we can only speculate based on external criteria. Those external criteria indicate that (1) odds favor a Craig resignation (support among his normal alliances and networks having collapsed), and (2) a Risch appointment is a completely credible scenario, but not yet to any absolute point.
Jim Risch
Speculation, at the national level anyway, has centered on Risch, and understandably. (Stopping right here and noting that the governor’s office explicitly says that no decision has been made.) He’s the one substantial Republican other than Craig (and we’re excluding from that candidate Rex Rammell, who would be running a splinter campaign) who has specifically expressed interest in running for the Senate in 2008, saying he likely would run for it if Craig did not. Risch has twice won statewide elective office (on top of a state Senate career spanning nearly 30 years) and last year won widespread applause for his seven-month run as governor of the state. (This site was among those extending kudos.)
His experience would allow him to jump in quickly. He hasn’t walked the congressional corridors, but short of having served there, he’d be solidly prepared. There would be few political problems. If Risch were running for the Senate as an incumbent next year, he likely would be hard to beat, either in the primary (and he’d probably clear the field of major challengers) or the general. (Democrats may not want to hear it, but they should remember that Risch has beaten Democrat Larry LaRocco twice in years past.)
There’s a little more: A Risch appointment would allow Otter to appoint a new lieutenant governor, maybe one closer to him. (State Senator Brad Little comes to mind as a prospect.)
(An online poll on the Spokesman-Review Huckleberries blog has Risch winning the vote on predicting who the next senator will be: Risch 47, Otter himself 14, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne 8, Representative Mike Simpson 6, Bill Sali 3.)
So a Risch appointment would come as no surprise. But there are counter-arguments. He and Risch aren’t especially close; Risch almost ran against him for governor last year. (They appear to have worked together capably enough, though.) He’s not the only possibility.
Otter in fact can appoint anyone, almost, he wants to. His only specific limitation is to an Idaho resident who meets the legal qualification (constitutional) for the job; and there’s a sort of political/ethical mandate that he appoint a Republican, as he surely will. So what other options would Otter have?
This could become a lot of fun: A web site based in and about Oregon, devoted to online polls on a variety of subjects - The Oregon Poll.
Gino at the site wrote us about its opening, saying “It’s a fun non partisan site for political junkies who’re interested in the horse race for political power, even if it is nonscientific. The goal is to get people thinking and talking . . .” Already, open polls on a range of subjects and races are up and starting to fill out.
Unscientific, and of course all the appropriate caveats apply. But we’ll stopping by. If it gets some substantial traffic, it could indeed generate some thinking and talking.
Aconsensus seems to have set in on Idaho Senator Larry Craig, three days after his arrest and guilty plea in Minneapolis went public. There’s a pretty broad view now: Craig should resign, soon, and the idea of actually running for term - a prospect Craig himself maintained at his Tuesday press conference - should be completely off the table.
This isn’t just the four Idaho newspapers that have (so far) called for his resignation, or the three (thus far) Republican members of Congress or the conservative activists who have done likewise. It’s also public measurement, the 55% of Idahoans in a Survey USA who turned thumbs down, and the overwhelming majorities in online (self-selected, but now days-old) polls at the Spokane and Lewiston newspaper sites, calling for immediate resignation. And (to be clear), we do think it likely that the senator will resign before long. We also think the cases laid out in each of the newspaper editorials are solidly argued.
Does that mean Craig’s options are foreclosed, that he cannot do other than resign and leave politics - or that there’s no argument in favor of doing otherwise?
No. Maybe only as an exercise in contrarianism, but also in recognition that the actions of any single person aren’t entirely predictable, let’s consider the alternative options, and the case for them.
In talking with several Idaho people today, journalists and others, there was a sense that the Washington crowd is landing harder on Idaho Senator Larry Craig than are his fellow Idahoans.
Maybe - but mainly as a matter of courtesy; you tend not to be cold and mean to someone you’ve known a long time. That’s not the same thing as approval.
Tomorrow, the Idaho Statesman becomes the third Idaho newspaper (after the Idaho Falls Post Register and the Coeur d’Alene Press) to explicitly call for Craig’s resignation. (At least three others, the Spokane Spokesman-Review, the Twin Falls Times-News and the Lewiston Tribune, appear to be on a hair trigger to do likewise.)
From the Statesman: “Two days ago, we urged Idahoans not to rush to judgment, and give Craig a chance to explain himself. Unfortunately, we have seen and heard enough. Judging from his performance Tuesday, when he read a brief public statement, Craig seems more interested in hunkering down, operating from a defensive state of denial. This is his prerogative. But he should not compromise Idaho interests in the process.”
MAKE THAT FOUR The Pocatello Idaho State Journal calls for resignation as well. “Regardless of hat the ethics committee may recommend Craig should recognize that his standing and influence in Congress have been hopelessly eroded. He could salvage at least vestige of respect by resigning. Step down, senator.”
MAKE THAT FIVE Add the Ketchum Idaho Mountain Express, which opined, “Instead of persisting in his foolhardy, quixotic quest to reverse his guilty plea in that unseemly Minneapolis bathroom incident, Idaho’s Sen. Larry Craig should instead be submitting his resignation as a U.S. senator.”
Not a bad rationale spun today by the Seattle Times, in suggesting Washington Senator - and, not to be forgotten, former state attorney general - Slade Gorton for the now-vacant national job of attorney general.
We wouldn’t particular go as far as they do. But there’s a case here. The man is a former AG, well enough regarded as such, with substantial legal background; he is a skilled politician and knows Capitol Hill and the players there; he is a loyal Republican but less ideological than many administration appointees; no apparent monsters lie in wait in his closet; confirmation by the Senate likely would be easy.
Not to say that’s whatPresident Bush will do - a Gorton appointment would in some ways run counter to his normal patterns - but it’s worth noting there’s a reasonable case there.
And is this thing ever not over yet. We’d anticipate that Idaho Senator Larry Craig will be spending a few days in quietude, evaluating and processing and doubtless talking with selected people about what, exactly, needs to happen next, now that he’s had his public say (as he did yesterday afternoon, at Boise - see the post below). For the rest of us, yes, there remain some more things to say. More still may emerge later.
This is a massive national story, and it will not end soon. In just the last two hours, we fielded calls from Associated Press radio (Washington), the Washington Post and the Boston Phoenix. Check out the Idaho Statesman’s page containing links to its recent material on Craig; it’s a very long list.
We have a Recommended Read: Today’s take by Bryan Fischer of the Idaho Values Alliance, whose views on this may stand as a helpful bellwether on this for a substantial portion of Idahoans. Fischer long has been a supporter of Craig, and he obviously takes no joy from what has been happening; he also seemed willing (notably in his post before this one) to give Craig the benefit of any reasonable doubt. He writes here that he watched Craig’s statement Tuesday and watched it closely, but he could not find it exculpatory - it was “unconvincing and unpersuasive.” Craig, he said, has lost the ability to lead (especially on those issues of top concern to Fischer), and “the appropriate and right thing for the senator to do at this point is to step down.” Fischer does not sound bitter or angry; he does sound deeply saddened.
He also notes this: “One significant feature of yesterday’s press conference is that there were virtually no Republican Party leaders in attendance, and, further, party leaders seem to have draped a blanket of silence over the entire party apparatus. Virtually no highly placed Idaho Republican has gone on record in support – wholehearted or otherwise - of the senator. The best that party leaders have been able to say so far is that they take the senator at his word and hope the public will not rush to judgment. This tepid support may be an indication that the senator’s GOP colleagues believe there is substance to the charges, and are finding it difficult to publicly affirm the senator or defend his behavior.”
He almost certainly right. Consider the web headline from today’s Statesman report: “Sen. Larry Craig asks forgiveness; GOP seeks ethics probe.” The White House says it is “disappointed in the matter.” Presidential candidate and Senate colleague John McCain remarked “It’s disgraceful,” on Jay Leno’s talk show, after Leno launched an extended round of gags on the incident. A least one Republican member of Congress has called for his resignation. Media talker Sean Hannity: “Senator Craig, if you have been engaged in this activity, resign.” Republican leadership has asked him to give up his committee assignments (the last step, ordinarily, before pushing for resignation - after all, what use is a senator without a role on committees?). Craig is getting no defense from his party; they’re throwing him overboard.
We don’t want to swamp the blog with Larry Craig posts, but a little finer point needs to be put here on just what the Idaho senior senator’s current status is. Which is: More dire than Craig apparently is willing to accept.
Our initial thought (on hearing the news reports 24 hours ago) was that, since his arrest in a Minneapolis airport mens room had little to do with his work as a senator, he might be able to ride it out, at least through this term (though re-election seems a lot cause). We no longer think so: While Craig is very unlikely to be forced out, conditions are deteriorating so quickly that his staying may soon become impractical.
Craig happened to be in Idaho when the story broke, and this afternoon he delivered a statement at a press conference - no questions taken.
He reiterated that his actions in Minneapolis were misinterpreted and that he should not have pleaded guilty to the disorderly conduct misdemeanor. He said repeatedly, “I am not gay.” He blasted the Idaho Statesman: “For eight months leading up to June, my family and I had been relentlessly and viciously harassed by the Idaho Statesman. If you’ve seen today’s paper, you know why.” He apologized to his constituents because “I have brought a cloud over Idaho,” though he said he did nothing wrong, apart from his handling of the incident. And of his political plans, he said, “Over the years, I have accomplished a lot for Idaho, and I hope Idahoans will allow me to continue to do that. There are still goals I would like to accomplish, and I believe I can still be an effective leader for Idaho. Next month, I will announce, as planned, whether or not I will seek reelection.” Finally, said he has retained an attorney in the matter and he acknowledged (though this isn’t on the Senate web site), “I’m sure this is an issue that is not yet over.”
That last may be the most pertinent point. By reaching a quick settlement on the criminal charges, Craig hoped (as he said) to put the matter quickly behind him. That has backfired: This will not end at least until Craig leaves the Senate. In shorthand, that is because his version of events simply isn’t being believed, because the circumstances and details unleashed fall into the category of information we’d rather not have known at all, and because of the reaction of his normal political supporters.
So, what was just a couple of days ago rumor, innuendo and speculation, has become hard fact at least as far as politics are concerned: Idaho Senator Larry Craig’s arrest and guilty plea in Minneapolis have begun to saturate both national and Idaho media. It has become inextricably attached to Craig, and that prompts the question: What now? Does this mean he he won’t run for re-election next year? (He has said that such issues won’t affect that decision; but such an assertion is easier to make in advance.) Might it even mean his resignation from the Senate, as it already has his resignation from a top position in the Mitt Romney presidential campaign?
Craig gave no immediate answers. But the speculation is well underway.
We’ve already suggested the reportage makes unlikely a run at re-election. Resignation seems iffier, but it’s not out of the question, and talk about it has gained steam in recent hours. At the Daily Kos site, mcjoan (who hails from Idaho) writes that “My gut says he’s going to resign; his being gay wasn’t a problem for the Idaho GOP just as long as they didn’t “really know” he was gay and didn’t have to think about it. Now that it’s been exposed, and it’s all over the local news according to my sources in Idaho (well, ok, according to mcmom), the pressure is mostly certainly going to be on him.”
Of course, that’s from someone opposed to Craig. But conservative blogger Adam Graham, a philosophical ally of Craig, wrote this: “Senator Larry Craig’s guilty plea in June of this year to a charge of lewd conduct should lead to the end of his Senate career. The honorable thing for Larry Craig to do is to resign. . . . Senator Craig’s explanation that this was all a “misunderstanding” doesn’t wash. Nor does his explanation of his guilty plea as something he did to resolve the issue expeditiously jibe. No innocent man in his right mind would plead guilty to a loaded charge like “lewd conduct” much less a man with 27 years in Congress. If Senator Craig is lying, he has a serious problem, if he is telling the truth, then he lacks the basic good judgment to be in the United States Senator. Either way, it’s time for him to go.” Graham’s not the only conservative to say so, either.
If Craig did resign, Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter would appoint a replacement. An early-early thought on that: Don’t look to the upper ranks of elected officials for his choice. But let’s hang on a bit; Craig may pause to test the waters, check for reaction. What reaction he gets around Idaho may help determine his next moves.
ALSO Conservative writer Hugh Hewitt on Craig: “I don’t believe him. Read the statement by the arresting officer. He must think the people of Idaho are idiots. But even if I did believe him, this would make his judgment too flawed to be in the United States Senate in a time of war. He has to go.”
Phil, an older man with wavy hair and background as a boat captain, had known Representative Brian Baird for years; he was a long-time friend and supporter, and ordinarily a question from him at a Baird town hall would be friendly and supportive.
Not tonight.
“You’ve done some amazing good work,” he said, looking downward across the Fort Vancouver High auditorium, down toward the stage where Baird sat, looking up, a microphone in hand. “That being said, ” Phil continued, “you’ve broken my heart.”
When he paused, Baird replied, “I understand your broken heart. It was not an easy decision for me . . .” He paused. “And knowing all you folks would be mad.” He suggested that coming to this meeting wasn’t easy, either. But he was convinced he was right: “If you could meet with the people I’ve met in the region, maybe your heart will be less broken . . .”
No sale. Phil shot back that Baird had become the “poster boy” for the Bush Administration’s Iraq policy, and “I don’t like that at all.”
“I don’t like it, either,” Baird said. (Both his talk and Q & A were peppered with zingers at the administration.)
Phil’s arm shot out, his finger pointing angrily at Baird: “My friend, you have screwed up, and you have to change course.” At that, the crowd erupted, cheering Phil . . .
And this was a crowd, to a big extent, of Baird’s best in-district political friends. Or, those who used to be his friends. A few speakers before Phil, a woman who was a long-time supporter dressed him down by reminding him, “We are the ones who hit the ground to get you elected. . . . We were so so proud of you and the work you did.” Now, she said: “I cannot believe your arrogance, Mr. Baird.”
The audience atmosphere was a little Pentacostal: Cries of “impeach Bush” or “end the war” and similar calls punctuated questions, answers and everything else. In the two hours we were there, not one questioner - out of perhaps 20 - expressed anything other than disgust and outrage at Baird’s new take on Iraq. To judge from audience reaction, a portion of the crowd of perhaps 400 to 500 (those that were inside - the room was filled solid and others couldn’t get in) supported him, but that portion was surely less than 10%.
Shouted one person, midway through: “You think you’re going to be re-elected?”
Baird: “It doesn’t matter to me.” Maybe, in the face of all that, it didn’t.
We have been saying, consistently, for some time, that odds favor Idaho Republican Senator Larry Craig seeking, as opposed to not seeking, re-election to the Senate next year. This afternoon, we’re reversing that estimate. You might think that means something has changed; that something would be this, from the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call:
Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was arrested in June at a Minnesota airport by a plainclothes police officer investigating lewd conduct complaints in a men’s public restroom, according to an arrest report obtained by Roll Call Monday afternoon.
Craig’s arrest occurred just after noon on June 11 at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. On Aug. 8, he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct in the Hennepin County District Court. He paid more than $500 in fines and fees, and a 10-day jail sentence was stayed. He also was given one year of probation with the court that began on Aug. 8.
A thorough report recounting exactly what the police report said is on the Roll Call site (which at times was so busy this afternoon we had some difficulty breaking in; most of it is alternatively available at the Talking Points Memo blog). (We might also add, for those unfamiliar with it, that Roll Call is not scandal sheet, but a solid mainstream reporter of activity at Congress. Its reports are solidly and broadly credible.)
You may recall that last fall, a speaker on a national radio program declared that Craig was gay. If you’re in Idaho, you may know that the biggest local open secret of the months since has been that Idaho Statesman columnist Dan Popkey worked for monthly researching that question, though no reports from that research have yet surfaced. (We’re betting something will appear shortly, though.) The Statesman’s web site does have a post under the line, “Report: U.S. Sen. Craig arrested in June for lewd conduct in men’s room.” Obviously, the story has gone national. The Atlantic Monthlycomments, “Needless to say, there will be a lot more to this story.”
What Craig pleaded guilty to, to be clear, was disorderly conduct (a misdemeanor), which can encompass a range of bad behavior. But his plea of guilty still runs up against the staff description of the incident as (in words that may be regretted already) a “he said/he said misunderstanding.” You might think that if Craig thought the incident really could be explained away as a misunderstanding, on a matter of this kind of sensitivity, that he would have it fought it.
Craig’s office indicated it would have another statement out later in the day. When we see it, we’ll note it here.
None of this precludes Craig from running again. We do think it will make it less likely.
Sunday’s recommended read is a profile in the Tacoma News Tribune of the leaders of the Christian Faith Center, the fast-expanding megachurch at SeaTac, Everett and - coming soon, on the move from SeaTac - Federal Way.
The Rev. Casey Treat shuttles between his two churches in a helicopter. When he arrives at the helipad on the grounds of his SeaTac megachurch, a golf cart whisks him to the front door. Soon he’s standing before a rapt audience and bantering with his wife and co-pastor, Wendy, via video and audio feeds. She’s in Everett, having traveled by the same helicopter from SeaTac.
The couple leads simultaneous services 40 miles apart. Their ministry reaches 8,000 worshippers in their churches each week and many more on TV.
The new church at Federal Way opening at September will be, its web site notes, about 220,000 square feet in interior size (about the size of a Wal-Mart SuperCenter); the TNT reports that the project cost will run about $70 million. It is nothing if not ambitious; audio on the church’s website says that with the new facility, the operation “will be stepping into a whole new level of influence.”
We’ve been neglectful in failing to update on one of the more interesting contests in this week’s Washington primary: The defeat of state Senator Jim Clements, by challenger Curtis King. What it means may take a while to sift out.
We’ve been following this one. Late last year Yakima-area Senator Alex Deccio resigned, opening the seat for appointment. Clements and King both applied, Clements getting the nod partly because not long previously he had won six terms in the House from the same district: Evidence of strong local support. And off he went to Olympia for this year’s session.
King decided to challenge, basing his campaign partly on Clements’ periodic compromises with the Democratic majority (Clements himself would be considered a conservative Republican), and partly on the basis that Clements seemed to take the seat, and his election, for granted. King proceeded to run exactly the right kind of campaign under the circumstances: Very high-energy, pulling lots of people and becoming highly visible. Only once it started to take off did Clements, the self-described “old porch dog,” start moving into action. By July local news reports suggested the race was too close to call.
King won decisively with 55.7% of the vote. What that means may be up for grabs. To what extent does it reflect low turnout in a Republican primary, which tends to help more rigorously conservative candidates? To what extent does it reflect King’s high-energy campaign? To what extent may it also reflect an anti-incumbent mood (see also Spokane)? We may return to this.
Forner state Representative Jeff Kropf, who left that post to move more deeply into Portland talk radio, is continuing to move more deeply into Portland tlk radio: He now has a consistent Monday-Friday talk show. To this point, he’d been mainly filling in, notably for Lars Larson on KXL; Kropf’s take is conservative and Republican.
The show will be on KUIK-1360 AM, in the mornings. Some commentary and analysis - sympathetic but clear-eyed - shows up in the linked post on Oregon Catalyst.
Washington Representative Brian Baird has scheduled a town hall meeting at Vancouver on Monday, and it stands to be one of the most notable such meetings on Iraq in the region this season. The reason is his change of tack on the subject. For quite some time basically anti-war, he has shifted course (probably less than 180 degrees, but substantially); his release today sums up his current view:
“The invasion of Iraq may be one of the worst foreign-policy mistakes in the history of our nation. As tragic and costly as that mistake has been, a precipitous or premature withdrawal of our forces now has the potential to turn the initial errors into an even greater problem just as success looks possible.”
Hotter subjects have we none, and Baird’s meeting is likely to be incendiary; at least one protest effort is already under plan. (Remember the the recent boiling point town halls of Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, who consistently has been nearly as anti-war as most of the people who attended.)
This is one of those subjects on which you’re better off being up front about your perspective, so, while this is a regional and not a national news blog, here’s ours: We thought in 2003, as the invasion was being launched, George Bush was absolutely correct on Iraq. George H.W. Bush, that is, in his calm, reasoned and intelligence/history-based analysis in 1991 (and later) on why American troops should not push on to Baghdad in the first Gulf War: The end result would far greater bloodshed, immense cost, a long-term American occupation of a large foreign country, regional instability, civil war and other demons by the host. He was right then, and right now, and day after day he is being proven prophetic.
Probably few minds will be changed at this point by either that last paragraph or much else anyone says: Opinions on Iraq seem to be hardening, if anything.
But - this being a Northwest blog - we would suggest a listen to an hour-long KUOW speaker’s forum recording, of a talk by Washington Post military reporter Thomas Ricks, consistently one of the better reporters on Iraq, about the Big Picture over there, with some focus on where we’re going.
In sum, he suggests the course seems almost locked for some time to come. He wouldn’t argue with Baird that withdrawal of troops carries a big risk of violence and instability; but then, he said, any option before us carries that risk - there are no good options at all. Whether the level of violence or instability worsens or improves over the coming months, he said, our response will be the same: A year from now, we’ll have half as many troops over there as we do now, because we won’t be able to support any more. “This war rapidly is becming not a problem for [Bush] but for the next president” - and the next president probably wouldn’t be able, whatever he or she wanted to do, to pulled troops and equipment out inside a year or two.
“I don’t think this will end well,” he said. We’re in act three of a five-act Shakespeare tragedy, he said, and the fourth act will be bloody and the fifth “messy.”
We tend not to be quite as pessimistic as Ricks. But his analysis is more clear and compelling that almost anything you’ll hear at a town hall, as calmly and clearly thought out as H.W.’s, and it’s recommended for some pre-meeting perspective.
McClure of Idaho, by William L. Smallwood, Caxton Press, Caldwell ID (2007).
In thinking back on James McClure, who was a senator from Idaho for 18 years through 1990 and a U.S. representative six years before that, you don’t recall either an overwhelming personality or riotous controversy; the mental picture can seem a little blurred, some of the normal shorthand - that he was a “conservative Republican” - doesn’t quite seem to cut it, especially for what the terms mean in this decade.
The new - release is set for September 1 - biography, McClure of Idaho, brings some focus. Get hold of two basic points and you have a fair sense of this guy who, improbably in some ways, has been one of Idaho’s most successful politicians.
One is this: He never really left the small, socially conservative, rural town of Payette where he grew up and established himself professionally. Politicians like to say such things about themselves, but in McClure’s case it seems generally true, generating the range of positives and negative you get from that background.
The other, less obvious to most of the public but clear to those who worked around or across from him, is implied by this passage: “You need to know that Jim McClure fancies himself as the consummate do-it-yourselfer. He did all the wiring and plumbing and heating installations in his Payette house during the years when it was undergoing remodeling, and he did the same thing in his cabin on Payette Lake outside of McCall. There isn’t anything around a house that he thinks he can’t install or repair.” McClure was (is presumably), to a degree unusual for a legislator, a highly focused detail man, happier working on the precise language of legislation or on a stubborn electrical wiring job, than in blasting off on the ills of the world.
Put the two pieces together, and you have a basis for evaluating McClure. This book, too - in an analogous sense, it too has these qualities. It is very much an “authorized” biography, and its mood and attitude is suffused by McClure’s and the community of family, friends and associates around him. But its 485 pages are also packed with loads of detail, and it’s an easy recommended read for anyone interested in one of Idaho’s leading political figures and the impact - considerable - he has had on the state.
Just a quick but striking quote here, from Oregon Senator Ron Wyden’s review of his recent Iran-centered town hall meetings. This was on the subject of impeachment of President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, which a number of people at those meetings (at Portland, Eugene and Medford) insisted upon.
I finished by saying that we should extend the same due process to President Bush that was extended to President Clinton, and that it shouldn’t matter whether you are Independent, Democrat or Republican when it comes to due process. A significant chorus of “no” came from the audience, including cries of “he doesn’t deserve it!” When passionate liberals argue in opposition to due process, you know that good and decent people have long ago exceeded their boiling point.
Representative Greg MacPherson wasted no time - barely a day after incumbent Democratic Attorney General Hardy Myers said he would retire, fellow Democrat MacPherson formally said he’s in the race. Not only that, his web site is already up - the man was prepared.
That may not be enough to scare off all primary competition; word still is that law professor John Kroger will join in shortly. But there is a sense here of hitting the ground running here.
For now, we’ll make only the suggestion that MacPherson’s campaign may be tied to some extent to the Measure 49 (the Measure 37 land use scaleback) ballot issue. His links to the issue run deep, not only in his own legislative career, but also that of his father, former state Senator Hector Macpherson, who was one of the creators of the land use law Measure 37 took on. And make the note that his Lake Oswego-based House seat, which has held solidly enough till now, may become hotly competitive next year - one of the few uplifting pieces of political news Oregon Republicans have gotten this year.
We more than you might expect with Bryan Fischer’s latest argument on Idaho legal/education/sex policy. Let’s open with excerpts from his Idaho Values Alliance blog:
In many states, including Idaho, sex outside marriage is against the law, and that includes consensual sex between teenagers. Sex outside marriage, whether “fornication” or “adultery” from a legal standpoint, is punishable by both a fine and imprisonment.
Yet educating teens about the legal risks they run if they become sexually active before marriage is a topic that is rarely if ever discussed in sex ed classes. I’m guessing educators show less restraint in making students aware of the legal risks of drunk driving or possession of drugs, but common sense dictates that making young adults aware that their behavior is not only dangerous but also illegal ought to be a part of a thorough education. . . .
Most teens and many parents in Idaho are most likely unaware that consensual teenage sex is a crime. Idaho lawmakers adjusted our sex offender statutes to include a “Romeo and Juliet” exception that keeps a young man who is a statutory rapist from being required to register as a sex offender, but when a male of any age – including a teenager - has sex with a girl under the age of 18 he is guilty of rape under Idaho law, whether the sex was consensual or not. Idaho law requires that he be sent to prison for no less than one year.
Fischer’s point that sex outside marriage violates Idaho law is correct (see most specifically the law against fornication), also that the law is rarely enforced (there have been a few occasions) and he probably is right too that relatively few Idahoans know any of this.
We have strongly believed for a long time that a basic crash course in law - civil and criminal, law as it affects ordinary people moving through society - for a semester or two ought to be a basic component of public education at the high school level. The idea that we’re supposedly educating a corps of citizens who derive most of what they know about the law from TV shows is appalling. We’d not argue at all with Fischer’s suggestion that the law as it relates to sex might be a slice of that course.
Spokane two or three decades back likely would have slam-dunked Dennis Hession in his election to hold the job of mayor to which he was appointed a couple of years back.
He looks and sounds like a mayor. He appears to have done a creditable job (from the Spokesman-Review’s endorsement: “The city is performing well, and re-electing Hession would promise political stability under a capable hand.”) Not Mr. Excitement, but steady and solid. And - significantly - one of the downtown professional/business crowd, an attorney comfortable with the community’s power structure. All of that would seem to be plenty to win election.
That said, we’d right now give odds that in November Spokane’s voters will replace him with Council member Mary Verner, who fits none of the traditional criteria but maybe satisfies where a lot of Spokane is headed.
That conclusion emerges from the early returns (we’ll be back at this to look at the detailed numbers later) from the Tuesday primary. Three substantial candidates were running for mayor. As of this writing (with about 98% of ballots counted), Hession (a former council member) took 10,666, Verner 10,286 and fellow Council member Al French 9,206. Next step is the November runoff for the top two.
Hession has been a reasonably visible mayor and (in normal fashion) has trumpeted his activities at City Hall, but - maybe in reflection of the ongoing angry voter mood - all three incumbent city officials wound up loosely trying to position themselves as outsider insurgents. That was most problematic for Hession who is, after all, trying to say at the same time that the current team is already doing a good job.
Verner’s second place finish may result from the sense that she seems least like a downtown insider. Two months ago we wrote that “Hession and French seem to have more a downtown business perspective, while Verner’s seems more shaped by policy activism, such as the environmental and resource staff work she did earlier in her career. (Echoes of it continue to show up - consider the long list of policy interests on her web site.)” Professionally, Verner is like Hession an attorney, but there the similarity ends; she is executive director of the Upper Columbia United Tribes.
In the extensive roster of departing electeds in Oregon, put Attorney General Hardy Myers in the “expected” category; he cites age (he’ll be 69 in 2008) and longevity - 12 years in the office.
As a candidate for re-election, Myers has had the assets of staying out of trouble and sound legislative experience (as a former House speaker), but a firey ball of charisma he isn’t; in that, he’s a fair argument for the natural head start Democrats have in running statewide these days.
That may be why immediate interest seems to settle on two Democrats as prospects for the race: state Representative Greg MacPherson, D-Lake Oswego, a major figure in the last session (a significant player on land use), and John Kroger, a law professor at Lewis & Clark College who has never run for office but has a fascinating professional history. Reportedly, both have some interest in the race.
No Republicans yet; don’t expect that field to remain empty for long.
Governing Idaho:
Politics, People and Power
by James Weatherby
and Randy Stapilus
Caxton Press order here Outlaw Tales
of Idaho
by Randy Stapilus
Globe-Pequot Press order here It Happened in Idaho
by Randy Stapilus
Globe-Pequot Press order here Camping Idaho
by Randy Stapilus
Globe-Pequot Press order here
This is a massive national story, and it will not end soon. In just the last two hours, we fielded calls from Associated Press radio (Washington), the Washington Post and the Boston Phoenix. Check out the 
The new - release is set for September 1 - biography, McClure of Idaho, brings some focus. Get hold of two basic points and you have a fair sense of this guy who, improbably in some ways, has been one of Idaho’s most successful politicians.
